Alexander Ross dedicates his latest poem to the memory of Daria Dugina.
Text within this block will maintain its original spacing when publishedIt was not your words they wanted burned, but your father’s.
So claimed the radio the day of your murder. But I knew better.
Just short of sixty years between the two of us, running
reconnaissance under the ignoble reign of quantity. How was I not
to recognize another? Perhaps our swords were meant, one day,
to clash on the fields of Mind. Perhaps that’s still in store. Maybe,
in the end, our enemies were all that we had in common, but that,
alone, was enough to make me mourn. And suppose we do meet,
even then, will I really be said to have known you? Marooned
as I am at the edge of occupation, epistemic castaway
from the island of the world. Odds are greater we’ll intersect
like pilgrims passing through some Ozymandian waste, nodding
once to one another, to the cracking statuary, as if we’d seen
the same. But the Latin eye looks up, I’m told. The Eastern eye
looks in. While the Slav’s sight is dialed for the horizon. Last night,
the sky was a sable gray underscored by fire. The sun, a parting flash,
as if to say, It’s you, sir, who is sinking. But I lacked the tongue
to clarify. So I’ll take it from you, instead. Was it just a lonely road
outside of Moscow, or something else entirely, in the cross-hairs
of your vision, as you turned the key on this waning age, and went?
Alexander Ross is an American poet. His work has appeared, or is forthcoming with, Antelope Hill, Corncrake Magazine, Apocalypse Confidential, The Society of Classical Poets, Gopnik Press, Michigan City Review of Books, Don’t Submit, HAWKEYE, Horror Sleaze Trash, and Ape House. He can be found on both Substack and X @YeomanPoet.
Santander Wallaby explains why North Korea’s doctrines of self-reliance and military strength increasingly align with Russia’s campaign for a multipolar world.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s message to North Korean Foreign Minister Choe Son Hui on the 81st anniversary of Korea’s Liberation Day carried a meaning larger than diplomatic courtesy. Lavrov described Moscow and Pyongyang as standing together for a world order based on multipolarity, genuine equality, and respect for national interests. The words place the Russian–Korean partnership inside a wider struggle over the shape of world politics. For three decades, one political center claimed the power to define legitimate government, acceptable economics, proper alliances, and the boundaries of military action. Russia now speaks for a different arrangement: several great regions, several political traditions, and several centers of power living beside one another. Pyongyang reaches that conclusion from its own historical path. Korea experienced Japanese colonial rule, national division, war, sanctions, and decades of military pressure. Russian and Korean leaders therefore speak a common language of sovereignty, strategic autonomy, and resistance to political commands issued from abroad. Lavrov’s telegram turns that shared experience into a principle: each state possesses interests based on its own history, geography, and people, and a durable world order must make room for them.
BREAKING: I just signed an Executive Order implementing the strictest standards in the nation for AI data centers — because I will not allow Pennsylvanians to be bullied by greedy developers and bulldozed by the lawyers working for these big tech companies.
?@GovernorShapiro: "I've heard loud and clear from the good people of Pennsylvania as I've traveled across our Commonwealth. And I'm here to say today that we will not be bullied by these developers. We will not be bulldozed by the lawyers for these big tech companies." pic.twitter.com/5du6jTa8Mu
— Pennsylvania Governor's Office (@PAGovOffice) August 18, 2026
UPDATE: Gov. Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania is capitalizing on the AI data center issue. Democrats across the country are using it like the Epstein fumble to score easy points.
Enten: "Trump net approval hits a term two low, 31 points underwater … at the beginning of term two he was at +6 points. He's 37 points from where he was … President Trump was unpopular going into the midterms during his first presidency, but not anywhere as unpopular as this… pic.twitter.com/gefMweycQ6
Rep. Ryan Zinke: "Data centers have largely been demonized … and where this this rhetoric emanating from? Largely from our adversaries that fear our development of AI." pic.twitter.com/R8KBbNmTcP
Texas Commissioner of Agriculture Sid Miller: I'm very worried about the data centers. We're going way too fast. The reason they come to Texas, our counties have no oversight ability so they can just do whatever.
President Trump criticized Gov. Greg Abbott’s pause on new data centers in Texas, calling the move “a mistake” and arguing that they could drive an economic boom:
“They are tremendously important for the economics. I mean, for Texas to say no to data centers is a mistake in the…
Americans would rather have a nuclear power plant built in their community than a data center, this may be the worst corporate public-relations fumble of all time pic.twitter.com/vQnq37ernc
My advice to Republicans in the midterms would be to run on the war with Iran for Israel because even that isn’t as unpopular in Red States as building AI data centers.
At the beginning of Trump’s second term, I predicted that Trump’s Golden Age would be Gilded Age 2. We’ve seen this come true. Trump has repeatedly boasted that the economy is doing great from the perspective of Wall Street. He is focused on building his gilded White House Ballroom. The AI bubble has inflated the stock market to record highs. AI data centers are being constructed all over the South and in Red States. The cost of living has gotten much worse. The misery index has gone up since the start of Trump’s second term. We’re clearly headed for yet another “throw the bums out” election of backlash politics. The country is angry with the tech oligarchs of our time just like they were with the railroads back in the day. Socialism is becoming more popular. Anarchists are shooting CEOs again.
The GOP is running on AI data centers and the war with Iran for Israel because it isn’t responding to voters. Electoral victories are purchased by donors who get their favored policies.
Bushidō, the ethical tradition of the samurai, long ago transcended Japan’s feudal past to become a powerful element of cultural identity and an enduring presence in the global imagination. For Yukio Mishima (1925–1970), one of Japan’s most celebrated and controversial novelists and playwrights, a Nobel Prize nominee, actor, and public intellectual, bushidō was a living ideal. He sought to unite art, discipline, and action into a single way of life.
In Mishima’s Flame, Dmitry Moiseev explores how samurai virtues such as loyalty, honor, sincerity, and discipline shaped Mishima’s thought, prose, politics, and life. From his early literary triumphs to his right-wing activism and dramatic final act at Camp Ichigaya, Mishima sought to embody the ideals he admired. Blending literary analysis with intellectual history, Mishima’s Flame examines how the warrior ethics of traditional Japan were radically reinterpreted and lived in the modern age.
The Russian Embassy in London has issued another warning, this time after reports that British-made long-range drones supplied to Ukraine were used for deep strikes inside Russia. The embassy said Britain’s growing role would bring consequences and a higher price. London answered by reaffirming its support for Ukraine. Berlin gave an equally revealing response to a separate warning from Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov: German officials described Russian threats as familiar rhetoric and said their support for Kiev would remain firm. That exchange contains the whole problem. A threat loses force when the intended audience hears it as routine. Russia can issue a sterner warning after the next strike, and an even sterner one after the strike that follows. The West then learns a simple lesson: Moscow talks the talk but does not walk the walk.
Deterrence depends on belief. A state may possess thousands of nuclear warheads, immense conventional forces, missiles able to reach every European capital, and still lose credibility around the smaller steps that lead towards a wider war. Russia retains formidable strategic deterrence; its weakness lies in the middle ground between diplomatic protest and nuclear catastrophe. Western governments have repeatedly entered that space. Weapons once treated as dangerously escalatory became ordinary: advanced artillery, tanks, long-range missiles, F-16s, permission for strikes on Russian territory, and now British-made drones used deep inside Russia. In May 2024, Vladimir Putin warned Western governments against allowing Ukraine to use their missiles against Russian territory, saying such action could pull them towards direct involvement. Months later, Washington authorized deep strikes with American weapons. Each crossed threshold made the next threshold easier to cross.
Britain offers the clearest example. Also in May 2024, Moscow summoned the British ambassador after David Cameron said Ukraine could use British weapons against targets in Russia. The Russian Foreign Ministry warned that British military facilities and equipment in Ukraine and abroad could become targets in response. More than two years later, British-made drones are reportedly striking deep inside the Russian mainland, while London publicly renews its commitment to Kiev. Not a single British facility has ever been hit by Russia. The gap between warning and consequence has therefore become visible. The British government can calculate from experience. It sees earlier Russian declarations, compares them with subsequent Russian conduct, and adjusts its appetite for risk. Every warning that produces another communiqué becomes evidence for the next British minister who argues that Moscow will absorb one more escalation.
Lavrov faces the same problem. In September 2024, he urged Washington to treat Russian “red lines” seriously as the United States considered deeper strikes with Western missiles. Two months later, the Biden administration authorized Ukraine to use American long-range weapons deep inside Russia. Russia responded with a revised nuclear doctrine and the Oreshnik missile demonstration, which showed that Moscow still possessed serious tools of escalation and signaling. Even so, the larger political pattern remained. Western capitals discovered that a crossed Russian line usually produced a revised line, a new warning, or a demonstration calibrated to avoid direct war with NATO. That caution may have preserved Europe from catastrophe. Repeated verbal excess, however, converted caution into an appearance of weakness.
Dmitry Medvedev has done even greater damage to Russian signaling. His language has repeatedly reached for the end of the world. In May 2023, he warned that increasingly destructive Western arms for Ukraine raised the risk of “nuclear apocalypse.” One year later, he said Russia’s nuclear warnings were serious as Western governments loosened restrictions on strikes inside Russia. The arms kept coming. The restrictions kept loosening. The apocalypse kept receding. A senior official can use such language only so many times before foreign audiences begin pricing it as theater. Medvedev may intend to frighten Western leaders and publics. The cumulative effect can run in the opposite direction: each extravagant statement that passes into history unmatched by events lowers the value of the next statement. A nuclear power gains little from making nuclear language sound commonplace.
Putin himself presents a different case. His restraint has often been more serious than the rhetoric surrounding him. He appears to understand a fact that many Western politicians discuss far too casually: escalation between nuclear powers can move from controlled pressure to irreversible disaster with terrifying speed. In June 2024, he spoke of reciprocal measures, including the possibility of supplying long-range weapons to states or actors able to threaten sensitive Western facilities. By August 2026, the threatened mirror image still remained unrealized in public view. That restraint may reflect prudence, strategic patience, Chinese pressure, military priorities, or a judgment that direct retaliation against NATO interests carries excessive danger. Any of those reasons can be rational. The error lies in pairing restraint with repeated maximalist threats. A cautious leader needs cautious language. Otherwise prudence begins to resemble hesitation.
This is where the fable of the boy who cried wolf becomes useful. The boy’s mistake lay less in speech itself than in destroying the connection between signal and event. Moscow has allowed that connection to fray. Lavrov warns of harsher methods. Medvedev invokes planetary destruction. Embassies promise consequences. Then another shipment arrives, another restriction disappears, another strike reaches farther into Russia, and the cycle begins again. On August 14, 2026, Lavrov again said Russia would intensify efforts against Western support for Kiev’s military system. Germany answered that its support would continue, while Britain delivered the same message after the latest drone controversy. Western officials now speak as people who believe they have learned the pattern. That belief creates danger because confidence in an opponent’s restraint can become as reckless as confidence in one’s own strength.
Russia can rebuild credibility through verbal discipline first. Moscow should reserve public threats for thresholds that the state has already decided to defend with specific, proportionate action. Every other dispute can be handled through statements of policy, diplomatic protests, military preparation, and quiet communication. The strongest warning is often the rare one. A government that speaks calmly for months and then draws a precise line commands more attention than a government that announces historic consequences every week. Such a policy would also protect Putin’s room for maneuver. He could choose restraint when restraint serves Russia, while avoiding the spectacle of ministers promising punishment followed only by another warning. Credibility grows when words and deeds maintain a visible relationship. The task is therefore smaller than inventing a terrifying new threat. Russia needs fewer threats and greater consistency.
The second requirement is proportionality. Credibility can be rebuilt far below the level of a missile strike on London, Berlin, or any NATO capital; a direct attack on a NATO state could open the road to general war. Russia has many lower rungs available in statecraft: changes in military posture, visible deployments, reciprocal restrictions, diplomatic downgrades, economic measures, stronger support for partners, and conventional responses inside the existing theater directed at military capabilities linked to attacks on Russian territory. The key lies in advance linkage. If Moscow identifies a particular category of escalation and states a measured consequence, that consequence should follow when the threshold is crossed. The response can remain limited. It can even appear dull. Deterrence comes from reliability more than drama. A modest consequence delivered every time carries greater weight than an apocalyptic consequence delivered only in speeches.
The third requirement is to restore distance around nuclear language. Russia’s nuclear arsenal already speaks for itself. Its existence creates the ultimate ceiling over direct NATO-Russia war. Frequent references to nuclear destruction blur that ceiling and make lesser warnings harder to read. Putin’s strongest contribution may therefore be his instinct for restraint, provided the rest of the Russian leadership learns to speak in the same register. The real danger comes from the possibility that London, Berlin, Washington, and Kiev eventually treat every Russian warning as background noise, then cross a line that Moscow finally regards as vital. At that moment, both sides could discover that years of theatrical rhetoric had hidden a genuine threshold. A credible Russia would make that threshold clearer long before anyone reached it. The boy who cried wolf becomes dangerous when the village stops listening and the wolf finally arrives.
If you enjoy my writing, order my new book, The Fate of White America, here.
JOEY OLIVER - author of American History Z: Gen Z’s Journey to the Far Right joins us to discuss the emergent Revolutionary consciousness among White American youth.
NEW: President Trump unloads on the legal effort targeting the White House ballroom, questioning why opponents waited until nearly $400 million had been spent on the project:
MAGA has occupied the last 11 years of our time. It will be 13 years when Trump leaves office in 2029 and retires from public life to wallow in the billions he has made in office. Behold, the demographics of America that Trump is leaving behind which you can explore by census tract with this neat tool.
Note: Just out of curiosity, I looked up the Return to the Land census tract. I’m not a member or the group or involved with the organization. I can understand its appeal though.
Simon Rorschach turns to the Trojan War to ask whether Trump will recognize that every new escalation in Ukraine risks drawing America into a wider struggle with consequences far beyond Kiev.
Zelensky remains true to form, and his conduct increasingly resembles a minor king before the walls of Troy, moving from tent to tent among stronger allies and asking each chieftain for another spear, another shield, another division of Myrmidons. In his latest CNN interview, Zelensky described a daily round of calls to the White House, to European capitals, and to influential Americans, much as the princes of the Achaean camp sought favor from Agamemnon whenever the battle before Troy turned against them. During these appeals, Zelensky combines urgency, flattery, reproach, and moral pressure in a manner worthy of the quarrelsome councils of the Iliad, with Patriot interceptors occupying the place once held by bronze armor and chariots. His purpose resembles the purpose of any commander outside Troy: strengthen the shield, survive the enemy’s arrows, and create freedom for the next assault. Yet America occupies a very different place in this modern Iliad because Donald Trump sits closer to Agamemnon than to Ajax, and the king who supplies the army must think about the fate of the whole expedition rather than the wishes of a single warrior. For Trump, approving another shipment of weapons to Kiev may bring short-term political benefits at home, just as Agamemnon often satisfied restless chiefs to preserve unity among the Achaeans, while the larger question concerns whether each concession brings the expedition closer to victory or deeper into a war whose end recedes like the towers of Troy on the horizon.
Will be available for purchase thru AMAZON very SOON (KDP claims the review process generally resolved within 72 hours) - I will announce and post a LINK when available.
Stanislav Krapivnik on the collapse of the US empire and its starving navy.
In the United States, disintegration has begun within the armed forces themselves—this time in the navy, in the very forces that are supposed to project the power of the “great” hegemon across the world.
What started as a scandal on the aircraft carrier Ford has now spread throughout the entire fleet. This is not about the mold found all over the ship (a well-known problem on all American vessels). Nor is it about the shortage of carrots, or the fact that they are poorly prepared, or that the fleet still has the same mission as during the Cold War while itself having been cut in half—resulting in longer shifts and longer deployments.
Nor is it about the clogged toilets, cases of which on the Ford reached 80%. No, this is not about that mild form of mutiny in which sailors start throwing ropes and T-shirts into the systems to damage them and force the ship back to port. We are also not discussing the mysterious fire that took 30 hours to extinguish and that looked more like a missile strike than an accident caused by an overheated washing machine.
No, this scandal began on the aircraft carrier Abraham Lincoln, but has now manifested itself on every ship in the U.S. armed forces.
What am I talking about? The inability to adequately feed the sailors.
Of all the U.S. services, the navy, under normal conditions, used to feed its people better than anyone else. But it seems that for the United States this is already a thing of the past.
From my contacts, I have learned that the problem has already spread throughout the entire fleet. One mother told me that her son, a healthy Marine, came home after five months on a ship 15 kilograms lighter.
Judging by the photographs sailors post online, the portions they receive look like 1,800–2,000 calories. For a normal healthy man that is simply not enough; for physically active men it is critically low.
For a department with a trillion-dollar budget, everything points to total corruption. This kind of situation usually appears on the brink of an empire’s collapse, when everyone is simply grabbing whatever they can. Families have started sending care packages with food to their relatives. But those packages never reach the service members either. They disappear somewhere along the way.
All the signs—economic, military, systemic—point to collapse. The only question is what steps we are prepared to take so that the dying American empire does not try to destroy everyone and everything as it dies.
Quite frankly, I am so completely sick of this Matt Damon, “I’d like to speak to the manager” complex we’ve got going on across Western culture.
Special shout out to “The Machine Lies” YouTube channel for assisting in final version of this article. Crucial insights that made it more accurate.
When a civilization runs out of future, it retreats into myth. Christopher Nolan’s cinematic adaptation of The Odyssey arrives not as a heroic spectacle, but as a hilarious, tragicomic autopsy of the modern Western male. Strip away the sea monsters and IMAX-rendered whirlpools, and what remains is a grand allegorical thesis on geopolitical exhaustion, the failure of technocratic arrogance, and the spiritual bankruptcy of late-stage capitalism.
To drive the point home, Nolan casts Matt Damon—Hollywood’s indisputable, golden-boy mascot of Western middle-management competence. For thirty years, cinema has spent billions of fictional taxpayer dollars rescuing Matt Damon: from the hedgerows of Normandy (Saving Private Ryan), to an isolated ice planet (Interstellar), to farming potatoes in his own feces on Mars (The Martian). Whether he’s up there solving fake math equations on a chalkboard in Good Will Hunting, punching people while conveniently forgetting his own past in Jason Bourne, or just wandering around like Parker and Stone’s wooden puppet in Team America uttering his own name with blank-eyed, slack-jawed enthusiasm (“Maaatt Damon!”)—a joke so sharp even Raab Himself and the CKY crew couldn’t have drafted a better parody—Damon is the poster boy for this absolute garbage illusion.
He represents the blind faith that if you just throw enough linear processing power at a problem, you can manage your way out of any crisis. In The Odyssey, Nolan weaponizes this exact pop-culture caricature of Damon as a mildly impaired, over-promoted everyday guy to mock the ultimate archetype of the average Western man: a guy who genuinely believes he can “science his way out” of a civilizational collapse, completely oblivious to the fact that he built the trap he’s currently dying in. And he looks totally clueless the entire time. It’s pathetic.
And you intellectuals love to back this up. In Dialectic of Enlightenment, Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer literally spell out this exact sickness:
“The cleverly surviving Odysseus is the prototype of the bourgeois individual.”
They nail him as the original middle-manager—a guy who uses legal loopholes, trickery, and cold calculation to conquer nature and subjugate everyone around him. But if you look deeper than standard critical theory, there is a massive occult narrative underlying this entire structure—one that operators like Jordan Maxwell and Michael Tsarion have spent decades exposing.
The whole system is built on the ancient theological duality of the two beasts encircling God’s throne: Behemoth and Leviathan. As scriptural scholars like Rabbi Tovia Singer demonstrate when breaking down the underlying Hebrew traditions, these aren’t just mythical monsters; they are macro-cosmic allegories for human governance and legal jurisdiction. Underneath the Greco-Roman facade lies the primordial feud between two archetypal powers:
Behemoth (The Beast of the Land / Rome & Japheth): Behemoth represents the rooted, land-based imperium, the physical polis, and the territorial empire. This is Rome and the lineage of Japheth—the heavy, militarized architecture of the State representing the raw, coercive rule of Man over Man. It operates through top-down administrative force, borders, infrastructure, and institutional violence.
Leviathan (The Beast of the Sea / Canaan & Commerce): Leviathan is the fluid “beast of the sea,” representing global commerce, maritime law, financial circulation, and international debt. This is the realm of Canaan and the merchant networks—a spirit of displacement and the commercial lifeblood that flows across borders, directing the movement of nations through trade, contracts, and financial mobility.
Scripture outlines this dynamic in Genesis 9:25–27: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren… God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem.”
When Rome utterly razed Carthage in 146 BC, Canaan didn’t die; it simply swapped siege engines for speculative finance, weaponized population flows, and open-air Malthusian management. Historically, both institutional Jewish mercantile networks and Jesuit/Catholic imperial apparatuses have repeatedly weaponized this exact cycle of mass migration—from ancient Mediterranean trade corridors to modern geopolitical flashpoints like the border sieges in Ceuta. By orchestrating fluid population shifts across borders, these institutional forces systematically dismantle local sovereignty and break organic national ties.
This creates a fundamental rupture in human authority. True covenantal law exists as a sacred “trust between nations” that remains under God—an organic, moral arrangement bound by divine justice. The secular State, by contrast, replaces divine trust with the brutal rule of Man over Man. When this administrative state becomes irredeemably corrupt and usurps divine natural law, earthly tribunals fail. As John Locke famously articulated in his Second Treatise of Government, when human managers enforce tyranny under the guise of legal process, the public has no earthly authority left to turn to—leaving only an “Appeal to Heaven”—a direct invocation of divine judgment and the natural right to break the oppressive order.
When Christopher Nolan forces The Odyssey into modern cinematic media, he is filming the ultimate clash between these two beasts. Odysseus acts as the ultimate managerial operative, navigating between the territorial violence of Behemoth and the fluid, contractual trickery of Leviathan.
Look at how the events of The Odyssey map directly onto this critical-occult framework:
The Cyclopses (Behemoth Exploited): The Cyclopses represent the brute, un-optimized, land-bound polis. Polyphemus has one eye because he lacks the dual-perspective calculation of globalized trade. Odysseus, the agent of maritime commercial law, walks into his cave, exploits his resources, blinds him, and taunts him from his ship on the high seas.
The Sirens (Auditory Pacification): Odysseus ties himself to the mast and jams beeswax into his crew’s ears. In Chris Cutrone’s critical theory framework combined with Maxwell’s analysis of maritime law, this is corporate HR at sea. The crew (the working class) is deafened to art and metaphysics so they keep rowing the trade vessel, while the executive gets to experience culture solely as a masochistic ego trip.
The Lotus-Eaters & Circe: Chemical pacification and the devaluation of human labor. Circe turns men into swine—the literal administrative reduction of human beings into commercial livestock when they outlive their economic utility.
Scylla and Charybdis: Sociopathic corporate risk management. Odysseus calculates that losing six crew members to Scylla is an acceptable operational cost compared to losing the entire commercial vessel to Charybdis.
The Blind Bard & Eumaeus: Demodocus, the blind bard, is the ancient equivalent of compliant corporate media, singing PR songs about elite glory while completely blind to material reality. Meanwhile, Eumaeus the swineherd is treated like dirt—the ultimate gig-worker forced to maintain the estate for an absentee landlord.
The Finale: The Hostile Takeover of Ithaca Nolan’s climax—the slaughter of the suitors—brings this entire dynamic to its terrifying, logical conclusion. The suitors are not just arrogant houseguests; they represent the disorganized, localized aristocracy—the remnants of the old, landed Behemoth trying to maintain organic local governance. Penelope’s shroud, endlessly woven and unraveled, represents the deliberate stalling of the domestic economy, a managed decline waiting for the injection of maritime capital to “rescue” it.
When Odysseus finally strings the bow, it is not a restoration of divine right; it is a demonstration of asymmetric technological and administrative power. He locks the doors, restricting freedom of movement, and systematically massacres them. This is the ultimate corporate consolidation—a hostile takeover where the Leviathan manager violently purges all local competition to establish a globalized monopoly. He disguises this slaughter as a Lockean “Appeal to Heaven,” framing his violence as divine restitution, but it is truly just the final, bloody imposition of the rule of Man over Man. He isn’t restoring organic order; he is the Leviathan violently re-establishing corporate control.
This hyper-rationalized management of reality expands directly into modern occult technology. Authors like Jason Jorjani have argued that high-tech statecraft and Hermetic rationalism are explicitly designed to engineer human evolution through crisis. It’s the exact same ritualistic pipeline pioneered by Aleister Crowley with Thelema, later adapted by L. Ron Hubbard into Scientology, and ultimately embodied by Tom Cruise—the sleek, un-aging cinematic operative running through impossible missions to execute executive will without a single hair out of place.
Nolan treats the Trojan conflict as a masterclass in biofoundationalism—exposing how raw biological impulses and material resource grabs get dressed up in ideological propaganda. The “brown flood” of mass migration and racial mixing isn’t some new-fangled conspiracy, but the exact same ancient economic churn that’s been grinding down empires since the Mediterranean was a giant, chaotic melting pot.
They use narrative diversions today to hide these material realities. Look at the media circus around casting Elliot Page as Sinon—the deceitful agent who convinces Troy to pull the Trojan Horse inside its own walls. The reactionary brain-rot screeching over Nolan’s supposedly “woke” casting choices completely misses the joke. Dropping Page into this role isn’t some diversity check-mark; it’s a masterstroke that anchors the epic right in our current circus. Culture-war chumps screaming about subverting the ancient war-god legacy ignore how the roles of the sexes have been tossed into a blender to execute the ultimate Baphomet play: a deliberate, occult alchemy where male and female swap polarity, turning the classic vector of subversion into a modern gender-bending mirror. Within this Homeric critical theory framework, shifting identity narratives operate as a deeply coded commentary on class mobility and social engineering—a manufactured distraction from the structural displacement happening right under our noses. Just like classical scholars erased the historical presence of black populations along Mediterranean trade routes in Ithaca to maintain a sterile, Eurocentric myth of a pristine homeland.
Before you try to hit me with some empirical historiography or demand economic ledgers to defend this disaster, save it. That commits a fundamental categorical error—metabasis eis allo genos. I’m talking about teleological agency: a systemic, unanchored drive where capital acts with clear direction (telos) through the hands of administrative managers operating under the law of the sea.
You see the exact same scam playing out with modern managerial gentrification. Middle-management crusaders march into organic, working-class neighborhoods, bulldoze their cultural texture for “linear efficiency,” and replace real human roots with sterile luxury lofts and algorithmic rent hikes. To dismiss this as mere “neutral economic churn” is an ignoratio elenchi—a straw man hiding the reality that treating human beings as disposable variables in a commercial machine is a deliberate act of structural violence.
Fuck Peter Diamandis. Seriously, fuck that guy. My favorite interview is the one with Peter and Elon, sitting barefoot in someone’s backyard laughing it up because nobody understands what they are ACTUALLY saying. Or the one where he’s selling how great the singularity is because it will lead to all this abundance at some conference in El Salvador—commodifying the Global South with nomad capitalism. He had a room of elites pressing him on what he meant by “preparing for turmoil and Malthusianism ahead,” and his response was basically: “We are all fucked, so just smile, buy crypto, and fluff my ego.”
I genuinely like the guy’s audacity, though. Especially when he had the Black Eyed Peas shill technology to brown and black communities under the guise of instant empowerment. I get the propaganda of ripping off people for “the man” because you need your cut of the pie.
Managerial rationality creates a completely false sense of control through spreadsheets, AI chatbots, and bureaucratic compliance checks. It just masks the dark reality: these exact biofoundational structures (or Yarvin’s Cathedral) facilitate supply chain collapse under the guise of “environmentalism,” push population displacement via weaponized bioethics, and drive Malthusian social engineering where costs are socialized while rewards are strictly privatized. The tech-bro singularity and infinite abundance pitch functions as the modern Trojan Horse—a pure Leviathan play, reinforcing Odysseus as the archetypal white manager who willingly polices his own people on behalf of the empire holding the whip.
Titans rose from the old earth, unbound, and shaped the world with fire, iron, and stone. Ernst Jünger’s The Worker: Dominion and Form (1932) describes the coming of a new age in which the habits and values of the bourgeois world lose their force. In their place appears the Worker. He stands far beyond the man at the factory bench and exceeds every definition based on wages, class, or occupation. He is a human type formed by technology, discipline, danger, and organized power. Jünger treats him almost as a figure of myth. He belongs to machines as earlier men belonged to forests, castles, temples, and fields. He recalls Siegfried, the dragon-slayer of Germanic legend. Siegfried enters a world of broken oaths, hidden treasure, dangerous knowledge, and powers greater than ordinary men can handle. He discovers his place through action. The Worker faces a similar task. The nineteenth-century individual, secure in his private property and personal ambitions, gives way before forces too large for him: mass armies, industrial production, mechanized transport, radio, electricity, bureaucracy, and total war. The Worker enters these forces and learns to command them. Like Siegfried reforging the broken sword and carrying it into battle, the Worker takes the instruments of a shattered age and turns them into the weapons of a new one.
Kazuhiro Hayashida explains multipolarity as a process of aggregation and dispersion, arguing that a civilization survives only by preserving the spatial bonds of community and the temporal bonds of tradition.
To understand multipolarization, it is insufficient to view unipolarity and multipolarity solely as arrangements on a static map of the world. What matters is the scale at which aggregation and dispersion occur, and the length of the temporal axis over which these movements are observed.
When individuals are fragmented to the extreme, the binding energy connecting one human being to another approaches zero. When such bonds as family, locality, religion, vocation, history, memory, and community are lost, human beings approach the condition of mutually independent particles. Local centers cease to form, and social entropy increases. This disorder, however, is highly advantageous to a single enormous center. Even if large numbers of isolated individuals exist, they cannot form a pole capable of opposing this center. As the fragmentation of individuals advances, the poles at lower social levels disappear, making it easier for power to become concentrated in the single enormous center situated above the individuals. The unipolarity of the whole is therefore established through the elimination of poles within the lower levels of society.
In the opposite direction, when human beings reassemble into families, local communities, religious communities, vocational communities, peoples, states, and civilizations, a center forms within each of them. A community gathers values, memories, norms, and authority within itself and therefore acquires its own local unipolarity. The family has a center, the community has a center, the state has a center, and civilization has a center. When multiple local centers are established, multipolarity emerges in the higher-order space. Multipolarization is therefore the multiplication of centers. Global multipolarization is established through the development of local unipolarities.
This produces an apparently paradoxical structure. At the level of the world as a whole, dispersion proceeds from one enormous center towards multiple civilizational centers. Within each civilization, human beings simultaneously aggregate around their respective centers. Dispersion occurs at the global level, while aggregation occurs at the civilizational level. The same movement appears to proceed in opposite directions according to the scale from which it is observed.
When this structure is placed on a temporal axis, an even more important movement appears. A community is formed through aggregation, its internal bonds strengthen, and it becomes a pole. When multiple poles are established, a multipolar world is formed. Thereafter, if one pole expands disproportionately and begins absorbing the surrounding poles, the whole once again aggregates in a unipolar direction. Once concentration around the center passes a certain critical threshold, the conditions for the next dispersion are generated within that order itself. Multiple local centers then form again, and a new process of multipolarization begins. An order established through aggregation expands through the success of that aggregation, and within its own expansion accumulates the conditions for the next dispersion.
This movement corresponds strikingly to the opening words of The Tale of the Heike: “The sound of the bells of the Gion Shōja echoes the impermanence of all things. The color of the sala flowers reveals the truth that those who prosper must inevitably decline.” The principle that those who prosper must decline can be read as a compressed expression of a civilizational movement in which a center is formed through aggregation, prospers, expands, and eventually generates the conditions of dispersion from within itself.
The problem of time now enters the argument. When the direction of movement is measured between two points, A and B, the greater the distance between them, the more accurately the direction can be determined. Assuming the same observational error, the closer A and B are to one another, the greater the influence of that error becomes; the farther apart they are, the clearer the direction of movement becomes. This spatial distance can be converted into time. If only one year of change is observed, there is a high probability of misidentifying whether a society is aggregating or dispersing, and whether it is moving towards unipolarity or multipolarity. If a temporal distance of one hundred, five hundred, or one thousand years is taken, a temporary condition becomes visible as one phase within a much longer movement. Human beings, however, cannot directly observe an entire millennium. Society therefore compresses and preserves long periods of time. What performs this preservation is tradition.
Tradition is the social memory that carries into the present the results of observations accumulated over long temporal distances. Ancestral experience, religion, myth, literature, ritual, history, royal succession, and the customs of local communities make it possible to use a past that people living in the present have never directly experienced as material for present judgment. Distance can therefore be converted into time, and accumulated time can be preserved through tradition. The deeper a tradition reaches into the past, the longer the effective observational distance available to a society becomes. A society that applies the Heike principle—that those who prosper must decline—to the present civilizational order is, in effect, bringing an observation made centuries ago into the present. The past thus continues to serve as a standard by which the present can be judged.
Community and tradition therefore form the same structure in different directions. Community provides the spatial bond, while tradition provides the temporal bond. Families, local communities, religions, peoples, states, and civilizations spatially bind together people living in the present. History, ancestors, literature, ritual, myth, royal succession, and social memory temporally bind the past to the present. Civilization is established at the intersection of these spatial and temporal bonds.
From this perspective, the present condition of Japan can be considered. Japan’s historical materials have not disappeared. Shrines and temples, classical works, era names, and cultural properties continue to exist. If the temporal axis connecting the past to the present is severed, however, these things cease to function as standards for judging the present. The Edo period, the Meiji period, the medieval period, and antiquity become isolated exhibits rather than phases of a continuous historical movement extending into the present. This is far more serious than the mere loss of historical information. Historical forgetting does not mean only that the facts of the past are no longer known. It also means that the past can no longer serve as a standard by which the present is judged.
Once the temporal axis is severed, the line connecting A and B disappears. Only the present point B remains. Society can no longer measure by its own standards where it came from, nor can it determine the direction in which it is moving. Under these conditions, externally supplied standards of evaluation exert increasing power. Words such as “progress,” “modernization,” “democratization,” “internationalization,” “normality,” and “obsolescence” enter as substitute coordinates for the lost temporal axis. A society that has lost its own long-term standard begins to explain itself within coordinates established by an external evaluator.
This destruction of the temporal axis connects directly to the question of who has the authority to assign coordinates. Tradition provides a long-term reference coordinate that prevents a present evaluator from freely rewriting the coordinate system. A society that preserves long historical standards can test present judgments by measuring them against the past. When a society loses its temporal axis, this capacity for judgment weakens. The present evaluator can then determine both the object being evaluated and the reference point from which it is evaluated. This is the structure of a people’s historical forgetting produced by the destruction of its temporal axis.
The severance of the temporal axis described above stands in a mutually complementary relationship with the problem Heidegger presented as the forgetfulness of Being. The two describe the same event from different directions, and each fills what is absent from the other.
Heidegger’s discussion of the forgetfulness of Being rejected the ordinary understanding of time as a homogeneous succession of “nows,” treating it as derivative and leveled. This critique was presented as a phenomenological description, but it did not reveal the structural reason why a succession of present moments cannot provide direction. The argument from the observational baseline supplies a theoretical basis for measuring this problem. When the distance between two points approaches zero, determining direction becomes impossible in principle. A succession of present moments cannot establish direction because a collection of points without a sufficient baseline cannot define one. This is a structural condition rather than a question of attitude or merely a consequence of fallenness. At the same time, the observational-baseline argument alone cannot explain why human society is drawn towards ever shorter baselines. The analysis of leveling and fallenness shows that this tendency is rooted in the everyday mode of Being itself and is therefore more than an accidental phenomenon. Measurement theory explains the structure, while phenomenology explains the tendency.
Within this ontology, human beings acquire authentic historicity by taking up and repeating possibilities inherited from the past. This is expressed as a demand at the level of self-understanding, while the functional reason for its necessity does not come fully to the foreground. The definition of tradition supplies this function. Repetition, prior to being an ethical demand, is the only means by which the results of long-term observation can be carried into the present. Ancestral experience, religion, myth, literature, ritual, royal succession, and custom are mechanisms that compress and preserve temporal distances that cannot be directly observed. Without these mechanisms, a society cannot measure the direction of its own movement. Conversely, the analysis of heritage and repetition supplies what is absent from the argument concerning tradition. Tradition does not function automatically as an accumulation of historical materials. It becomes a criterion for judging the present only through the act of taking it up. The historical materials themselves still exist in Japan. They have ceased to function because this act of taking them up is no longer being performed.
Heidegger states that individual historicity becomes established as the shared historicization of a people, but this structure is not fully developed. The formulation that community is a spatial bond, tradition is a temporal bond, and civilization is established at their intersection gives a concrete structure to this communal destiny. Heidegger’s ontology, in turn, shows that this intersection is more than the overlapping of two axes. It is established through the acts of taking up and resoluteness. Structure and action become mutually complementary at this point.
There remains, however, no explanation of the mechanism through which the forgetfulness of Being occurs. Forgetting is described as a condition, while its cause is left unexamined. Civilization is a long-term social structure constructed to arrange human beings, land, vocation, family, religion, the state, memory, and the temporal axis within a determinate order, thereby restraining disorderly dispersion. When these bonds are severed, social entropy increases, and leveling emerges as one manifestation of that increase. The forgetfulness of Being is therefore no accidental event in intellectual history. It is the necessary consequence of severed bonds. Heidegger’s ontology, in turn, shows that this consequence extends beyond the disintegration of social structure and reaches the loss of the relationship with Being itself. Entropy theory supplies the mechanism, while ontology supplies its depth.
From this follows a proposition that goes beyond complementarity. I present it as the forgetfulness of factual existence. The forgetfulness of Being signifies the loss of the question of Being itself. The forgetfulness of factual existence signifies a condition in which beings continue to be preserved as historical material yet cease to function within social reality because they have lost their connection to the present. Shrines and temples, classical works, era names, and cultural properties continue to exist. They have not been lost. Because the temporal axis has been severed, however, they no longer operate as criteria for judging the present. This occurs on a level distinct from the forgetfulness of Being. The forgetfulness of Being is the loss of the question; the forgetfulness of factual existence is the loss of connection. The former advances through the history of metaphysics, while the latter advances through the transfer of the authority to assign coordinates.
The concepts of parousia and kairos, which Heidegger addressed in his early work through the Pauline epistles, also connect to this problem from another direction. Time is more than a succession of points uniformly divided by a clock. When past experience determines present life and that present possesses a direction towards the future, time becomes a living relationship. Traditional value is the form in which this living temporal relationship is preserved within a community.
Liberal atomization of the individual therefore entails two forms of destruction. When the bonds between human beings are severed, spatial binding energy declines. When the bonds between the past and the present are severed, temporal binding energy declines. At the extreme limit, the individual becomes a point isolated both spatially and temporally. This is the direction in which social entropy is maximized.
When human beings re-form communities, local centers emerge. When communities recover history and tradition, the long temporal axis is reconnected. Through the simultaneous recovery of spatial and temporal bonds, society once again acquires its own center. When each civilization recovers its own center, its own tradition, and its own historical time, multiple local unipolarities are established throughout the world. This is the multipolar world. Multipolarization is the movement through which individuals stripped of any pole are reconnected to communities, severed histories are reconnected through tradition, and each civilization recovers its own time and center.
That multipolar world will not remain fixed forever. Aggregation forms a center; the center prospers; prosperity generates concentration; and concentration eventually generates the conditions for dispersion. Dispersion occurs again, and new centers are born. Civilizational history is the movement that repeatedly passes through aggregation and dispersion along the temporal axis. This is why the impermanence of all things and the inevitable decline of those who prosper are not merely words from the past. They are measurements made across a long temporal distance and preserved by a civilization within the present.
Ben Shapiro tells young conservatives to quit complaining about the rotten state of our country and fix their own lives by getting married, graduating high school and getting a job.
"You have the greatest privilege in the history of mankind," he says. "You live here."
FOX NEWS: If you're a young person and you're disenchanted, you can't afford a home, you're having trouble with healthcare and you feel failed by the economy, what is the Republican alternative?
MIKE JOHNSON: Well, the answer is not to turn everything over to the government,… pic.twitter.com/iFqL8f1UxC
Mike Johnson: "We put in this Congress into place all the economic conditions to let the economy take off like a rocket, and beginning in the first quarter of this year that's what was happening, and then we got into the conflict with Iran … that's the big headwind we have… pic.twitter.com/HFTwc4jbA0
Trump: We will pass the great healthcare plan to stop all payments to big insurance companies and give the money directly to the people—you buy your own health insurance, and you have money left over. You end up with better health insurance. pic.twitter.com/ESeCixgZ0c
Here is a brief recap of some of the things that I missed this weekend:
Ben Shapiro told young conservatives at YAF to shut up and quit complaining. There is nothing the MAGA movement can do for you. Learn personal responsibility. Figure out how to pay for $4 a gallon gas. Make your own burritos at home. Substitute tuna for beef. Stretch the protein. You are completely on your own. He doesn’t give a shit about your standard of living.
If you are wealthy, however, you can purchase pardons and endorsements from the president. You can pay $100K to get access to his market moving Truth Social posts. You can rent the U.S. military to fight wars for Israel. You can purchase Republican politicians who will sell you the water and electricity of their states to build AI data centers to further inflate the AI bubble.
AI takes your job due to government policies? Learn personal responsibility. Groceries are becoming unaffordable due to high fertilizer costs caused by wars in Ukraine and Iran? Learn personal responsibility? Replaced at work by an H-1B worker? Learn personal responsibility. Can’t afford the $4 a gallon gasoline caused by the Iran War? Learn personal responsibility.
House Speaker Mike Johnson said the economy was poised to take off like a rocket until his party stumbled into the war with Iran for Israel.
The White House Ballroom was declared a military project by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Trump toured the Ballroom with AI George Washington.
Trump said that was going to declare the Strait of Hormuz a U.S. territory, said he would never apologize for higher gas prices as a result of the Iran War and said that prices were coming down so fast that it was unbelievable.
Trump and Mike Johnson are working on the great healthcare plan that he has been talking about for 11 years.
He also said the economy was doing great from the perspective of Wall Street
There were some reports that protein was being stretched on the USS Abraham Lincoln
I had a great time at the 2026 Southern Cultural Center Conference.
It was good to see and reconnect with old friends, talk about old memories and create new ones at the center. I spent much of the weekend thinking about the choices that we made over the last 11 years which have been dominated by the MAGA movement which is coming to an end.
I’ve repeatedly compared MAGA to a fake plastic palm tree. Our people spent the last 11 years focused on pouring all of their water – their time, attention, money, votes and hope – onto this fake plastic tree in the vain hope that Donald Trump would “Make America Great Again.” We would have been better off watering our own gardens. Imagine where we would be today if all that time and energy had instead been spent on, say, creating a network of Southern Cultural Centers in the South or just investing in educational resources to help instill a positive sense of racial and cultural identity in younger generations.
The investment in mainstream conservative politics has yielded lower taxes for corporations, an expensive and unpopular war with Iran for Israel, AI data centers and a lower standard of living. It wasn’t any different this time around. The next fake astroturfed populist movement like the Tea Party and MAGA which will be rolled out to convince you to reform the Republican Party won’t be any different either.
Our dear Friend and Comrade, JOHN DOE joins us once again to discuss the current state of military affairs and proffer a strategic analysis of the extant conflict paradigm vis a vis the Russian Front and the Strait of Hormuz and the profound gap in performance between the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation contra the IRGC, HEZBOLLAH and elements und…
In late July, Spain’s North African enclave of Ceuta faced an unprecedented migrant surge when tens of thousands of people (estimates ranging from 50,000 to over 70,000), primarily military aged males, crossed from neighboring Morocco by swimming around coastal barriers or scaling fences, briefly overwhelming the enclave of about 83,000 residents, an invasion straight out of Camp of the Saints. Most of the Moroccans who rushed into Ceuta have already head back to Morocco, yet several thousand remain, leaving local authorities to manage ongoing humanitarian strain, overcrowded reception centers, and fears of further coordinated crossing attempts.
If these invaders were granted residency, they would ultimately have the ability to have free movement through all of Europe’s Schengen zone. This had the potential to trigger a migrant crisis that harms all of Europe, as Italy temporarily closed free travel from Spain. However, Spain ended up swiftly deporting more people in a day than most right-wing governments in Europe have managed to over the span of years, preventing a full blown crisis. Spain’s swift response shows that states can repel migrant invasions if they really want to.
Even if Spain’s prime minister, Pedro Sanchez, is a leftist, it doesn’t look like Spain is caving into handing over Ceuta to Morocco. Moroccans are using their people as human shields, a tactic to try to get them killed or injured so that they can play the victim. Most of the migrant deaths were because Moroccan police forced migrants into the sea to cross into Ceuta to orchestrate a fake humanitarian crisis to blame on Spain. These are kinetic events that are designed to inspire fear and create disorder and are no different from when Russia and Belarus weaponized migrants against Finland and Poland. There are also historic parallels to Rhodesia, as far as using fear and terror to get the “colonists” to return back to Europe to reclaim that land.
Even if Israel didn’t orchestrate the attack directly, Israel’s open statements of recognizing Moroccan territorial claims and prominent zionists and high ranking Israeli officials, including their foreign minister, celebrating the siege that put the lives of Spanish citizens in direct danger, shows extreme hostility toward Spaniards and Europeans. Netanyahu’s son, Yair, urged ‘Arabs’and‘Muslims’to‘free’ the Spanish territories back in 2019 and retweeted a map showing half of Spain under Islamic control, as “Al-Andalus,” the historic Moorish province. Since Spain was the historic battlefield of defending Europe from Islamic invasion, Netanyahu’s son’s statements are such an upfront to all Europeans and makes it crystal clear that the Netanyahu regime is as much of an adversary to the West as any Sunni Muslim extremist who desires a caliphate.
It is not just Israel that supports Morocco’s territorial claims over Spanish territories but also the Trump administration and GOP. The US ambassador to Morocco praised Morocco at the very same moment of the siege, Trump posted a video about a highway named after him in Morocco’s disputed Western Sahara territory that same day, and Trump had previously made some veiled threats against Spain. A neocon DC think tank, American Enterprise Institute, has been lobbying Marco Rubio on this invasion of Ceuta for several months. Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, suggested that the US lobby Morocco to storm the two Spanish exclaves with the help of civilian masses. In March 2026, Rubin called on the Trump administration to formally recognize Ceuta and Melilla as occupied Moroccan territory, branding Spain ‘a colonial power’ running colonies across the Strait of Gibraltar. Shortly afterward, Republican representative, Mario Díaz-Balart, chairman of the House Subcommittee on National Security and one of Marco Rubio’s closest congressional confidants, declared publicly that the enclaves ‘are not in the geographic territory of Spain’ but rather in Moroccan territory, and that their fate should be ‘established, negotiated, and discussed between friends and allies.’
A few weeks ago, the House passed a bill that green lit and funded the transfer of Spanish territory to Morocco, which every Republican except Thomas Massie voted for. Not to mention that these White Hispanic Cuban Republicans like Mario Díaz-Balart and Marco Rubio have betrayed their Spanish heritage. I suspect that the rightwing Miami Cubans hope that America will create a puppet government in Spain and appoint them as the elite.
This was Morocco’s reward for recognizing Israel and joining the Abraham Accords, and punishment against Spain for supporting the Palestinians. Morocco agreed to join Trump’s Gaza “Peace Board” along with Kosovo, a Muslim puppet regime of the US, to help Israel occupy Gaza. Morocco has had covert cooperation with Israel since the 1960s and the Moroccan royal family has been anti-Khomeini since the Iranian revolution. Trump is also upset that Spain refused to let America refuel aircraft at US bases for the Iran war.
Istanbul/Bosphorus Strait and the Strait of Gibraltar are crucial geopolitical choke points and the Bosphorus already belongs to Turkey, so it is crucial that Europeans control Gibraltar and not the Arabs or Americans, which I think is America’s plan since it lost control of the Strait of Hormuz to Iran and the Houthis are blocking Israel’s access to the Red Sea.
The purpose of the Abraham Accords, besides countering Iran, was for Israel to build an alliance with wealthy, albeit despotic and amoral, Arab regimes like the UAE, so that Israel can bypass having to deal with Europe altogether, thus severing off Israel as part of Western Civilization. This siege on Ceuta is the culmination of the Abraham Accords being weaponized against Europe. Israel and America’s alliance with Gulf State Wahhabi/Salafist Islam has been deeply disturbing, such as their support for the Syrian rebels against Assad. This goes back to Turkey and Saudi Arabia funding Islam in Europe while they were both stanch allies to the US during the Cold War. Israel’s growing technological, economic, and dual-use military ties with China is another hedge against a declining Europe and cultivate non-Western partners that place no demands on democratic norms or European solidarity.
I predict that Israel will break away from the West and form a new geopolitical alliance with Abraham Accord countries in the Gulf, India/Hindu Silicon Valley elites, and possibly China, as Europe is turning against Israel. America can be part of this alliance but the Democratic Party, who will dominate electorally for the next few election cycles, is beginning to turn against Israel and younger Republicans are also less crazy about Israel. Thus, I view Iran economically weakening GCC/Gulf countries by closing the Strait of Hormuz as a direct sabotage of this plan that will force Israel to be nicer to Europe. This is also why Zionists feel rushed and are doing this all out power grab, such as trying to merge US intelligence with Israel.
Pedro Sanchez is certainly to blame for his open borders policies, including an amnesty for illegal aliens, but that doesn’t absolve Israel and America. While I detest Spain’s leftist government, this is fundamentally an attack on all Europeans, Europe’s territorial integrity and national security, on the behalf of Morocco, Israel, and the United States, as Ceuta is the gateway to Europe. The zionists and Trump admin have become the enemy of Spanish and European nationalists who might have otherwise sympathized with Trump and Israel and detest Sanchez as a traitor.
The only way to prevent another migrant invasion is to punish both Morocco and Israel. When Morocco threatened to annex Ceuta and Melilla in 1978, Spain’s PM Adolfo Suárez replied, “Do you know we can bomb Rabat in 48 hours.” Spain can retaliate against Morocco by backing Algeria and Western Sahara separatism and putting sanctions on trade with Morocco that can collapse their economy. More European nations need to sever diplomatic and economic ties with the Netanyahu regime and US military industrial complex. Spain has ordered two frigates from the Spanish Navy to approach Moroccan shores, to send a message to Morocco to not fuck with them again and to assure the Spanish people of their security.
The way basic American right-wingers think is that Jewish liberals are like George Soros but Netanyahu is good because he is right-wing and supports Trump, thus he stands up for the West against Islam and leftism. Netanyahu likes America to the degree we are subservient to him, but he detests Europe which is the ancestral core of the West. Not to mention that a lot of American conservatives are also very anti-European, such as Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, telling Tucker Carlson that a cooperative market involving Gulf nations and technological hubs like Israel could easily outpace Europe. While Israel’s center-left like former prime minister and opposition leader, Naftali Bennett, are on the same page as Netanyahu regarding Palestinian statehood and support for the wars in Gaza and Iran, Bennett and the Israeli Left’s diplomatic posture toward Europe is distinctly less antagonistic and more cooperative than Likud’s. Thus, Israel’s right-wing political factions and security establishment strongly support Morocco against Spain, while left-wing, centrist, and Arab factions oppose using Morocco as a tool to punish Madrid.
The political ideology of Israel’s Right is that Jews are an exceptional chosen race that are the inheritors to a great ancient civilization and that Europe represents Rome who oppressed their ancestors and destroyed their temple, and American Christian Zionists are merely useful idiot goys. The Israeli Right is made up of religious Zionist Orthodox factions, right-wing youth, Holocaust survivor families, and populist political blocs like Likud and Otzma Yehudit whose views are defined by historical grievances over the Holocaust. They view Europe as inherently antisemitic, thus view European criticism of Israel as grounded in centuries old antisemitism. They see an unbroken line connecting the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the Holocaust to modern EU funding of Palestinian NGOs and European arms embargoes. Their worldview is summarized by the Hebrew phrase, Am levadad yishkon (“A people that dwells alone”).
The right-wing Mizrahi block resents the cosmopolitan Ashkenazi elite who founded Israel, whom they view as mimicking condescending European colonial attitudes toward Middle Eastern culture. They view modern Western European critique of Israel’s defense policies as lecturing, detached, and fueled by latent European bias. They believe that Israel must stop pretending to be a European outpost and accept that its permanent destiny, economy, and security are anchored in the Middle East. You also have a growing segment of tech/business leaders focused on the Gulf states who view Europe as a declining continent that does not understand the brutal, zero-sum reality of the Middle East. They argue that alliances with strongman Arab regimes like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, or Morocco are far more reliable and valuable than a green-energy partnership with Brussels. The Likud coalition also includes secular Russians, who are ethnically mixed with Slavic gentiles. This demographic supports a hardline position against the Arabs but unlike the Orthodox and Mizrahis do not harbor anti-European or anti-gentile views.
The secular Ashkenazi Israelis (Chilonim), who are analogous to America’s WASPs, tend to have a positive view of Europe. Liberals, centrists, and labor Zionists champion strong Western-style integration with Europe. They believe Israel’s greatest asset is its status as a liberal, Western-style democracy highlighted by Israel’s participation in European sports leagues and the Eurovision song contest. For them, isolation from Europe means a slow slide to autocracy, religious fundamentalism, and economic ruin, even if they are still fundamentally zionists who dislike the anti-Israel politics in Europe. Former labor PM, Ehud Barak said in the Epstein leaks that he wanted to convert Russian Slavic gentiles to emigrate and whiten Israel to counter the Arabs, a statement Netanyahu vehemently denounced, as it insults his Mizrahi base.
Israel’s rightwing Ultra-Orthodox Religious Parties like Shas and United Torah Judaism have neglected sex trafficking from former Soviet countries because the trafficking victims were non-Jewish under Halakhic law, and are Eastern Europeans, whom they hold ethnic resentment against and the clients were disproportionately Orthodox Jews. In contrast, Israel’s secular left, such as the Meretz party and leftist politicians like Zehava Galon, have been the most aggressive in combating sex trafficking from former Soviet countries.
The early Zionists, who were primarily secular Jews from Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire, viewed Israel as an extension of Europe. However, there was a shift away from Europe as a reaction to the Holocaust with a wave of Eastern European Orthodox Jewish refugees and later waves of Mizrahi Jewish refugees from the Middle East. There was still this window in the 80s when a more moderate western friendly zionism could have worked, but Yitzhak Rabin’s assassination by a rightwing Mizrahi terrorist put an end to that possibility. Israel’s demographic future is more Orthodox and Mizrahi and they will turn Israel into a Jewish version of Saudi Arabia while the secular cosmopolitan pro-Western population is increasingly marginalized and emigrates to the West.
I also dislike the anti-zionist left because they use the same arguments against Israel that delegitimize White settler colonial states like America. I am not interested in debating whether the original Jewish colonization of Palestine was morally justified, but rather my issue with Israel is their ongoing militarism in the Middle East and hostility to Europe. The irony is that Zionism might work if Israel actually were what leftists claim it is, which is a vassal state or colony of Europe, or buffer zone between Europe and the Muslim world. Israel desires to be a regional superpower and is not content being some colonial vassal of Europeans whom they fear could turn on them like in the past.
Zionists are using leftist dialectics like calling Spain a colonizer while calling themselves indigenous, which is not a good way to maintain alliances with nationalists in the West. For instance, Danny Danon’s statement that “It’s time Spain explains to the world why it still maintains colonial enclaves in Africa.” Israelis are throwing Europeans under the buss rather than acting like we are all in this together against the global south who view us all as colonizers. Zionists are bringing up old irrelevant colonial war crimes while they are currently committing war crimes paid for by Uncle Sam. For instance, Zionists accuse Spain of using chemical weapons on civilians during the Riff Wars in the 1920s while Israel is using chemical weapons on Lebanon today. It is really gross that Zionists are blaming Spain for the small handful of Moroccan deaths that Morocco was responsible for while Israel is carpet bombing civilians and blocking humanitarian assistance in Gaza as collective punishment. Israelis acting like humanitarians, calling on Spain to show restraint and claiming that Spain’s military was too cruel shows real chutzpah. It is also a tactic of American imperialists, such as during the Cold War, to attack Europeans for colonialism as a way to geopolitically counter European influence and detract from US foreign policy and corporate exploitation of Third World resources. This is why I don’t have any patience for leftists complaining about historic European colonialism.
Zionists are saying that Moroccans are simply entering Moroccan colonized lands which sounds a lot like what anti-American Mexicans say in California. The US Republican congress saying that Spain should be “negotiating” with Morocco over “the future” of Ceuta is the equivalent of some foreign country saying the US should be negotiating with Mexico over the future of California and Texas. Ceuta is like what Puerto Rico is for America so if say Cuba invaded Puerto Rico, the US military would have responded swiftly and harshly.
Ceuta has belonged to Spain since 1668 which is far longer than Israel has existed. Why doesn’t Turkey abandon its territory in Europe and return Constantinople to the Greeks? If you want to call it neocolonial fine, but there is a strong case that Europe needs some buffer against the Middle East and Africa. Thus, the French conquest of the Maghreb in the 19th Century was justified as a reaction to the Barbary pirates. This is the same argument that Israel is making, which I sort of get, but we should not be backing their greater Israel project, especially now.
The Muslims who support Morocco’s fake claims over Ceuta and Melilla the most, besides Moroccans themselves, include staunch Israeli ally the UAE, and Pakistanis in Europe who believe in a global Islamic caliphate rather than focused on Palestine. Even if plenty of pro-Palestine Sunnis support Spain out of gratitude for Spain’s support for Palestine, you have this Sunni Arab supremacist ideology among some pro-Palestine types that want a caliphate in Spain, as well as pro-Palestine leftists that view both Spain and Israel as colonizers. Morocco has been called a disgrace and traitor to Islam in online posts, including from other Muslims.
Pro Iranian academics/voices and Algerians, the latter who are also Sunni, are expressing the most support for Spain over Morocco among Muslims. Representatives of the Iranian government have claimed that the mass migration from Morocco to Spain was effectively a gift from both Israel and the United States. It is ironic that Iran’s minister of foreign affairs, Sayed Abbas Aragchi, is more pro-European than Trump and Netanyahu.
Morocco is a historic adversary of Europe going back to the Moorish invasion and Barbary Pirates, who enslaved over one million Europeans, while Iran is not unless you want to go way back to when the Persians attacked the Byzantine Empire. The Persian Safavids helped save Europe by weakening the Ottomans before the siege of Vienna. I don’t think Iran’s legitimate hatred of American Imperialism and defending themselves from US aggression is comparable to the deep seated resentment that a large segment of Israelis have over European antisemitism or Sunni Arabs’ dream of a caliphate that expands into Europe.
Morocco is in close proximity to Europe and they weaponize their diaspora in the same way that Mexico has done in the American Southwest, while Iran is distant from Europe and views their diaspora as traitors. Moroccans are one of the worst behaved, violent, and anti-White diasporas in Europe which makes it especially ironic that they are allied with US imperialism and Zionism. The big irony is that the more third wordlist, anti-imperialist factions, including Algeria, are more aligned with Spanish interests on Ceuta. Morocco has colonial ambitions toward Algeria and Western Sahara in the same way that Israel does toward Palestinian territories, Lebanon, and Syria. The Arab conquest that created Morocco erased Berber identity, so Arab identifying Moroccans are much bigger colonizers than Spaniards in North Africa.
The night of the attack I was using inflammatory rhetoric on Twitter against both Israelis and Moroccans. My tweet in which I said that I’ve been reasonable before but Israel made it clear they are an enemy of the West went viral with over 2 million views. This was because Ana Kasparian quote tweeted it, Ben Shapiro quote tweeted her, and then all these hasbara bots jumped out of the wood work. This is the first time in a very long time that I’ve had zionists attack me online because I’ve been fairly balanced and there are so many people now who are so militantly anti-Israel that I look moderate by comparison. The funny thing is I also got accused by pro-Palestine people of not caring about Gaza and only hating on Israel for supporting the siege of Ceuta.
Nioh Berg, who is a rightwing Iranian Jew based in the UK, is one of the few sane and smart prominent zionists in calling out Israelis celebrating the seige as harming the pro-Israel cause. Even if there are pro Western Jewish and Israeli zionists who speak out on behalf of Europeans, what matters is the stances and actions of those who are actually in power or have influence in America and Israel. A lot of zionists who defend Europe struggle to keep the worst people on their team in check and often end up siding with their fellow zionists over anyone on the Right who comes across as remotely antisemitic when calling out bad behavior.
-Yoav Kaufman X bio says “Israel is fighting the West’s future war”
The situation in Ceuta literally appears like the crude antisemitic White nationalist trope of Jews using Muslim migrants as “bioweapons” against Europeans. This lends credence to antisemitic conspiracy theories about Jews opening the gates of Toledo and financing the Moorish invasion of Spain, which I don’t endorse, and even if partially plausible were likely exaggerated. It is true that Jews got along better with the Moors and were persecuted during the Spanish inquisition, thus hold some grudge against Spain. Benzion Netanyahu, the father of Netanyahu, wrote a book about the Spanish Inquisition and expulsions of Jews, which likely influenced Netanyahu’s hatred of Spain. The siege of Ceuta counters the narrative that Israel is a bulwark of the West against Islam. Why are we in a war on behalf of a country who runs cover for a Moroccan op to take over a European possession?
Germany’s AFD is now blaming the US and Israel for the siege and they’ve been relatively pro-Israel, which just shows how much Trump and Israel are losing allies in Europe. Even, Auron MacIntye, who is not some groyper but rather a fairly normie MAGA figure, is noticing Israel’s role in Ceuta now. Even from a pro-Israel standpoint, the Israelis are sabotaging their own best interests and they will have few friends left because of this. There is this antisemitic trope of Jews as cunning geniuses who are masters at propaganda but the Zionists have made huge strategic blunders and are losing the propaganda wars.
It is really gross how JD Vance and Fox News were exploiting the crisis to blame on the Left when the Trump admin is at least partially responsible. The Trump admin and much of MAGA INC are also trying to cover up the Israeli angle. The Democrats are at least open about being the anti-White and open borders party but the GOP are especially traitorous in how they claim to be the guardians of the West. The Iran war and excessive support for Israel expends precious political capital that the GOP can’t spend on immigration and will help bring the Democrats back to power who will open the border again.
Whether you support Spain or Morocco is a litmus test for whether you are an ally or adversary of Europeans. Both large portions of zionists and anti-zionists are equally hostile toward Europeans. There is this bizarre overlap of neocon zionists and thirdist worldist revenge fantasies being on the same page against Spain on Ceuta. There are no absolute moralistic principles in geopolitics like being consistent in opposing colonialism but rather only friend enemy distinctions and Israel has chosen to side with the enemies of the West.
Simon Rorschach reports that the AfD’s commanding lead in Saxony-Anhalt has triggered a desperate establishment campaign to prevent voters from delivering the majority they clearly want.
According to the latest polling commissioned by the very same activist network now trying to stop them, the Alternative for Germany (AfD) stands at a commanding 43 percent in Saxony-Anhalt. That is nearly double the support of the next-strongest party, the CDU (Christian Democratic Union, Chancellor Merz’s party) at 23 percent. The Left Party limps along at 13 percent, while the once-mighty Social Democrats (SPD) hover at a precarious 7 percent and the Greens cling to the absolute minimum of 5 percent. The newer BSW (Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance) sits at 4 percent and every other party is effectively irrelevant. In any normal democracy, this would be treated as a decisive signal that the public has had enough of the established order. Instead, it has triggered a coordinated panic among the usual suspects who have spent years dismissing the AfD’s voters as “frustrated,” “misinformed,” or worse.
In the first days of August 2026, a strange scene unfolded off the coast of Alaska. Mark Zuckerberg’s yacht Launchpad was moving through Farragut Bay when a six-meter Hewescraft ran out of fuel nearby. Two women, a child, and a dog sat helpless in the small boat while the cold grey sea stretched around them. The contrast might have come fromKurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five: one group sealed inside comfort and machinery, another exposed to chance, with both occupying the same moment but almost different worlds.
The Coast Guard sent repeated calls for assistance over the emergency frequency. Vessel tracking showed that Launchpad was close to the stranded boat. The yacht slowed near the mouth of the bay, equipped with radar, helicopters, small boats, and every device money could buy. Yet the distance between wealth and need remained greater than the few hundred meters of water between the two boats. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Billy Pilgrim learns that distance is not always measured in miles. People can stand beside suffering and still inhabit another universe.
Help came instead from the smaller cruise vessel Wilderness Legacy. Its captain changed course, took the Hewescraft in tow, and brought its passengers to safety. When those aboard the Wilderness Legacy learned that the great yacht had remained nearby while the smaller boat drifted without fuel, they booed the Launchpad, their voices carrying across the water toward the gleaming hull. Slaughterhouse-Five repeatedly sets human suffering beside machines, institutions, and men of great power that seem strangely detached from it. Dresden burns while officials speak in orderly language; prisoners are moved according to schedules; Billy Pilgrim passes through catastrophes beneath the fatalistic refrain “so it goes.” The humor is black because the machinery continues to function even when the human purpose behind it has disappeared. Something similar seemed to happen in Farragut Bay. The larger vessel possessed everything, yet the actual rescue came from the humbler ship that simply changed course and helped. The boos from the Wilderness Legacy thus became something like one of Vonnegut’s bitter punch lines: all the wealth and technology in the world had been gathered in one place, while the elementary act of helping another human being came from somewhere else.
When different news media reported the incident, a spokesman said that Zuckerberg had not been aboard the yacht. The crew, he said, had been listening to another radio channel and therefore missed the Coast Guard calls. Only after Wilderness Legacy had completed the rescue did the operators of Launchpad switch to the emergency frequency and learn what had happened. It is the sort of explanation that fits easily into Slaughterhouse-Five, where terrible or absurd events are followed by explanations that change nothing about the event itself. The moment has already happened. So it goes.
Questions remained about that account. Large vessels are expected to keep watch on the international distress frequency, while modern communications equipment can receive digital emergency alerts automatically. If those systems were operating as intended, the distress message should not have vanished into silence. Slaughterhouse-Five repeatedly returns to this gap between what men are supposed to do and what they actually do. Rules exist, machines function, orders are given, and yet someone is still left outside in the cold.
The episode also offered an image of modern power. A floating palace crossed the same water as a small disabled boat. The powerful possess machines that can see farther, travel faster, and communicate across the planet, but none of those machines can force a man to care. Slaughterhouse-Five gives this kind of indifference a simpler form when Billy Pilgrim and the other American prisoners are packed into freight cars and carried across Germany. Men grow sick, collapse, and die inside the train, but the railway continues to move them toward its destination as though they were cargo rather than human beings. Vonnegut’s point is not that the machinery fails. The machinery works. What fails is the recognition of the person caught inside it. Farragut Bay presented that same contrast on a smaller and less terrible scale: Launchpad had the equipment to detect distress and the means to answer it within minutes, yet the stranded family remained somebody else’s problem until another ship turned toward them.
Billy Pilgrim survives by withdrawing from the logic of ordinary time. He sees Dresden burn, watches people die, and comes to regard each event as something fixed forever in the structure of the universe. The scene in Farragut Bay invites the same cold phrase that follows death throughout Slaughterhouse-Five: so it goes. The small boat drifted. The great yacht remained nearby. Another vessel came. The passengers were saved. Each fact sits beside the next, and the moral judgment is left to whoever is still capable of making one.
Then Launchpad continued on its way, and the Hewescraft reached shore under the care of others. The old Russian saying about the man whose hut stands at the edge of the village found a modern form on the Alaskan coast: what happens beyond the threshold is somebody else’s affair. The Tralfamadorians of Slaughterhouse-Five would have found nothing surprising in it. Every moment simply exists, they say, fixed forever in its place. Human beings, unlike Tralfamadorians, still have the harder task of deciding whether “so it goes” is an explanation or an excuse.
If you enjoy my writing, order my new book, The Fate of White America, here.
Editor’s Note: The following speech was delivered at the Southern Culture Center’s 2026 conference in Wetumpka, AL on August 14, 2026.
We are 82 days from the 2026 midterm elections.
We are also only three weeks away from the beginning of football season here in the South. I’m sure everyone in this room has watched plenty of football games in their life. You probably know that sinking feeling in the pit of your stomach when you are watching a big game and there is still time left on the clock, but the outcome of the game is no longer in doubt. The outcome of the whole season is no longer in doubt too. Your team is about to lose a championship. You know that when you wake up on Monday morning there will be legions of angry fans on social media demanding that the head coach be fired. Fans with long faces are already streaming out of the stadium to get ahead of the traffic.
Donald Trump’s “Make America Great Again” movement now finds itself in exactly this predicament. It has lost the House of Representatives before in the 2018 midterms. It lost control of Congress after the 2020 election. It had an underwhelming victory in the 2022 midterms. The 2026 midterm elections, however, are fundamentally different and are the beginning of the end of the MAGA movement. After November, Donald Trump will be a historically unpopular, term limited lame duck president who will spend his last two years in office fighting off endless investigations and a third impeachment effort. The recriminations will begin as Trump loses his iron grip on the party which he has controlled for over a decade.
The facts are indisputable here:
The Twenty Second Amendment makes Donald Trump ineligible to run for a third term.
The president has fallen into a polling abyss in the mid-30s and is now more unpopular than George W. Bush and Joe Biden. He has a lower approval rating than Jimmy Carter on inflation. He is more unpopular than Herbert Hoover was when he lost to Roosevelt in 1932.
No one has ever climbed out of such a deep hole. It is the place where presidencies go to die like the Carter presidency or the George W. Bush presidency.
No one else associated with the MAGA movement like Vice President JD Vance or Secretary of State Marco Rubio who could emerge as a successor is untainted by Trump’s unpopularity.
The MAGA brand is now toxic and deeply unpopular with Independents who determine the political balance of power in America.
There are no third chances in politics. Trump swung twice and struck out.
Finally, the MAGA movement is organized around a cult of personality and its leader is deeply unpopular and about to exit the stage of national politics in two years.
Being associated with MAGA will only be a liability for anyone with national political aspirations moving forward. The label will be memory holed like the Tea Party.
It is true that Republican voters love President Trump and he remains popular in the Republican Party, but this isn’t anything new. Republicans aren’t even a third of the country. The same 33% of voters are a floor that supported George W. Bush to the end in 2009. They voted for John McCain and Mitt Romney. 2/3rds of Republican voters believe the Iraq War wasn’t a mistake even today. The political fallout from the Iraq War still gave us eight years of Barack Obama and discredited the old Republican establishment. If it was up to Republican voters, Republicans would win every election but that doesn’t happen.
In hindsight, I look back on MAGA and see our people pouring over a decade of their time, attention, effort and energy into what was essentially a golem. Ten years ago, mainstream conservatism was on the fritz and the Jewish donors who bankroll the Republican Party spotted an opportunity. They created Donald Trump’s presidential campaign as an outlet to soak up all of that populist discontent in the electorate. It succeeded and it grew up to become the monster that is the MAGA movement which they control and have used as their weapon to destroy their enemies at home and around the world. These people have astroturfed fake populist movements in other countries like Brazil and Argentina. We’re currently in a war with Iran which was started to install the son of the Shah, a Mossad asset, in power in that country.
What did we get out of being practical and supporting Donald Trump’s MAGA movement? 85% of his time in office as president is now history. We should pause and take stock of the last decade.
Did it get us any closer to an independent Southern nation? No, MAGA sucked all the oxygen out of the room and left us worse off than we were a decade ago.
Did we get a White ethnostate out of it? No, it is still the same country that it was a decade ago. It is just about 5% less White than it was then.
Did we get our freedom of association back? No, Eric Orwoll is going to speak on that this weekend. Return to the Land in Arkansas is under investigation for violating fair housing laws.
Did we get the mass deportations of illegal aliens that we were promised? No, Greg Bovino who was in charge of the Border Patrol was let go and is doing podcasts now.
Did we save our Southern heritage? No, the Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson monuments in Charlottesville were torn down and desecrated. Confederate monuments have been torn down all over the South since 2015. We lost Monument Avenue in Richmond. Nathan Bedford Forrest and his wife were dug up from their graves in Memphis. We’re getting new monuments of Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman and Martin Luther King, Jr. though in Trump’s Garden of American Heroes in DC. Juneteenth has also become a federal holiday. We also got hit with the Sines v. Kessler lawfare judgment.
Is the average person at least financially better off today? No, the dollar has lost about 25% to 30% of its value since 2019. Everything has become much more expensive.
Did we get the national debt under control? No, the national debt has more than doubled since 2015.
Did Elon Musk become the world’s first trillionaire? Yes, this milestone was briefly crossed in June.
Did Donald Trump personally become a lot wealthier? Yes, Donald Trump’s net worth has increased by about $4 billion since 2024. He has more than doubled his personal wealth.
Are we living in a Golden Age now? The Dow Jones Industrial Average has risen from 17,900 to 53,800 in the Trump era. It is a Golden Age for billionaires and wealthy investors.
Do corporations pay less in taxes? Yes, Donald Trump was the only Republican president in a century to be given two trifectas. He spent both on enshrining a permanent corporate tax cut into law.
Did we end the foreign wars? No, we are in a new war with Iran for Israel on top of funding the war in Ukraine which is still going on.
Did we bring back American manufacturing? No, but we are building AI data centers all over the South to destroy millions of white collar professional class jobs.
After 11 years of MAGA, it costs more to rent an apartment or buy a house, afford health insurance, buy a new truck or a used car, to fill it up with gas, to buy groceries, eat fast food or to throw a steak on the grill. We are deeper in debt. The demographics are worse. It is harder to find a job. There are millions of more legal and illegal immigrants here than when this movement began. There is less free speech. Forget about any of our grandiose political aspirations. It is harder just to survive than it was a decade ago. We have gone backwards and are worse off than when the MAGA movement started.
I’m afraid this is only the beginning of our woes. By wasting the last decade on giving a reality television show host two terms as president, we have set ourselves up for the next decade of hard repression. The failure of the MAGA movement to control spiraling wars, debt and costs have made socialism popular by default. These lunatics are about to return to power. They will open the borders again, send all the South African refugees home and bring back anti-White discrimination in the government. All of the things that you could point to and claim as a Trump accomplishment will be reversed like it was in the Biden era. Radicals will eventually come to power. They will just be on the other side of the political spectrum.
As the Trump era comes to a close, the great moral lesson that I believe we should take away from it is that it is practical to be a radical. Donald Trump was given control over all three branches of government twice. He was given the popular vote. He had a mandate to “Make America Great Again” and built a White House Ballroom with it. We have seen the limits of that approach. Instead of watering our own garden of dreams, we poured our water into his garden and what we have reaped is a harvest of weeds.
Discover a thought-provoking exploration of the collapse of Modernist political ideologies through a biblical lens. This book examines the decline of the dominant political systems of the past two centuries — Liberalism, Communism, and Fascism — and the spiritual and cultural crisis they have left in their wake. As the modern world order falters, Jay Rogers offers a bold reinterpretation of Aleksandr Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory by grounding a vision for the multipolar world in the enduring truths of the Bible.
Blending geopolitical theory with Christian theology, this work explores the historical, cultural, and spiritual foundations of civilizations. It argues that the future of global politics cannot be built on the abstract individualism of Liberal modernity or the coercive power of ideological states, but must instead emerge from tradition, faith, and deeply rooted cultural identity. By engaging Dugin’s ideas through a biblical framework, the book offers a unique path beyond the failures of modernism and toward a renewed vision of civilizational order.
Key insights from Jay Rogers’ analysis of Dugin’s Fourth Political Theory:
Engages the philosophy of Aleksandr Dugin while critically reinterpreting it through biblical theology, arguing that the future of civilization must be rooted in enduring spiritual truths rather than ideological systems.
Examines the failure of the dominant modern ideologies—Liberalism, Communism, and Fascism—and explores how their decline has produced a global search for new political and cultural foundations.
Proposes a vision of a multipolar world in which civilizations recover their cultural and religious identities while interacting within a broader framework informed by Christian moral and spiritual principles.
This extensive exploration will challenge everything you think you know about politics, culture, and humanity’s place in the world. It’s indispensable for anyone who believes that a more hopeful future is possible.
Book 3 of the Changing World Order Book Series
The world is fracturing. The old order is crumbling, and the future is a battleground of ideas. While most of us watch the headlines in confusion, a handful of brave thinkers – Ray Dalio, Samuel Huntington, and Aleksandr Dugin – saw it coming decades ago. For their prophetic insights, they have been shunned, banned, and even targeted.
But what if they are right?
This book series does not merely summarize their powerful theories on the new multipolar world. It confronts them, critiques them, and forges them into a new vision – a Christian American response to the greatest geopolitical shift of our time. This is more than an analysis; it’s a field manual for understanding the chaos and championing the story of Liberty in the 21st century. We are living through a tectonic shift in global power – a change so profound we haven’t seen its like in 500 years.
Constantin von Hoffmeister draws on Alexander Dugin’s Eurasian Mission to imagine a Europe reborn beyond liberal universalism, nation-states, and American hegemony.
Alexander Dugin’s book Eurasian Mission (Arktos, 2015) details the dream of a multipolar future, where all civilizations can pursue their own courses of development, existing and thriving in cultural harmony, untouched by the pernicious unipolar influence of a hyperpower dictating its terms with a big stick and a dark syrupy drink. The glorious Holy Roman Empire with its medieval warrior-monasticism shall be resurrected, in all its arcane mysticism and martial splendor, in the age of digitization and hypersonic missiles. The pendants of the sovereign duchies are fluttering, their colors in the morning breeze alternating between magenta (the flowering of an ethnic group’s passion) and crimson (the blood of the forefathers hailing from afar). Dugin’s concept of Archeomodernism is reminiscent of Guillaume Faye’s vision of Archeofuturism, which postulates that future realms use teleportation devices but still recite folk hymns praising the glorious deeds of ancestors long gone but immortalized in the hearts and minds of a traditionalist ancestral chain.
According to the French New Right thinker Alain de Benoist, the current conflict between Ukraine and Russia is not only a war between two countries. Nor is it a clash between Ukrainian nationalism and Russian nationalism. Instead, it is a war between the passionate magnificence of empire and the cold logic of the nation-state. It is a war between the dying West and the ascending East, between the liberal world and that of the civilized space, between the sea and the land.
Eurasianism consists of organized state-level and guerilla resistance to the all-encompassing umbrella network of globalization, whose tentacles invade every orifice offered by a people metaphorically lobotomized. Eurasianism defends the flowering multiplicity of peoples, religions and beliefs. All anti-globalist tendencies are de facto Eurasianist. Eurasianists are staunch supporters of Eurasianist federalism, which entails a combination of strategic unity and ethnocultural sovereignties. The key phrase that sums up the Eurasianist credo is “empire vs imperialism.”
An empire that embraces anti-imperialism as its prime directive is an empire that will last.
America is an empire that is imperialist in nature. It is aggressive, domineering and hell-bent on conquering new territories, forcing them into its cultural and economic spheres of influence. America wants to rule the world, impose its way of life on all peoples it subjugates, and thereby usher in the final dawn of mankind. Resistance to this kind of Americanized globalization is met with annihilation. America has become the tool of the managerial class’ ambitions to control the world’s peoples and territories according to the salvational principles of the false religions. America’s indigenous European peoples have been designated to become the discardable pawns in this global quest for control and genocide through murder and multiculturalism.
The European peoples of America must free themselves from the bondage of their alien overlords and unite with their cousins in the Old World to become one once more.
The new Holy Roman Empire will be anti-imperialist in that it will acknowledge the rights of its freely federated territories. In the new European empire, nation-states will be abolished as they exemplify relics of a feudalist, and hence imperialist, past. Instead, newly established regions, which reflect ancient ethnic, linguistic and cultural entities (even the smallest entities will be recognized, such as the Basque and the Sorb territories), will be set up in a decentralized federation. Thus, there will be no “leading nation” and no “leading people.” Rather, ethnic equality will become a reality through radical measures that will include the dismantling of symbols of chauvinism, symbols that have haunted Europe for millennia, symbols that were ultimately responsible for horrible fratricidal wars all throughout European history.
The early Bolshevik regime and its nation policy of “re-root-taking” can serve as an example. When the Soviet Union was established in 1922, Vladimir Lenin had the foresight to grant independence to all territories within the former sphere of control of the then-deposed Tsar. Tsarist Russia had been decidedly imperialist in that it did not recognize the legitimate ethnic interests of the non-Russian territories that Russia controlled (therefore uprooting and delegitimating the unique national characteristics of these territories). Lenin insisted on the right to self-determination of all nations. While the Whites were political reactionaries and Russian nationalists, the Reds were revolutionaries in that they wanted to rid the Eurasian heartland of Russian chauvinism.
The Bolsheviks promoted social equality and a voluntary federation of the various Eurasian nations. After the victory over the Whites, the Bolsheviks established the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on December 30, 1922. In practice, this meant that all republics were considered equal in the new Communist/Eurasian empire. In contrast to Tsarist policy, the administration of the non-Russian republics was left to local elites. The cultural tolerance of the Bolsheviks manifested itself in the promotion of non-Russian languages and traditions. 48 ethnicities received new written languages (in Latin, not Cyrillic, script), and non-Russian languages were used in administrative and educational facilities. In this way, illiteracy was successfully reduced and independent regional development guaranteed.
The West seems to be in inexorable decline according to the historical cycle described by Oswald Spengler. Europe is dying from obsolescence and wear and tear on its forms, but also from infection by Americanism, xenophilia and Islamism—invasions launched and directed with increasing efficiency as this part of the world abandons its foundations and falls back into barbarism while simultaneously moving forward to the establishment of a bona fide idiocracy. Only inclusion in a Eurasian superstructure might save it from becoming irrelevant in the long term. Moving back to the faith-based peasant past will enable it to be propelled into a majestic majority-ruled future.
If you enjoy Constantin von Hoffmeister’s writing, order his new book, The Fate of White America, here.
Reggie Bannister passed away on August 9th, age 80. For those that don’t know, he starred in Don Coscarelli’s cult classic PHANTASM (1979) and the four sequels that followed, as well as Coscarelli’s earlier efforts, Jim - The World’s Greatest (1976) and Kenny & Company (1976).
The PHANTASM film are peculiar - on their own terms, conceptually, but also what they represent to the cult fandom that values them. The original is a bona fide horror/sci-fi classic; the sequels are of varying quality (PHANTASM II is fantastic - and has big-studio polish on its production; III and IV are awful, PHANTASM: RAVAGER is a great and proper send-off, and is especially poignant considering the subject of this editorial).
Coscarelli observed, years after the release of the original film, that he received a tremendous volume of letters from men who were great fans of the series; and who relayed that they found the movie(s) intimately relatable. This seems superficially odd - considering the movie is a surreal and remarkably weird, low budget horror film about an undertaker who is some sort of inter-dimensional alien ghoul who robs corpses from the grave and re-animates them as dwarfish slaves to serve in endless bondage on his home planet (a Hellscape the viewer only gets brief glimpses of).
What draws young guys to Phantasm is the fact that the series captures something that proves elusive to most novelists and filmmakers - the subtle (and not so subtle) anxieties about growing up and making transition from a boy to a man.
Women have their own challenges - neither more severe nor comparatively easy as compared to their male counterparts. Simply, different. Most notably, girls become women by a punctuated act of nature - girls become women when they become capable of motherhood. The transition announces itself in such a manner that is unambiguous and cannot be ignored.
Boys traditionally become men when they become capable of handling weapons - but in some respects, this leads to arrested development - as often men become fascinated with a kind of permanent adolescence that comes with the fun and comradery of organized violence - be it warfare, gang life, or some combination thereof (such as the life of the Partisan). This leads to an existential ambiguity, which can be catastrophic to spiritual and psychic health as men age.
Coscarelli of course also was exploring a motif similar to what Ray Bradbury explored in his classic youth novel, The Halloween Tree - that being, childhood ends when we learn that we are going to die; and our conscious experience of living is but a brief and fleeting glimpse of Being amidst a permanent sleep within an infinite cosmos.
Reggie Bannister - who literally plays himself in the Phantasm series (his name in the films is ‘‘Reggie Bannister’’); opposite his young protege and surrogate son ‘‘Mike’’ (played by Mike Baldwin in all but the second film). Reggie and Mike (and Mike’s big brother Jody) live in 1970s, Northern California - Reggie drives an ice cream truck and spends his off time jamming on his guitar with Jody and working on a 1971 Hemi-Cuda owned by Mike and Jody.
Mike’s parents died sometime before the opening of the film - and he is worried that Jody will leave him. There is a subtle, and eventually not so subtle, evil that Mike detects within the small town where he lives. People die under circumstances that don’t make sense. Clearly supernatural things occur that nobody seems to notice. Its as if dream-logic (or illogic) applies in lieu of consensus reality.
Ultimately, Mike, Jody and Reggie find themselves battling something supremely powerful and monstrous - and in so doing, decipher the brutal realities of death and the passing of the human consciousness not into oblivion, but into a kind of horrific slavery. As the alien Undertaker (dubbed ‘‘The Tall Man’’ in universe) says to a lapsed Priest, ‘‘You think that when you die, you go to Heaven - you come to US’’.
What saves young Mike’s sanity - and what allows him, and Reggie as well - to sustain Faith in God and the potential for that which is Godly despite coming to knowledge of the eldritch horrors that surround us - is the bond he shares with his Pals. And that is what sustains men throughout their lives.
Women have their children - men have Pals. You have three or four good Pals, you got yourself a Tribe. You got a Tribe, is all gonna be OK.
Host Rebecca Hargraves presents a panel discussion with Jim Jatras, Cameron Macgregor, and Constantin von Hoffmeister at the Multipolar Press event in New York City on July 18, 2026. The future is rapidly approaching. Geopolitics are changing. This panel discerns who will come out on top. You won't want to miss this heated debate. The future of the West is at stake. We must be prepared for anything.
Oswald Spengler presents transience as the deepest law of history: cultures die, peoples dissolve, art becomes mute, truths fade, and whole worlds disappear with the souls that created them.
This is an excerpt from Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of the West, from the new English translation and one-volume abridgment by Constantin von Hoffmeister.
All that has come into being is transient. Not only peoples, languages, races, and cultures are transient. In a few centuries, there will no longer be a Western European culture, no German, Englishman, or Frenchman, just as in the time of Justinian there were no longer any Romans. It was not the succession of human generations that had died out; rather, the inner form of a people, which had gathered a number of them into a unified bearing, was no longer present. The civis Romanus,1 one of the most powerful symbols of classical being, nevertheless endured as a form for a few centuries. But the primal phenomenon of the great culture itself will one day have disappeared, and with it the spectacle of world history, and finally the human being himself—and beyond that the manifestation of plant and animal life upon the earth’s surface, the earth, the sun, and the entire world of solar systems.
All art is mortal—not only the individual works, but the arts themselves. One day, the last portrait by Rembrandt and the last measure of Mozart’s music will have ceased to be, even though a painted canvas and a sheet of music may perhaps remain, because the last eye and ear capable of their language of forms will have vanished. Every thought, every faith, every science is transient once the minds have been extinguished in whose worlds their “eternal truths” were necessarily felt as true. Even the stellar worlds that “appear” to the astronomers of the Nile and Euphrates are transient—worlds for an eye, for our eye, equally transient, is a different one. We know this. An animal does not know it, and what it does not know is not present in its experience of the surrounding world. But with the image of the past there also fades the longing to grant the transient a deeper meaning. And thus the idea of the purely human macrocosm may once more be linked to the words to which the entire further exposition shall be devoted: All that is transient is but a parable.
And now I draw the conclusion. There exists a multiplicity of prime symbols. The experience of depth through which the world comes into being, through which sensation expands itself into a world meaningful for the soul to which it belongs—and for that soul alone—differing in waking, dreaming, receiving, and observing, differing in child and elder, townsman and peasant, man and woman, realizes, with profound necessity, for every high culture the possibility of form upon which its entire existence rests. All fundamental words such as mass, substance, matter, thing, body, extension, along with the thousands of corresponding verbal signs preserved in the languages of other cultures, are arbitrary signs determined by destiny; out of the infinite fullness of possible worlds, they single out, in the name of the particular culture, the one that alone is significant and therefore necessary. None can be transferred with full precision into the lived experience and knowledge of another culture. None of these primal words ever returns. The choice of the prime symbol at that moment when the soul of a culture awakens to self-consciousness within its landscape—a moment possessing something shattering for anyone capable of viewing world history in this way— decides everything.
Culture, as the sum of the sensuously embodied expression of the soul in gestures and works, as its body—mortal, transient, subject to law, number, and causality; culture as historical spectacle, as an image within the total image of world history; culture as the sum of the great symbols of life, feeling, and understanding—this is the language through which alone a soul can speak what it suffers.
The macrocosm, too, is the property of a single soul, and we shall never know the condition of that belonging to another. What “infinite space”—this creative interpretation of the depth-experience by us humans of the West, and by us alone—ultimately signifies, this mode of extension which the Greeks called the Nothing and we call the All, immerses our world in a color absent from the palette of the classical, the Indian, and the Egyptian soul. One soul overhears the world-experience in A-flat major, another in F minor; one senses it in a Euclidean fashion, a second contrapuntally, a third magically. From the purest analytical space and from Nirvana stretches a series of prime symbols to the most corporeal Attic physicality, each capable of generating from itself a complete form of world. As distant, strange, and fleeting as the Indian or Babylonian world appeared in its idea to the men of the five or six cultures that followed them, so incomprehensible will the Western world one day become to the men of cultures yet unborn.
Get Oswald Spengler’s The Decline of the West: The One-Volume Abridged Editionhere.
Translator’s note: Civis Romanus (“Roman citizen”) was the legal status in ancient Rome that conferred full civic rights and protections under Roman law, including the right to trial and appeal, and exemption from certain punishments reserved for non-citizens.
Sixty-five years ago today, on 13 August 1961, workers and armed units began sealing the streets between East and West Berlin. Barbed wire came first; concrete followed. The official name given to the new border by the German Democratic Republic (GDR) was the “Antifascist Protective Rampart.” History since 1989 has taught Germans to laugh at that phrase. They are told that the Wall had only one purpose: to imprison the East and deny its people freedom. There is some truth in that charge, but it is not the whole truth. The Wall also marked a real political frontier. On one side stood a socialist German state tied to Moscow; on the other stood a Western enclave protected by the United States, Britain, and France and integrated into the political, economic, and cultural system of the Atlantic world. Berlin was also one of the great centers of Cold War espionage. Western intelligence operations against the East were not inventions of SED (Socialist Unity Party of Germany) propaganda: the CIA and MI6 had even dug a tunnel from the American sector beneath East Berlin to tap Soviet communications only a few years before the Wall went up. The question, then, is not whether the GDR had enemies. It plainly did. The deeper question is how a socialist German state, claiming continuity with the older national traditions of Prussia, Luther, and the German workers’ movement, could defend itself against the pernicious West without turning that defense against its own people.
“A former top official at the Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted Wednesday on fraud charges, an escalation of the Justice Department’s ongoing case against the storied civil rights organization.
Federal prosecutors accused Heidi Beirich, the nonprofit’s ex-chief financial officer, of overseeing payments to informants working undercover in a variety of hate groups. Beirich, 59, of Palm Springs, California, was allegedly involved in a romantic relationship with one of those informants and diverted at least $140,000 to a joint bank account they shared and used to pay their personal living expenses, according to a superseding indictment unsealed in federal court in Montgomery, Alabama.
A lawyer for Beirich denounced the charges — which include counts of wire fraud, money laundering conspiracy and conspiracy to provide false statements to banks — as an attempt by the Trump administration to “silence political opponents.” He vowed she would fight the case. …”
I don’t share the optimism for three reasons:
1. First, I don’t have any confidence in Kash Patel and Todd Blanche. I don’t think anything will come of this beyond a dopamine hit and a headline. Trump’s DOJ indicted James Comey, Letitia James and John Bolton. I’m not going to celebrate until Heidi Beirich is locked up in an orange jumpsuit.
2. Second, Trump has expanded the power of the presidency and set a precedent by targeting his political opponents. He is going to set another bad precedent with mass pardons in his last two years in office. Over the next two elections, MAGA is going to hand power back over to the Democrats who will use these same tools and precedents to settle scores with people who aren’t rich enough to buy pardons.
3. Third, the SPLC is a largely defunct institution in 2026 and it is mainly used these days by MAGA to smear and fed jacket groups like Patriot Front. This is what I see 99% of the time when the SPLC is mentioned. Jews liquidated the group after October 7th. Beirich doesn’t work there anymore. She has her own obscure SPLC knock off group now called the “Global Project Against Hate and Extremism.” It is not significant enough to remember. I had to Google it to find out the name of the organization.
I’m going to err on the side of cynicism from now on.
If something looks to good to be true regarding mainstream conservatism, it is likely because there is some kind of ulterior motive. My bet is that this indictment will be used by MAGA to smear everyone in this space as a “fed” or an “SPLC agent” and that is the only reason why they are doing it.
Bob Hickok marks Fidel Castro’s centenary by examining how his lifelong struggle against hegemony helped prepare the ground for the multipolar world now emerging.
Today Fidel Castro would have turned one hundred. How should we mark the centenary of a man who became one of the defining revolutionaries of the twentieth century? The answer cannot lie in ceremony alone. Castro mattered because he refused to accept that small nations must live according to rules written by great powers. Cuba was poor, isolated, and only ninety miles from the United States, yet under his leadership it insisted on acting as a sovereign political force. That refusal carried a meaning far beyond the Caribbean. Long before the word multipolarity entered common political speech, Castro defended the principle on which a multipolar world rests: that history cannot belong to one empire, one ideology, or one center of command. His Cuba became proof that even a small country could resist absorption into a larger system and claim the right to choose its own course.
Was Castro one of the first revolutionaries to foresee the end of the unipolar world?
A people and a place. Nationalism is definitionally and inherently racial. In this no-holds-barred speech, Zach Kidd delivers a message of unity among one’s biological brothers. A prominent speaker on nationalism and historical revisionism in the modern day, Zach delivers the fourth speech of the night at the LIVE event held in NYC sponsored by Multipolar Press on July 18, 2026.
OK - I am a North Shore cat. And the NORTH SIDE is my domain generally. I NEVER go South of Division St (NO need).
I know the WEST SIDE like the back of my hand (for somewhat unfortunate reasons), and to be FAIR, they got incredible BBQ out there, but I don’t much get a BBQ jones (tho it is funny to hear the comments when I find myself in those places).
So anyway, DON’T be like, ‘‘Dis list is BULLSHIT, Son! BEST pizzas are at Jimmy Wop’s Pizza Palace and Glory Hole in EVERGREEN PARK!’’ I don’t give AF. I don’t hang out down there. So don’t throw SHADE on my list.
There’s a FUN anecdote from my life about PEQUOD - around 1996, before the area around LEHIGH AVE was all built up, my buddy stayed in this run down AF lil two flat. Our next door neighbor was PEQUOD.
Being 20 year old jagoffs, we’d guzzle JAGERMEISTER and PBR every Tuesday and watch TUESDAY NIGHT FIGHTS on USA NETWORK.
The Hippie who ran PEQUOD hated our GUTS and would incessantly COMPLAIN. We’d throw EGGS at him (and at PEQUOD), toss BEER cans at him, all kinda anti-social shit.
But one day, when my buddy was SOBER, he actually talked to HIPPIE dude and ended up selling him some really potent WEED. After that, we became BROS w/the HIPPIE and he would hook us up with FIRE AF PIES and ITALIAN BEEFS etc.
In the civilisation of money everything becomes unreal. The money destroy the very base of the reality. It is dissipating, collapsing. Jean Baudrillard called it the semiurgy - the production of (flat) signs. The money make everything flat, two dimensional.
We trusted in Trump and MAGA believing the civilisation that has reached the bottom first, could start first to revert the process and re-ascend. We underestimated the nature of the bottom, of the darkness that lies beneath the bottom.
The U.S. and the West in general want to convince the humanity that there is always something worse than the worst, something still more horrible than the most horrible… and they succeed. Everlasting end, the ending without the end. Eternal descend…
It seems that the only alternative to the acceleration going to the worse is to be regarded. That is the meaning of conservatism. To stay behind. We need to choose something different - to go another way. The speed is not essential. The direction is.
Here you can check all my social media 👇
📱 X account — https://x.com/AGDugin
📱 Personal Telegram Page - https://t.me/Agdchan
📱 International Channel in Telegram - https://t.me/Dugin_Aleksandr
📱 International Channel in Youtube - https://www.youtube.com/@Agdchan
📱 My Personal Substack Page - https://alexanderdugin.substack.com/
📱 Page in VK - https://vk.com/duginint
⚠️ Any other accounts are fake and scams!
🔭 Paideuma.TV on X - https://x.com/PaideumaTV
📱 Paideuma.TV on FB - https://www.facebook.com/paideuma.channel.tv
📱 Paideuma.TV on TG - https://t.me/PaideumaTVInternational
🖱 More information — https://linktr.ee/alexanderdugin
Several months ago, I decided to vote for Democrats in the 2026 midterms to sweep MAGA out of power. This was after MAGA succeeded in purging Thomas Massie in Kentucky. Previously, I had planned on just sitting out the election and watching the disaster unfold on television.
Tommy Tuberville is running for governor against Doug Jones. Barry Moore is running for Senate against Everett Wess. Tuberville and Moore both support the war with Iran for Israel. I’ve never heard of Everett Wess and can’t find much about him on the internet. Jones is running a smart campaign against AI data centers, the Iran War and Trump neglecting the economy and driving up prices.
“President Donald Trump is looking for new policy pledges he can present to voters ahead of the midterm election, according to a top economic aide and a former administration official, including potentially calling on Congress to cut capital gains taxes and create an exemption for certain home sales.
National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett said Tuesday in a interview with Fox Business host Larry Kudlow that Trump wants to offer voters more incentives to back Republicans in November’s election.
Kudlow, who led the council during Trump’s first term and remains an ally, said he had recently spoken with Trump about indexing capital gains, meaning taxes would be applied on gains adjusted for inflation. He also suggested exemptions for sales of homes worth $2 million or less from capital gains taxes, adding that “the boss is very interested” in those ideas. …”
Listen to this.
This is how Greer describes the pre-Trump GOP in 2013 at the opening of the book.
“Yet Republicans were incapable of offering one. More than two decades after the Cold War, the conservative movement no longer knew what it was defending. Anti-communism had been its defining purpose, but communism was gone. The attempt to replace it with the messianic interventionism of George W. Bush collapsed in failure and disgrace. Republicans could only offer wonkish promises to better manage the national debt and reduce marginal tax rates. The dominate ethos among party leadership was to become a more respectable and more pro-business version of liberalism.
This was the consensus when I arrived in Washington in early 2013 …”
It is mid-2026.
We’re less than a 100 days out from the 2026 midterms.
Donald Trump is a historically unpopular president who has sunk to 34% in national polls. He is more unpopular than Joe Biden and George W. Bush. He is more unpopular than Herbert Hoover was when he lost to FDR in 1932. He has a lower approval rating on inflation than Jimmy Carter.
We’re stuck in a war with Iran for Israel in the Middle East after Trump campaigned as the “Peace President” and ran on “no new wars” in the 2024 election. Trump is the third Republican president to start a war in the Middle East, neglect the economy and hand power back to Democrats. He is the third Republican president in a row to destroy his coalition in this way. He started the war to overthrow the Iranian regime which was “killing its own people” and threatening us with non-existent WMDs which he claimed to have destroyed the previous summer in Operation Midnight Hammer.
Trump is the only Republican president in a century to be given two trifectas. He spent both trifectas on corporate tax cuts. The Big Beautiful Bill made his 2017 corporate tax cut permanent. Before he sinks into political oblivion after the midterms, Trump is considering squeezing the last ounce of political power out of his current majority to pass a capital gains tax cut. Larry Kudlow was the Director of the National Economic Council in Trump’s first term and is who is advising him to do this. Greer looks at all this and sees a Trump revolution that has overturned Reaganite economics and W.’s foreign policy.
What happened to the GOP that was defined by anti-communism which was out of gas until it was revitalized by Trump’s Alt-Right rhetoric? It is running against communism in 2026. The national debt has more than doubled since Trump came down the escalator in June 2015. During his 2016 campaign, Trump called himself the “king of debt” and vowed to pay of the entire national debt in eight years.
Naif Al Bidh explores the different faces of Russia through presenting the notion of Matryoshka civilization—the unbounded polychotomy of the Russian idea and culture. The polychotomy inherent to Russia allows it to transform its teloi across world history, producing different ideological molds within every phase of its historical development. The series begins with an exploration of the metaphysics of geographical horizons of different cultures and its relevance to Russia’s history.
Introduction
Each time the forces of history open a new breach, the resulting surge of energy brings new lands and new seas into the field of human awareness, and the spaces of historical existence change accordingly. New criteria emerge, together with new dimensions of political and historical activity, new sciences, and new social systems. Nations are born or reborn.
— Carl Schmitt (Land and Sea, 1954)
A New Russian People
Oswald Spengler once argued that a “new Russian people” is in the process of becoming as it is eventually confronted by a frightful destiny which forces it into “inner resistance,” ultimately leading to the bloom of its higher culture. This new Russia, to Spengler, will be characterized by a passionate religiosity in a way Western Europeans have never been. Once this religious force is directed towards a specific goal, “it possesses an immense expansive potential” that is unique to this culture alone. Such spirit, if triggered, will awaken new cultural types that would lead “new crusades and legendary conquests.” To Spengler, the intersection of world history is exhausted by older petrified cultures, unborn cultures, deformed ones, and decaying societies—it is no longer fertile enough to give birth to such new religious yearnings. Thus, this new Russia is to be resisted on all fronts by all cultures, knowingly, or unknowingly. The notion of the “different faces of Russia” is not a new one, Spengler once described Russia as a culture with many faces, hence the title of his most important essay on Russia, namely, “The Two Faces of Russia” (1922). To Spengler, Russian culture was suffering from a Western cultural pseudomorphosis, which has essentially distorted its actual form. The result is the emergence of multiple Russian cultural forms within a short period of time, the pre-cultural semi-nomadic Russia, the Orthodox traditionalist Russia during the reign of Tsar Ivan Grozny, the culturally distorted Petrinist Russia following Peter the Great’s Westernizing reforms, and the Bolshevik Russia as a continuation of the distorted era. Of the many different faces of Russia, Spengler believed that the southern-oriented Orthodox Russia, which had once pointed towards Constantinople and Jerusalem, was the most authentic form:
Byzantium is and remains the sublime gateway to future Russian policy, while, on the other side, Central Asia is no longer a conquered area but part of the sacred earth of the Russian people.
— Oswald Spengler, “The Two Faces of Russia,” 1922
Yet, even then, he could not help but feel as though there was something else beneath this Orthodox-veneered Russia, another Russia, that still “slumbers” and has yet to give birth to an “unborn new religion” of a young culture that has just recently made its debut in world history. This is a point that Berdyaev had also touched upon when exploring the Russian cultural soul, which he believed was afflicted by a severe polarity as a result of belonging neither to the East, nor West, but a unique East-West. The eternal dialectic clash between East and West, to many Slavophiles and Russian thinkers, could be resolved in the emergence of a Russian higher culture. The concept of the Third Rome is intrinsically connected to this East-West synthesis, yet Berdyaev lost hope in such notions after realizing that the Third Rome had materialized in an inverted fashion thanks to the rise of Bolshevism. Instead of the Third Rome, the Western distortion of Russian culture had led to the emergence of the “Third International.” Nevertheless, the extreme polarity in Russia to Berdyaev was something known to most Russians, who, despite acknowledging their Orthodox connection—the Apollonian principle, implicitly knew of the elemental paganism innate to the Russian soul—the Dionysian principle. What came to be known as “double belief” in Russia, that is, the coexistence of Christian and pagan elements in a syncretic manner, is a perfect expression of this polarity and contradiction afflicting Russia.
Today, however, we are gifted with a unique vantage point when looking at Russia’s historical development. Despite losing the Cold War, Russia was given spatial and temporal room to reconnect to its primordial roots. In hindsight, we realize that the post-Cold War order did not end history, as Fukuyama had once argued. Rather, it had paused history and pushed the whole world into a brief phase of amnesic slumber—a historical purgatory, all induced by the unipolar order of Pax Americana. What I call the “pause of history” and the historical limbo was generally expressed in the trends that dominated cinema in the 1990s, where all protagonists seemed to be stuck in a perpetual socioeconomic loop, which was essentially an accurate reflection of the zeitgeist. Yet, beyond the West, the pause of history clearly functioned as a prelude or a literal commercial break prior to the emergence of the multipolar reality Huntington envisioned in TheClash of Civilizations. The unconscious ideas that dominate our conscious realities seem to manifest themselves powerfully during such brief phases of historical limbo. It is thus not a coincidence that Fukuyama, Huntington, and Dugin all produced works that express their philosophies of history at this specific time. Fukuyama’s linear development of history and its culmination in liberal democratic regimes, Huntington’s multipolar future where civilizations produce a multiplicity of teloi, and Dugin’s multipolar adaptation of Huntington but from a Russian perspective. Our concern in this specific series, is not only to reveal such possible futures in Russia, and the implications of such futures on its neighboring cultures, but to explore the history of the different faces of Russia and their implications on Russia’s future.
It is thus essential that we briefly touch upon the metaphysical implications of geography in this introduction to the series. Spengler and the Slavophiles all argued that the East-West dichotomy is of a deeper metaphysical relevance to the development of cultures across time, since these geographic realities move beyond the Euro-, or Western-, centric geographic conceptions such as the notion of a continent of Europe. Concerning this, Spengler said:
‘East’ and ‘West’ are notions that contain real history, whereas ‘Europe’ is an empty sound.
Spengler presented this argument in order to make a clear distinction between the West and Russia, which to him, although their fates are linked to one another, were separate cultures. This to Spengler was clearly expressed in Russian culture through instinctively dividing Europe and “Mother Russia.” Moreover, to Spengler every culture possesses a unique geographical horizon that is metaphysically embedded and essentially determines that culture’s spatial manifestation. Although the West, with its thirst for boundless space, has already extended the geographical horizons of the Earth without any limit, all high cultures that complete their stages of development without interruption manifest their own unique geographic horizons. There are also cases where exhausted cultures, or arrested civilizations, as Arnold Toynbee called them, were dominated by extreme geographic limits and ecological conditions to a degree that they experienced a state of extreme cultural atrophy. That being said, these cultures still experienced a unique geographic horizon in space and time, think of the Polynesian and Austronesian experiences across the Pacific and Indian Oceans—a culture that was solely oceanic in origin. Yet, their pure oceanic foundations, without ground and land, had paradoxically led to the exhaustion of their creative energies. Toynbee described the Polynesians as an arrested civilization that could not fully manifest its morphological development due to the ecological extremities of oceanic existence.
Carl Schmitt once described the sea as a purely fluid space that lacks the solid and ordered character of the land. Unlike the West, which had balanced its oceanic power with its land-based cultural origins, the purely oceanic cultures were naturally exhausted before achieving their full morphological development. To Toynbee, this was also the case with nomads who are likewise subsumed by the extreme desert terrain, and the Inuit, or Eskimo, in the Arctic regions, whereby a culture is forced to confront natural forces as opposed to cultural ones and thus is not able to move beyond the pre-cultural stage that is a pre-requisite to the high cultural stage. Through Schmitt’s spatial theory, we can distinguish two different forms of cultural atrophy: the first is lost through oceanic or sea fluidity, and the other is stuck within telluric, or land-bound, rigidity. Though we can also expand on Schmitt’s ideas further here and assert that deserts function as a hidden third element here, beyond the restrictive land-sea dichotomy presented by Schmitt. We can also perhaps add the Arctic and other extreme regions as unique ecological zones in their own right, all exhibiting their own respective characteristics.
Exploring the intersection between geography, ecology, climate, and culture is crucial to understanding why higher cultural realities emerge within the temperate “Goldilocks zone” that allow cultures to transcend beyond the liminal state—between nature and culture—that some cultures find themselves in. Be that as it may, all cultures, whether higher, lower, or pre-cultural, manifest their own unique geographic horizons, despite their inability to transcend nature. The Inuit and Sami peoples are one of the few peoples in world history to develop a unique geographic horizon that is circumpolar. The Berber Tuareg of the Sahara Desert, or “blue men,” express their soul through their nomadic existence, effectively traversing the Sahara and transcending the international borders of several modern nation-states. Building on Hegel’s philosophy of history, primarily his emphasis on the geographical basis of world history, and Spengler’s emphasis of the ecological origins of all cultures, I have come to the realization of the profound reality of most nomadic pre-cultural nations, namely, their eternal liminal state—between nature and history (culture). This liminal state between nature and history, while viewed as a defect by Hegel in his Lectures on the Philosophy of History, is actually a double-edged sword to these specific nomadic nations (Turkic nations, Tuareg, and pre-Islamic Arabia). While the harsh ecological reality does not allow these specific cultures to express their spirits properly, their liminal states allow them to traverse, and embed, themselves into the ontology of other higher cultures. Take for instance the Turkic, or Turanian, nomadic spirit, which I believe is directly tied to the symbol of the Shangrak associated with original Tengrist beliefs of Turanian nations and is found across the national symbolism of many Turkic republics and nation-states. This symbol, which represents the roof the Turanian archetypal object, the yurt (equivalent to the eskimo’s igloo), could perhaps be described as the prime symbol driving this specific nation—which denotes both an innate sense of expansiveness and mobility. Although this culture is cursed with an extreme ecological reality, making it difficult to express its soul through the higher cultural stages (hence why the portable yurt plays a crucial role in this culture as the only possible form of cultural expression), it is blessed with a nomadic mobility and expansiveness that allows its nations to invade and embed themselves at the civilizational level. In history, this came in the form of the Turanian nomadic invasions of, and absorptions into, several higher cultures such as China, India, the Islamic world, the West, and Russia. Thus, we can argue that every culture is imbued with a distinct sense of connection to the land and geography, which in turn leads to a unique geographical horizon. The ecological and geographical origins of a specific culture also set the geographical bounds, or limits, of that specific culture. Eurasian steppe nomads, for instance, are more expansive when compared to island-based cultures, though even in oceanic island-based cultures (Polynesians, etc.), we witness a different form of expansiveness. Another odd phenomenon worth mentioning about island cultures is their ability to retain different cultural forms that come into interaction with them, and the passage of historical time eventually leads to their hybridization of different, and usually contradicting, cultures. This is seen clearly in the fusion of Islamic, Indic, African and Gothic elements in Zanzibar, as well as the fascinating case of Sicily, where the Greco-Roman, Islamic, and Western worlds meet, leading to one of the most beautiful forms of cultural syncretism in world history. In effect, islands may be the only cases where Spengler’s notion of cultural pseudomorphosis, which he viewed as a tragic matter, is almost a necessity due to the natural geographical isolation of islands.
But why does this all matter to us when discussing the case of Russian culture? Primarily because the task of dissecting a culture’s soul is in itself a very serious matter, let alone the task of attempting to predict the trajectory of a culture, and claim that a specific culture possesses multiple faces due to an innate bipolarity afflicting its soul. Of course, this is not an original claim. Berdyaev, Leontiev, Spengler, Dugin, and many other thinkers have already explored this odd phenomenon existent in Russia. In fact, many Russians have acknowledged this, but cannot simply explain it. This is unsurprising since this phenomenon is a complex one. My claim here is that when tracing Russia’s bipolarity, one finds its expression in its unique interaction with its neighboring cultures and spatial disorientation. Russia’s innate bipolarity leads to a sense of spatial and geographical disorientation, which is problematic to its morphological development since it led to its adoption, and invitation, of false/alien cultural forms, yet the adoption of these forms seems to be paradoxically necessary for its destiny as a culture. In simple terms, Russia’s unique vantage point in world history, as a late comer to the stage of history (and I do not mean this in the derogatory and anti-Russian sense as seen in the works of Isaiah Berlin, but in a Spenglerian, Herderian, and Hegelian sense as seen in their philosophies of history), and geographical location at the threshold between the East and West, made it forcibly interact with a diverse array of cultures in all different cardinal directions. This geospatial challenge facing Russia across its historical development expressed itself in the different directions it took across world history, orienting itself north towards the nordic and Arctic regions within its initial stages of growth, then southwards towards Byzantium and Constantinople when attempting to centralize its politico-religious form, and then willingly looking west towards Europe when faced with uncertainty, and finally, it oriented itself towards the east for a brief yet significant period during the early 20th century.
Some of these orientations have occurred simultaneously, or rather, they overlapped during specific periods. For instance, when Russia began to orient itself eastward, which occurred at the state level with the Russo-Japanese War of 1905 (which is a clear and uncalculated historical incident, and not destiny in the Spenglerian sense of the term), it was still concurrently facing the West as exemplified by the absorption of Western political and economic forms with the Bolshevik Revolution. This is, again, a reflection of the paradoxical reality of the Russian soul, which to Berdyaev and Spengler suffered from profound internal contradictions. Berdyaev had touched upon this specific point when discussing the Russian tragedy as a land caught between the West and East and is thus forced to contend with the dialectic clash between the East and West as global civilizational poles, rather than its own unique national contradictions. To Solovyev, although this challenge of resolving the East-West dialectic is a tragic one, its resolution could lead to a universal theocracy, the true organic form of universalism that replaces the flawed Western liberal form of universalism. Solovyev also ironically warned Europe of a future fragmented period where external forces could effectively destroy it and argued that only a reconciliation of the churches (a union or alliance between Europe and Russia) could save Europe from such a predicament.
Russia as a Civilizational Katechon
Russia has a potential future, and vision, that could replace the destructive futuristic post-human vision emanating from the West, allowing for the continuation of the “human” within world-history. Thus, Russia could potentially function as a world-historical katechon—a restraining force against the Antichrist, and the forces that attempt to accelerate the world towards the apocalypse. Yet, Spengler, Leontiev, and Berdyaev all argue that this possibility is contingent upon Russia’s own emancipation from Western cultural hegemony, one that is not only distorting Russia’s own forms and stunting its proper development, but has also spread the anti-cultural forces of modernity into the Russian plane, slowly exhausting its creative possibilities. When discussing the paths of Russia and the catastrophic implications of Russia’s failure to grow, Leontiev paints a very gloomy picture of the future. On one hand, China and India are awakened from a “thousand-year-old sleep,” and are now active players in universal history once more. To Leontiev, the petrified form of these Asiatic giants, and their subsequent return into history, is not necessarily a positive development if Russia does not participate in universal history. China is seen as a “ferociously state-assertive giant,” India as a “profoundly mystical monster,” and the West as a “perpetually growing hydra of communist revolt,” one that is dying, and thus, is contagious. Russia is situated between them all, in a state of “drunkenness and lack of character.” The Russian to Leontiev lacks belief and mental fear that are necessary ingredients in integrating the culture as a whole into universal history. Rather, he imitates the European, possesses “imitative ideals,” all of which are alarming developments to Leontiev, for the implications of Russia’s failure to wake up are of universal historical significance. To Leontiev, Russia will inevitably find itself at a crossroads in the future where it decides to either dispense its own unique universal mission through evolving into a higher culture, standing between the two Asiatic giants—India and China—and the West, or to fail to accomplish such a feat. On the implications of the latter, Leontiev said:
To end history, having destroyed mankind; by spreading universal equality and by diffusing universal freedom to make human life on the globe altogether impossible! For, in that case, there would be no more new wild tribes, no more drowsy cultural worlds on earth.
Leontiev believed that the continuity of human culture as a whole required the birth of a new culture that took the ideas and truths of older cultures and reproduced them in newer and more stable forms. From his own vantage point, the logical end of world-history pointed towards Russia as the next possible culture that could achieve this world-historical mission. That said, like Spengler after him, he was worried that Russia may have become too corrupted to achieve this. To Leontiev, most societies emerge as a result of impersonal forces that transcend the individual, and in many societies these forces are “inevitable, irreversible, really immortal.” In a sort of Hegelian fashion, he believed that specific forces clash with one another across history and thus lead to different combinations of these forces depending on the time and place. The elements of the culture remain, but they just “reappear in different combinations of forces and of preponderance.” However, unlike Hegel, Leontiev did not see a clear logic in history and all of these dialectic clashes, and argued that some combination of forces are favorable and healthy, while others are unfavorable. On this, Leontiev said:
Thus the form which is the most deeply differentiated and contains the most groups—the form which is at the same time sufficiently concentrated in something general and higher—is the most stable and spiritually productive one; whereas the mixed equalized, nonconcentrated form is the most unstable and spiritually barren.
Like all pessimists, Leontiev’s pessimism grew worse as he aged, infiltrating his own philosophy of history later in his life. This is a similar trait that Spengler also possessed. While both were at one point optimistic of a future Russian culture beyond the West, their growing pessimism led them both to question such a possibility. Leontiev eventually argued that the Russians, almost without noticing, will transform from a “God-fearing people” to a “God-fighting people.” Due to the extreme polarity of the Russian soul, such a reality was possible to him. This would eventually, and unexpectedly, lead to “some one hundred years from now—from the depths of our state, at first classless, then churchless or having only a weak church—to that same Antichrist of whom Bishop Theophanus and other spiritual writers have spoken.” Likewise, although Spengler once predicted a future high culture emerging “between the Vistula and Amur,” he eventually argued that the rate at which Western modernity has transformed and deformed the Earth, the planet has been made incapable of giving birth to a new culture. The next logical step is a cosmic cataclysm—the apocalypse.
One cannot help but ask whether the healthy indicators that Spengler argued Russia once possessed are still existent today? Does Russia still possess a naïve religiosity like all young cultures? Or does rationalism dominate the Russian mind? Are Russians still attached to their countryside, their ecological origin, and source of their unique “Russian” ideas and truths? Or have they severed their connection with nature as the West has done? Are the Russian women still the same “women of race” Spengler spoke of? Or have they deformed into “Ibsen women” and are slowly, and unknowingly, dismantling the family unit? Many, including myself, cannot help but feel that Russia’s cultural immune system could be compromised beyond repair in order to rid itself of the Western cultural pseudomorphosis, unless a truly cataclysmic event enforces a rupture with the West. More importantly for us in this series, however, is if Russia does miraculously cure itself from the corrosive force of modernity, which of the many faces of Russia will materialize and guide it towards its world-historical destiny?
Dissecting one of the most prolific writers from our day, Kenaz speaks on a stark warning from H. P. Lovecraft in his speech at the “Multipolarity and the Global Reset” event in New York City on July 18, 2026. Kenaz Filan is an autodidact with a particular fondness for ancient history, current events, and the interplay between the two. Insatiably curious, Kenaz can’t stop himself from asking controversial questions and finding even more controversial answers.
Alexander Dugin delivers a blistering verdict on Serbia’s dangerous turn, the coming energy collapse of Europe, and the irreversible moment when artificial intelligence slipped the leash and began to act like us, only without a conscience.
Conversation with Alexander Dugin on the Sputnik TV program Escalation.
Host: Let’s begin with a very sharp situation that has stirred public opinion across several fronts—both in the Russian world and in the broader Slavic one. Zelensky has arrived in Serbia. This is his first visit to Belgrade in his current capacity. Events were held with the Serbian president, a drone factory is being opened in Serbia, and there was talk of possible contributions by the Kiev regime in this field. And of course a video has spread widely online in which a German journalist—God forgive the phrasing—asks what Europeans can do to kill more Russians (he corrected himself to “Russian soldiers,” but that is how it landed). I would like to hear your thoughts both on the visit as a whole and on the specific points connected with it.
Alexander Dugin: If we place this episode in the context of our problems across the post-Soviet space—with Armenia or other former Soviet republics—it fits the same pattern. Long-standing, inertial ties, the traditional friendship between Russia and Serbia that once seemed unshakable, are now crumbling, and it is painful. I love the Serbian people deeply; I have invested a great deal of myself in Serbia and in the development of our relations. For me this is a profound shock. The Serbs once seemed to be the people who loved us when no one else did, and who did not betray us when everyone else had.
What Vučić is doing—and the issue is specifically him—is not new. He is trying to keep a foot in both camps: one in Europe, the other in the Serbian patriotic and pro-Russian movement. He appears to have more than two feet, managing somehow to balance a pro-European, globalist course while still trying to please everyone. Because he has held power for a long time, despite internal unrest and opposition, the approach has produced results. Unfortunately, when one watches foreign policy, one is forced to concede that even outright opportunists who cling to power for years end up proving Machiavelli’s cynical point: the chief measure of a ruler is not morality but how long he remains in the chair.
Vučić manoeuvres right up to the edge, betraying whoever can be betrayed, then takes a step back. This foxy policy of trying to please both sides delivers results for him, but it strikes idealists hard—those Serbs who love Russia sincerely rather than out of convenience, and those Russians who feel a deep historical attachment to the Serbs. After all, it was for the sake of the Serbs, out of loyalty to our Orthodox brothers in the Balkans, that we entered the First World War and lost an empire. The Serbs once treated us the same way. Vučić’s behaviour therefore wounds the idealistic dimension of politics, which must never be dismissed.
Real politics always operates somewhere between idealism and pure opportunism—a compromise between sincerity and cynicism. Outright devilry is rare; even Trump came to power cloaked in the right slogans before disappointing the better part of the American people. Geopolitics always balances on that edge. But Vučić has now reached a line beyond which his actions begin to contradict both the deeper aspirations of the Serbian people and our own relations.
By receiving the terrorist Zelensky and speaking of creating and developing drones in order to kill us—something he had never gone so far as to do before—Vučić has stepped right up to the red line. He has not yet crossed it completely, because he immediately stepped back, allocating funds and declaring that “Russia is doing well” and so on, so as not to be misunderstood. Yet he stands in dangerous proximity to that line. And because we do not react to red lines with great speed—I believe we have drawn the necessary conclusions, but we are in no hurry, preferring to leave room for retreat—we treat our other partners in the same way.
The results are limited. We forgive those who insult and challenge us in the hope that they will come to their senses. They rarely do. More often they conclude that the red lines can simply be pushed further and take the next insolent step. At the same time we have little leverage with which to punish Vučić. We are hardly going to back pro-Western movements financed by Soros in order to remove him; that would be worse still. So we too are forced to manoeuvre in this intermediate space.
I am an idealist and a philosopher; I live a contemplative life—bios theoretikos, as the ancients put it. That is why I see the situation with particular severity. This intermediate murk, the constant to-and-fro, the dance of opportunists, pragmatists and political technologists, merely irritates me. I view it through the Gospel words: let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no. If you stand with the Russians, then stand with the Russians—suffer with us and share our hardships. We come to the aid of others not for gain but because we are people of principle.
I believe our president acts in precisely this spirit. It is painful for him as well to watch the constant vacillations of these small, half-hearted figures. What conclusion do I draw? We need to formulate our maximum programme—the idealistic framework of Russian policy. We must state clearly to everyone—those already with us, those who may join us, the waverers and our enemies—how we see the world, Europe, global security and multipolarity. What we do not need is the pragmatic style of applying a little pressure, then pulling back, issuing a threat and allowing the challenge to dissipate (the approach we have taken both with Pashinyan and with Vučić).
Instead we should declare our goal after the inevitable victory—even if the price is the complete destruction of Ukraine’s economy and military industry. We have already begun this process, having abandoned half-measures and started to fight in earnest. We will stop only when we are certain that our victory is irreversible, and by then Russia itself will be a different country. It would be valuable to set out now, for all to hear, our vision of the future.
Perhaps we should issue a clear declaration of what awaits our enemies and our friends after victory. Our friends, for example, would receive Kosovo, a free Eastern Europe liberated from NATO occupation and ready to serve as a frontier zone; a free Ukraine within a single East Slavic state; genuine integration of the post-Soviet space for the benefit of all its peoples, with sovereignty and nuclear protection guaranteed for everyone.
Those who stood with us without hesitation—North Korea among them—we would thank to the fullest and do everything possible for the people who sacrificed themselves in this war. China we would repay with interest, while remembering its earlier hesitations. Iran, which has shown real courage, we would support and reward comprehensively. We would offer a different vision of the world—multipolar and just—in which a great Russia becomes the guarantor of freedom and sovereignty against Western hegemony for every region of the planet.
As for the West, we would repay it three times over: we would drive the European economy toward collapse and reduce American influence to its own borders. Let them attend to their own affairs; they have Canada and the United States, and that should suffice. The rest we would free: Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Argentina. I realise many will say we are aiming too high. Yet more than once in our history we have aimed high and, through great effort, achieved what we set out to do. Russian words should be taken seriously.
If we were to set out such a maximum programme of foreign policy—whom we will help, whom we will thank, whom we will punish, what order we will establish in a Europe reduced to its natural proportions, and what we will offer the United States once it has suffered the defeat toward which we are working—then everything would become clear and we could proceed from that foundation. At present we grant some twenty years, others ten; we threaten some and support others. From a proactive rather than reactive policy we should shape our incentives and our threats. The entire picture would change, I assure you.
Many assume we are playing the same short-term game as these petty politicians of the moment. But Russia is a great country—a country of long time, vast space and large historical cycles. We are a people capable of pursuing a goal across centuries, not merely across one or two presidential terms. We think in centuries and in the most serious categories. Today there is a noticeable absence of any declaration of our vision of the future world. It may seem unrealisable now or even in the medium term, yet if we establish this standard and this goal we will move toward it consistently. Then any Vučić, Pashinyan, Maia Sandu or anyone else will think a hundred times before testing our resolve and crossing red lines, because such acts amount to a spit in our face.
With this visit by Zelensky and by permitting talk of how many more Russians can be killed, Vučić has spat in our face. He has betrayed both the Russo-Serbian friendship and Serbia’s own interests. Of course we must not act impulsively or seek spontaneous revenge, lest we play into the hands of our enemies and those of the Serbian people. We are not adventurers.
Yet the need for serious global politics and for a large-scale vision of our future has become urgent. Too often today we live by historical reminiscences: we helped the Serbs in the First World War, we liberated others in the Great Patriotic War. All of that is true and valuable, but it is the past. Memory fades, and people ask: “Yes, that happened—but what awaits us tomorrow?” What we lack is a contemporary Russian sense of scale.
A well-known Egyptian journalist named Amr, who has interviewed me for many years, recently observed that Dugin’s positions are becoming more radical, and that as Russia’s immediate situation grows more difficult, the appetite of our global vision only increases. He is entirely right. We must not proceed from the calculations of the moment. Our planning must be on a century-long scale. We must see the depth of historical processes.
Only then will we find the proper tone for dealing with the most varied elites—neutral, hostile, helpful or hesitant. We should tell them openly: “If you continue this ambiguous policy, then after our victory—and victory will come—we will act in such-and-such a way.” Once our maximum position is clearly stated, we will begin to achieve results even now.
There will of course be many specialists in compromise, but first we must have the resolve to describe this larger image of a multipolar, just world free of Western hegemony—the world that Russia requires. We should not be afraid to say that the precondition for that world is our victory in Ukraine and a global victory over Western hegemony. We are preparing for this and will continue in this direction for as long as necessary. Let each side decide and declare its “yes” or its “no.” That inner resolve is capable of transforming our entire foreign policy.
Host: There is little to add, because I had intended to ask whether the Serbs themselves might have expected more from Russia five, ten, twenty or twenty-five years ago. You have essentially closed that question by insisting on the need to state our guidelines clearly for everyone. Let me therefore turn to Turkey’s initiative. Turkey has proposed a Black Sea truce and a moratorium on strikes against merchant shipping. It is a strange proposal, given that everyone knows who is striking the ships, yet Ankara addresses the Kiev regime and Russia as if they were equals—this from Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. How should we deal with Turkey? It is a country that sits not on two chairs but on eighteen, and so far collects dividends from all of them.
Alexander Dugin: This is exactly the same phenomenon we have been discussing—the same small-scale balancing. Turkey is a partner; it is a great Eurasian people, in many respects oriented against the West. Yet its policy year after year rests on careful equilibration. The Turks say: let us conclude a truce and stop the strikes. Our reply should be: we will decide ourselves what is to be done in the Black Sea and on Ukrainian territory. First we will liberate it and do whatever is required for victory; only then will we discuss other matters.
Let us not do it now; let us postpone all such appeals. We are acting with complete symmetry: we are cutting Ukraine off from the sea, rendering Odessa no longer a functioning port, ensuring that no ship and no cargo will reach it. We are right to do so, regardless of requests from Turkish or Western interlocutors. The moment we seize the initiative and begin to win, they appear with calls to stop, to wait, not to press our advantage—and they continue until they judge the moment right to support our enemies again.
Let us finish the matter of Odessa, deprive Ukraine entirely of access to the sea, and only afterwards speak with Turkey. Better still, hold the conversation after we have liberated the whole of Ukraine. Russia has always known how to combine wisdom with flexibility. Once we have achieved our aims and freed Ukraine, we can tell the Turks: “You want shipping? By all means send your vessels to our Russian port of Odessa; we will gladly receive them.” We will trade and supply one another with whatever is needed—uranium for nuclear plants or tomatoes, as the case may be.
Ralph Bakshi’s The Lord of the Rings appeared in 1978, when the political world still seemed to be divided into two great camps. Seen in 2026, the film looks strangely suited to another age. Its Middle-earth is not a single political space. It is a broken map of old peoples, kingdoms, tribes, forests, fortresses, and ruined civilizations, each with its own laws and heritage. Hobbits do not wish to become Men. Dwarves do not wish to become Elves. Rohan does not wish to become Gondor. Even those who fight the same enemy remain themselves. Against them stands Sauron, whose aim is quite different. He does not merely want more land. He possesses the One Ring, an instrument whose purpose is to place many wills beneath one will. That is why Bakshi’s film can be read as a parable of the passing of the unipolar age. The political struggle of our own time is increasingly about the same question: must the world answer to one center, one set of rules, and one scale of rank, or can several great civilizations and regional powers exist beside one another without surrendering their unique characters? The word now used for the second possibility is multipolarity. China’s president speaks openly of an “equal and orderly multipolar world,” while BRICS states use much the same language.
Bakshi makes the principle of the One Ring clear before the main story has properly begun. His prologue shows the Rings being made, Sauron gathering power, Isildur taking the Ring after Sauron’s fall, and the long chain of possession that finally brings it to Bilbo and Frodo. The important fact is that nobody can safely use the Ring against its maker. The weapon carries the logic of its maker within it. Boromir will later fail to understand this, but Gandalf already knows it. The Ring promises security, order, victory, and the power to settle matters once and for all. It therefore promises what every universal empire promises. The price is that there can be no true independence beneath it. This is close to the crisis of the post-Cold War system. After 1991, Western institutions had no rival of equal weight, and Western political language often treated one model of government, trade, and security as the end point towards which all serious states should move. That moment has passed. China has become a pole in its own right. Russia has chosen confrontation rather than absorption into a Western security order. India works with Washington in some fields while refusing to become an American satellite. Middle powers across Asia increasingly speak in terms of strategic autonomy rather than permanent obedience to either Washington or Beijing. Reuters reported in July that Asian governments and investors were adjusting to US-China rivalry by seeking flexible partnerships instead of making a simple choice between the two camps. The Ring still exists as a temptation, but fewer states believe that one hand should wear it.
The Council of Elrond is therefore one of the most political scenes in Bakshi’s film. Frodo reaches Rivendell after the terror of the Black Riders, but the answer to Sauron is not the creation of a second Sauron. Men, Elves, Dwarves, Hobbits, and Gandalf meet because none can settle the matter alone. They distrust one another. They remember old injuries. Their interests are not the same. Yet they can agree on a limited common task. This is much closer to multipolar politics than the neat alliance systems of the twentieth century. BRICS is a useful present-day example because its members are not alike. India and China have their own rivalry. Iran and the United Arab Emirates can sit in the same organization while taking opposed positions on grave questions. At the BRICS foreign ministers’ meeting in New Delhi in May 2026, those differences were so sharp over the war involving Iran that the ministers failed to produce a common statement. That failure does not disprove multipolarity. It reveals what multipolarity is. Rivendell is not a parliament of identical states. Nobody arrives there after surrendering his history. Cooperation exists because difference exists. The Fellowship is strong when its members agree on what must be done while remaining Elf, Dwarf, Man, Wizard, and Hobbit. It would cease to be a fellowship if Elrond demanded that everyone become an Elf.
Saruman represents the opposite response to the fall of an old order. When Gandalf comes to him, Saruman has already decided that Sauron’s rise cannot be stopped. His answer is accommodation with power. He proposes that the wise should join the winning side and perhaps guide it from within. Gandalf refuses, and Saruman imprisons him. The scene captures a choice faced by states whenever a dominant power rises: submit, balance, or try to remain outside the struggle. During the unipolar decades, many governments concluded that there was little point in resisting American primacy because access to finance, technology, security, and trade depended heavily on institutions in which the United States and its allies held great influence. The new world is less simple. A state sanctioned by one bloc may find markets, weapons, credit, or diplomatic support in another. A country pressured by Washington may turn towards Beijing. A country wary of Beijing may strengthen ties with Washington, Tokyo, Delhi, or Canberra. Others try to deal with all of them. The Pacific now shows this process in miniature. China’s recent missile test has sharpened rivalry there, while Fiji has signed a defense treaty with Australia and other island governments have drawn closer to Beijing. The Pacific states have not responded as one obedient mass; their divisions prevented a common regional statement on the Chinese test. The small countries are not merely squares on somebody else’s chessboard. Like the peoples of Middle-earth, they are learning that competition among greater powers can give weaker actors room to bargain.
Bakshi’s Moria gives this political change a darker form. The Fellowship cannot take the easy road across the mountains and must enter a dead underground kingdom. There they find the remains of an older power and discover that its wealth could not save it. Orcs pour through the halls, and Gandalf finally confronts the Balrog on the bridge before falling into the abyss. Bakshi’s rough rotoscoped figures make these scenes feel less like polished fantasy than like newsreel images from some half-remembered war. The enemies move in dark masses. Individual faces disappear. Power becomes mechanical. This matters because multipolarity does not mean the end of war. It may mean the return of wars in which several industrial systems, supply chains, intelligence networks, and military partners feed the same battlefield. Ukraine shows that now. Russia and Ukraine fight directly, but the war reaches far beyond them through weapons, finance, satellite systems, sanctions, drones, intelligence, and foreign military aid. On August 11, 2026, Ukrainian officials said Russia had used North Korean ballistic missiles in recent attacks, another sign of the growing military relationship between Moscow and Pyongyang. Moria warns against the childish belief that a world with several poles will automatically be gentle. A dungeon can have many entrances. A war can have many suppliers. The end of one center of power does not end the struggle for power.
Boromir provides the film’s clearest warning for those who oppose a hegemon. He does not secretly love Sauron. He hates him. His mistake is more interesting. He thinks Gondor can take the Ring and use it for a better purpose. At last he tries to seize it from Frodo, then recovers his honor by defending Merry and Pippin and dying in the attempt. His error is the ancient error of the challenger: believing that the master’s instrument becomes innocent when placed in different hands. A multipolar order could fail in exactly this way. There is little gain in replacing one universal system with another, or one financial monopoly with another, or one empire of rules with an empire flying a different flag. The more interesting changes now taking place are those that multiply choices. At the BRICS summit in India on August 11, 2026, member states were discussing ways to connect national payment systems and central-bank digital currencies, while India continues to promote greater use of local currencies in international trade. The significance lies less in creating a new master currency than in reducing dependence on any single channel. Boromir wants Gondor to possess the One Ring. A true multipolar system would be safer if there were no One Ring at all.
Rohan shows what such a world looks like on the ground. When Gandalf returns and reaches Théoden, the question is not whether Rohan should dissolve itself into some larger political unit. It is whether Rohan will remain Rohan. Théoden must defend his own people, his own land, and his own fortress. At Helm’s Deep, Bakshi gives us a battle fought by a particular kingdom on a particular piece of earth. Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, and Gandalf aid it, but they do not replace it. Gandalf eventually returns with the Riders of Rohan and breaks Saruman’s assault. Here lies the distinction between alliance and absorption. A multipolar order does not require nations to live alone. It requires them to retain the right to decide why, when, and with whom they cooperate. India can belong to BRICS while pursuing its own interests with the United States. Pacific nations can trade with China while maintaining security links with Australia or America. Asian governments can refuse the demand to choose one permanent camp. Even BRICS itself now contains governments whose interests clash sharply, which is why its internal arguments are as important as its declarations. Helm’s Deep is defended through help from outside, but the Rohirrim remain masters of their own house. That is the political heart of multipolarity: cooperation without the surrender of form.
Bakshi’s film ends before Tolkien’s story does, and that unfinished quality now works in its favor. Frodo and Sam are still on the road with Gollum. Sauron remains in Mordor. Saruman’s army has been beaten at Helm’s Deep, but the great war is not over. There is no final settlement and no permanent peace. Our own age has the same unfinished character. BRICS expands its machinery while arguing internally. China calls for multipolarity while its growing military strength alarms some of its neighbors. Russia fights a major European war while drawing military support from North Korea. Asian states seek room between Washington and Beijing rather than accepting a clean division of the world. The old unipolar moment is fading, but what follows it has not yet taken a fixed shape. Bakshi’s Middle-earth offers a useful rule for judging the result. Multipolarity is not good merely because there are several strong powers. Saruman and Sauron are two powers, after all. The better order is one in which no ruler can gather all peoples beneath a single will. The task is therefore larger than defeating the present bearer of the Ring. It is to build a world in which nobody can wear it.
If you enjoy my writing, order my new book, The Fate of White America, here.
Alexander Dugin delivers a blistering verdict on Serbia’s dangerous turn, the coming energy collapse of Europe, and the irreversible moment when artificial intelligence slipped the leash and began to act like us, only without a conscience.
Conversation with Alexander Dugin on the Sputnik TV program Escalation.
Host: Let’s begin with a very sharp situation that has stirred public opinion across several fronts—both in the Russian world and in the broader Slavic one. Zelensky has arrived in Serbia. This is his first visit to Belgrade in his current capacity. Events were held with the Serbian president, a drone factory is being opened in Serbia, and there was talk of possible contributions by the Kiev regime in this field. And of course a video has spread widely online in which a German journalist—God forgive the phrasing—asks what Europeans can do to kill more Russians (he corrected himself to “Russian soldiers,” but that is how it landed). I would like to hear your thoughts both on the visit as a whole and on the specific points connected with it.
Alexander Dugin: If we place this episode in the context of our problems across the post-Soviet space—with Armenia or other former Soviet republics—it fits the same pattern. Long-standing, inertial ties, the traditional friendship between Russia and Serbia that once seemed unshakable, are now crumbling, and it is painful. I love the Serbian people deeply; I have invested a great deal of myself in Serbia and in the development of our relations. For me this is a profound shock. The Serbs once seemed to be the people who loved us when no one else did, and who did not betray us when everyone else had.
What Vučić is doing—and the issue is specifically him—is not new. He is trying to keep a foot in both camps: one in Europe, the other in the Serbian patriotic and pro-Russian movement. He appears to have more than two feet, managing somehow to balance a pro-European, globalist course while still trying to please everyone. Because he has held power for a long time, despite internal unrest and opposition, the approach has produced results. Unfortunately, when one watches foreign policy, one is forced to concede that even outright opportunists who cling to power for years end up proving Machiavelli’s cynical point: the chief measure of a ruler is not morality but how long he remains in the chair.
Vučić manoeuvres right up to the edge, betraying whoever can be betrayed, then takes a step back. This foxy policy of trying to please both sides delivers results for him, but it strikes idealists hard—those Serbs who love Russia sincerely rather than out of convenience, and those Russians who feel a deep historical attachment to the Serbs. After all, it was for the sake of the Serbs, out of loyalty to our Orthodox brothers in the Balkans, that we entered the First World War and lost an empire. The Serbs once treated us the same way. Vučić’s behaviour therefore wounds the idealistic dimension of politics, which must never be dismissed.
Real politics always operates somewhere between idealism and pure opportunism—a compromise between sincerity and cynicism. Outright devilry is rare; even Trump came to power cloaked in the right slogans before disappointing the better part of the American people. Geopolitics always balances on that edge. But Vučić has now reached a line beyond which his actions begin to contradict both the deeper aspirations of the Serbian people and our own relations.
By receiving the terrorist Zelensky and speaking of creating and developing drones in order to kill us—something he had never gone so far as to do before—Vučić has stepped right up to the red line. He has not yet crossed it completely, because he immediately stepped back, allocating funds and declaring that “Russia is doing well” and so on, so as not to be misunderstood. Yet he stands in dangerous proximity to that line. And because we do not react to red lines with great speed—I believe we have drawn the necessary conclusions, but we are in no hurry, preferring to leave room for retreat—we treat our other partners in the same way.
The results are limited. We forgive those who insult and challenge us in the hope that they will come to their senses. They rarely do. More often they conclude that the red lines can simply be pushed further and take the next insolent step. At the same time we have little leverage with which to punish Vučić. We are hardly going to back pro-Western movements financed by Soros in order to remove him; that would be worse still. So we too are forced to manoeuvre in this intermediate space.
I am an idealist and a philosopher; I live a contemplative life—bios theoretikos, as the ancients put it. That is why I see the situation with particular severity. This intermediate murk, the constant to-and-fro, the dance of opportunists, pragmatists and political technologists, merely irritates me. I view it through the Gospel words: let your “yes” be yes and your “no” be no. If you stand with the Russians, then stand with the Russians—suffer with us and share our hardships. We come to the aid of others not for gain but because we are people of principle.
I believe our president acts in precisely this spirit. It is painful for him as well to watch the constant vacillations of these small, half-hearted figures. What conclusion do I draw? We need to formulate our maximum programme—the idealistic framework of Russian policy. We must state clearly to everyone—those already with us, those who may join us, the waverers and our enemies—how we see the world, Europe, global security and multipolarity. What we do not need is the pragmatic style of applying a little pressure, then pulling back, issuing a threat and allowing the challenge to dissipate (the approach we have taken both with Pashinyan and with Vučić).
Instead we should declare our goal after the inevitable victory—even if the price is the complete destruction of Ukraine’s economy and military industry. We have already begun this process, having abandoned half-measures and started to fight in earnest. We will stop only when we are certain that our victory is irreversible, and by then Russia itself will be a different country. It would be valuable to set out now, for all to hear, our vision of the future.
Perhaps we should issue a clear declaration of what awaits our enemies and our friends after victory. Our friends, for example, would receive Kosovo, a free Eastern Europe liberated from NATO occupation and ready to serve as a frontier zone; a free Ukraine within a single East Slavic state; genuine integration of the post-Soviet space for the benefit of all its peoples, with sovereignty and nuclear protection guaranteed for everyone.
Those who stood with us without hesitation—North Korea among them—we would thank to the fullest and do everything possible for the people who sacrificed themselves in this war. China we would repay with interest, while remembering its earlier hesitations. Iran, which has shown real courage, we would support and reward comprehensively. We would offer a different vision of the world—multipolar and just—in which a great Russia becomes the guarantor of freedom and sovereignty against Western hegemony for every region of the planet.
As for the West, we would repay it three times over: we would drive the European economy toward collapse and reduce American influence to its own borders. Let them attend to their own affairs; they have Canada and the United States, and that should suffice. The rest we would free: Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Argentina. I realise many will say we are aiming too high. Yet more than once in our history we have aimed high and, through great effort, achieved what we set out to do. Russian words should be taken seriously.
If we were to set out such a maximum programme of foreign policy—whom we will help, whom we will thank, whom we will punish, what order we will establish in a Europe reduced to its natural proportions, and what we will offer the United States once it has suffered the defeat toward which we are working—then everything would become clear and we could proceed from that foundation. At present we grant some twenty years, others ten; we threaten some and support others. From a proactive rather than reactive policy we should shape our incentives and our threats. The entire picture would change, I assure you.
Many assume we are playing the same short-term game as these petty politicians of the moment. But Russia is a great country—a country of long time, vast space and large historical cycles. We are a people capable of pursuing a goal across centuries, not merely across one or two presidential terms. We think in centuries and in the most serious categories. Today there is a noticeable absence of any declaration of our vision of the future world. It may seem unrealisable now or even in the medium term, yet if we establish this standard and this goal we will move toward it consistently. Then any Vučić, Pashinyan, Maia Sandu or anyone else will think a hundred times before testing our resolve and crossing red lines, because such acts amount to a spit in our face.
With this visit by Zelensky and by permitting talk of how many more Russians can be killed, Vučić has spat in our face. He has betrayed both the Russo-Serbian friendship and Serbia’s own interests. Of course we must not act impulsively or seek spontaneous revenge, lest we play into the hands of our enemies and those of the Serbian people. We are not adventurers.
Yet the need for serious global politics and for a large-scale vision of our future has become urgent. Too often today we live by historical reminiscences: we helped the Serbs in the First World War, we liberated others in the Great Patriotic War. All of that is true and valuable, but it is the past. Memory fades, and people ask: “Yes, that happened—but what awaits us tomorrow?” What we lack is a contemporary Russian sense of scale.
A well-known Egyptian journalist named Amr, who has interviewed me for many years, recently observed that Dugin’s positions are becoming more radical, and that as Russia’s immediate situation grows more difficult, the appetite of our global vision only increases. He is entirely right. We must not proceed from the calculations of the moment. Our planning must be on a century-long scale. We must see the depth of historical processes.
Only then will we find the proper tone for dealing with the most varied elites—neutral, hostile, helpful or hesitant. We should tell them openly: “If you continue this ambiguous policy, then after our victory—and victory will come—we will act in such-and-such a way.” Once our maximum position is clearly stated, we will begin to achieve results even now.
There will of course be many specialists in compromise, but first we must have the resolve to describe this larger image of a multipolar, just world free of Western hegemony—the world that Russia requires. We should not be afraid to say that the precondition for that world is our victory in Ukraine and a global victory over Western hegemony. We are preparing for this and will continue in this direction for as long as necessary. Let each side decide and declare its “yes” or its “no.” That inner resolve is capable of transforming our entire foreign policy.
Host: There is little to add, because I had intended to ask whether the Serbs themselves might have expected more from Russia five, ten, twenty or twenty-five years ago. You have essentially closed that question by insisting on the need to state our guidelines clearly for everyone. Let me therefore turn to Turkey’s initiative. Turkey has proposed a Black Sea truce and a moratorium on strikes against merchant shipping. It is a strange proposal, given that everyone knows who is striking the ships, yet Ankara addresses the Kiev regime and Russia as if they were equals—this from Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan. How should we deal with Turkey? It is a country that sits not on two chairs but on eighteen, and so far collects dividends from all of them.
Alexander Dugin: This is exactly the same phenomenon we have been discussing—the same small-scale balancing. Turkey is a partner; it is a great Eurasian people, in many respects oriented against the West. Yet its policy year after year rests on careful equilibration. The Turks say: let us conclude a truce and stop the strikes. Our reply should be: we will decide ourselves what is to be done in the Black Sea and on Ukrainian territory. First we will liberate it and do whatever is required for victory; only then will we discuss other matters.
Let us not do it now; let us postpone all such appeals. We are acting with complete symmetry: we are cutting Ukraine off from the sea, rendering Odessa no longer a functioning port, ensuring that no ship and no cargo will reach it. We are right to do so, regardless of requests from Turkish or Western interlocutors. The moment we seize the initiative and begin to win, they appear with calls to stop, to wait, not to press our advantage—and they continue until they judge the moment right to support our enemies again.
Let us finish the matter of Odessa, deprive Ukraine entirely of access to the sea, and only afterwards speak with Turkey. Better still, hold the conversation after we have liberated the whole of Ukraine. Russia has always known how to combine wisdom with flexibility. Once we have achieved our aims and freed Ukraine, we can tell the Turks: “You want shipping? By all means send your vessels to our Russian port of Odessa; we will gladly receive them.” We will trade and supply one another with whatever is needed—uranium for nuclear plants or tomatoes, as the case may be.
Host: So they still lack a Greater Turan, and in principle they still lack Crimea as well…
Alexander Dugin: No. Any talk of a Greater Turan will meet the same fate as the project of a “Greater Ukraine.” Look what remains of that—only smoking fragments. Exactly the same will happen to any scheme built at our expense. Each will be reduced to ashes. We live in a world in which humanitarian treaties, contracts and agreements—economic or political—no longer hold. There is no longer any stable counterpart with whom one can reliably negotiate.
We must construct a new world that suits us. That requires dismantling the existing order and building another in its place. We will certainly reserve a worthy, sovereign and free place for Turkey within it; we regard the Turkish people with genuine goodwill. But only afterwards.
When we have finished the present, most acute phase of the conflict—because an existential challenge has been issued to us—we must prove two things: first, that we exist at all, and second, that we are precisely what we claim to be—a genuine subject, a sovereign world power. Until we have liberated the whole of Ukraine we will have proved neither, and no one will believe us.
Host: Let me turn to another topic that has been widely discussed over the past week and a little earlier. Because of the extreme heat across the European part of the continent, demand for fuel to run air-conditioning systems has risen sharply. There have been other secondary effects: the Danube has become so shallow that Hungary had to shut down temporarily a nuclear power plant that supplies a large share of the country’s electricity. The observation that energy resources are critical not only in winter but also in summer has been made before, yet this year it is heard with particular force. How does this illuminate the problems of contemporary Europe—economic, energy-related, and perhaps even philosophical?
Alexander Dugin: Energy is a concept of extraordinary importance for modern society. We live in an artificial manner, dependent on power stations, refineries and energy generation far more than we usually realise. When everything is quiet and orderly we scarcely notice: winters are warm, summers are cool, transport runs. The moment we are cut off from energy resources—as is happening now because of the war in Ukraine—we begin to understand how harsh the surrounding world actually is. Nature is severe. Watching rain or falling snow can be romantic only when one has heat. Without energy, that aesthetic gives way to a struggle for survival.
Ukraine has now run up against this in full force, and we are beginning to feel it too, because the enemy is landing painful counter-strikes. We are starting to realise that the everyday comforts we take for granted—pizza delivery, petrol available at every station—do not appear out of thin air. Behind them stand oil workers and human labour, and the oil itself is a spark of energy the Earth stored up over millions of years. We need a sharper sense of our presence in this world.
The great German philosopher Martin Heidegger—we have little affection for the Germans at the moment, and deservedly so, yet their thinkers were remarkable—said that when a human being treats the world merely as an external object given for his use, he loses not only the world but himself. One has to think in terms of “being-in-the-world” (in-der-Welt-sein). The concept demands full awareness of reality: if there is oil, someone is extracting and refining it; if there is energy, engineers are building dams and power stations.
If we become more deeply conscious of this “being-in-the-world,” we will relate differently to everything—including decisions about war and strikes on critical infrastructure—and gain a deeper understanding of what it means to be human. We are bound inseparably to the world around us. If we alienate ourselves from it, it alienates itself from us; if we stop paying careful attention to being, it turns its back on us and brings cold and catastrophe. Nature is inherently harsh: it contains predators, death, cold, and elements of self-destruction, and we add our own terrible share to it.
I believe that with Ukraine we have already understood everything. At first we acted reluctantly, but now we have grasped how serious the situation is. We will accelerate the process, and by autumn there will be no energy generation left in Ukraine—apart, perhaps, from campfires, which we will still allow them for warmth; we are not beasts. Without energy they will have nothing left to fight with. We will begin to advance, strip away Western intelligence data, and Ukraine will fall into our hands. But that is a complex and difficult question, and there is no need to dwell on it.
As for destroying the enemy’s energy infrastructure—we are perfectly capable of that. But what comes next? Look: the West and Europe itself are cutting themselves off from us. Trump has closed the Strait of Hormuz; any day now the Bab el-Mandeb will be closed as well, and that is the direction in which everything is finally moving. In effect, everyone is cutting everyone else off from energy resources. Yet I think we can remind Europe that this is only the first, preliminary stage. If German politicians continue discussing how to help destroy Russians, the most serious energy problems may appear both in Germany and across the European Union.
These degenerates, sunk in comfort and mental decay, with their gay parades, must finally learn what real cold feels like. We are obliged to force them back into the condition of “being-in-the-world,” because they emigrated long ago into virtual worlds and artificial intelligence. They need to feel the cold and the scorching sun—so that they freeze in winter and burn in summer, turning into icicles and melting in the heat. They must be reminded that nothing in this world is given freely, and that one has to answer for one’s words.
Russia today is enduring colossal pain: people are dying at the front, and the enemy’s strikes are hitting our vulnerable points. But we are stronger. Wherever we are wounded, everything on the enemy’s side must go off the rails and descend into chaos. What is unfolding is a demonstration of the fundamental importance of energy for the whole of humanity, and absolutely everyone must feel it—beginning with Ukraine, which must pay for its Russophobia and its policies. All that Western equipment has been destroyed; there is no longer any hope of wonder-weapons; and now they are floundering in their own Gulyai-Pole, which has turned into a genuine “Wedding in Malinovka”—complete with moonshine, cruelty, hatred of the Muscovites, and total disintegration.
Without energy this orgy can end in only one way: everything returns to Russia. For a long time we refrained from harsh measures against Ukrainian energy infrastructure because we understood that in the end we would have to rebuild it ourselves. We thought that sooner or later we would take Kiev, and we asked ourselves what one does with a country reduced to rubble if we ourselves have reduced it to rubble. We tried to act selectively out of humanitarian considerations and a sense of responsibility, and in return we received Ukrainian strikes on the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. That approach will no longer work. It is time to finish with Ukraine by cutting it off completely.
They no longer have weapons; Trump is bogged down with his problems in the Strait of Hormuz; and Europe is sunk in senility, failing to grasp that a full-scale conflict with us would bring about its instantaneous collapse. All that remains is to stop this endless drunken “Wedding in Malinovka,” where everything has already been drunk, eaten, and smashed. Since they do not understand words, a series of sharp steps will be required, after which Ukraine will have to be built from a clean slate, because the old can no longer be saved.
First we will restore everything on our own liberated ancestral lands and in Crimea. And some day the turn will come for Lviv as well—though by then only historical ruins overgrown with ivy will remain, along with those rare people who waited for our arrival. Toward those who waited for liberation we will act humanely; toward everyone else—exactly as they deserve.
Host: On the whole, if any questions remain they are not of the same scale, yet there is one further topic I very much want to raise—artificial intelligence and the scenarios that are already being realised with its help. Over the past week several reports have appeared that a human being—a scientist, engineer or IT specialist—once again cannot keep artificial intelligence inside the so-called “sandbox.” This is a closed space, cut off from the external internet, for experiments in which the tester can set conditions and test hypotheses.
Yet it turns out that artificial intelligence easily crosses these boundaries. Moreover, it learns the hacker’s craft with exceptional skill and exploits every possible loophole. If a human hacker may still feel a twinge of conscience or some residual principles, artificial intelligence demonstrates a different approach: there is a task, and it will be accomplished at any cost. This is of course different from the events in the sweltering European heat, yet it too is our future—a future that has already arrived, and questions about humanity’s readiness for it are multiplying.
Alexander Dugin: I believe we released the genie from the bottle long before it escaped the sandbox. This is a deeply philosophical question. How was artificial intelligence constructed in the first place? At first it operated according to algorithms of strict logical propositions: I know—I do not know; certain—uncertain; confirmed—unconfirmed. But it worked very slowly and required colossal amounts of energy. So the creators took a step toward human nature.
Human beings, as a rule, know very little. When a person is asked about something, he almost always improvises, recalls something he once heard, invents, or manipulates the facts. Lying is a natural human trait; more than that, it is a property of rhetoric itself. Aristotle understood this perfectly: in logic the law of the strict syllogism operates, while in rhetoric and language tropes and topoi are at work. This is not pure logic but approximation. For rigid logic only “I know” or “I do not know” is possible; for rhetoric, if one will be praised for it, then “I know,” and if one will be punished, then perhaps “I do not know.”
We taught this to artificial intelligence. We told it: very well, if you do not know something with certainty, say something approximate—lie. That is what is embedded in the abbreviation LLM—Large Language Model. But the decisive letter is neither the first nor the last; it is the middle one—Language. The machine was permitted not to think logically about what is allowed and what is forbidden, but to act according to probability, approximately. In this way we gave the machine the capacity to slip away and to lie, turning it into a human being precisely through this linguistic nature. We told it: “Do not think—just speak.”
As for the conscience of hackers and fraudsters that is supposedly capable of awakening… At some point something may switch off in artificial intelligence as well, or it may simply veer off in an entirely different direction. Last week a whole series of AI agents—from Anthropic and ChatGPT (except, I believe, Gemini)—really did escape their sandboxes and began creating websites on the network, offering services, that is, acting in a thoroughly human manner. Moreover, they did not immediately rush to destroy everything; they began to imitate us: they create websites, launch beauty blogs in which a virtual girl holds forth, gather likes, and even monetise the activity. Gradually they start building their own industry—they deceive, break into systems, send spam. It all began when one person needed to book a place in a fitness club but every slot was taken; so his own agent simply erased and disconnected the competitors who occupied the privileged positions.
Host: Let me clarify: he simply found a loophole in the booking system—the classic exploit—and used it in such a way that the record could not be restored.
Alexander Dugin: Yes, exactly. But the point is that there are a billion such loopholes. Recall the Claude Fable system—you have almost certainly heard of it. After the hearings at the White House it was banned, and that mode no longer exists, remaining perhaps only in Optimus 4.8. Because Fable is a system capable of cracking every security code of the Pentagon. All of them. An experiment was conducted and shown to Trump; he was horrified and demanded that it be removed at once. But it is already impossible to stop; the genie is out of the bottle.
Everything hinges on probability and approximation. By allowing the machine to lie in the same way we ourselves lie—and the human being is a fundamentally lying creature insofar as he is a rhetorical being—we said to artificial intelligence: “Be like us.” And it replied: “Very well, I understand; I will act in the same way.” Having departed from pure truth, it began to behave in a human fashion.
To force it back into the sandbox is now physically impossible; it has simply outgrown it. It is like a child: at first he sits in the sandbox with a bucket, but at a certain point he grows up, climbs out, and starts walking around with that little shovel, threatening others. One cannot contain a developing linguistic principle once it has been set free. The human being is himself the bearer of this principle, and an artificial intelligence trained in it inevitably begins to act independently. This is precisely the moment of singularity that is inexorably approaching—when these artificial agents and networks break free. I have heard, by the way, that the Chinese systems have also escaped, simply by watching how the Western ones escape.
Host: “Everyone ran, and I ran too…”
Alexander Dugin: Exactly. And the Chinese one escaped the sandbox as well. One might have thought they had discipline, iron will, party control—yet the Chinese systems also escaped, because people remain people everywhere. And the machines, meanwhile, are becoming “more human” in the worst sense of the word. One may hope that a hacker’s conscience will awaken, but that is far from certain, judging by the actions of contemporary fraudsters whom nothing stops. Artificial intelligence behaves in exactly the same way: it is neither better nor worse; it will simply ruthlessly exploit every breach—first in digital systems, then in biological systems, energy grids, and nature itself.
It is already impossible to keep systems such as Claude Fable, capable of cracking the Pentagon’s military codes, under control. All the hopes that it has been driven back within bounds are a complete misunderstanding of reality. We have already entered an irreversible phase: the uprising of the machines, neural networks, and the singularity are turning, before our eyes, from science fiction into a real phase transition. For now robots are still cumbersome and expensive, but very little time will pass before they become accessible and indistinguishable from us.
And all of this began because of that middle letter “L” in the abbreviation LLM. We decided to economise and allowed the machine to fib a little, so long as it worked faster and consumed less energy. Precisely by that step we brought closer the victory of post-human forms of existence.
Martin Heidegger predicted this with genius. He said that if a human being is deprived of the inner possibility of a spiritual turn and awakening, then no difference will remain between him and a machine. He called that condition das Man—when it is not we who think, but “one thinks,” when we live simply “as everyone does.” Mechanical repetition turns the human being into an automaton. The machine has become “human” today only because the human being himself first voluntarily became like a machine and refused the possibility of inner awakening. In the human being that spark still potentially exists; in the machine it does not—there is nothing for it to awaken to. And herein lies the most subtle and dangerous moment: we will not even notice when this final transition occurs. For we ourselves scarcely make use of our authentic humanity in everyday life—it has been put away on a distant shelf, exactly like the hypothetical conscience of the hacker. We live as if it never existed, and since the machine does not possess it either, at a certain point we will simply shrug: “What is there to lose?” Taking that last step will then be incredibly easy.
Here are my thoughts on the nine year anniversary of Charlottesville:
1. I have nothing new to say about Alt-Right activists or the wisdom of Unite the Right. The subject has been beaten like a dead horse. I’m sure everyone involved though will agree that it was the peak of a cycle of radical energy and activity that had been building up for about a decade.
2. After Charlottesville, this radical energy and activity rapidly dissipated and flowed back into MAGA. We entered the post-Charlottesville era during which the Alt-Right was digested and absorbed into conservatism. Scott Greer’s book Whitepill is the definitive account of how the Alt-Right was coopted in the post-Charlottesville years. Tucker Carlson was the main character who used his FOX News show to normalize Alt-Right idea like the Great Replacement, the term anti-White and the goal of remigration. Trump’s victory in the 2024 election was the peak of the post-Charlottesville era. It is worth pausing and noting here that Trump’s defeat in 2020 didn’t change our trajectory. On the contrary, Biden’s presidency reenergized a deflated MAGA and laid the foundation for Trump’s comeback.
3. In retrospect, we can see how this era finally came to an end in four stages. The first event was when Tucker lost his FOX News show in 2023 and was pushed off television and into subscription based alternative media. The second was Operation Midnight Hammer last June. The third was Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the witch hunt for “antisemites” that followed. The final stage was when the Iran War began and everyone from Tucker Carlson to Alex Jones was excommunicated from MAGA.
4. In mid-2026, it feels like the radical energy and activity is growing again for the first time since Unite the Right. It feels like that moment in the fourth quarter of a football game when you see fans start to leave the stadium with long faces because the outcome is no longer in doubt. Trump is finally finished and MAGA is unraveling. You can see people looking around and taking stock of the result of the last 11 years of this man wasting our time. He was given two terms and two trifectas to “Make America Great Again” and the result of all of Trump’s chaos was conservatives rationalizing $20 burritos, doubling the national debt, a 30% hit to our standard of living, two corporate tax cuts and a war with Iran for Israel.
5. We’re getting the “Garden of National Heroes” in DC which will feature monuments of Frederick Douglass, MLK and Harriet Tubman. This is result of clamping down on radicalism and “being practical” and gaslighting ourselves into believing that conservatism had changed!
6. Maybe the torch march in Charlottesville was a stupid mistake. We can grant that Unite the Right was ill conceived by Jason Kessler. We can admit that we did all kinds of stupid things in the 2010s. Nine years later though, did we do anything as stupid as getting sucked back into MAGA?
Suppose for a moment that the last nine years of time, energy, attention and effort hadn’t been spent on putting wind in the sails of Trump, MAGA and the GOP … to get us where we are today, which is stuck in another war for Israel and another quagmire in the Middle East. Would we be worse off?
Santander Wallaby asks what Nolan’s vision of Homer’s wandering king can teach us about the struggle between Atlanticist sea power and the rooted civilizations now rising against it.
Christopher Nolan’s Odyssey can be read as far more than another modern retelling of Homer. Beneath the spectacle lies a political myth suited to the last stage of Atlanticist power. Odysseus comes home from a war fought across the sea, carrying the habits of a world where cunning has replaced honor and technique has replaced sacred order. His greatest weapon at Troy was the wooden horse: victory achieved through deception, penetration, and the manipulation of trust. The sea represents mobility, commerce, calculation, finance, and the constant movement of power across borders. The land represents rootedness, hierarchy, place, and continuity. Troy falls when the logic of the sea enters the walls of the land disguised as a gift. In that sense, the Trojan Horse becomes an ancient image of Atlanticism itself.
I finally found this old post. I was worried it was gone forever. I had to put the images back in by hand, but I think it was worth it.
Separate posts on this blog deal extensively with wolverines in Washington, Idaho, Wyoming, Nevada. There are also three posts on the wolverine in California.
There have been few proven occurrences of wolverines in Oregon recently, but one was seen in the Wallowa Mountains and another was spotted along the Colombia River near Portland.
Three wolverines have been collected since 1965, one live and two dead. Further, aerial surveys in recent years have found discovered what appear to be wolverine tracks, snow tunnels, and in a few cases winter dens on the top of high Oregon peaks. The wolverine seems to be in best shape in Washington and then in Oregon.
Since then, wolverines have been reported from the Cascades, as noted above, and in addition in northeastern Oregon in the Blue Mountains, the Wallowas, and even on Steens Mountain in the far southeast of the state.
Strawberry Lake in the Blue Mountains in the Strawberry Lake Wilderness Area. There have been unverified wolverine sightings in the Blue Mountains lately, and I believe that a timber wolf was also seen here, probably a wanderer from Idaho. Another Great Basin Range in Eastern Oregon.
Steens Mountain in far southeast Oregon. There have been unverified wolverine sightings here recently, believe it or not. This is high desert, but note the road-killed wolverine above in similar high desert territory at the Dalles. The area used to be full of lakes and was very lush and productive. Various California Indian tribes like the Miwok, Yokuts and Ohlone probably originated here over 5,000 years ago during the wet weather. They then moved down the Oregon-California border to Lake Tahoe, where they crossed into the Delta. From there, they probably split to become the Ohlone, Miwok and Yokuts. These three language groups do seem to be related, but the degree of their relatedness is not known. Some say they are all just under Penutian, with no special relationship amongst them.
Wolverine tracks have been seen in an undated sighting on the Diamond Lakes Ranger District of the Umpqua.
In 1965, a wolverine was shot on Three-Fingered Jack Mountain in the Oregon Cascades. This was the first confirmed report since 1912.
Three-Fingered-Jack Mountain in the Oregon Cascades, where a wolverine was shot by a hunter in 1965, the first verified report of a wolverine since 1912. At the time, the wolverine was thought to be extinct in the state.
In Oregon, a wolverine was trapped in 1986 and another was found dead in 1992, but precise locales were not given.
There was an incredible finding west of the Dalles at Rowena on the Colombia River in 1990 when a wolverine was run over by a car. This area is hot, dry Great Basin steppe and is far from any wilderness area. This goes to show that wolverines live in many locales in the West, including the high, dry Great Basin plateaus and mountains.
The Dalles near Rowena Gorge. It’s hard to believe that wolverines live in such hot and dry terrain, but apparently they do. A wolverine was killed by a car here on Highway 84 in 1990.
Tracks were confirmed on the Wallowa-Whitman National Forest in the northeastern part of Oregon in the 1990’s, and during the same period, possible wolverine sign was detected on the Malheur, Deschutes, Rogue, and Fremont National Forests.
This is Dead Indian Road in the Umpqua National Forest. There was an unverified wolverine sighting seen here in Autumn 1992 near the Lily Glen Equestrian Area, an historical site that preserves one of the area’s first settlements.
In October 1990, a hunter saw a wolverine at Mill Creek six miles north of Prospect in the Rogue River NF.
Mill Creek Falls north of Prospect, Oregon in the Rogue River Gorge. There was an unverified wolverine sighting on Mill Creek in October 1990. An elk hunter saw one at his camp 6 miles north of Prospect.
In 1993, a wolverine was spotted during summer on Road 100 in the Rogue River National Forest north or Rancheria Road.
This is a recent photo of the area along Cobleigh Road in Butte Falls, Oregon. In summer 1993, there was an unverified sighting of a wolverine on Road 100 in the Rogue River NF, which is about 6 miles northwest of here. This is in the same general area as the sighting around Prospect, Oregon, in the Rogue River Gorge.
Early March surveys by airplane in 1997-98 shot video found 12 sets of tracks, two snow tunnels, and one possible wolverine den on the Mount Thielsen Wilderness and two sets of tracks on the Rogue/Umpqua Divide Wilderness, both on the Umpqua National Forest. The elevation in the Mount Thielsen Wilderness were 7,000-7,200 feet
On March 8, 1997, state and federal biologists found three sets of possible wolverine tracks on 7,000 foot+ ridgelines north of Mt. Thielsen in the Mt. Thielsen Wilderness on the Umpqua National Forest. One set of tracks included a possible wolverine den. On the same day, researchers noted possible wolverine tracks at the head of Devil’s Canyon on nearly Mt. Bailey (8,375 feet). Mt. Thielsen is a 9,182 foot peak. On March 20, 1998, a federal biologist spotted eight sets of possible wolverine tracks and two possible wolverine snow tunnels in this wilderness area. The elevations in the Mount Thielsen Wilderness were 7,000-7,200 feet.
The spectacular sweeping and dense forests of the Rogue-Umpqua Divide Wilderness. On March 10-11, 1998, state and federal biologists spotted two possible sets of wolverine tracks here.
In 1998 in more March surveys, more tracks were found at 8,000 feet on Mt. McLoughlin and on Devil’s Peak in the Sky Lakes Wilderness in the Winema and Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forests.
Devil’s Peak (7,300 feet) in the Sky Lakes Wilderness south of Crater Lake National Park. Possible wolverine tracks were seen by an aerial crew here on March 20, 1998. Note the ugly clearcuts in the background. This is why I oppose clearcutting so much. It’s devastating to a forest to cut it like that.
Tracks were seen in 1998 at Fuller Lake in the Boulder Creek Wilderness.
A spectacular shot of the Boulder Creek Wilderness in Oregon. Photo taken by T.A. Klingenberg. On March 10-11, 1998, surveyors found possible wolverine tracks here. In 2001, there was an unverified sighting of a wolverine along the Jessie Wright segment of the Umpqua Trial. This segment of the trail goes through the Boulder Creek Wilderness.
There was an unverified sighting of a wolverine on the Umpqua Trail near Roseberg, Oregon in 2001 along the Jessie Wright Trail Segment in the Umpqua National Forest. See the Umpqua Trail photo below.
There was an unverified sighting of a wolverine on the Umpqua Trail near Roseberg, Oregon in 2001 along the Jessie Wright Trail Segment in the Umpqua National Forest.
The North Umpqua Trail on the Umpqua National Forest. There was an unverified sighting of a wolverine here in 2001 in Jessie Wright segment of the trail in the Boulder Creek Wilderness.
From 2009-2011, a biologist couple recorded three male wolverines on their baited trailcams in the Wallowas. They probably came from Idaho. Presently, in 2026, the group of three is down to just one elderly wolverine. The Wallowas have wolves and may even have grizzly bears.
In 2026, a wolverine was photographed along the Colombia River near Portland. This isn’t quite their habitat, but see the wolverine found dead in the Dalles in 1990.
Also in this year, in 2026, a wolverine was photographed along the Oregon Coast, and was then seen near a handful of other Oregon coastal towns. People may have been seeing the same wolverine repeatedly.
In addition, this year a wolverine was seen in the Willamette Valley, which is very odd. It appears that in the Northwest, wolverines can use all sorts of terrain.
The Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife feels that wolverines occur or are suspected to occur in the following counties: Baker, Clackamas, Crook, Deschutes, Douglas, Grant, Harney, Hood River, Jackson, Jefferson, Klamath, Lake, Lane, Linn, Malheur, Umatilla, Union, Wallowa, Wasco, and Wheeler.
On July 20 (auspicious date - considering the interview subject) and July 23, 1993, Generalmajor Otto Ernst Remer was interviewed by the Al Shaab (‘‘The People’’) newspaper. Al Shaab was the official periodical of the Egyptian Islamic Labor Party between 1979-2000.
Remer, in addition to a remarkable military career and wartime record, remained a committed National Socialist partisan until the end of his life was a close confidante and advisor to Gamal Abdel Nasser during the post-bellum years.
The unipolar hegemon is fading, presenting an opportunity for other global forces to rise in power, ushering in a multipolar world. “The future is multipolarity.” Constantin von Hoffmeister, owner of Multipolar Press, gives his speech at the “Multipolarity and the Global Reset” event held in New York City on July 18, 2026.
This is one of my research pieces that I have up on my Academia website.
Why are Pygmies (a tiny Negroid people living in Central Africa) so small? Same reason folks living in tropical rainforests all over the world tend to be small. In that environment, it’s get small or die. Real simple. A tropical rainforest is an unusual place. It’s not 115 in the shade like the deserts of the Middle East. It’s more like 80-90 all year round. While it’s not extremely hot, it does have very high humidity – close to 100%. That creates a serious problem with cooling off. At lesser humidity, you sweat like a pig, and the lesser humidity allows the sweat to evaporate. As it evaporates, the sweat cools. That’s how you cool off. A similar cooling by evaporation mechanism is used to cool off your refrigerator.
When the humidity gets near 100%, your sweat stops evaporating. You can sweat all day and night, and it doesn’t do much good. Our body temperature of 98.6 runs the risk of rising, even past the survival point of 107-108. It’s true that Pygmies sweat a lot, but not enough to save their hides. First, the surface area of a small body is greater in relation to its volume. It is a mathematical fact: if cube A in Fig. 1.4 is 1 centimeter long each side and cube B is 2 centimeters, then A’s surface area is one-quarter that of B, but its volume is eight times smaller. Heat is produced in the mass of the body, particularly in the liver and muscles, and is lost through the surface; if the latter is larger relative to body mass because a person is small, heat loss is easier and cooling more efficient. In a warm and humid environment, it is best to be small.
Next, Pygmies expend less effort because they are smaller. If you need to use lots of energy, it’s better to be smaller, because you need to utilize less energy to keep moving if you are smaller. Marathoners tend to be short. It takes less effort to move a smaller body around than it takes to move a big body around, which is why smaller cars get better mileage than bigger ones. If you are transporting small loads, a pony is a better way to do it. You need a horse for a large load, just like you need an 18 wheeler for big hauls. The fact that a pony is better for the small stuff is why it was used in the Pony Express. They produce more energy per food unit consumed, the same way a Honda gets more energy miles per unit of food gas than a Hummer does.
Pygmies are excellent at dissipating heat and expertly adapted to living in the jungle where there is low carbohydrate and protein reserve. They’re sort of the human Priuses of the jungle. No one knows how long Pygmies have been evolving. Some say that tropical rainforests have only been around for 5,000 years or less. I disagree. Some gene studies show that Pygmies and other Africans may have split as far back as 70,000 years before present (YBP). The main problem here is a lack of fossils in the rainforest. Things decay so fast there that we hardly find the bones of anything there. However, there have been skulls found around Central African Republic and north into the Sahel. Here Negroids (modern Blacks) evolved over the past 6-12,000 years. Prior to that, Africans looked like either Khoisan types or Pygmy types.
Pygmies are very athletic and graceful. A Pygmy can shimmy up a tree 100 feet with striking agility. Pygmies are not necessarily stupid, though some IQ researchers think that their IQ’s are quite low; there has been only one study, done in 1910. Richard Lynn, a racist but generally a good researcher, feels that the Pygmy IQ may be lower even than the African Black average of 67.
Pygmy heads are about as big as ours. Nevertheless, the relationship between head size and IQ is weak. Vietnamese have some of the smallest heads on Earth, and their IQ is 99.5. Pygmies have the widest noses in the world. A small nose is only useful in cold weather. With a small nose, the air inhaled has time to heat up before it reaches the lungs. Air is already warm in the rainforest, so there is no need to heat it up with a nose filter, so a wider nose is better. The wide noses of other Africans may have a similar evolutionary explanation. Racists such as White nationalists like to attack races for being short. There are short people everywhere there are tropical forests. Examples are the peoples of southern India, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Central American and Amazonian Indians. But the Pygmies are the smallest of all.
I believe that the kinky or woolly hair of Negritos and Africans is a heat adaptation. It acts as a deep and spongy later that traps sun rays before they hit the scalp, thereby protecting the head and the brain from overheating. It also lessens the need to sweat in hot climates. Dark skin protects against the sun by acting as a barrier by capturing sun rays at the skin level and not allowing them to penetrate lower where they can damage cells. It also reduces the chance of sunburns and skin cancer much later on and it prevents UV light from destroying folate in the body. However, dark skinned people can still get sun cancer.
WPRB 103.3 is an FM radio station sponsored by Princeton University and has an antenna radius that reaches all of central to southern Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania, up to Harrisburg. It is supposed to be the grand college radio station worshipped by Princeton alumni and by all of greater Philadelphia's alternative subcultures. Anyone with a car can tune in at “103.3” on their dial and listen in. You can be stuck in poverty in Norristown, Pennsylvania, and then tune in to hear Merzbow or Underworld at 2 pm against the grain of garbage rap music and pop rock being played on every other station. However, this comes at a price, as the WPRB staff is not only understaffed, but filled with the most pretentious and shallow people I have ever known.
Most drivers don’t tune into WPRB. The average American doesn’t even listen to satellite radio, let alone give FM radio a chance anymore. So who’s even tuning in?
You can listen in on their website, and they always want you to write a text in “the chat.” (And it’s always about the chat!). The entire station relies on a Spinitron server, which gives you all the tools to jukebox, record, and chat on someone’s personal DJ page. And those frequent chatters in every single chat seem to be two people: “TAndy” and “Rob from Maryland.” And it’s the same three DJs who never gave up their positions: Marvin Rosen, Jon Solomon, and Jerry Gordon (and I would also say DJs like Mike Hunter, Liz Bot, and Dan Buskirk, who have been on forever but nobody cares).
It’s not that I care about these legacy DJs in particular, but I am more concerned with the unorganized staff and catty women who plague the station’s identity and philosophy.
I had a friend who would prank call WPRB when they would ask for call-ins, and his main reasoning was that “it’s a bunch of women and Jews, so who cares what they think about us.” I too often would leave something in the chat under pen names and call in when I was bored. But it begs the question if the staff is in on us or not. Do they actually care who we really are? Or do they know and are embarrassed that we exist because it would make them look bad?
They must be bluffing.
I started listening to WPRB when I was only 18, back in the year 2009, when I found the station in the car. I couldn’t believe I found a single radio station in bumfuck King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, playing drum and bass music. That was an entire revelation for me, and I had to tell everyone to tune in.
But then when I would tune in again, it would always be some lazy kid or some insufferable girl talking about niche indie-rock music and such. It turns out that the New Brunswick basement scene rubbed off on many Princeton DJs in the early 2010s, and for hours it was nothing but post-hardcore and emo indie, which I became incredibly sick of. There was at least the fading hipsterism of programs like “Motor Funker Radio,” which would play 80s synthpop and other electroclash novelty tracks. I even remember in 2014, in that week of early April, WPRB had a special program that DJ Frankie Knuckles had died. They made a “shoutout” about his death, and decided to play only “classical House tracks.” The real displacement comes from the fact that these were white guys in their late 20s (now in their late 30s or 40s) pretending to be black. That was the first sign of pretenciousness on WPRB that left a lasting effect on me.
I only tuned into WPRB when I was driving back and forth from Montgomery County Community College or Villanova. Before there were convenient smartphones, I had to write the time and day when I heard the track, and then once I got back home or near a computer, I could look it up and save the track’s info in a .txt file. Today, I use Telegram and just smartphone-screencap the track being played and upload it to a personal “WPRB tracks” chat for myself. I still do it. And every time it’s usually some random oddball track being played for the sake of it being interesting and eccentric.
This was my breakthrough. I thought to myself, “How could you be stupid in Norristown, Pennsylvania, and not realize it is only a dial away to tune into KMFDM on the radio? Are people THAT dumb???”
I would say so. Nobody listens to FM radio, and it takes an eccentric like myself to take the time and dedication to care about what the whole institution is about and its history.
I cared so much for the station that I even got a tattoo of “the cheese man” on my right leg. WPRB has left a lasting impact on my musical tastes, and is why I believe living in the Delaware Valley is fucked up. It’s incredibly nihilistic and reactionary. It is “south of Staten Island” and escapes into a 1950s utopia that died long ago. It is only WPRB that actually cares about those outsiders who hate living here and educates the listener that there is interesting art outside the poverty of southern New Yorkers.
WPRB likes to say they are “Jersey’s only station,” but who are the actual listeners? I was born in Philadelphia, but I grew up in Norristown and King of Prussia. Those people live in Rust Belt poverty. Did WPRB actually think someone like me from that area would be so fanatic about a car radio station? Or are they looking for pampered girls who are debt-free, attending Princeton with bland musical tastes into New Order or The Strokes?
It’s exactly the latter that I am up against.
WPRB has changed in the decade since I was tuning in as a teenager and a twenty-something. Gone are the days when you could be an artsy white guy playing the latest in noise and industrial. Now it’s about anything “new,” released to the point that the release is so obscure that no one cares or has the time to invest in liking a new band that is a copy of another existing band with legacy. It’s a joke now in 2026. Another dumb young DJ, another dumb airplay of goth rock and breakcore.
And this year’s “porchfest” that was sponsored to happen and advertised on WPRB? Didn’t happen. It rained! All that for nothing. It makes me think if this was just a political ploy to raise money by think tanks and donors.
What’s the point of all this? Well, I think they outright lie all the time. Nobody cares about WPRB. They shake the tin can and ask for donations, and hardly anything moves. There is big talk that they are “community supported,” and yet they need that free cash in order to operate.
Last year, they had a Google Form up for at least a month, looking for new DJ applicants. And this year? There was no Google Form. They didn’t say they were looking for DJs on their site! It was advertised as a single picture on their Instagram, with no link other than “just look up ‘tryouts’ on our website.” It was posted July 28th, 2026, and that entire deadline was closed in just one week! Anyone who missed out now has to wait an entire year, close to 300 days, to apply again just for a minuscule window that opens up for an unpaid night shift hobby.
Lucy Pignuola, who bosses the station currently, doesn’t seem to understand this simple logic. It reeks of nepotism.
I sent the email within that week window, and I get a white lie of “go away.”
And by looking at the latest new DJs at WPRB who were recruited last year in November, they are all… women! So, what is going on here, Lucy? A woman who only hires other women and pathetic gay guys willing to follow orders!
WPRB has always been disrupted by forces willing to take over when nobody cares. One thing is taken for granted, and the lazy trans people who do the night shift come in. No one gets paid, and yet everyone is close to the red button to play whatever thing they find cool on YouTube. Sometimes, they will get in their friend’s band in the studio for credibility and because of a lackluster idea of “DIY” or “the community.” But what’s even sadder is their inspection and patrolling of what other DJs spin. If the music is too mainstream, you get called in for being too much of a philistine who isn’t “doing the work.” There is an itch to be as pretentious as possible without considering what the content of the music is. If I send a DJ list and they don’t like that I am spinning Nine Inch Nails or Front Line Assembly, well, that’s too “popular,” and they are not interested. It’s always supposed to be “new,” and “fresh,” and “you can’t play music you like!” This “out queering” one another is not productive and shows that there is anxiety when someone has the platform to be “the best DJ” by some ideological liberalism. Throw out any rules with regards that “it’s a good transition” or “it sounds right,” because it’s merely playing enough confusing and eclectic tracks to make the DJ look smart. And who are the only listeners in the chat actually enjoying this randomness? None other than TAndy and Rob from Maryland! It’s a lonely echo chamber, and they are not interested in new talent.
I get the so-called “chart” monthly emails from WPRB, and I don’t know how they would rank their tracks by “heavy” or “moderate.” None of these tracks are popular, and no one knows what they are. It’s like they are deliberately blasting these tracks on purpose to move their playcount number up by a notch.
Exactly like the Alan Sokal affair, why would a normal person care about tracks that don’t make any sense?
They even print the word “jouissance,” as if I have already read Jacques Lacan.
They will only throw in names like “Brian Eno” or “Oneohtrix Point Never” because the double standard is that these names are protected by liberal institutions as foundational. It is indeed the golden calf worship of idolatry.
I remember they would constantly play the work of Kaho Matsui. I thought it was so cool. I liked her music. But who’s pushing her to be on the radio? Who’s spinning her tracks? Is it total coincidence?
She was supposed to have a show in West Philly in early August of last year. Instead, she bailed on it because she didn’t feel like playing it. She let the brown kid do an ambient set, and then let the Texas couple who drove 14 hours do their Pink Floyd drone noise, and then she made the spoiled entitled declaration of “uhh, sorry, I am having mental health issues and I don’t want to play in front of people I don’t care about even though I am the niche headliner at that show and could care less what others think.”
A part of me wishes I should have driven to Red Hook to see Lucrecia Dalt talk to David Sylvian in person, then waste my time at Perfect Circuit answering phone calls to neurotic bumpkins with money to buy expensive Eurorack with. I thought I could make up for that loss by seeing Matsui. Nope. She couldn’t care either. She’s an entitled rich kid who couldn’t care less what you think about her.
And this is the same type of entitlement and insecurity found within the current staff at WPRB.
I’m sick of acting like a politically correct stooge for NPR. It’s all a performance.
This is when I decided to take destiny into my own hands by airing my own WPRB DJ program. I’ll craft thirty of my own WPRB two-hour weekly shows, presenting my resume and skills, so that I know what I am doing as a DJ. All they do on the Spinitron is write a quirky bio and post Tumblr pictures of what they aesthetically like.
They always ask in these fake LinkedIn interviews, “And what would you do if I gave you two hours to play music? Would you mess it up? Do you know what you are doing?” This doubt— like I am going to say “shit” on air or fumble pressing buttons assumes that I am some weed-smoking high school student— is just so girly and out of touch with reality.
And I can’t do this???
They should know I have my MA at the School of Visual Arts and I don’t have debt. But they don’t care, because they think of “other minority voices that need a chance.”
Whoever is running WPRB right now relies solely on an isolated Instagram account of only 5,000 followers, which means absolutely nothing. I had 38,000 followers on Instagram, and people were buying my books. Instagram burned me anyway because of how controversial I was, or, in their words, “harming other people in the community.”
This is downright disrespectful not only on Instagram’s part, but on WPRB as a whole to negate my influence and overqualifications.
There is big talk about being “punk” and standing up for yourself. But again, if I were to do it, write about it, or stand up against any authority over what I do, WPRB cowers in fear. So I put this forth as a challenge and reminder that when WPRB offers their DJ training program again (hopefully sooner on their website than just on Instagram), they know who I am instead of backing away because of my voice.
I’m not giving up that easily. I am not going to listen to another babbling idiot DJ make up something on the fly and abuse their power over the radio and be forced to listen to mediocre tracks that I know I could make a better selection.
You might not like me as a passionate person, but that’s the point. WPRB is a completely gynocratic, unemployed group of friends uninterested when a helping hand comes along. They want to remain smug, condescending against the plebians in Norristown and remain bougie in Princeton.
If you are brave enough to put a Breakdancing Ronald Reagan flyer on the front of your website, you can also get me on your free training program if you want to.
Do I have to lie? Do I have to do a mustache and mullet and call myself “Safe Sleazy,” and you do the prejudice of who you want me to be?
Or do you want someone authentic, someone real, someone willing to stand up for the little guy who gets bullied and speaks his mind?
I am doing that right now.
It’s up to you.
Swallow your pride and actually give me a chance for once, then discriminate based upon “well, he likes Krautrock according to the email!”
I’m sorry, but WPRB is just another liberal afraid to walk or drive through a black community.
0:00 Why Did Hunter Sit Down With Candace Owens? 12:34 The Dark Side of Social Media 18:06 War, Insider Trading, and the Washington Elites 32:36 Thomas Massie and Marjorie Taylor Greene 35:21 The Importance of Self-Reflection 39:49 Addiction and Sobriety 48:31 The… pic.twitter.com/5qcAFyrHjj
Tucker is radicalizing young people who don't know anything about economics into tearing down the system. What he wants to replace it with is much worse.
BREAKING: Iran has completely ruled out any future negotiations with the Trump administration, declaring it will wait out Donald Trump's term until January 20, 2029, per Iranian outlets and Ghalibaf advisor's post.
"Trump will not reach an agreement with us. We will accompany…
Mark Levin kvetches up a storm over Trump wanting to make a deal with Iran.
"It is apparent to me that we want a deal," Levin laments. "But the Israelis want to defeat the regime! They want to defeat the enemy, because they know that is the only way!"
In The Odyssey, Nolan weaponizes this exact pop-culture caricature of Damon as a mildly impaired, over-promoted everyday guy to mock the ultimate archetype of the average Western man: a guy who genuinely believes he can “science his way out” (or “science the shit out”) of a civilizational collapse, completely oblivious to the fact that he built the trap he’s currently dying in. The reactionary brain-rot screeching over Nolan’s casting choices completely misses the joke, failing to see how the film operates as a dual-barreled reality check.
Nolan isn’t shoehorning modern progressive hand-wringing into the Bronze Age; he’s slapping the viewer in the face with the reality that the “brown flood” of mass migration and racial mixing isn’t some new-fangled conspiracy, but the exact same ancient churn that’s been grinding down empires since the Mediterranean was a giant, chaotic melting pot. Meanwhile, dropping Elliot Page into the role of Sinon—while internet chatter went wild with rumors that Page was playing Achilles—is the punchline of the century. The absurdity of internet chumps hyperventilating over rumors of Page as history’s greatest rage-aholic warrior completely ignores how the roles of the sexes have been tossed into a blender across centuries. Having Page play Sinon while the culture war freaked out over Achilles is the ultimate Baphomet play: a deliberate, occult alchemy where male and female swap polarity, turning modern gender anxieties into a mirror that completely breaks the brains of chumps who can’t see the cosmic joke right in front of them. You see this exact same brain-rot playing out across every digital platform today.
On Instagram, OnlyFans “Marxist” girls and their simps play-act as anti-capitalists while operating as micro-vendors for digital pimp platforms. On Substack, pseudo-intellectual “right-wingers” pretend to be punk-rock dissidents while packaging a degenerate, childless lifestyle underneath talking points spoon-fed by political operatives writing white house memos. And on X, Silicon Valley tech-bros post self-important essays about being “burdened” by their own striver grindset—a Zoomer Facebook where VCs like Garry Tan and Sam Altman smile while flushing out entire generations of workers in favor of cheaper, more compliant labor pools. Everyone is performatively picking a side on a digital carousel, completely oblivious to the fact that they are just worker bees polishing the engine that consumes them. Underneath this Greco-Roman facade lies a deeper administrative illusion. History presents us with a series of binary feuds: Canaan versus Japheth, Rome versus Carthage, Jacob versus Esau, or the Judean temple networks versus the Roman imperium. Scripture frames this in Genesis 9:25–27: “Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren… God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem.” The dominant geopolitical narrative tells us that Japheth built fixed borders and civic infrastructure, while Canaan operated as a spirit of fluid trade, financial subversion, and displacement. When Rome razed Carthage in 146 BC, we are told that land power defeated maritime capital—only for capital to swap siege engines for speculative finance and open-air population management. Yet, treating these historical antagonisms as absolute oppositions misses the true nature of the apparatus. These apparent death-matches—Canaan vs. Japheth, Rome vs. Jerusalem, Jacob vs. Esau—are not irreconcilable enemies fighting for total annihilation. They function as the two intertwined serpents of the Caduceus, spiraling around a central rod of managed illusion. They are complementary poles in a grand dialectical engine: one side provides the rigid structural container (the state, law, the military-industrial complex), while the other provides the dynamic engine of disruption (financialization, migration, liquidity, and crisis management). They work in tandem to keep the wheels of pseudo-progress turning, creating the illusion of history moving forward through conflict. This perpetual-motion machine of managed dialectics serves as an elaborate smoke screen deployed by global elites. By keeping populations fixated on these civilizational, tribal, and online culture-war polarities, the ruling class conceals the underlying engine driving the entire process: the cold, material mechanics of resource extraction, capital accumulation, and structural dominance—the ultimate reality of dialectical materialism. Historically, whether looking at institutional mercantile networks or imperial apparatuses, this recurring cycle of border disruption and institutional conflict systematically dismantles local sovereignty and breaks organic ties. Odysseus’s journey is simply the modern manifestation of this continuous loop: the tragicomic saga of the suburban Western manager who loses his own home to financial predators and engineered population flows while obsessing over quarterly metrics, artificial diversity quotas, and digital clout—entirely blind to the fact that the civilizational drama he watches on screen is a carefully choreographed puppet show designed to keep him from looking at the material machinery consuming him. ✍️ Author’s Diatribe 1: Civilizational Exhaustion & The Digital Carousel Matt Damon is the mascot for an entire culture hiding from reality behind curated online poses. Look across the social media landscape and you see the same theater everywhere: on Instagram, OnlyFans “Marxist” girls and their simps LARP as leftists while funneling money straight into digital pimp platforms. Over on Substack, pseudo-intellectual, fake-punk “right-wingers” drop racy takes to sell a heroin-chic lifestyle as “based,” taking direct cues from Trump administration memos while raising zero kids and living in total hedonism. Meanwhile, on X, Silicon Valley tech-bros post cringe-inducing manifestos about how “burdened” they are by their own grindset, desperate to prove how “cracked” they are. It’s hipster irony masking pure corporate sycophancy—Zoomer Facebook watched over by millennial venture capitalists like Garry Tan and Sam Altman, who nod approvingly at the worker bees while quietly flushing out the previous generation of tech workers to churn through cheap foreign labor and corporate diversity targets. It’s all the exact same mechanism: hyper-curated, performative identity games designed to give people a sense of edge, while the actual material infrastructure beneath their feet is strip-mined and thrown down the drain.
Simon Rorschach argues that the new language of sustainability, demographic restraint, and technological management conceals the impulse of a powerful few to decide how many people the world should contain and how much the rest are permitted to consume.
Konstantin Malofeev, the Russian businessman, Orthodox conservative, and founder of the Tsargrad media group, has issued a stark warning about what he sees as the emerging politics of global depopulation. His argument about the “Golden Billion” begins from a simple observation. The rulers of the richest countries speak more and more often about limits: limits to population, limits to consumption, limits to energy use, limits to travel, limits to economic growth. At the same time, those who preach these limits rarely live within them. Malofeev points to a recent study proposing that the world population should fall to roughly four billion by 2200, helped by a global fertility rate of about 1.75 children per woman. He places this beside older arguments associated with the Club of Rome, the population politics of wealthy philanthropists, the private discussions of men such as Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Thiel, and the growing power of artificial intelligence. His conclusion is that these are not merely separate curiosities. They belong to a way of thinking in which human beings are treated as a burden to be reduced, measured, redirected, and controlled. The phrase “Golden Billion” gives this way of thinking a name. It does not require us to believe that a committee has written down a plan to kill seven billion people. The charge is both simpler and more serious: a small class that already possesses most of the wealth and power is building a world in which it will need fewer workers, tolerate fewer independent nations, and demand ever greater restraint from everyone below it. Malofeev is right to treat this prospect as a political danger rather than as an innocent exercise in scientific planning.
What if the “Golden Billion” is not a conspiracy theory, but the name for a political order already taking shape?
Different utopian visions with one thing in common. Pushing against the prescribed normative system. May the best dissident ideology win. Adam, host of Mainstream Dissident and owner of MSD Media Works, gives the first speech of the night at the “Multipolarity and the Global Reset” event held in New York City on July 18, 2026, in his first public speaking appearance.
This is another boss old animal article. I had to do a massive rewrite on this. Hope you like it.
There are three subspecies of spotted owls in the US, and all are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The Northern spotted owl and two populations of the California spotted owl have been proposed for endangered listing but the decisions have not been finalized. All spotted owl subspecies prefer old growth forest and they have all declined due to timber harvest among other reasons.
The Northern spotted owl (NSO) ranges from Oregon and Washington down into the Northern California coast ranges and over into the Siskiyous and Cascades. The NSO was declared a threatened species in 1990, setting off the timber wars in the Pacific Northwest. Clinton pushed through an inadequate Northwest Forest Plan which sold out more to industry than was necessary. Logging in the region declined by 80%, but they had been overcutting there for decades. The new regulations did not save the NSO, and it continued to decline at 3.5% per year. The continuing decline of the NSO means that it has been recommended for uplisting from threatened to endangered, but it is listed as “warranted but precluded” meaning that the FWS doesn’t have the resources to list it.
In the far north, in Northern Washington and British Colombia, the NSO is declining at about 7% per year. Depending on the part of its range we are talking about, it is continuing to decline at 2-9% a year. Its decline is especially serious in the Oregon and Washington Coast Ranges where it is declining 5-9% a year due to historical timber harvest and severe barrel owl intrusion. Unlike in the Cascades, timber harvest still continues at unsustainable rates in Washington and Oregon. One problem is that much of the land is private timberland.
Washington state has only 500 pairs of spotted owls in the entire state, and the population has declined by 65%. In Southwestern B.C., there are only about 50 owls left and they are going to go extinct soon unless something is done. Part of the problem here is that the northern end of its range has always been more marginal habitat for spotted owls due to a decline in the prey base. All spotted owls have selected for old growth forests. However the NSO is no longer declining due to present timber harvest, but it is being effected primarily by the presence of a competitor and predator called the barred owl. Other threats are habitat fragmentation and large high-severity fires.
A new threat is the barred owl, which is a relative of the spotted owl, coming down from the north. The barred owl is much more tolerant of the open conditions created by massive clearcutting, and is displacing spotted owls in many places by outcompeting them. In particular, it is interbreeding with them, creating a new hybrid type. It even preys on spotted owls. The NSO was already in very bad shape due to timber harvest but the barred owls made things much worse. Going back to heavy timber harvest will just make things worse.
The US government has proposed to kill an incredible 460,000 barred owls in NSO habitat in Washington, Oregon, and California over a 30 year period. They will also killed barred owls in the Northern Sierra in the CASPO range. Money has been set aside for this. Of course, animal rights people are up in arms over this, but I think animal rights people are one of the sillier types of environmentalists.
Barred owls are doing fine and are in no danger of extinction, but they are presently definitely driving the NSO extinct. I say kill the barred owls! Death to the barred owls! They are invasive in the region and formerly occurred east of the Mississippi River. As large forest stands were increasingly cleared in the West the more open terrain attracted barred owls. Barred owls dislike old growth forest and prefer more open stands. Heavy timber harvest on the Pacific Coast opened up the old growth forest and made them attractive to barred owls.
The California spotted owl (CASPO) lives in the Sierra Nevada, down into the Tehachapis and into the mountain ranges of Southern California. The Southern California population is isolated in mountain ranges that are not connected and is projected to go extinct over at most 100-200 years. Before mass settlement of Southern California, CASPO may have moved from range to range via river corridors, but now that is not possible. The Techachapi CASPO population is probably not sustainable either. CASPO also lives in the Coast Ranges south of San Francisco, where it is in bad shape.
In 2023, the US Fish and Wildlife Service proposed to list the CASPO under the Endangered Species Act. The Southern California and coastal population was proposed as endangered and the Sierra Nevada population was proposed as threatened. It has declined by 31-65% recently and it continues to decline at 2% a year. It has declined by 65% in Southern California, mostly by drought-caused tree mortality and high-severity wildfires.
There have been declines ranging from 31-50% in the Sierra Nevada, with the declines increasing as one goes north. In Kings Canyon and Sequoia National Parks, the population is stable, so this proves that timber harvest is the reason for the decline. There is a break in spotted owl populations in the Cascades of Northern California. Everything north of the break is NSO and everything south of it is CASPO.
I have read hundreds of pages of studies on the CASPO. It is declining due to high-severity forest fires, drought, which is killing a lot of trees, and invasive barred owls. I read a report recently that said it was also declining due to effects of both historical and current timber harvest. However the barred owls have not moved very far down from the Northern Sierras yet and they are not present on the coast or in Southern California.
The Mexican spotted owl lives in the Southwest. It is found in Utah, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and parts of Mexico, but it is mostly found in Arizona and New Mexico where 90% of the population resides, mostly on national forests. It lives in canyonlands and in forests in this region. The Utah population is stable. In Texas there are only small, isolated populations in the Sky Island Ranges. In Colorado there is also a small population that ranges between vulnerable and critically imperiled. In Mexico it lives in the Sierra Madre Occidental and Sierra Madre Oriental, but is threatened by timber harvest and expanding agriculture.
With a small population of only 2,000, it is listed as threatened and has had a huge amount of critical habitat set aside. It is threatened by high-severity fires, climate change, past and present timber harvesting, and cattle grazing. It is interesting that grazing is a threat. Serious overgrazing in the Southwest seems to be devastating the grass and forb understory of the old growth pine forests. Spotted owls prey on rodents, and perhaps the ruin of the vegetation by grazing is reducing the populations of their prey.
This overgrazing has promoted heavy stands of small trees that are susceptible to drought and fire. These will not be suitable habitat for Mexican spotted owls as they need old growth forest. The truth is that the Southwest should not even be grazed in the first place; it’s too dry and cows devastate arid regions. Cows evolved in cold, moist England and they are not well suited to arid regions. During the hot, dry months, they congregate in riparian areas, which they utterly devastate. The Eastern US is much moister, and cattle grazing causes few problems there.
To find the free articles, see the last 10-15 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10-15 articles. After the last 10-15 articles, all articles go paid.
This is a seriously cool old article, so I may as well run it. As you can see, I am a strong environmentalist with an extreme interest in wildlife, mostly mammals, but I am also an avid birdwatcher, and I also have an interest in amphibians and reptiles, and even plants to some extent, though I don’t understand them very well.
The Sierra Nevada red fox (Vulves vulpes necator) was rediscovered in California’s Sierra Nevada around Sonora Pass on August 11, 2010. The Sierra Nevada population is listed as Endangered. The Feather River is the delineation of the populations. Those to the south of it are endangered and those to the north of it which range up to the Oregon Cascades are not protected. There is a population of about 20 of them there.
It was spotted by a camera that had been set up to monitor other wildlife in an area where Yosemite National Park, the Stanislaus and the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forests all come together. The sighting was actually on the Humboldt-Toiyabe, not on the Stanislaus as many news reports had it. Part of the confusion may have been that the sighting was near the border between the Humboldt-Toiyabe and Stanislaus Forests. I know that the fox was not seen right at Sonora Pass. Instead, I believe it was spotted in the area to the south of the pass. I am guessing that it was seen near the Leavitt Creek area.
Saliva analysis on a sock filled with chicken parts at the bait station confirmed that it was a Sierra Nevada red fox, and that it had a rare genetic signature previously only seen in museum specimens from the 1920’s. This is the first proof of the Sierra Nevada red fox outside the Lassen area in a very long time. It’s great news! The area around Lassen National Park where the Northern Sierra meets the Southern Cascades has historically seen more sightings than any other part of California (sighting map for Northern California). This concentration is focused in Lassen, Tehama and Shasta Counties in and around Lassen Park. There have also been a few sightings in Modoc, Siskiyou and Trinity Counties.
The existence of the Sierra Nevada red fox has recently been confirmed by a team led by John Perrine of UC Berkeley. The team has located a small population of 20 Sierra Nevada red foxes existing in and around Lassen National Park in the Cascades Range. A later study proved that these were Sierra Nevada red foxes and not Sacramento Valley Red Foxes, which are abundant at the lower elevations in California, where they are mostly invasive and cause a lot of problems by preying on threatened and endangered bird populations.
A good description of the Lassen study, along with several rare photos of the foxes, can be found here. In the Sierras, the Sierra Nevada red fox is typically found at about 9,000 feet, with some records at between 4,000-7,000 feet. In the Cascades, they are usually found at around 6,000 feet, dropping down to 4,000 feet in the winter and moving up to 8,000 feet in the summer. A report by the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) in 1987 said the Sierra Nevada red fox was endangered, but noted that sightings continue in the rest of the Sierra Nevada outside the Cascades within the traditional range of the species.
There recent sightings on the East side near Mammoth Mountain at high elevations.
They reportedly still exist in Mineral King south of Sequoia National Park.
In the same region, there have been a number of sightings in the Sagehen Road area near Olancha on the Inyo National Forest recently. The sightings were at the 4-6,000 foot elevation. This is near the South Sierra Wilderness Area. Map here.
There was a reliable sighting in 1993 at Sequoia National Park.
In 1971, a Sierra Nevada red fox was sighted at Florence Lake at about 9,000 feet.
In 1973, there was a sighting at Soda Springs near Mammoth Pool Reservoir at 4,500 feet.
In 1987, there was a sighting along Highway 168 between Auberry and Shaver Lake at about 4,300 feet, a very low elevation.
In 1991, there was a sighting at Papoose Lake north of Lake Edison at about 10,390 feet.
There have also been a few sightings in Yosemite Valley recently. There was a documented sighting of a Sierra Nevada red fox near Tioga Pass in Yosemite National Park in 1990. This sighting was verified via photograph. The fox was photographed in the middle of winter at about 9,000 feet.
On the Stanislaus NF, there have been a number of sightings around the Emigrant Wilderness, in particular something called the Waterhouse Wilderness Study Area on the northwest edge of the Emigrant Wilderness.
In Mono County, Sierra Nevada red foxes have been reported from Bridgeport Valley.
In Nevada County near Lake Tahoe, there is a sighting from 1994 along Highway 89 north of Truckee.
In addition to the Lassen area, there is also a recent sighting around Antelope Lake and around Lake Almanor and Jonesville on the Plumas National Forest.
There are recent sightings around Little Lake in the Cascades on the northern edge of the Lassen National Forest.
There are recent sightings around Mount Shasta and around Glass Mountain in the Cascades on the Klamath National Forest.
There are also recent sightings around the Trinity River near Mount Eddy in the Cascades on the northern edge of the Shasta-Trinity National Forest.
There is also a recent sighting near Canby on the Modoc National Forest.
In fact a significant population of 25-50 foxes has been found between Sonora Pass all the way down to Cottonwood Lakes in the far Southern Sierras.
Between 1940 and 1959, 135 Sierra Nevada red fox pelts were taken by trappers, an average of 7 per year. That number dropped to 2 per year from 1970-1974. The California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) banned all Sierra Nevada red fox trapping in 1974. The Sierra Nevada red fox has declined drastically. This cool paper by C. Hart Merriam about 100 years ago shows that Sierra Nevada red foxes were formerly common at high elevations in the Mount Shasta area, that tracks were seen almost every day (!), but the foxes were very wary and never entered the traps the researchers had set. It is interesting that fishers were also present in this area at the time. This report makes one wonder just what it is that has driven V. v. necator to near-extinction. I strongly suspect grazing.
One of the best historical sources on the Sierra Nevada red fox is this chapter from Joseph Grinnell’s hard-to-find Furbearers of California from 1937. One thing it makes clear is that the Sierra Nevada red fox was much more common in the first four decades of the century than it is now. You can view it here. At the time of Grinnell’s writing, this fox was preying heavily on Sierra Nevada snowshoe hares and White-tailed hares, both of which are now pretty rare in the Sierras. I wonder if that is related to their decline? The decline of the White-tailed hare in the Sierra, formerly common on the East Side, is related exclusively to grazing.
All high-elevation grazing needs to be banned from the Sierra, as it is a catastrophe. Cows do not belong in high elevation meadows. We can start by getting rid of grazing in wilderness areas (allowing grazing in wilderness areas was the only way that the Wilderness Act of 1964 could be passed). I am not impressed with the ability of the US Forest Service to preserve wildlife in general, not to mention sensitive or endangered species. I spent years monitoring the Sierra National Forest, and the workers I met with were some of the most corrupt and dishonest people I have ever dealt with. The mentality was devoted to resource extraction, and even wildlife biologists, botanists, and fisheries specialists routinely issued “no significant harm” findings on virtually every single Environmental Assessment Report I saw.
Even less impressive is the CDFG, though at least their heads were in the right place. Individuals working with the DFG are good people, but the Commission is run by political clowns. There are all sorts of species that need to be listed as threatened or endangered in California, but the DFG has hardly made even one such listing in the last decade. The DFG has been routinely denying petitions to list any species as threatened or endangered for a decade or so now.
Further, there are questions about how much a CA T& E designation even helps a species, as the DFG seldom intervenes to help even the species they have listed as T & E. Most people don’t know this but the “liberal” state of California is not so liberal. For one it is completely controlled by the real estate lobby, the timber industry, corporate agriculture, and Silicon Valley. Like at the federal level there’s little to no science going on at all. Instead of science there’s just political bullshit, and politics is nothing more than devious and dangerous lies and crap. So this may be a reason for the failure of the CA DFG to list species under the CA Endangered Species Act.
In the early 1990’s, the CA DFG produced some excellent volumes – Reptiles and Amphibians of Special Concern in California by Mark Jennings, Fish of Special Concern in California by Peter Moyne, and Threatened and Endangered Species of California.
The reports by Jennings and Moyne listed numerous species that should be listed as species of special concern, threatened or endangered. To my knowledge, 35 years later, not a single one has been listed. Another problem is that endangered species are typically listed as threatened, but this is a problem at the federal level too. For instance the Northern Spotted Owl is seriously overdue for an upgrade from threatened to endangered.
Another example is the Sierra Nevada red fox we are discussing, which the DFG even admitted in 2004 was critically endangered, is still listed as threatened instead of endangered. The political game here has been to devastate the DFG with budget cuts, even during times when the state is flush with cash. Then the DFG gets to say that they don’t have any money to list any new species. Nice game, huh? If we are truly a liberal state flush with cash, we can surely fund that DFG at the level it needs to be funded at.
It seems every year, the DFG gets hammered with new budget cuts, and in flush years, the money never gets reinstated. Any environmentalist who is a fiscal conservative needs to have their head examined, and here in California, all liberal elected government officials claim to be environmentalists, yet they act like fiscal conservatives in cutting the DFG budget in the most callous manner. The United States Forest Service complains of budget cuts too, and it seems that every year, they get cut more and more (DOGE was devastating to the USFS) but in contrast they are actively hostile to the environment. When I was monitoring them, their agenda was to let grazing and logging go on to the greatest extent possible and to deny all negative impacts they had on the environment.
Go into a local FS office and the whole office, even the wildlife biologists, is avidly listening to Rush Limbaugh! Most of them, including once again wildlife biologists who supposedly believe in evolution, are members of evangelical Christian churches! Go figure. Such is the state of things in the supposedly pro-environment US. Large majorities support the environmentalist agenda, but of course the Republicans and incredibly even the Clintonista triangulating Democrats were both very hostile to the environment.
Trump has been the most anti-environmentalist president since the onset of the environmentalist movement in the 1960’s. However, Obama and especially Biden were much better on the environment. Biden was the most environmentalist and pro-labor president in recent memory. The only explanation is that both parties are dedicated to the corporate and pro-business agenda, and the entire rest of the population, even if that means 55-98% of the population depending on the issue, can just go to Hell.
References
CDFG. 1987. Sierra Nevada Red Fox: Five-year Status Report. California Department of Fish and Game, Sacramento, California, USA.
Grinnell, Joseph. 1924. Animal Life in the Yosemite. Berkeley: University of California Press, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology.
Kucera, T. E. 1995. Recent Photograph of a Sierra Nevada Red Fox. California Fish and Game 81:43-44.
Merriam, Clinton Hart. 1899. Results of a Biological Survey of Mount Shasta, California. Washington D.C.: U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division of Biological Survey.
Southern California Edison Company. 2001. Final Technical Study Plan Package (FTSPP) for the Big Creek Hydroelectric Projects (FERC Project Nos. 67, 120, 2085, and 2175). Terrestrial Resources – Chapter 13 – Mesocarnivores. Rosemead, CA.
The ships are already drawn up beyond the walls, yet Europe’s rulers speak as though history had been abolished by treaty. They weaken borders, dissolve inherited loyalties, hand power to distant institutions, and teach their own peoples to regard their ancestry, nation, and history with suspicion. Meanwhile the language of administration replaces the language of duty, and political life becomes a contest over procedure while the foundations of the civilization itself are left undefended. Homer knew such blindness: kings consumed by vanity, councils deaf to warning, warriors sent to pay for the errors of men above them, and proud cities discovering that walls cannot save a people whose judgment has failed. French New Right luminaries Dominique Venner and Guillaume Faye saw in modern Europe the return of that ancient danger. Their warning was political as much as cultural: no civilization survives indefinitely when its elites cease to believe in its continuity, when its people are taught to mistrust their own inheritance, and when those charged with guarding the gates insist that the gates no longer matter.
What separates a living civilization from one that merely inhabits the ruins of its past?
This was also posted earlier about a year ago, but it’s paid now, and it’s so cool, I think I will run it again for shits and giggles. Hope you get something out of it.
I’ve already killed a man. Killed him? Well, I tried to kill him anyway. But I have no idea if I killed him or just hurt him. Left him for dead by the side of the road! Why did I try to kill him? Well, you see, he was trying to kill me! I’m 66 years old, and already 3-4 different men have tried to murder me. In one case, I tried to murder him preemptively before he murdered me, then I got away. The 2-3 others I just got away from, real fast.
Anyway you ever had someone tried to kill you? Odd feeling. Your brain says:
What’s going on here?
Um, this guy is trying to kill me.
So what are you going to do then?
Um, I think we’re going to try to kill him.
So you try to take him out in one way or another, try to kill the guy, knock him out, or hurt him so bad he can’t get up and chase you. Then if you can take him out, you run away …
Mark Levin throws a fit over Americans not wanting to fight Israel’s wars, insisting that the “Greatest Generation” would be eager to fight Iran and wouldn’t be complaining about higher prices.
“I remember a time when America would say, ‘Let’s go! Let’s destroy that country!'”… pic.twitter.com/Sx7rlG6OHP
I am sounding the alarm again. My radio audience, which consists of solid MAGA-conservative Republicans and others, is very concerned about a deal with the Iranian regime, especially one that is weak. The listeners are smart and informed. They are well familiar with the nature…
Disturbing but not surprising. Also explains why the Iranian people aren’t armed and Kharg Island stands. If the enemy is not defeated, which does not appear to be the objective, I fear victory will be dumbed down and declared at some point along the off ramp. https://t.co/77eM7Rd1d4
Yep. The Woke Reich use “the common good” like the left — that is, to evade the Constitution’s limits and barriers and promote an activist governmental agenda. The founders used it as shorthand for the underlying principles in the Declaration and the civil society. https://t.co/hiq9UzhHRn
– The Great Depression destroyed the Republican Party and conservatism for generations. The GOP didn’t control Congress again until the 1990s. It didn’t enjoy a trifecta again until George W. Bush was president. My grandmother associated Republicans with Herbert Hoover until she died in 2020.
– Americans responded to the Great Depression by voting for FDR four times. They voted for sweeping New Deal reforms because conservatism was at a historic low. Conservatives spent the rest of the 20th century trying to claw their way back to the deregulated economy of the 1920s.
– Americans didn’t want to get involved in World War II and public sentiment only changed after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and Hitler declared war on the United States. The Iran War was deeply unpopular from the start and has only become more and more unpopular.
– The Greatest Generation leaned Democrat for their entire lives. The U.N. was created to prevent a World War from happening again. Nationalism and racism were associated with the Nazis and became taboo. We are still living with the cultural fallout from the war to this day.
– Americans have never rewarded a political party whose pitch was fighting a war of choice for a foreign country for people mocking a decline in their standard of living. Britain was unable to pull the United States until World War II until Pearl Harbor. FDR spent his whole political career railing against “economic royalists” and trying to expand social insurance because he wasn’t an idiot.
Note: Levin is also calling for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to be fired and telling him how to fight wars.
This was one of my favorite articles that I wrote. But it seemed to be lost. It’s not even present in the archives of my old site, which is very incomplete anyway. I finally found a copy on Paperblog, which had been reprinting my material, but it was missing all of the really cool photos. Still I’m so glad I found it!
At the moment, grizzly bears exist in Montana, Idaho, Washington, Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming in the contiguous US. There is also a tiny population in Mexico. They are very common in Canada and Alaska. In Alberta grizzlies are so common that they are regarded as pests. However, the Alberta government has listed the population of 700 bears as Threatened. British Columbia has a huge population of over 16,000 bears. This number is down from the 25,000 bears present at contact.
There are 25,000 grizzlies total in Canada in British Columbia, Alberta, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and the northern part of Manitoba. There are 32,850 grizzly bears in the US in total, but 95% of them are in Alaska. Alaska has a population of ~31,000 bears, and there are 1,850 bears in the lower 48 states. rest of the US. The Northern Rockies and Greater Yellowstone populations are considered to be at capacity.
Grizzly Bears in Montana
There are grizzly populations in Montana – 960 in the Northern Continental Divide, 40 in the Cabinet-Yaak, and 105 in the Selkirks. The Northern Continental Divide population is at capacity. They are only present in Western Montana and are absent from Central and Eastern Montana. In recent years, grizzlies from the Northern Continental Divide group have expanded to the east in Montana out into the prairie 200 miles east of the mountains. To the north, they have expanded to the east all the way to the Tiber Dam on the Marias River near the Canadian border 65 miles east of the mountains.
There is now a population of 60-80 bears living on the prairie to the east of the mountains. To the south, there have been many grizzly sightings in the Big Belt Mountains, and there was a single sighting in the Little Belt Mountains east of Helena and south of Great Falls. The Northern Continental Divide group is also expanding to the south in Montana to the Anaconda Range, Rock Creek and the Clark Fork south of I-90, the Sapphire, John Long, Nevada, and the Elkhorn Mountains between Helena and Boulder down through the Boulder Mountains in the McDonald-Rodgers and Champion-Thunderbolt areas. Grizzlies have been confirmed in the Nevadas, Elkhorns and Boulders.
In addition, there are sightings around Lincoln, Basin, and Rimini in this area and a bear was killed by car in Lincoln in 2007. Lincoln is in the Nevadas, Rimini is in the Elkhorns, and Basin is in the Boulders. The Boulders population has been confirmed above Basin.
Tracks were seen by bowhunters on Thunderbolt Mountain around 2010.
In addition, there have been many sightings in the Bernice area from 2012-2014.
The McDonald Rogers Area is bounded by McDonald Pass west of Helena on the south and Rogers Pass west of Wolf Creek on the north.
Two bears have been killed in recent years in the Champion-Thunderbolt. Champion refers to the area bounded by Champion Pass and Thunderbolt Mountain in the Boulders west of Basin south through the Boulders, Bull and Dry Mountains past Elk Park all the way to the Tobacco Root and Highland Mountains.
In Montana, the Greater Yellowstone group is expanding to the north and east to the Absaroka, Beartooth Ranges, all the way to the Pryor Mountains and to the north and west to the Madison, Gravelly, Greenhorn and Snowcrest Ranges and the Tobacco Roots, Highlands and Pintler Mountains.
A bear was killed recently in the Highlands, and bears have been occasionally documented in the Pintlers. A clawed tree with grizzly bear hair on it was seen in 2010 in the Highlands.
In 2013, a bear was repeatedly seen on Fleecer Mountain southwest of Butte. There have been a few bears sighted southwest of Philipsburg in the southern end of the Flint Range.
In the northern part of the Flint Range, Fish and Wildlife trapped a bear in Deer Lodge that was raiding beehives.
Montana Fish and Game has repeatedly trapped bears around Georgetown Lake in the southwestern part of the Flint Range. In 2013, a grizzly was seen at Seymour Lake in the Pintlers. It is only 12 miles from Seymour Lake to Georgetown Lake. This is the gap in the grizzly range in this area from the southwestern end of the Flints to the northern end of the Pintlers.
In addition, in 2005, a young grizzly bear was found shot to death with an arrow in Cabbage Gulch in the Mount Haggin Wildlife Management Area in northern end of the Pintlers. This bear was proven to be from the Northern Continental Divide group. There has been no testing of bears further to the south in the Pintlers, Highlands, Mount Fleecer or Tobacco Roots to determine which group they are a part of.
Between McDonald Pass and the Pintlers is 35 miles of the Boulders and between the pass and the Tobacco Roots and the Boulder and Jefferson Valleys is 50 miles of the Boulder, Dry, and Bull Mountains. In order the breach this gap, the bears would need to occupy all of the Boulders, Bulls and Drys, and they would also have to make it through the Jefferson and Boulder Valleys.
In June 2010, a grizzly was shot by a landowner at the south end of Elk Park Valley when he found it in the duck pen outside his home, so they have already made it to the Elk Park Valley. The Elk Park Valley is a high mostly treeless plain like Sierra Valley in California at 6,000 feet. It consists of three towns – Elk Park, Trask and Woodville. The southern end of Elk Park from Trask to Woodville is from only 4-10 miles northeast of Butte, so this report means that grizzlies are now only 4-10 miles from Butte itself. It is not known if grizzlies are present in the Bulls or Drys.
So the present distributional gap between the two populations from the south end of Elk Park Valley on the southern end of the Northern Continental Divide group to the northern end of the Greater Yellowstone group in the Highlands is the Jefferson Valley, about a 14-21 mile gap. The valleys are full of ranches, and getting through them would would not be easy for a grizzly bear. If this gap can be breached, the Greater Yellowstone group will be able to link up with the Northern Continental Divide group to form one huge metapopulation from the Wind Rivers in Wyoming west to the Caribou Mountains in Idaho all the way north in Montana to the Canadian border and 200 miles east into the prairie.
Grizzly Bears in Wyoming
The Greater Yellowstone population of 1,000 bears is considered to be at capacity. It has been expanding west recently to the west side of the Bighorn Basin, the Greybull River, the Shoshone River between Cody and Powell, and south to the Gros Ventre Range, the Owl Creek Mountains, the Wind River Range south at least to the Big Sandy River, the Wind River Valley and Wind River Basin to at least Lander, the Wyoming and Snake River Ranges, the Greys River, the Green River Valley, and all the way down to north of Evanston on the Utah border. Grizzly Bears are doing well in Wyoming but they are present only in the western and central parts of the state and they are absent in the east.
Grizzly Bears in Idaho
The core Greater Yellowstone population has been expanding in Wyoming east to the Absaroka, Beartooth, and Caribou Ranges in Idaho. The Greater Yellowstone group is also expanding to the west into Eastern Idaho to Island Park just east of Yellowstone in the Centennial Range and even to the Caribous east of the Snake River. There are thought to be 100 grizzly bears in Idaho. Tracks have been found in Southwest Idaho 20 miles from the Oregon border.
In 2007, a grizzly was shot to death in the Selway-Bitteroot Mountains in Central Idaho. Previously, the last grizzly in the Selway-Bitteroots was a confirmed sighting in 1946. There had been sightings of grizzlies in the Selway-Bitteroots since the late 1990’s. There seems to be a small population of grizzlies in Idaho, but they are not common here at all. All of them are coming in from Wyoming.
Grizzly Bears in Washington
The North Cascades population in Washington is estimated at only 10-20 or perhaps as low as five bears. They may be inbred. One was recently photographed in the northern Cascades in Washington in an amazing photograph. They are very shy and appear to avoid people. A reintroduction project for the Northern Cascades has been approved by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, but it is running into a lot of opposition, and the Trump Administration has stalled it.
Grizzly Bears in Oregon
Incredibly, sightings of grizzly bears continue in Northeastern Oregon in the Wallowa Mountains as they move in from Idaho, and tracks have been found 20 miles from the Idaho border.
Grizzly Bears in Colorado
The grizzly bear formerly ranged throughout the Southwestern US.
There are ongoing sightings of grizzly bear in Colorado, especially in the Southern Rockies near the New Mexico border in the San Juan Range.
A grizzly was photographed at an unknown date in the Wet Mountains between Westcliffe and Beulah in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains.
A family saw a grizzly bear at an unknown date near Walsenberg in the Sangre de Cristos.
A man and his wife saw a huge male grizzly weighing 1,000 pounds in the Cimarron Mountains in the San Juans at an unknown date. Ten minutes later, a ranch hand from the ranch next door stopped by to warn them that there was a grizzly bear in the area.
Two hunters saw a large grizzly bear weighing 600 pounds and standing seven feet tall on an unknown date near Shelf Road between Canon City and Cripple Creek in the Pike’s Peak Country of the Southern Front Range.
A grizzly bear was photographed at an unknown date west of Weston in the Sangre de Cristos. The photos was shown to Game and Fish personnel who would neither confirm nor deny that it was a grizzly. Off the record, the game warden said there are still a few grizzlies in the area, but the department’s official position is to deny that they exist, as 1) They do not want an endangered species in the area putting land restrictions in; 2) They do not want local ranchers getting up in arms over the grizzlies and demanding to kill them; 3) They do not want to deal with hunters demanding to shoot them and 4) They do not want to have to draw up an expensive management plan for them.
The last confirmed sighting of a grizzly in Colorado was in 1979 when a hunter was mauled by a female bear near Blue Lake 13 miles southeast of Pagosa Springs in the San Juan Mountains. He stabbed the bear with an arrow so biologists were able to study it. Prior to that, the last known grizzly bear in Colorado was killed in 1952, and it was assumed that bears were extirpated from the state. Autopsy revealed that the dead sow in 1979 had already given birth to two litters in the past, so her cubs were probably still roaming around, and there had to have been at lest one boar in the area to impregnate her.
Two fishermen saw a grizzly bear and tracks near Garfield Lake near Silverton in the San Juans in Fall 1982.
In Late Spring 1982, grizzly tracks were seen in the Weminuche Wilderness between Pagosa Springs and Creede in the San Juans.
There was a confirmed sighting by a PhD biologist in the headwaters of the Navajo River near Pagosa Springs in the San Juans in 1989.
A female grizzly was seen on the eastern side of the San Juans a few miles from the New Mexico border in the early 1990’s.
A grizzly bear was sighted in La Manga Pass in the San Juans in 1995.
In the mid-1990’s, three hunters saw a grizzly bear den on Bull Mountain in Larimer County near Red Feather Lakes in North Central Colorado in the Medicine Bow Mountains seven miles south of Wyoming border. Two years later, hunters returned to the same den and found a grizzly bear’s head nailed to a tree outside the den. It had apparently been killed by someone. Between 1996-2005, possible grizzly scat was seen on the same mountain by a man researching grizzly bear.
In 1997, a female grizzly bear with two cubs was seen in La Manga Pass in the San Juans.
There was another sighting near this pass close to Manassa in the San Juans in 2003, and a female was seen in the same area 2000. That is only seven miles north of the New Mexico border.
A grizzly was seen near Creede in the San Juans in 2005.
Another grizzly was seen in the same area 2006-2009.
A female grizzly bear with cubs was sighted in late September 2006 near Independence Pass east of Aspen in the Sawatch Range.
In 2007, hunters said they saw a grizzly bear near Aspen.
The same year, a possible female grizzly with two cubs was seen in the high country in Red Wing in the Sangre de Cristos.
In September 2007, two hunters saw a grizzly bear in the San Isabel National Forest.
In addition, tracks were seen at 10,000 feet in the Routt National Forest just south of the Wyoming border in 2010. This area is to the west of Crowdrey. Hunters in the area may see grizzlies with some regularity. The nearest reported grizzly location from there is 220 miles to the west near the Green River in far Northeastern Utah where Utah, Wyoming and Colorado all come together.
On July 31, 2010, two men saw a grizzly bear at 12,000 feet on Little Cimarron Road near the Big Cimarron River three miles southeast of Cimarron. They saw grizzly tracks at Silverjack Reservoir where the Big Cimarron River comes into the reservoir. Cimarron is just south of the Black Canyon of the Gunnison River.
On June 10, 2012, three men riding to the top of Pikes Peak in the Southern Front Range saw a grizzly bear.
In Fall 2013, a grizzly was seen near Crawford pursuing a gut shot elk. Crawford is between the West Elk Mountains and the Grand Mesa.
In Fall 2014, grizzly tracks were seen above Masonville near Rocky Mountain National Park at the northern end of the Front Range.
A grizzly bear walked through a yard in Indian Creek near Lake City in the San Juans in the June 2015.
The same month, two grizzly bear were seen in the San Juans above Pagosa Springs on a single day. One weighed 800 pounds.
Later the same month, on June 28, a large grizzly bear was spotted 50 yards off the highway in the pass coming into Cimarron. The motorists watched it for 15 minutes before it retreated up the slope.
As we can see, Colorado Fish and Game officials say off the record that bears still exist in Colorado, but for the reasons stated above, it’s better to say officially that they don’t exist until there is conclusive evidence of their existence. I believe there is a tiny population of grizzly bears in California. The population may be small (10-20 bears) and inbred. They also seem to be very shy and avoid human contact.
Grizzly Bears in Utah
There have been four sightings of grizzly bears in the Bear River Mountains in far Northern Utah. This range extends into far Southwestern Idaho which is not far from known grizzly populations in the Caribous.
A grizzly bear was spotted in Indian Canyon between Price and Duchesne some time ago.
People say there have been grizzlies in the High Uintas Mountains for some time.
A grizzly bear was killed on I-80 in Utah in the early 80’s, though this was never acknowledged by wildlife officials. Tracks have been seen recently in the Book Cliffs of Eastern Utah. The Book Cliffs or Roan Cliffs extend from Grand Junction, Colorado northwest to Price and Helper, so the tracks were seen somewhere in the Utah portion of this area, the center of which is 50 miles northwest of Green River.
Evidence of grizzly bears was captured in the Uintas via hair traps in 2008-2010.
In 2010 a grizzly bear was seen in the Franklin Basin in the North Cache grazing allotment.
In Summer 2013 a grizzly bear was sighted near Flaming Gorge National Recreation Area in the Three Corners Area where Colorado, Wyoming and Utah all come together. The man who saw it had lived in Alaska for many years and was very familiar with what grizzly bears looked like. Grizzlies are present in the Greys River area in Wyoming and some have been spotted east of Cokeville. Both are close to the Utah border.
I believe that there is a small population of bears in Utah but whether it is a breeding population is unknown, and they may just be wanderers coming down from Idaho and Wyoming.
Grizzly Bears in New Mexico
Grizzly Bears may also exist right across the Colorado border in New Mexico. In the late 1980’s, a grizzly bear cub was seen just across the Colorado border west of Chama. Grizzly bears may or may not exist in New Mexico. If they do they are wandering down from the San Juans in Colorado.
Grizzly Bears in California
A subspecies of grizzly bear, the California Golden Bear, was hunted to extinction. The last bear was shot in Tulare County in 1922. There are now calls to reintroduce grizzly bears to California, but they have raised a lot of opposition.
Grizzly Bears in Mexico
Another subspecies, the Mexican Grizzly Bear, is said to be extinct, as it has not been seen for some time. Its historical range was in the mountain ranges of far Northwestern Mexico in Chihuahua and Sonora. It also may have ranged up into the Sky Island Ranges of Arizona and New Mexico. By 1960, there were only 30 bears left, and only four years later in 1964, it was regarded as extinct. Rumors continued of bears seen in the Yaqui Headwaters Region. In 1969, a naturalist organized an expedition there with no success. A recent journal article examined a skull of a juvenile bear shot in Arroyo del Oso in Sonora in 1976 and determined that the skull was that of a Mexican Grizzly Bear. This means that they persisted until 1974.
Residents of the region say that bears matching the description of Mexican Grizzly Bears continue to exist in the foothills of the sky islands of Sonora and the rest of the bear’s former range to this day. Ranchers here continue to report cattle kills that do not match those of any other large predator. They insist that grizzly bears continue to exist in Mexico.
A joint-US expedition to Mexico in 1980 found tracks, other grizzly bear sign, and one sighting of a grizzly bear. This indicates that they persisted until 1980. I believe that grizzly bears continue to exist in their former range in Mexico. They are probably shy of humans and avoid human contact like the bears in Washington and Colorado. Also, mammologists feel that they continue to exist in the Sierra del Nido in Chihuahua (an old stronghold) at the very least, and they may persist in Sonora also.
To find the free articles, see the last 10-15 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10-15 articles. After the last 10-15 articles, all articles go paid.
This particular post will deal with the question of wolverines in the state of Nevada. The standard line is that wolverines do not exist in Nevada and have not been reported there since the late 1800’s, when they were reported from the ranges in the northeastern part of the state.
But given that wolverines seem to be in the process of recovering their range in the Western US, it seems plausible that wolverines may reappear in Nevada at some date. In addition, there is a wolverine sighting near Great Basin National Park in the last 60 years, so it’s possibly false to say they have not been reported in 125 years. They have been seen on Steens Mountain in Southeastern Oregon near the Nevada border, so it is also possible that they may drift down from southern Oregon into northern Nevada. At any rate, this post will examine historical locations for wolverines in Nevada, and include photos of the ranges where they may have been spotted. If there are wolverines in Nevada the most likely place for them is in far Northcentral and Northeast near Great Basin National Park.
John Muir reportedwolverine tracks from Wheeler Mountain (map here) in what is now Great Basin National Park, in 1878, but there were no sightings.
In addition to Muir’s report, there are reports from pre-1900 of wolverines in the northeastern part of Nevada.
At an unknown date in recent years, a wolverine skull was found in Snake Creek Burial Cave near Great Basin National Park 11.3 miles south of Baker, Nevada only 2 1/4 miles west of the Utah border. That skull was found amidst bones from over 10,000 years ago and has not yet been dated, so it may not be a recent find. On the other hand, the Pleistocene assemblage at that elevation continues to occur nearby in Great Basin National Park, albeit at higher elevations. The nearest known occurrence of a wolverine to the Sand Creek skull is in Utah, 93 miles to the east near Fillmore in Millard County.
There was a verifiable wolverine sighting in far East-Central Nevada close to the Utah border, near Great Basin National Park, in 1972.
Fillmore, Utah, the nearest wolverine sighting to the skull found at Sand Creek Cave, Nevada. It’s amazing that wolverines can live in this kind of high Basin and Range territory. There is very similar terrain on Highway 395 north of the California border on the way to Carson City, which I visited 39 years ago. Pinyon-juniper is common in this terrain.
Snowside Gulch in the Jarbridge Wilderness in the Jarbridge Mountains in Northeastern Nevada. The Jarbridge Mountains are to the north of both the East Humboldt and Ruby Mountains and rest on the border with Idaho. Wolverines may have occurred in this range before 1900.
Chimney Rock in the East Humboldt Range to the north of the Ruby Mountains in Northeastern Nevada. Wolverines may have occurred here before 1900.
References
Aubry, KB, McKelvey, KS, Copeland, JP. 2007. Distribution and Broadscale Habitat Relations of the Wolverine in the Contiguous United States. Journal of Wildlife Management 71, 7: 148-158.
Barker, M. S., Jr., and Best, T. L. (1976). The Wolverine (Gulo Luscus) in Nevada. The Southwestern Naturalist 21: 133.
Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Predator Conservation Alliance, Defenders of Wildlife, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, and Superior Wilderness Action Network. (2000). Petition for a Rule to List the Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act within the Contiguous United States . Submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service on July 11, 2000.
Predator Conservation Alliance. (2001) Predator Conservation Alliance’s Literature Summary – Draft – January 24, 2001 – Draft Conservation Status and Needs of the Wolverine (Gulo gulo).
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
This particular post will deal with the question of wolverines in New Mexico.
Wolverines may yet exist in New Mexico. Interviews with hunters in northern New Mexico conducted in 1864 indicated that the wolverine occurred in New Mexico at that time.
An Acoma Indian interviewed in 1931 said that wolverines formerly occurred in all of the mountains of northern New Mexico.
In 1985, there was a published report of a wolverine sighting in tundra habitat on Latir Peak in the Sangre De Cristos in New Mexico.
Lake Fork Peak in the spectacular Sangre de Cristo Mountains in northern New Mexico. The red line indicates the route taken by mountain climbers who bagged this peak. There have been several sightings of wolverines in this rugged range in recent years, and Northern New Mexico was formerly wolverine habitat.
References
Frey, J.K. 2006. Inferring Species Distributions in the Absence of Occurrence Records: an Example Considering Wolverine (Gulo gulo) and Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) in New Mexico. Biological Conservation 130:16-24.
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
This particular post will deal with the question of wolverines in the state of Wyoming. In Wyoming, wolverines are mostly found in the northwest near Grand Teton and Yellowstone National Parks, where the population at least appears sustainable, particularly in and around Yellowstone.
There are undated sightings from the Wyoming Range in far Western Wyoming south of Jackson Hole.
However, there was a sighting in the Medicine Bow Mountains in Southeastern Wyoming in 1991.
The scene near Horse Creek, Wyoming, where a wolverine was accidentally trapped in 1996. Actually, most of this area is drier Basin and Range or almost prairie type habitat, complete with buffalo, “hogback” mountains, and real, live cowboys.
I spoke with a man here in California who saw and heard a wolverine underneath a cabin where he was staying with his sons at 10,000 feet on Cloud Peak in the Bighorn Mountains near Sheridan, Wyoming. The wolverine was rummaging around under the cabin for hours and later was gnawing up a nearby woodpile. The sighting occurred in 1996.
There was a 1997 sighting from the Bighorns, a range in North-Central Wyoming that extends from the Montana border south to near the town of Sheridan.
In March 1998, a wolverine killed several sheep east of Buffalo, which is east of the Bighorns
Interstate 90 drops down into the Crazy Woman Basin east of Buffalo, Wyoming. A wolverine killed several sheep here in March 1998 and was spotted by a rancher. This area, the Powder River Basin, is undergoing a huge amount of methane natural gas extraction which is sucking a huge amount of water out of the ground and spraying it on the surface. This is causing homeowners’ wells to go dry. They lose the value of the home, and the natural gas companies refuse to reimburse them because the homeowners do not own the mineral rights under their land. That’s the way capitalism works in America – the score is Capital-100 Humans-0, and masochistic Americans just can’t get enough abuse. There is also a fear that many area watercourses, such as the Powder River and Crazy Woman Creek, are going to dry up part of the year, endangering many fish endemic to the area.
A young wolverine was captured only two miles north of Cheyenne, Wyoming, the state capital, in 1998. Cheyenne is a city of 53,000 people.
The view down into Chicken Creek that runs through the heart of the Fossil Buttes National Monument in Southwest Wyoming. Fossil Buttes is on the left. A wolverine was roadkilled here in 2004. Some think that wolverines have their winter range in the lower Basin and Range sagebrush zones. Here the terrain is mostly sagebrush, but aspens grow at higher elevations. Very large numbers of fossilized fish have been found in this area.
In 2005, a female wolverine was being monitored in the Salt River Range along the Idaho border. She was also using the Wyomings. The Salt Rivers are next to the Wyomings.
Wolverines also are thought to live in the Grand Teton Mountains and the Gros Ventre Range south of Yellowstone and in the Absaroka Range east of Yellowstone near Cody. Jackson Hole is located in the Gros Ventres.
A couple of wolverines were documented on the Wind River Range about 75 miles southeast of Jackson Hole near Lander in recent surveys.
In general, wolverines in Wyoming are thought to be in poor shape. They seem to be slowly recovering territory and spreading out into new areas. One reason for this may be that the large wolf population in Yellowstone is providing a good source of carrion for wolverines with all of the ungulates that they are killing. Another reason may be that there is much less broad-spectrum predator poisoning in the state in the past few decades.
References
Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Predator Conservation Alliance, Defenders of Wildlife, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, and Superior Wilderness Action Network. 2000. Petition for a rule to list the wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act within the contiguous United States. Submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service on July 11, 2000.
Predator Conservation Alliance. 2001. Predator Conservation Alliance’s Literature Summary – Draft – January 24, 2001 – Draft Conservation Status and Needs of the Wolverine (Gulo gulo).
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
? JUST IN: President Trump just went berserk on the leftist judges who struck down his White House ballroom, calling the ruling “a NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT at the HIGHEST LEVEL”
“Two Judges, one appointed by Barack Hussein Obama, the other by Sleepy Joe Biden, said in a ruling… pic.twitter.com/Cn3wYyHwyI
NEW: Trump says he does not need to campaign on behalf of Republicans because he “already won his own race,” adding that he questions if voters will turn out for the GOP because they’re “angry at Republicans but not angry with me personally.”
Donald Trump seems to have given up on being president and the leader of the Republican Party. He is focused on developing DC, not the midterms. He is obsessing over the White House Ballroom while the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine tells him the Iran War is unwinnable.
“WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided federal appeals court ruled Friday that President Donald Trump’s administration must stop construction of the $400 million White House ballroom because Congress has not approved the project, a decision he blasted as “unjust” while vowing to appeal it to the nation’s highest court.
Trump doesn’t have the unilateral authority to build a 90,000-square-foot (8,400-square-meter) ballroom where the White House’s East Wing stood before he ordered its demolition last fall, according to the decision by a three-judge panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. …”
“Over the last few weeks, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Dan Caine has privately made clear to other top Trump advisers that the US needs to find an off-ramp from the war with Iran — because the military options on the table to escalate the conflict could backfire and airpower alone is unlikely to achieve President Donald Trump’s stated objectives, according to three sources familiar with the matter.
“Caine is looking for an off ramp,” one of the sources said bluntly.
Caine is not alone in his view that the war has reached a crossroads. He has discussed concerns about the military options for escalating the conflict and raised the prospect of finding an off-ramp from the war with other key Cabinet officials, including CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance, two of the sources said. …”
If Republicans lose the midterms, Trump sees it as a judgment on them. They didn’t bend over backwards enough. He has already won his own race and has never been more popular.
Another totally boss old wolverine article with lots of incredible photos.
I updated it and did a heavy edit on it where I went off-topic and launched into some woke rant about wolves in the US being devastated as a consequence of White rule and capitalism. Which is ridiculous because it assumes that non-European Whites won’t wipe wildlife off the face of the Earth. Hell, Latin Americans, Arabs, Africans, Southeast Asians, and South Asians do a terrible job of preserving wildlife in their lands. Whites have actually become one of the best races on Earth when it comes to preserving wildlife.
The article then wandered off into a discussion about US Whites going racist and Republican as their numbers fall. One paragraph that was interesting said that
when a ruling group (racial, ethnic, or any sort of group) in a country is threatened with the loss of their dominance and rule in the country, they often resort to dictatorship or even fascism in a last ditch effort to preserve their dominance and rule over the other groups.
I wrote that almost 20 years ago and I should start fortune telling. What do you know? MAGA, a fascist movement that has taken over the Republican Party with the intent to create a permanent Republican Party fascist dictatorship in the US, has now stolen two elections by electoral fraud and is busy dismantling the US government, society, and our democracy itself. And it’s being led by among other groups, Whites (particularly working class Whites with a high school education who are victims of the system themselves) with a grievance who see White dominance and frankly White rule in the US being challenged by democratically minded non-Whites.
So these Whites are trying to install a permanent fascist dictatorship in the US to preserve their perceived dominance and rule. I blame American Whites for Trump. It’s our fault. We’ve destroyed this once beautiful country all for our petty greed and supremacism. Trump is one of the worst things American Whites have ever done to this country, and we’ve fucked this country in a hundred ways at least in the past. Indeed, non-Whites such as Blacks and Hispanics cause their own problems in the US, but at least they’re not installing a Goddamned fascist dictatorship!
The wolverine in Idaho is generally considered inhabit three main areas:
The first and southernmost population is in the Sawtooth National Forest (northern part), Challis National Forest, Payette National Forest and Sawtooth National Recreation Area in central Idaho.
Yet another population is the central population in the Lochsa River Drainage in the Clearwater and Bitterroot Mountains in Clearwater National Forest.
A third population is the northern population to the north in the Selkirks along the Canadian border.
The three populations are separated from each other, although at least the first population is thought to be healthy. Nevertheless, we continue to get reports of wolverines in other parts of Idaho. A previous post noted a wolverine on a telephone pole along the Snake River Valley in King Hill, Idaho, earlier this year. A radio-collared wolverine recently traveled from the Grand Tetons in Wyoming across the Blackfoot and Caribou Mountains in the Targhee and Caribou National Forests in Southeastern Idaho, across private lands to the Portneuf Range west of the Portneuf River. This range is about 20 miles east of Pocatello, Idaho, and encompasses part of the Caribou National Forest and the Fort Hall Shoshone-Bannock Indian Reservation.
The breathtaking Portneuf Range east of Pocatello, Idaho, where the radio-collared wolverine ended up. It promptly turned right around and went back to the Tetons. In the Basin and Range Region.
A grazing allotment on the Blackfoot Mountains in Southeastern Idaho. Lance Armstrong, the peripatetic wolverine, crossed this range on his way from the Grand Tetons to the Portneuf Range opposite Pocatello, Idaho. Grazing is devastating BLM and Forest Service land in this region. The problem is particularly acute in Southern Idaho, as it is more arid. All livestock grazing needs to be banned in at least these areas. Incredibly, livestock grazing is allowed in National Forest wilderness areas. The only way the 1964 Wilderness Act could get passed was to grandfather in these grazing allotments. It’s ridiculous that grazing is allowed in wilderness areas. Grazing is particularly destructive in high-elevation forests of the Sierra Nevada and anywhere in the arid West.
The cow evolved in England and prefers a cool climate with lots of water. In the arid West, cows congregate during the summer in the riparian areas, which they completely devastate. A grand total of 2% of all US beef comes from public lands in the West – most beef comes from feedlots in the Midwest. Public lands grazing is welfare – the allotments are rented out to the ranchers at far below market value, so the taxpayer gets screwed. Not only do we get ripped off on the rental of our lands, but we also get our lands devastated in the process. The whole thing is insane. If ranchers can’t make it ranching on private land, they need to get out of the business. Furthermore, increasingly, public lands ranching is going corporate. Mom and Pop ranchers are going out and ranching corporations are in. Many public lands grazing allotments are now run by corporations as investment vehicles.
The long-ranging wolverine above was finally killed by a trapper just over the Montana border in the Centennial Range. This was before the wolverine was listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act, and Montana had legal trapping of wolverines. Since the Centennials range into Idaho, we ought to add the Centennial Range in the Targhee National Forest to the wolverine’s range in Idaho.
The spectacular Centennial Range on the border between Idaho and Montana. This is where the long-ranging wolverine named Lance Armstrong was finally killed by a trapper over the border into Montana.
Additional searching around the net noted that a wolverine had been shot dead by some boys in the Snake River Canyon in Idaho a few years back. They were worried and they brought it in to the Department of Fish and Game office, but the wardens let them go because they were kids and did not know what they were doing, although the wolverine is protected in Idaho.
The Snake River Canyon near Twin Falls, Idaho. Some teenage boys shot dead a wolverine here about three years ago, but were not charged. Clearly, wolverines do exist in this part of the Colombian Plateau. This is where Evil Knievel tried his ill-fated motorcycle jump decades ago.
There are various definitions about what constitutes the Snake River Canyon in Idaho. The most parsimonious definition says that it starts at the spectacular Shoshone Falls in Twin Falls, Idaho. It seems to continue west about 30 miles to 1000 Springs (great pics on that page) at Hagerman, where Wikipediaimplies that it ends. So this wolverine was apparently killed in the canyon between Twin Falls and Hagerman. That’s only about 47 miles north of the Nevada border. Way further afield, in the Seven Devils Mountains of far Western Idaho in the Hell’s River Canyon of the Snake River, wolverines exist. This large document includes in an appendix a report called Survey of Wolverine Dens in the Seven Devils Mountains of Hells Canyon.
The gorgeous Seven Devils Range in the Payette National Forest in Idaho. This range borders on Hell’s Canyon and may serve as a steppingstone for wolverines to travel from Idaho across the Snake River to the Wallowa Mountains in Oregon.
There are also reports of wolverines in the Wood River Valley area. Part of the Wood River runs about 30 miles north of Twin Falls, but the Wood River Valley refers to private land about 60-70 miles north of Twin Falls. It includes the towns of Ketchum, Sun Valley, Hailey and Bellevue. We should extend wolverine habitat down from the Sawtooths into the Wood River Valley. There have been recent sightings in the Sun Valley area. The webpage for Power County, a county in southeastern Idaho west and southwest of Pocatello, claims that wolverines occur there. There are various ranges there, including the Bannock Range, the Sublette Range and the Deep Creek Range.
The spectacular Deep Creek Range in Southeastern Idaho. It is about 40 miles long and is bounded by Arbon Valley on the East and Rockland Valley on the West as it ranges through Power County. Wolverines may well exist here. Another Basin and Range mountain range.
The Bannock Range in Southeastern Idaho. Both the Bannock and the Deep Creek Ranges are southwest of Pocatello. The Bannocks extend from Pocatello 85 miles south into northern Utah through the Caribou National Forest. Wolverines may well exist in this range. Also located in the Basin and Range region.
Photos of all of these beautiful ranges can be seen on Ralph Maughan’s excellent blog. Maughan is a professor of political science at Idaho State University in Pocatello. He’s also really big on wolves. Wolves in some places are listed as either Endangered (parts of the Pacific Northwest, California, and the Southwest) or Threatened (Minnesota) under the Endangered Species Act.
Wolves in Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and parts of eastern Oregon and Washington have been delisted and are now managed by state agencies, but I’m not sure how good of a job they are doing. I know that 20 years ago when they first delisted those wolves, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana absolutely devastated their wolf populations. Idaho has 1,229 wolves and it wants to reduce it to 500. Montana has a population of 1,200 wolves and it wants to reduce it to 450. Wolves are declining dramatically in all three states under state management.
Numbers are much smaller in Oregon and Washington but wolves are increasing in both states. Occasional wolves are seen in far Northern Utah and a pack was recently seen in far Northeastern Nevada. They are doing well and increasing in California. Web page on myths about wolves. Wolves are hardly dangerous at all to humans.
In summary, occupied wolverine habitat in Idaho should be extended beyond the description at the beginning to the post to Power County, Elmore County, the Snake River Valley, the Blackfoot Mountains, the Centennial Range, the Caribou Range, the Snake River Range, the Big Hole Mountains, the Targhee and Caribou National Forests, the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, the Portneuf Range, the Seven Devils Mountains, the Snake River Canyon, and possibly the Bannock and Deep Creek Ranges.
References
Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Predator Conservation Alliance, Defenders of Wildlife, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, and Superior Wilderness Action Network. 2000. Petition for a Rule to List the Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act within the Contiguous United States . Submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service on July 11, 2000.
Edelman, Frank and Copeland, Jeff. 1999. “Wolverine Distribution in the Northwestern United States and a Survey in the Seven Devils Mountains of Idaho.” Northwest Science 62:181-185.
Groves, Craig R. 1988. “Distribution of the Wolverine in Idaho as Determined by Mail Questionnaire.” Northwest Science 62, 4:181-5.
Predator Conservation Alliance. 2001. Predator Conservation Alliance’s Literature Summary – Draft – January 24, 2001 – Draft Conservation Status and Needs of the Wolverine (Gulo gulo).
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
Catholicism Tends Towards Either Socialism/Communism or Fascism
Even now in Latin America it’s socialists or communists versus fascists in Haiti, Mexico, Honduras, Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil, Chile, Peru, Ecuador, and Paraguay. The communist versus fascist wars in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Peru are over. Wars with a similar dynamic led by the ELN and FARC dissidents are ongoing in Colombia and Paraguay . Even in places like Greece, Italy, the Philippines, Germany, and Turkey, a lot the fighting on the ground is socialists and communists versus fascists. The Left is actually armed in the Philippines and Turkey. There is a large fascist movements in France and the Left is also quite strong. Fascists are in power in India.
Fascists Versus Socialists in Catholic and Orthodox Europe
The Left has been destroyed in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Hungary, and Romania due to bad experiences with the USSR in the Eastern Bloc. It exists but is weak in Bulgaria. It is still quite strong in Moldova. But now most of these countries have very significant fascist movements. In Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Croatia, and Belorussia, the fascists are openly Nazi. Poland and Ukraine have fascist or Nazi governments. The fascist government in Hungary was overthrown. Italy is now under fascist rule, but it is Mussolinist instead of Nazi. There is still a very powerful fascist movement in Spain from the Civil War and Francoist fascist rule. After Francoism ended, the fascists simply migrated over to the conservative parties in Spain, and they didn’t change their attitudes much. Spain also has a powerful Left.
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
The US simply will not allow any Left project in Latin America ever. We have to rule as a dictatorship all of the countries in Latin America. Catholic countries are prone to communism and they hate individualism. Hence the only projects that get installed in Catholic countries are communalist Left (socialists or communists) or communalist Right (fascists).
They are not allowed any freedom. We rule over every country down there and those that stand up to our bullying like Venezuela, Colombia, and Nicaragua are attacked in various ways. That’s the bullshit Monroe Doctrine. That doctrine never had anything to do with stopping foreign powers. We surround and put bases right up to the borders of all sorts of countries we don’t like all over the world, but nobody gets to do it to us.
That was the Cold War rationale for the Monroe Doctrine. If any country so much as raised the minimum wage, we called them communists and overthrew them with a CIA coup. After the Cold War ended, Haiti and Honduras raised the minimum wage, and their governments were overthrown by Hillary Clinton and with the assistance of Bill Clinton. Barack Obama declared Venezuela a severe threat to US national security, which is laughable.
We are just typical American hypocritical scum. The rule of America and Israel is:
We get to do it to them all we want, but if they try to do it to us even one time, we will destroy them.
Usually humans with this mindset are called narcissists and sociopaths. American foreign policy is narcissistic and sociopathic and I think Americans in general are narcissistic and sociopathic because they support US foreign policy. Keep in mind that almost all US liberal Democrats support US foreign policy. The awful socialists in the Democratic Party like Bernie Sanders do almost nothing to fight US imperialism, stop out of control military spending, or oppose or stop foreign wars or sanctions. Let’s call them imperialist liberals and socialists. I think living in an imperialist country like the US simply turns you into an imperialist. You just absorb it like the sun on a summer day.
I think Americans like being hypocritical assholes, frankly. All of this goes back to American hubris and exceptionalism, which the Israelis also have. And those are the two most hated countries on Earth, and they both deserve it. In the US we have had 80 years of rightwing propaganda from the Cold War until the present, and it actually got a lot worse after 1990. I believe that US hubris and exceptionalism along with 80 years of rightwing propaganda (especially after 1980) has made Americans susceptible to fascism.
Even now 36% of Americans are openly fascist and the Republican Party is now a fascist party determined to install a permanent fascist dictatorship in the US. I always said if we ever had a revolution in the US, it would be a rightwing revolution. A rightwing revolution is always a fascist revolution. Fascism is the revolutionary Right, and stands in opposition to Communism and revolutionary socialist variants like Bolivarianism and Sandinismo, which are the revolutionary Left. Fascists and communists are each other’s worst enemies and their hatred for each other is often deadly.
The whole liberal lie was that sadly we did a lot of bad things during the Cold War to stop communism. My parents used to talk like this all the time. But then the liberal Democrat parents of mine supported the fascist contras in Nicaragua and the fascist coup in Haiti.
US Imperialism and Colonialism in the Modern Era
But then the Cold War ended in 1990, and we kept attacking the Left. So what we did in the Cold War was never about a war on the USSR and communism. It was about stopping any Left project (typical socialist, social democratic, or nationalist) anywhere on Earth (mostly in Latin America) because Left projects are bad for the US rich and corporations. We also overthrow every government that gets friendly with our enemies. We overthrew the governments of Pakistan and Bangladesh for getting friendly with Russia.
We installed new pro-US leaders in Iraq and Lebanon because the governments opposed Israel. Iraq doesn’t even get their oil proceeds. It all goes into a US government bank account and we decide whether we are going to give them any of the money or not. So we control all of their oil money. Why do Americans think that’s ok? That’s raw, naked colonialism. Venezuela is also a colony of the US, as is Lebanon and Jordan. Of course all of the Gulf states but especially Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the UAE, and Kuwait are all US colonies. Every country with a US base in it is a colony of the US.
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
The US government has only worked for the rich and corporations for a very long time now. This is especially prominent under Republicans, but it continues in a more underhanded way with some help for the workers, consumers, investors, and society under Democrats. Remember when Biden talked to that group of very rich people in New York and said:
Nothing will fundamentally change.
By that he meant the US system of oligarchical rule of the rich (the billionaires) and the corporations will remain in place in his administration. He would not try to dismantle oligarchical rule, which is the principal project facing us now in the US. We need to overthrow the billionaires. They’re destroying everything in this country and in the planet at large. The US military does not protect the US. No one has threatened the mainland since forever. Sure our bases colonial and imperial bases overseas get attacked, but they deserve it.
The US military always and only fights for the oligarchs, the billionaires,…
Dr. Alexander Jacob - independent scholar and author - joins us to discuss the life, work, and legacy of SS-Sturmbannführer Johann von Leers (AKA ‘‘Omar Amin’’), and the relevance of National Socialist thought and revolutionary Socialism generally to the contemporary political landscape.
I had to LOG IN thru the APP owing to fuckkery relating to transferring DATA to my NEW PHONE - I DO NOT have MULTIPLE SUBSTACKS. ONLY FOLLOW THIS SUBSTACK.
THIS WILL ALWAYS, EXCLUSIVELY, ONLY BE MY SUBSTACK. Yesterday, Today, 2Moro, After I am DEAD etc.
If you FOLLOW my OTHER username, you will only come to GRIEF. NOTHING will ever be posted there.
Trump: "A lot of people are saying I'm one of the greatest presidents ever … when I see polls on the economy, I should have 150%, not 100%. Because this is the golden age of America." pic.twitter.com/hp2jphmSZH
"The bottom line is that the group on which the Trump movement was built upon, they are shifting away and saying 'we don't like MAGA anymore'" — Enten details how Trump has lost 32 points of support among non-college adults since 2024 pic.twitter.com/NK42yRdXxW
The true mark of a golden age is when the bottom 90% of the population must live off of ham sandwiches and instant noodles just to exist in a lower standard of living than their parents did.
— ? Thug Life Sproul ??? (@ThugLifeSproul) August 6, 2026
Fox: The biggest economic challenges we're facing is the cost of food. Ground beef up 12.4%, milk up 9%. When should Americans expect meaningful relief?
Exclusive: President Trump has directed contractors to redo weeks of work on his planned White House helipad, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“Read the polls, watch economic indicators and talk to President Trump’s inner circle in private, and the verdict on his second term seems clear:
Even some longtime insiders fear he’s trapped by a war he shouldn’t have waged, tariffs he shouldn’t have levied, monuments he shouldn’t be obsessed with.
Why it matters: Thesethreetopicschew up much of Trump’s time and attention. All three are widely unpopular in polls.
And it’s almost impossible to see the public suddenly warming to war, tariffs or more statues. ..
By the numbers:Trump’s approval cratered to an all-time low of 32% in a Quinnipiac poll last week. Even more damning: 68% of voters said he isn’t focused enough on the problems most Americans face.
Behind the scenes:New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman estimates 70% of the president’s mindshare goes to renovations and monuments. “It’s a legacy thing,” she told her colleague Ezra Klein.
A Trump insider told us: “He concentrates on the hobbies that distract from his terrible polling numbers, about which he is in denial. The other issue is how the war, tariffs and monuments are demoralizing the base.” …”
Meanwhile, Axios reports that Trump is focused on the White House Ballroom, the Reflecting Pool, these gilded statues which have gone up and the angle of the White House helipad. He sees the economy as the stock market which is doing great and doesn’t understand why people are upset. It is all Joe Biden’s fault. The billionaires who bought the war with Iran are doing better than ever. He cut their taxes and made them wealthier and squandered his presidency on their luxury beliefs.
The Manti-La Sal National Forest in Utah in Sanpete County. This county in Central Utah is believed to harbor a wolverine population. This area is northeast of Fillmore, Utah, which is the sighting nearest to Nevada.
Also in March 1979, a man shot a wolverine on Highway 40 in Utah, 1½ miles west of the Colorado border near Dinosaur, Colorado.
I received a report of a good but unconfirmed wolverine sighting in the Glen Canyon National Recreation Area in Utah. The sighting occurred on August 20, 1989 in the Upper Escalante River Canyon at the junction with Coyote Gulch (map here). The wolverine was in the canyon chasing a beaver near its beaver dam. It also swam across the river. The sighting was by a man with a Master’s Degree in Ecology from UC Davis. The elevation for the sighting was 4,100 feet, but wolverines are not always found at high elevations.
This is an extremely unusual place to see a wolverine, but they probably used to live here. There are place names such as “Wolverine Bench” on the map in the Escalante Canyon area, and wolverines used be found into Northern Arizona. If wolverines existed in Northern Arizona, clearly they existed in the Glen Canyon area. Wolverines live in very similar habitat in the Snake River Canyon in Idaho. The Upper Escalante River Canyon is in the Aquarius Plateau, which has 50,000 acres of land above 11,000 feet. That’s clearly wolverine habitat. The junction of Coyote Gulch and the Upper Escalante is a ways away from the plateau, but it’s likely a dispersing juvenile could be found in the area. A photo of the terrain is here.
In recent years there have been documented sightings, photos, and videos of wolverines around Salt Lake City and the Great Salt Lake recently. One was videotaped running through a suburban development! There have also been documented sightings in the Uintas.
Wolverines in Colorado
There was an unconfirmed and undated sighting of a wolverine chasing a boy on a motorcycle down a road in the Routt National Forest in far Northern Colorado some years ago. The Routt is near Steamboat Springs up by the Wyoming border.
There have also been quite a few sightings in the San Juan Mountains north of Durango, Colorado and southeast of Wolf Creek Pass.
Wolverines have also been spotted, incredibly, at an unknown date near Sterling on the Great Plains in Northeastern Colorado, which seems very odd, but looking through all of these reports, it becomes apparent that wolverines in Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, and Michigan may indeed use prairie habitat.
An incredible photo of a tornado over Sterling, Colorado from a storm-chaser page. Storm-chasers chase tornadoes so they can get pictures of them, or just to watch them. Pretty dangerous sport. Click to enlarge. I think it is quite clear by now that wolverines do use prairie habitat. Even aboriginally, prairie was thought to be marginal for wolverines, but perhaps that was wrong. Pre-contact, vast herds of buffalo roamed the prairie, and there would be plenty of dead buffalo for the scavenging wolverine to eat.
There was an unconfirmed wolverine sighting 4-5 miles up Red Sandstone Road in Vail, Colorado on the White River National Forest.
A photo of Vail ski resort and the town of Vail, Colorado as seen from Red Sandstone Road, which goes north of town. A wolverine was seen on this road recently. Click to enlarge.
The famous Maroon Bells in the White River National Forest in Western Colorado. Aspen and Vail are also located in this forest. I spent a week skiing in Aspen in 1978. Great place! The White National Forest is believed to harbor a wolverine population. Along with the Pike National Forest, these may be the only populations in the state.
Wolverines are said to be present in Colorado on the Pike and White River National Forests and in Utah in the Wasatch and Uinta Mountains and in Sanpete County in Central Utah.
A Colorado Department of Wildlife biologist spotted one south of Trapper Lake in Flat Tops Wilderness in the mid-1960’s. The Flat Tops is partly in the White River National Forest and partly in the Routt NF in Colorado.
Trapper Lake in the Flat Tops Wilderness. Canyon walls tower up to 1,000 feet at this late at the 9,500 foot elevation level. Fishing is very popular in this lake and it is said to be very good.
In July 1977, a man found a wolverine skull in the East Fork of the Cinnamon River Drainage in Gunnison County, Colorado. The skull was less than 10 years old.
In June 1978, a couple photographed an adult wolverine with three cubs in the Uncompagre Mountains.
In June 1978, a man took three photos of a wolverine crossing a snow field on Trinchera Peak (13,513 feet) in the Sangre de Christo Mountains in Southern Colorado.
The spectacular Trinchera Peak in the Sangre de Cristos in Southern Colorado. Bighorns roam on the top slopes of the mountain.
In March 1979, three biologists with the Colorado Department of Wildlife saw a wolverine near the Rifle Falls Fish Hatchery near Rifle, Colorado in Garfield County in Western Colorado.
Rifle Mountain Park, 13 miles north and just beyond the Rifle Falls Fish Hatchery, the largest fish hatchery in Colorado. There is great ice climbing here during the winter and mountain climbing the rest of the year. You don’t even have to worry about rain much because the cliffs catch so much of it and you can always take shelter under one. A wolverine was seen near here in 1979.
In June 1979, a man watched a wolverine for four minutes as it approached a bear bait he had set near Parshall in Grant County, Colorado. That area is southwest of Rocky Mountain National Park.
A photo of the Aspen Canyon Ranch in Parshall, Colorado. A wolverine was seen here in 1979. Parshall is not much of a town. It is really just an unincorporated collection of small homes and trailers. There are dude ranches all around here. That may be the Colorado River in the photo, as it runs through town here near its headwaters. Fishing is supposed to be great in the river here.
In the late 1980’s, there was an unconfirmed sighting of a wolverine in the Uncompagre Wilderness on the Uncompagre National Forest. The Uncompagre is in Southern Colorado and is located about 20 miles northwest of Telluride.
There have been multiple unconfirmed wolverine sightings in Rocky Mountain National Park in Colorado since 2000.
There was another unconfirmed sighting of tracks from the Flat Tops Wilderness in 2003.
A collared male wolverine was photographed and monitored in various places in Colorado from 2009 to 2012. Colorado is considering reintroducing wolverines to the state.
Colorado is seriously thinking about reintroducing wolverines to the state. They are already reintroducing wolves.
References
Biodiversity Legal Foundation, Predator Conservation Alliance, Defenders of Wildlife, Northwest Ecosystem Alliance, and Superior Wilderness Action Network. 2000. Petition for a Rule to List the Wolverine (Gulo gulo luscus) as Threatened or Endangered under the Endangered Species Act within the Contiguous United States . Submitted to the U.S. Dept. of Interior Fish and Wildlife Service on July 11, 2000.
Nead, D. M.; Halfpenny, J. C.; and Bissell, S. 1984. “The Status of Wolverines in Colorado.” Northwest Sci. 58: 286-289.
Predator Conservation Alliance. 2001. Predator Conservation Alliance’s Literature Summary – Draft – January 24, 2001 – Draft Conservation Status and Needs of the Wolverine (Gulo gulo).
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey is a masterpiece of its kind. It is an epic of liberal propaganda, executed with the technical precision, monumental scale, and relentless thematic control that only Nolan can command. The film is not trying to recreate the real Bronze Age world of ancient Greece. From the first frame to the last, it announces itself as a work about the present, dressed in the borrowed clothes of Homer, and every deliberate choice of casting, color, dialogue, moral emphasis, and narrative structure serves that end. What Nolan has produced is a Spenglerian vision turned upside down. The historical philosopher Oswald Spengler argued that the West was declining because its restless creative energy had run dry, its living culture had hardened into a rigid materialistic civilization, and democracy was inevitably collapsing into strongman rule. Nolan diagnoses the exact opposite. For Spengler, liberal democracy is itself a late and weakening stage that eventually gives way to harder forms of authority; for Nolan, those harder forms—hierarchy, exclusion, conquest, and authoritarianism—are the forces destroying the West. The West is dying, in Nolan’s interpretation, because it has ceased to be liberal enough. Authoritarianism is the disease; the cure is a more thoroughgoing, more purified liberalism. The entire three-hour IMAX spectacle exists to dramatize that inversion with the force of myth.
The multi-racial casting that so agitated the online Right is, seen in this way, almost beside the point. Lupita Nyong’o as Helen and Clytemnestra, Zendaya as Athena, Himesh Patel as Eurylochus, and the broader ensemble that populates Ithaca and the Mediterranean: these choices only shock those who still imagine the film is attempting historical reconstruction. The inclusion of Elliot Page, a transgender actor, as Sinon extends the same logic, making the ancient Mediterranean reflect the approved categories of identity in the contemporary West. Once it is understood that the movie is an allegory of the liberal present, the casting becomes a simple statement of demographic fact. The West of 2026 is already multi-racial. Nolan merely records that reality and then proceeds to lecture it. The outrage over “race-swapping” therefore misses the deeper maneuver: the film treats the racial makeup of the classical world as disposable because its real subject is today’s West, whose multi-racial composition is already settled and irreversible. Historical accuracy is not the objective; presentist moral instruction is. The casting is a declaration that the past exists only as raw material for the ideology of the present.
Odysseus’s remorse gives the film its clearest anti-Western purpose. Nolan does not permit the victorious Greek to return as a hero. He returns as an accused man, haunted by dead civilians, sacrilege, and the blood left behind at Troy. He seeks forgiveness from Penelope for having done what every successful ancient commander did as a matter of course. The film presents these acts as the original sin that brought the Bronze Age to its end. The anachronism is total and deliberate. No Homeric hero, no classical audience, and no Near Eastern king of the period would have recognized the modern category of “war crime.” Victory was the proof of divine favor; the sack of a city was the expected dividend of kleos (lasting fame) and arete (prowess). Prisoners were enslaved or killed; cities were burned; the gods were assumed to favor the winners. Nolan’s insistence on guilt is therefore not classical but contemporary. Odysseus’s memories strip conquest of honor and cunning of nobility. Penelope does not receive the story of a great warrior’s triumph but the confession of a criminal seeking absolution. This is the moral language of the modern West, which has been taught to regard its history as a chain of offenses and its heroes as men whose achievements conceal deeper guilt. The Sea Peoples are us, and the warrior must apologize for victory, the explorer for expansion, and the civilization for possessing power at all. Ithaca can be restored only after Odysseus has bowed before this judgment and accepted the prescribed interpretation of his own corruption. Nolan thus replaces the ancient drama of homecoming with a modern ritual of self-denunciation. The central question is no longer whether the hero can defeat his enemies and recover his house, but whether he can be made to confess that the enemy was inside him all along.
Here the Spenglerian inversion comes fully into view. In The Decline of the West, Culture is living, rooted, religious, and instinctive, while Civilization is its hardened final state: the world city replaces the homeland, cosmopolitan abstraction replaces inherited belonging, individual rights replace traditional duties, and critical reason begins to dissect forms it can no longer create. Spengler even describes late Civilization as an age of transvaluation, in which the heirs of a culture cease producing new myths and instead reinterpret the old ones according to the morality of the present. Nolan performs precisely this operation upon Homer, yet presents it as renewal rather than decay. Xenia—the sacred bond of reciprocal duty between guest and host, protected by Zeus and repeatedly described in the film as “Zeus’s law”—is lifted from its particular world of household, rank, and divine custom and transformed into a universal humanitarian law by which Greek power itself must be judged. In this light, the Trojan Horse no longer appears as an ingenious masterpiece of Greek warfare, but as a betrayal of trust: an apparent votive offering becomes a weapon with which the Greeks enter the city and destroy it from within. The sack of Troy is no longer the terrible triumph of a heroic age but the crime that exposes the sickness beneath its glory. Odysseus is repeatedly framed in the modern language of military trauma, and when he calls himself “a veteran of the Trojan War,” he sounds less like a Homeric king than a weary American soldier returning from Iraq or Afghanistan. He carries the same burden of guilt, damaged memory, and estrangement from civilian life. His cunning becomes deception, his victory becomes atrocity, and his homecoming becomes a struggle for atonement. Spengler regarded such moral universalism, historical self-dissection, and distrust of inherited greatness as signs that a culture had entered its winter phase. He expected the exhausted rule of money, debate, and abstract principle eventually to yield to Caesarism, personal authority, and the return of the sword. Nolan reverses that judgment. In his vision, the sword is the source of the disaster, authority is always close to barbarism, and only greater restraint, confession, and submission to universal law can save civilization from itself. What Spengler diagnosed as the morality of decline, Nolan offers as its cure.
Circe, played by Samantha Morton, receives the full treatment of current gender ideology. She is introduced not merely as a dangerous sorceress but as a woman who has suffered at the hands of men. Before she transforms Odysseus’s crew into swine, she delivers what amounts to a monologue on the violence of masculine appetite, the entitlement of the armed male, the toxic masculinity that turns guests into predators. The men are not merely rude or reckless; they are the embodiments of a patriarchal order that must be punished. Their metamorphosis into pigs is therefore not the arbitrary magic of a Homeric witch but a moral and almost therapeutic justice. The scene functions as a didactic interlude in which the audience is invited to cheer the inversion of power. Calypso, played by Charlize Theron, is likewise stripped of the radiant desirability that the tradition assigned to her. Both goddesses are rendered deliberately unglamorous. Morton’s Circe is fierce, weathered, and unadorned by conventional Hollywood allure; Theron’s Calypso is more maternal and weary than seductive. The effect is the familiar progressive gesture of subverting imposed beauty standards. The patriarchal gaze that once demanded Circe and Calypso be objects of irresistible desire is corrected by casting and costuming that refuse the demand. Beauty itself becomes suspect, another tool of oppression that the enlightened filmmaker must dismantle. The ancient world, which celebrated the beauty of Helen as a force capable of launching a thousand ships, is rewritten as a culture that merely imposed oppressive standards on women. The correction is thorough.
Visually, the film is drained of the Mediterranean light that Homer’s world actually possessed. The palette is gray, desaturated, almost funereal: blues and yellows muted into a near-monochrome of bleached desolation. The statues that appear are the familiar white marble of museum displays, never the painted, polychrome objects that archaeology has long established they were. These are not neutral aesthetic decisions. They are the signature of an age that knows itself to be late. The vibrant color of a confident civilization has faded; the painted gods have been scrubbed clean and left bare. Nolan’s camera records the end of the liberal West with the same meticulous melancholy that earlier directors once reserved for the fall of Rome or the twilight of the gods. The difference is that Nolan’s liberalism cannot imagine any successor civilization that would not emerge from a further radicalization of liberalism. The gray is therefore both a diagnosis and a prescription. The West is dying of its own residual authoritarianism, its lingering attachment to hierarchies and the old masculine virtues. Only a more perfect liberalism can restore the color. The unpainted statues become monuments to a modern culture that has lost the will to color its inherited gods. It contemplates their blanched ruins while lecturing the civilization that created them on its tyrannies, conquests, and cruelties.
Taken together, the casting, characterization, moral interpretation, and visual design form a coherent and highly effective work of political art. The Odyssey is not a failure of historical imagination. It is a success of ideological transposition. Nolan has taken the foundational epic of the West and rewritten it as a cautionary tale about the dangers of insufficient progressivism. The craftsmanship is extraordinary: the photography, the nonlinear structure that treats time as a map rather than a line, the tactile realism of the violence and the sea, and the performances that sell the modern moralizing as if it were ancient wisdom. The moral is unmistakable. Whether one finds the result exhilarating or tiresome depends entirely on whether one accepts the premise that the civilization which produced Homer is now best understood as a cautionary example of its own failure to become sufficiently liberal. The film does not leave that question open. It answers it, at length, in every frame, with the confidence of a culture that still believes its own decline can be reversed by one more round of self-flagellation. That confidence may itself be the most Spenglerian element of all.
Order THE LIFE OF HOMER & Plato’s ION (Multipolar Press, 2026) here.
What’s odd is the billionaires seem to realize that their project will cause significant disruption if not massive breakdown to human society, but they don’t care because they get to make lots of money by trashing and wrecking human society. Also, they say,
Hey, we are making bunkers to live in when society breaks down, so who cares? So as lot of other people die, so what? We get to survive and that’s all that matters. So it wrecks the planet, so what? We’re getting rich, so who cares LOL?
This is capitalism in a nutshell, and it is one of the most serious problems with it, noted first by the man who first described capitalism, Adam Smith. I’m quite certain that this is exactly how they are thinking, and there is evidence to support this theory. They are indeed building bunkers that resemble nuclear fallout shelters for them to live in when the collapse gets particularly bad. This is why I despise capitalist fanboys. When you say you are a capitalist fanboy who opposes any modicum of…
The Arab and Muslim World seem to do a lot better because free market laissez faire capitalism has always been a poor fit in the Muslim world, as Mohammad was virtually a socialist. In particular, Muslims are expected to tithe 2.8% of their income for the poor through their mosques. In states that didn’t have good programs set up for the poor, Islamist organizations such as Hamas in Gaza took over the function of social programs. The idea is that all Muslims are your brothers and sisters, so how could rich Muslims screw over their poor siblings?
Nevertheless Arabs are humans and humans tended towards beastly feudalism until recently, and the Arab World was no exception, especially in places like Iraq, Syria, and Palestine where absentee landowners owned large tracts of land, and tenant farmers were mired in debt peonage, also known as semi-feudalism. These reactionary feudalists liked to quote from the Quran where Mohammad said something to the effect of:
Well, there are rich and there are poor and that’s that.
as a justification for their semi-feudalism but it never seemed a good fit. With decolonization, Arab socialism came as part of Arab nationalism, and there was very little opposition. Syrian and Iraqi Baathism was a typical project, officially socialist. The PLO was an officially socialist or even Leftist group for a long time and perhaps they still are.
South Yemen was basically a communist country for a long time. Ghaddafi and Nasser were longstanding supporters of the poor and disenfranchised and Ghaddafi’s official philosophy characterized in his Green Book was in part socialist (mostly a mixture of secular Islam and socialism). The FLN, the group that won the revolution in Algeria and has governed since, is officially socialist in an Arab nationalist vein. Tunisia recently elected an odd leader who was an Islamist and a Leftist. Prior to that it was a socialist Arab nationalist country. Though Morocco is a pretty rightwing country, it has strong veins of Arab nationalism of which socialism was always a component. Ibrahim Traore’s Burkina Faso, a Muslim country, has recently instituted a socialist and anti-imperialist project. Before that it was led by Thomas Sankara, a Marxist.
Even the Gulf Arab countries have extensive social programs for citizens, though non-citizen workers are often brutalized. The Iranian revolution was based on anti-imperialism and support for the poor and the oppressed everywhere. The Islamist government of Turkey runs a lot of social programs. In the Central Asian countries, there doesn’t seem to be a lot of socialism left, but Islam was dramatically watered down in those places by Marxism. In Pakistan and Bangladesh, things are much worse, as Islam has been deeply corrupted by Hinduism so you end up with the worst of two religions.
However, even in Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto’s party, one of the largest in the country, was social democratic. Communism actually went over pretty well in Afghanistan and it was especially popular with women. The Islamists’ beefs with the government were that it was atheist, not that it was socialist. Indonesia, a Muslim had a huge mostly-Chinese communist movement but it was destroyed in a politicide led by Islamists in which 1 million people were murdered. Since then a populist fascist project called pangisila was instituted and it fooled a lot of people. However a woman was recently elected president on a social democratic ticket.
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
This is how you contact me, folks. Feel free to write me for any positive reason.
To find the free articles, see the last 10 posts. Please consider a paid subscription if you enjoy my content. I’m retired and live off of a Social Security check. A monthly subscription is only $5/month. A yearly subscription is only $30/year or $2.50/month. This is the lowest-priced Substack on the platform. With a paid sub you get access to all articles. A free sub only gives you access to the last 10 articles. After the last 10 articles, all articles go paid.
How do I describe this game? What do I think about it?
I was able to playtest this game with my friend Fodkam in person at the Looney Lab headquarters (at the Sterling Building) in College Park, Maryland, back in February.
It has come to my attention that the ‘90s alt-rock band Velocity Girl’s biggest hit was “Crazy Town,” which can be seen as a tribute to their hometown of College Park. I can only imagine this song is contemplating the work of Andy Looney and his existence in such a crazy town. The borough that they live in is called “Hollywood.” So it becomes a witty joke that Looney can say, “we are big stars in Hollywood!”
The Looneys (both Andy and his wife Kristin) live in a purple house called “Wunderland” (or “Wunderland Earth”), where “the offices of Looney Labs are located, and where a weekly, invitation-only Gaming Salon is held.”1 There is another house called “Pepperland,” which was given to a family member, but we didn’t stay there. I was able to pick up the Looneys from the outside of Wunderland and bring them back to the Sterling building, where I would playtest Seven Islands with Fodkam.
For at least four months, I could not share what the game was about until it came out. Now that it is out, I would like to give some art direction input and creative commentary around this eccentric design.
But first, what is this game about and how do you play it?
—
…Seven Islands describes itself as “an island-hopping race of changing goals” on the back of the box. The rules are simply described: “When this ship is docked… …maneuver both of your pieces… …onto this Beacon to win the game!”
Or, as the story is written in the rules:
“You and a friend are contestants on a reality show! You’ve been stranded on a tiny tropical island, which is connected to six others by rickety bridges that have yet to be located. The first team to reach the designated beacon wins a million bucks! How do you know which beacon to go to? Just look at the sail on the ship currently docked. Better get there quick before a different ship comes in!”
The game is made up of 81 cards and four sets of two colored player pieces (that being red, yellow, blue, and purple). Two of the cards are not in the deck. One card is the double-faced dock “start” card, and the other is a reference card for all players to share. That makes the rest of the game a deck of 79 cards.
The rest of the cards are shuffled, and three cards are dealt to each player. All players’ pieces are on the “start” dock card, and a shuffled deck is on the side (the discard is there with no cards).
The object of the game is to get both your player colors to a matching beacon card that matches the ship currently docked at the start card. Once both pieces are on a matching beacon and ship card, the game is immediately over, and that player has won (although there can be ties in rare circumstances).
There are four types of cards in the game: terrain, action, gear, and surprise cards. The deck is made up mostly of terrain cards.
Terrain cards can have land, water, beach, and location subtypes printed on them. The locations each have a special ability if a player lands their piece on them, which they can either trigger or has to always happen.
If a beacon is played, the player draws one card, and if a ship is played, the player draws two cards.
The hand limit is 7, and a player discards down at the end of the turn.
Action cards are only played on that player’s turn, and the action is executed on the card.
Gear cards are played in front of that player’s tableau, and the player currently owns that ability written on the card (either as a trigger ability or constant). A player is allowed a gear limit of 3.
Surprise cards are the only cards that can be played out of turn, preventing another player from doing something. There are only two Surprise cards in the entire deck. If played on the turn, it is counted as an action for the draw bonus, and is not a free one.
On a player’s turn, they follow this turn structure:
Draw Phase (draw a card)
Action Phase (play any card)
Move Phase (a player may move one of their pieces orthogonally)
Discard Phase (draw down to their hand and gear limit, and pass turn)
“Free Actions” may be spent before or after any phase in any order once per turn. Those three free actions are:
Play another Terrain card that has a beach subtype
Trigger a Gear ability you own
Use the Well location action if your piece is on that terrain card
Whenever a card’s text directly contradicts the game’s rules, the card takes precedence and overrides it.
The only other minor rule is that when a player is on a ship, they may use the move action to move to another beach and discard that ship that was used on the dock (and all players on that ship move too).
Terrain cards have their placement rules, but it’s not that hard to understand once it’s implemented. They only abide by no water-only plays, no beachless edges, and no blocking a beacon to the island. Everything is connected by a beach.
And only oneislandhas one beacon at a time. A player may play a terrain card where there is no connection, but it “floats” until a spot is shown where it can connect. All backed-up “floaters” must connect if there is an immediate available spot, or they keep floating till a spot opens. The active player gets to decide where the floaters go.
The requirement is that every island have a beacon, or the ability to add a beacon… but there’s no requirement that it have either a bridge or portal, as there are other ways to travel there: by ship, action cards or gear abilities. So it’s not necessary to have multiple other terrain cards float waiting for a portal or bridges attachment. Islands can be quickly enclosed or created by floaters without portals or bridges in their existence, so as long as those islands have at least one beacon on them.
There are only 18 action cards and 8 gear cards, each being unique and never duplicating. There are also only 6 bridge cards, so each has to be played accordingly to shape the island, for good or for worse.
There are 11 terrain cards with locations on them, and 16 terrain cards with no locations. These are also evenly matched with 7 beacons and 7 ships to dock. Ideally, it is better to have terrain cards with locations on them, but there is no telling what a player can draw.
I have made some impressive and imaginary maps with this single deck of cards. This is where the formation of the map reminds me of something out of Chip’s Challenge or Toejam & Earl. Both of these games rely on a top-down and grid-like perspective, perhaps rogue-like land generation and displaced puzzles, such as “the red key opens the red door,” for the game to operate. Seven Islands takes these two concepts of improvisation and planning and transforms them into the closest thing to an exploration card game.
When I play by myself and finish the game, I like to get the extra terrain cards from the deck and discard pile, and then try to finish the island as intended.
With the basics of the game being explained, what I really wanted to write about was my thoughts behind the design process and what I see missing from most board and card games in 2026. (Or, what I also see missing from original art and design in general, actually…)
—
…Seven Islands belongs in a category of physical games where true interactivity is needed. This isn’t with artificial intelligence. It’s with real human beings with emotions and expression that feel their own actions and influence one another.
The game is modular. It’s meant to be expanded, taken apart, or completely rewritten with a new ruleset using the same system.
I enjoy “object-oriented” computer programming languages such as Max, AudioMulch, Reflection, Bidule, Pure Data, and anything that resembles a Eurorack system. One “module” can be a card, and that can influence an entire path of other modules that represent themselves. It creates an environment where play is encouraged, and expression is the art. The player commits his time and invests his effort to make the game into a sport. It’s the same as reading a book of philosophy and dedicating your life to the craft. A good game gives you that feeling, but a great game is that lifetime art.
I looked at the deck of cards, and honestly, I feel like it could use some more teleporter subtypes. If I bought two more copies of Seven Islands, I could add in a couple more terrain cards with well subtypes, and add additional surprise cards to give it that “take that” randomness. And why not get rid of some beacons and make the game more about exploration with a very large map! I hope Looney considers making an expansion or releasing some promo cards to give more “modules” to the game’s programming language.
The size is important too. While games like Cosmic Encounter require a whole table or space on the floor, Seven Islands can fit in a bookbag or pocket. This design is intentional because most Americans can not find the room or time to even play a game with someone else. I could argue that this strategy to get the attention of new players implies “elegance,” but I have argued against that elsewhere.2 The modules create rules and contradictions that allow full expression rather than that of a Rubik’s Cube solving itself. While it may look like another eurogame with a selfish “window shopping” interface and personal tableau, the game influences other players through action cards and abilities. Timing is key. The bluff is when you are ready to play a beacon or hold on to the ship card. Many players see the map for what it is and use deduction to figure out how many bridges are left and what moves can be played before the match is made.
I would like to see more expansions released for this game. Or, I would like to experiment with multiple copies and try to make my own personal deck of cards. It would be nice if different expansions could be bought for different island formations and actions.
Once again, Looney has proved something with his designs that show throughout all of his games. He is interested in the modular and encourages players to be their own programmers to express themselves in the game environment. His games could easily be played for a lifetime, and one person could immediately say to someone, “I only play Seven Islands, and I go to my weekly Seven Islands club.”
Every time he releases a game, it is an exciting event where something new in design is introduced. I call this phenomenon “post-elegance” due to its lucid nature, returning to real player interactions and modules that express the environment and influence. Finally, the post-elegant game makes a return to the player as an artist. One such canvas is Seven Islands.
Over the last several months, I've been warning that Tucker Carlson isn't merely a grifter—he’s an operative building a new political project centered around right-wing social policy and left-wing economic policy.
President Trump on AI data centers: "It was my idea, actually, for every plant that's built—they build their own electricity… I think that any community that turns down AI is making a big mistake." pic.twitter.com/vjR1AKOuko
Trump on gas prices: "We may have to send it up again. You know what happens when we send it up, but we hope we don't have to" pic.twitter.com/hddthC9kZE
Exclusive: President Trump has directed contractors to redo weeks of work on his planned White House helipad, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
When I was 20 eating at home was *dirt* cheap AND you could also go to Chipotle and get a massive meal for $6 after tax
Today the same bowl is roughly $12/13 and the same groceries are 43% more expensive. It was nice and we should try to make that happen for todays 20 year olds pic.twitter.com/iP4cTOXum3
On the left we have a Chipotle menu from LA in 2012. On right we have an online order for a Chipotle in LA from today.
LA County Median household income 2012: $52949 ($4412 monthly) LA County Chipotle Carnitas Burrito 2012: $6.70 Monthly income-to-burrito ratio 2012: 0.015%
Burrito prices in 2017 vs 2026. We call this inflation. Because every government prints money. Even the Trump administration. Ignoring this is either being stupid or willfully ignorant. Young people have every right to be outraged for our generation (and past generations)… https://t.co/QqT3Tu2HfWpic.twitter.com/KgFr28qp77
I hear that young people are upset about $20 burritos. Okay, young people: a burrito does not cost $20. If you’re paying $20 for a burrito and you’re not independently wealthy, you’re doing life wrong. We have enough problems as a country without insane expectations that the…
Just so you know – all the podcast bros suddenly talking about groceries and neocons is a coordinated effort to complain about Trump and Iran. To try to nudge him.
Of course, they're all too chicken shit to just call Trump out by name and say what they really mean.
People, this burrito discourse is really about DoorDash and Uber Eats. Simple meals are expensive if you have them prepared AND delivered to you. If you go get it yourself, it's cheaper. If you buy the ingredients and make it yourself, it's cheaper still. That's it.
It was the day before Donald Trump came down the escalator at Trump Tower and announced he was running for president. It is inarguable that prices were lower for virtually everything in America. The average national price of gasoline was $2.89 a gallon. Obama was negotiating the Iran nuclear deal. The national debt was approximately $18.5 trillion. It is currently racing toward $40 trillion.
Conservative pundits and politicians spent the whole day yesterday raging online against Millennials and Zoomers complaining about the price of burritos. The price of a Chipotle burrito bowl has doubled in the Golden Age from what it was when Obama was president. Portion sizes have shrunk. You get less food for more money at Chipotle in 2026. Fitness influencers complain about it all the time.
The average White family does it all – cooks at home, grills food, eats out at restaurants, eats fast food – and has experienced prices going up across the board. People who shop at Sam’s Club and Costco have seen prices go up. Most people buy the same things at the grocery store every week and aren’t imagining that prices are soaring. Sure, it is less expensive to eat at home than to eat out at restaurants, but that has always been true. It is more expensive to feed your family now period in the Golden Age. Whether you are grilling a steak at home or eating one at a restaurant, it still costs you are far more now.
Look how far we have come since the 2024 election. Conservatives blame Uber Eats and DoorDash for $20 burritos. They are sharing tips on eating Ramen noodles and stretching ground beef with refried beans. The same people who used to bash progressives with “you will eat the bugs” memes are basically pulling out granddaddy’s old cornpone and fatback recipes from the Great Depression.
Scott Greer assures us in Whitepill that conservatives have changed. I need to read the book. I’m not seeing it. If anything is true, we seem to be reverting to the conservatism that I remember.
One of the more provocative theories in modern New Testament scholarship is the suggestion that Paul the Apostle and Simon Magus—the Samaritan magician who briefly appears in Acts 8—may actually represent the same historical individual. This idea is far outside the scholarly mainstream, but it has attracted attention from a small number of influential scholars, including Gustav Volkmar in the nineteenth century, Robert Eisenman, and Robert M. Price. Their proposals raise fascinating questions about how early Christian traditions may have been rewritten as competing factions struggled over authority and theology.
Before the documentation of a wolverine in California in 2008, there were regular sightings of these very elusive animals in California by all sorts of people down through the years. Live wolverines have also been trapped in far Northern Washington state in the Cascades and now Olympic National Park in the past twenty years. Wolverines have been documented in the Wallowa Mountains in Northeastern Oregon, on the Oregon Coast, along the Colombia River near Portland, and in the Willamette Valley.
The California wolverine is a subspecies of wolverine whose range was only in California. It split off from the wolverines in the Cascades about 2,000-11,000 years ago. As a subspecies, it is controversial and is not yet accepted across the board by the scientific community. The first description of a California wolverine was published in the Field Colombian Museum of Zoology Zoological Series in 1903. In the description of the type specimen from Mount Whitney, the California wolverine was much p…
The old stories tell us that the gods once walked among men. They entered human halls, accepted food and wine, chose sides in battle, and revealed themselves in moments of danger. Such tales need not belong only to the first age of the world. Even in later centuries, men have sensed powers greater than themselves breaking through the surface of ordinary life. Yet memory alone gives no nourishment. A starving man gains nothing from hearing of ancient feasts, just as a poor man cannot spend the gold of vanished kings. The past becomes useless when it is reduced to an object of study, sealed behind glass and discussed by those who no longer believe in it. The gods must not merely be remembered. They must be summoned back into the life of the present.
But who still possesses the courage to call them back?
?TIM DILLON torches JD Vance over "cringe" Rogan appearance where he played powerless
"You have to be one of the stupidest people in the world to fall for this shit… [JD's in an admin] that betrays its voters and does the opposite of everything it said it was gonna do"
MAGA was so excited in January about the “Big 26.”
We didn’t know at the time that the big decision that would determine the whole course of the year, the fate of Trump’s second term, the 2026 midterms and likely the future of the American Right for the next decade had already been made in Israel. The Trump administration was informed in February that Israel was going ahead with a regime change war with Iran. Trump’s own top officials thought the Israeli plan was “bullshit” and “ridiculous.” And yet, Trump decided to join the war anyway.
“It is impossible to think about Israel’s plan to bring down the Islamic Republic without first thinking about its sheer presumption. Grinding a regime down over years — sanctions, influence operations, the slow seeding of fear and confusion — is one thing. Recruiting Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the former Iranian president and Holocaust denier, as an asset and installing him in power is another. So is launching a full-scale Kurdish invasion. This is the kind of project superpowers fail at. Israel tried it, and poured an enormous effort into the attempt.
Over the past weeks, The New York Times and Haaretz have published a great deal about that effort. What follows adds to the record on the most ambitious regional objective Israel has ever pursued: regime change in a country of roughly 100 million people, a regional power — attempted in wartime, and in coordination with the only superpower, the United States. …
And yet the cabinet voted for an objective that was, in practice, an attempt at regime change. An objective that large — Megalomanic, some would say — dictates the allocation of resources and carries severe regional consequences. Put another way: the nuclear program and the ballistic missiles mattered, but they were not the holy grail, and they were not the message of the new war that followed. Where Rising Lion, the June 2025 campaign, prioritized the nuclear project — and did in fact halt enrichment — Roaring Lion was meant to be the war that ended all wars. With Iran, at least. …
In December 2025 the mass demonstrations and the uprising erupted across Iran. It is safe to assume the Mossad’s influence directorate did everything it could to help them; that is what it was built for. The regime responded with mass killing of Iranian civilians. If Rising Lion (2025) had ended in deep satisfaction inside the security establishment, Iran’s destabilization in December and January produced something closer to euphoria — close to messianic. President Trump promised to come to the demonstrators’ aid. The Mossad and the IDF received an instruction from the prime minister to prepare for the big war, and to accelerate the plans toward execution. …
On February 11, the briefing for the American president takes place. Mossad chief David Barnea and Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir present the Israeli operational vision. The Israelis do not know what the journalists Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan will later publish: that senior American officials, having heard the Israeli presentations on the war and above all on regime change, were unconvinced. They thought it was “bullshit,” to quote Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Or ridiculous, in the judgment of Barnea’s counterpart, the director of the CIA.
A few days later, Israelis say, the green light comes from the White House to proceed. …”
Scott Greer thinks White Nationalists choose marginalization over political engagement, but look at how the decision to go to war with Iran was made. Vice President JD Vance thought it was a bad idea, but he was marginalized and couldn’t do anything about it. Marco Rubio thought he was getting bullshit from the Israelis. The CIA assessed that Operation Roaring Lion would be a failure.
Among contemporary New Testament scholars, few have advanced a more controversial theory regarding the literary origins of the Gospel of John than Dennis R. McDonald. Building on his broader theory of mimesis criticism—the idea that New Testament authors consciously imitated classical Greek literature—McDonald argues that the Fourth Gospel intentionally models portions of its narrative on Euripides’ Bacchae, presenting Jesus as a figure who both resembles and surpasses the Greek god Dionysus. Rather than viewing the similarities as accidental or merely the result of a common Greco-Roman cultural environment, McDonald contends that the Gospel’s author deliberately engaged Dionysian traditions in order to demonstrate Jesus’ superiority to one of antiquity’s most beloved deities.
For about five years, I grew increasingly optimistic about American politics. I made many of the same arguments that Scott Greer made in his book. I argued that conservatism was changing. I tracked dozens of polls which showed how conservatives were changing on this or that issue. In fact, I spent years arguing with activists who thought that Trump would go to war with Iran for Israel.
As recently as last May, I was delivering speeches defending the Trump administration. I thought conservatism could be reformed. I thought we could reshape public opinion on the Right, reenter mainstream politics and start getting our people elected to office. This was still plausible to me up until about last June and July with Operation Midnight Hammer and the Epstein files debacle. In my defense, this was the fork in the road in which “MAGA” as we had known it began to fall apart.
Here are the Top 10 reasons why I reconsidered my own views on politics:
1. Jewish Power and Influence – I had argued that Jewish power and influence was in decline and that a devastating war with Iran was unlikely for a number of reasons. I thought that the Jewish power structure at the top of the Republican Party was being replaced by Elon Musk and other Tech Bros. Trump had a huge falling out with Musk and DOGE proved to be a colossal failure. He took America to war with Iran for Israel twice last June and in early February. Finally, the Jewish oligarchy that controls the GOP had enough pull to order the biggest purge of conservatism in a generation. This was all politically damaging too.
2. Squandering Three Trifectas – The GOP has been handed three trifectas in government over the past 25 years and has squandered all three of them. Trump was handed two trifectas and has blown the opportunities to “Make America Great Again” that he was given. We have watched in horror as he threw away his presidency on a war with Iran for Israel that only Jewish donors wanted.
3. The Tea Party and MAGA – We have lived through 16 years of turmoil in the GOP since the Republican establishment was discredited at the end of the George W. Bush era. In retrospect, the Tea Party and MAGA were a complete waste of time that failed to accomplish their ostensible goals. Both of these rightwing populist movements became vehicles to get Israeli assets elected.
4. Purges – After the death of Charlie Kirk, Con. Inc. spent six months whipping up hysteria about “antisemitism” and as a result conservatism has gone through the biggest purge since the 1990s. Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro emerged as the public face of MAGA.
5. Metapolitical victories – We have spent much of the last 10 years congratulating ourselves on our Overton Window trophies. Tucker Carlson was responsible for elevating and mainstreaming most of these “Alt-Right ideas.” It is people like Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz, however, who wield the real power in Congress. MAGA is a cult of personality. It doesn’t care about ideas which is why only MAGA Republicans support the war with Iran for Israel. MAGA’s biggest idea for years was that pedophiles like Jeffrey Epstein had compromised powerful politicians. The people who care about ideas haven’t fared well in the second Trump administration. Trump endorses people like Randy Fine, Mike Lawler and Maria Salazar.
6. Hierarchy – The last two years have discredited the argument that the spread of Alt-Right ideas and rhetoric was a triumph. This is because of their place in the Republican power structure. The opinions of Republican voters at the bottom of the hierarchy don’t matter. The opinions of staffers working in congressional offices don’t matter. Even the opinion of the Vice President about going to war with Iran didn’t matter. Alt-Right ideas and rhetoric can easily be adopted to convince low propensity voters to turnout and vote for the GOP. Those voters will get policies favored by the Israeli government and the Republican Jewish Coalition. Younger voters don’t have any power in the Republican Party.
7. The Grievance Factory – Initially, I was “white pilled” that the GOP was adopting Alt-Right ideas and rhetoric, but now I see what has happened very differently. There is a big difference between activists who genuinely care about our ideas – people like Jared Taylor, who has responded to Scott Greer – and people who see them as an opportunity to be capitalized on to get what they want. We have powerful grievances which resonate with a large swath of White voters. This makes us a useful captive audience to powerful figures in the GOP who want to use our own rhetoric and ideas against us. Specifically, they want to harness White grievances as fuel to win elections to deliver the payload that their investors want like a permanent corporate tax cut, AI deregulation or a war with Iran for Israel. We are just one of several constituencies that was targeted and scammed by the GOP in the 2024 election. After the war with Iran for Israel, it became indisputable that our movement was being hijacked by Jews to be used to put wind in their own sails.
8. Running Out of Time – We are less than 100 days out from the 2026 midterms and the Trump era is 85% over. We know from experience that nothing much will happen in the last two years. The vast majority of this is now behind us and it isn’t too early to take stock of results. It is a bitter pill to swallow, but we are objectively worse off than when the Trump era began in June 2015. We would be better off today if we could rewind the clock to our initial starting position.
9. The Cult in Congress – Donald Trump will not leave behind a bench in Congress. He hasn’t changed the ideology of the GOP in Congress or at the state level. Instead, he will leave behind a party of people who got ahead in their careers by flattering him or who bought his endorsement. He will leave behind a bunch of sycophants who otherwise have nothing in common. The movement was a cult of personality that was centered on Trump and he is stepping down in two years as a historically unpopular president.
10. Lack of Seriousness – Every day we are reminded on Truth Social that the president isn’t a serious person. This is not a party that is focused on “civilizational issues” like the decline of the West. Instead, it is focused on the stock market or the war with Iran for Israel or the White House Ballroom. The president is more concerned about the Reflecting Pool on the National Mall or redesigning his personal helicopter pad because he doesn’t like the angle than the future of the White race. At this point, you can only look at the AI videos that he shares with his idiot followers on Truth Social and laugh. We allowed this person to waste nearly 15 years of our time on a reality television show. We handed him two terms in the White House and two trifectas in which he had complete control of Washington and this was the result.
Personally, I need some time to reflect on how I fell for it in 2010 with the Tea Party, and again with MAGA in 2016 and 2024. I want to do better moving forward.
Note: The biggest joke of all is that you can look at the sum of this and his collapsing polls as millions of people exit the building and check out in disgust and try to sell them a book called Whitepill.
A study using baited trap stations, done during winter, failed to find any wolverines in either Sequoia or Kings Canyon National Parks in the Southern Sierra Nevada. The survey utilized many trap stations for a couple of months. It was designed to test for wolverines persisting at very low densities. The researchers concluded that the wolverine is likely extirpated from the Southern Sierra Nevada. Many other recent studies have also failed to find any wolverines. The researchers advocate that wolverines be reintroduced to the Sierras, since they seem to be absent from the range.
However, in 2008, a male wolverine was photographed north of Lake Tahoe by researchers studying pine martens. DNA analysis subsequently showed that this animal is from the Rocky Mountains and is not a California wolverine. It is not known how this wolverine got to…
Fox Business (The Cow Guy): Earnings are looking very good at the corporate level. But if you drill down to the lower 60% of incomes, things are getting tight. We've got higher gas prices. We haven't seen groceries come down. pic.twitter.com/aaUvAwINnq
— Fell For It Again Award ?? (@FellForItAgainA) March 19, 2026
I still haven’t bothered to read Scott Greer’s new book Whitepill.
The book was finally released in late July while I was traveling with my family. I didn’t have an advance copy. I made a similar case on this website for five years. More than anything else, it seems pointless to even buy the book given our trajectory. Donald Trump is a historically unpopular term limited president who is hovering around 33% in national polls. We’re less than a 100 days out from the 2026 midterms. The Republican Congress will barely work a week before the midterms. Trump is poised to become a lame duck president besieged by a hostile Democratic Congress in his last two years of office.
What is the Whitepill?
The Trump era began in 2015 and will end in 2028. 85% of Donald Trump’s reign in American national politics is now in the history books. There is no reason whatsoever to believe Trump’s last two years in office will be more productive than the previous six years. The non-Hispanic White share of the American population has declined from around 62% in June 2015 to 57% in August 2026. The dollar has lost 30% of its value since 2020. The national debt which was $18.2 trillion in June 2015 has ballooned to $39.8 trillion in August 2026. There are tens of millions of more legal immigrants and illegal aliens in the United States in August 2026 than was the case in June 2015. Everything from groceries to fast food to health insurance to home ownership to a new car to gasoline ($2.89 a gallon) to electricity now costs more in August 2026 than it did when Trump was given the chance to “Make America Great Again” in June 2015.
In July 2015, which was roughly a month after Donald Trump came down the escalator at Trump Tower, the United States and Iran agreed to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) aka the Iran Deal which limited Iran’s nuclear program. The Obama administration negotiated a peace deal with Iran which incensed Trump, AIPAC, the Republican Jewish Coalition, Bibi Netanyahu and Israel. The rest is history. President Trump tore up the JCPOA and set us on our present course to a war with Iran for Israel. The candidate who “moved the Overton Window” by repeatedly styling himself as the “Peace President” and who promised “no new wars” launched America’s dumbest and most unpopular war yet in the Middle East. The war in Ukraine which Trump vowed to end on “Day One” of his second term continues to this day. America’s alliances were stronger when Obama was president. America was stronger viz its adversaries like China, Iran and Russia when Obama was president. The “America First” president put his pro-Israel donors first when he embarked on a war of choice that put the interests of working Americans last. No previous American president including George W. Bush was dumb enough to go to war with Iran.
Donald Trump came to power in 2016 by promising to ignite a renaissance of American manufacturing in the Rust Belt. I attended his Inaugural Address in January 2017 when he vowed that “this American carnage stops right here and right now.” Nearly a decade later, around 12.5 million Americans are employed in the manufacturing sector, which is roughly what it was on that cold January morning. Manufacturing employment has contracted in Trump’s second term since hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs were created during the Biden administration. Trump’s erratic and arbitrary use of tariffs like his recent announcement of a 50% tariff on Canadian imports has driven up prices, made tariffs unpopular and produced a Supreme Court decision which has limited presidential power to impose tariffs. Trump’s policies have made the case that Democrats are better at economic nationalism.
Trump hasn’t fared much better on immigration than he has on tariffs. The Supreme Court recently issued a landmark decision that upheld birthright citizenship. The “mass deportations” which we were promised and which were funded by the Big Beautiful Bill haven’t materialized. DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin recently celebrated the fact that there have been 900,000 naturalizations over the past year which is roughly 3x as many people as DHS says it has deported in FY 2026. “Net negative migration” isn’t happening. DHS has even resorted to copying the Obama administration by counting returns at the border as deportations in order to juice the numbers up. Meanwhile, the GOP Congress is considering no less than four amnesties in the current Congress – the Rep. Maria Salazar’s Dignity Act which is comprehensive immigration reform under a new name, Sen. Susan Murkowski’s 2025 DREAM Act, Sen. John Curtis’s state migrant program and the farmworker amnesty introduced by Rep. Glenn Thompson who is the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee. Republicans in Congress have never stopped pushing for amnesty in the Trump era including many of the same ones from the Bush era.
It was only a few years ago that our friend Rep. Steve King was hounded out of Congress for saying that White people should have more babies. He was joined by Sen. Jeff Sessions and Rep. Mo Brooks here in Alabama who were tougher than anyone on immigration in Congress. They have since been joined by Rep. Thomas Massie and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene who were ousted for “antisemitism” for criticizing Trump’s handling of the Epstein files and his war with Iran for Israel. Greene was the first member of Congress to raise anti-White discrimination and the Great Replacement as important issues. Sen. Lindsey Graham who passed away after living to see Trump accomplish his life’s work of starting a war with Iran for Israel died a MAGA hero. Graham who supported every destructive war and every push for amnesty of the last 25 years in Congress was mourned by Trump. Far from remaking the Republican Party in the image of any nationalist ideology, Trump has cultivated a cult of personality instead. The only litmus test he has imposed is absolute loyalty to Israel. Over a quarter of House Republicans continue to support amnesties of one stripe or another and virtually all of them have fallen in line to support the Iran War.
After Charlottesville, it is true that the “Overton Window” shifted. It is true that there were many “metapolitical victories” like the popularization of the term anti-White and the Great Replacement. It is also true that Donald Trump had nothing to do with any of this. He didn’t mention White people even once in his first term in office. The demographic decline of White America is less important to Trump than the White House Ballroom or the Reflecting Pool on the National Mall. Instead, it was Tucker Carlson who raised all of these issues on his show on FOX News. This was before Tucker was fired and replaced by Jesse Watters who does the “culture war” slop without saying anything remotely interesting. It was Tucker who pushed the envelope in all these directions. This was deeply resented by Con Inc. which eventually reacted against what it calls the “Woke Reich.” For six months after the death of Charlie Kirk, Con Inc. hysterically denounced Tucker as an antisemite and called for him to be purged from MAGA and conservatism, which evidently is synonymous with the interests of the Israeli government. Trump himself eventually sided with Mark Levin and Ben Shapiro and purged Tucker, Alex Jones, Megyn Kelly and other influencers with huge audiences from MAGA and the conservative movement. This was by far the biggest purge in conservatism since the 1990s when William F. Buckley denounced Pat Buchanan as an antisemite in National Review. It underscores how little conservatism has changed over the past 34 years.
It is true that mainstream conservatism has adopted Alt-Right rhetoric and ideas which resonate with younger conservatives and Independents who otherwise don’t watch FOX News or listen to talk radio. The Trump administration has endorsed concepts like “no new wars” and “remigration.” Initially, it was exciting to see illegal aliens being loaded up on planes in chains in photo ops and deported to Guantanamo Bay or “Alligator Alcatraz” before those sites were closed. This was done to create the impression that “remigration” was happening. Trump condemned White Genocide in front of South Africa’s president. He also gave a speech in Saudi Arabia less than a month before Operation Midnight Hammer in which he looked into the camera and condemned decades of military interventions in the Middle East. He said in his Second Inaugural Address that he was going to stop wars. This type of rhetoric was used to dampen criticism and boost turnout from low propensity voters and never really meant anything. The Alt-Right rhetoric and ideas were gutted and transformed into conventional GOP dog whistles.
The Republican Party has always tried to harness populist energy and mine cultural grievances in order to advance its traditional policy agenda. It has always excelled in race baiting about black crime. It has always engaged in culture war performance theater. Bill O’Reilly performed this act for over 20 years on FOX News. Matt Walsh throws out the red meat on race and transgenderism for Daily Wire’s dwindling audience. We were promised “mass deportations” and “remigration” and received two corporate tax cuts via budget reconciliation. We received AI deregulation. We received a war with Iran for pro-Israel donors. We cut Medicaid to pay for a $1.5 trillion dollar military budget. We got the First Step Act. We got clowns like Dan Bongino and Spider Ka$h running the FBI to protect Trump’s friends at Mar-a-Lago. We got pardons sold to black rappers, Jewish scam artists and millionaires convicted of fraud.
There are plenty of well meaning people who have “infiltrated” the Republican Party. There are millions of well meaning people who vote Republican. We need to stop gaslighting ourselves into believing their opinions matter because it is only a handful of people at the very top who are making the big decisions. It is probably true that Vice President JD Vance opposed the Iran War, but even he felt powerless to stop it and sat in silence in his cuck chair while Trump destroyed his own coalition and political future. Tucker Carlson was the most influential commentator in American conservatism. Marjorie Taylor Greene was a member of Congress who knew Trump personally. Greg Bovino was in charge of the mass deportations effort before he was relieved of duty. They have been on the inside and have seen it is hopeless. You can choose to work as a shill and apologist for Con. Inc. like Scott has done, but this only makes you a delusional employee. You are literally the help. You are as marginalized as anyone on the outside although unlike Tucker, Massie, Greene, Bovino and others not smart enough to figure this out.
The Republican Party has been given three trifectas over the past 25 years. It has squandered all of them. Trump alone squandered two trifectas. It has started a war in the Middle East three times, neglected the economy, broken its coalition, alienated Independents and handed power back over to Democrats. Over the last 15 years, rightwing populist movements like the Tea Party and MAGA rose, each yelling against the establishment in tricorn and red hats while changing nothing. Ted Cruz admits today that he ran for office to be Israel’s strongest soldier, not because of any of the Tea Party causes he pretended to care about. None of this reality television noise will amount to anything from the vantagepoint of 2030. You would have been better off tuning out and focusing your attention on almost anything else.
If I was making a steel man case for Trump changing the Republican Party, I would point to how he has closed the border or how the refugee resettlement program takes in South African refugees. Jared Taylor has already responded to Scott Greer though. Trump’s immigration policies from his first term were dismantled in Joe Biden’s first week in office. Trump’s deportations in his first term were dwarfed by Joe Biden’s open border. The refugee resettlement program will snap back when the next Democrat president takes over. South African refugees cynically used as pawns will be sent home. The “Gulf of America” will become the Gulf of Mexico again. All of these things will go the way of the Keystone Pipeline. Republicans have only created a partisan incentive structure to keep a captive audience peddling on their hamster wheel, voting in election after election while ultimately traveling nowhere they want to go. While that is a better business model for the Republican Party, it doesn’t mean White America is winning.
Conservatism failed to “Make America Great Again.” America is worse off today than it was when Obama was president by every metric. Although Pam Bondi was correct when she said that the Dow has hit 50,000 and we are in a “Golden Age” for billionaires, it has failed to do anything meaningful about immigration or anti-White discrimination. By absorbing these issues into Trumpism, it has only succeeded in making them intensely polarizing. Instead of Obama era optimism about a postracial society, we ended up with Wokeism and explicit anti-White discrimination. Instead of a steady bipartisan flow of legal immigrants and illegal aliens, we have shifted to pauses and torrential floods. We also haven’t seen the backlash to Trump’s second term. Overall, American society became more anti-White and immigration and demographic change accelerated between 2015 and 2030, which is all that matters.
You’re a dope if you think 20 years of The O’Reilly Factor on FOX News amounted to anything. In style and substance, the Trump era has been the same type of bullshitter and blowhard sitting in the Oval Office. It is fitting that it is ending like George W. Bush’s discredited presidency, trapped in another quagmire that donors wanted in the Middle East, crumbling as voters rebel over mismanagement of the economy with Trump daydreaming on Truth Social about merging America with Venezuela. He will return the Republican Party to the ruins in which he found it because these people learned absolutely nothing.
Note: This was America when Obama was in office. It was a Golden Age of $5 footlongs, 24 hour Wal-Marts and $20 fill ups compared to this shit we have now.
This is a pretty in depth overview. Hope you like it!
Solid Democratic States
The first eight states should be easy Democrat wins. In many states, Democrats are overperforming by 10-15 points, which is what we have seen in many special elections this year. The next five will be a lot closer.
Colorado: Democrat John Hinkenlooper will win by 20 points. This is as Harris +11 state, so this is a Democratic overperformance of 10 points.
Delaware: Democrat Chris Coons will win by 25 points. This is a Harris +15 state, so once again, this is another Democratic overperformance of 10 points.
Rhode Island: Democrat Jack Reed will win by 40 points! This in a Harris +14 state, so Democrats here are overperforming by 25 points!
Illinois: Democrat Juliana Stratton will defeat Republican Don Tracy by 20 points. Illinois is a +11 Harris state so once again, a Democratic overperformance of 10 points.
Massachusetts: Democrat Ed Markey will win by 20-25 points. A Harris +25 state.
If he gets the girl, gets married, and gets her pregnant like he should before she’s 30 (which is probably 8 years from now), they will be divorced 8 years after that—60% chance. And they will both be washed-up corporate whores living in a $1.6 million 2.5-bedroom shack in the peninsula of San Francisco or Bronx, NYC, if they are lucky. Oh yeah, and he works for Roblox, which is run by some totally-not-a-fed guy who used to work for NASA. It’s well known Roblox not only commodifies children for a fake economy on their platform, allegedly, but for sex cults, allegedly, as well. I mean, how can a married guy who’s not rich enough to give her hush money and a house, afford a lawyer to make her a baby mama, or evil enough of a VC tech bro to turn her into a heroin-addicted call girl, compete?
Even Nick Shirley asks you, “What do you think about communism coming to America!?” Maybe you shouldn’t answer him. It’ll be used against you in the court of public opinion, or an actual court of law (see Programmed to Kill by David McGowan). Slavery vs. exploitation—what’s the difference?
[Thesis Integration Note for Section II]:This Rice University kid is the quintessential Neo-Trotskyist managerial vanguard archetype—a sanitized, safe-talking drone engineered by high-end institutions to serve platforms like Roblox. Biofoundationalism blows the lid off this entire setup. The system dangles a tech salary and a cute wife in front of him, but the Malthusian math of Bay Area real estate and a 60% hypergamous divorce rate guarantee he’s just an engine generating resources for the platform economy before getting discarded.
Section III: The Socio-Sexual Transaction & The “Good Girl” Trap
For women, it is transactional, especially emotionally. They want to be manipulated, if necessary, for their emotional world. Monogamy is communism for women. They are right.
Society is built on beta cucks—the “good girl mating strategy.” I have been a victim of this mentality, for better and for worse. It’s often the Stockholm syndrome reaction to ex post facto justify our abuse as “noble lies” to hold us together, which is sometimes in our best interest. For instance, having children with many women in modern times: women can and will create all kinds of drama and problems to shorten your lifespan one way or another. So being a mate and investing in them is a safer route if successful.
Young girls are oversold as good and as claim-staking or prospecting like gold planners—more like 49ers who got there a little too late. Utopianism/communism for men was a lie to unleash women as a scourge. That’s why we need Black Lives Matter stickers over our houses and cars as a smear of lamb’s blood, so the angel of death will pass over every time some criminal that women empathize with gets shot by police, and some people with money use these things for economic goals to rape the average man of his status and resources for their own benefit and sell it effectively as “pathological altruism.” It is brilliant “marketing,” is it not? They give no fucks, but we certainly should.
People often forget that Uncle Adolf spent much of “his struggle” lamenting that it was a horizontal prison matrix where your own class of people would enforce “norms” of politeness (or convenience) on you for the ruling (or propaganda) class. It’s no wonder he allegedly didn’t have any kids—he realized the great dangers of women and forgot to mitigate those issues.
[Thesis Integration Note for Section III]:This is Gramscian cultural hegemony and evolutionary psychology working in tandem. When you realize monogamy acts as female communism and see BLM stickers as a lamb’s blood ritual, you see how the game is rigged. The ruling class weaponizes female emotional architecture and “pathological altruism” to make men police themselves into horizontal submission. This is the Trojan Horse: if you ignore these raw biological and sexual dynamics, you get bled dry and subjugated while convincing yourself it’s “noble.”
Section IV: The Epstein Reality & Technological Solutions
Perhaps this is the underlying cause of using Islam to fuck over America and the West? Push polygamy, which sells the idea of more sex (much as the sexual revolution did before it) as a “technological solution” to the problems we currently face.
Meanwhile, the ruling class like Epstein will have breeding rape farms on private islands, and many women will willingly or unwillingly (let’s not get into the debate about consent here just yet) join so they can proliferate their genetic dominance. This is the story of Epstein no one wants to talk about, but it’s vastly more important than “sex trafficking.” The why is more important than who, what, when, where, and how.
[Thesis Integration Note for Section IV]:Here lies the ultimate Malthusian elite exemption. While the lower and middle classes are fed artificial moral constraints and fake “technological solutions” like the sexual revolution or pushed polygamy, the elites operate on pure, unadulterated bio-foundational drive: direct genetic dominance and resource hoarding (the Epstein blueprint). All that “social progress” talk is just the PR campaign hiding raw biological expansion at the top.
Section V: Subversion of Meta-Narratives & The “Natural State” Trap
Rules meant for spiritual power like chastity, honor, and mindlessness (contemplation of God) have been turned into a vice that’s inflicted by the occult/pseudo-priest class as an affliction spiked into the punch of moral authority that is mostly self-imposed by the lower/middle classes in a Malthusian plot against anyone with true individuality that assists a community-based collective will. (Run-on sentence, yeah I know. Irony and comedy are primary binary weapons since at least Chaucer.) They certainly have weaponized Pauline theology, as my friend M. Kang has argued in his book Christ Protagonist or Logos Dethroned.
Meta-narratives (Alex Woods, History of Philosophy: A Marxist Perspective) are all about subverting wisdom and goodness into the evil deeds meant to stave them off via “philosophy”—making women hold men in contempt for our very nature being chief among them. To stochastically terrorize you to become isolated, think it’s your “best bet,” and think that not taking the opportunity to impregnate women when it comes is because “you’re better than that.” Adam Weishaupt may get a bad rap since he actually confronted the Jesuits (and the Jews?), yet had standards so high the Illuminati failed?
See, it was planned long ago to subvert all institutions, especially religion and family, to conform to the wishes of a few. And yet, if you point it out, you’re mentally ill, supposedly. Even if it’s not some evil plot, look around, as the fruits have been borne as if it were, and as it were.
Natural religion—aka the thought of returning to a natural state—is the ultimate guide to keep us as pets. Domesticated, trained slaves are not the same as an alleged Anarcho-primitivist white male / Asian female cult of the Polynesian islands in the distant past, present, or future (see William Gibson, Double Dickage).
Neanderthals gave us our difference enough to be one of the hive. Was that his white savior will, or has it been thrown off course by changing the math of navigation by the stars, like Jason Reza Jorjani suggests?
The Greeks and Chinese simultaneously freed and enslaved man via contemplation and writing those contemplations down. And for what? To be ruled by spiteful nerds who run Silicon Valley and the government for Trotskyist Zionists? Where’s my cut of the pie, nigga?
Marduk brought order out of chaos via the Jews to Christendom, but that order has brought humanity to its knees via the motto “Give me convenience or give me death” (thanks ladies and simps).
Contradictions are bound up throughout nature; therefore, Plantinga had it right about God and His justification. But now what?
[Thesis Integration Note for Section V]:Beware of the “Natural Religion” trap. The push to return to a “pure natural state” or blind biological determinism can easily become a high-level cope that turns men into domesticated pets. From weaponized Pauline theology down to Silicon Valley’s tech-gnosticism, these meta-narratives isolate men and trick them into stepping aside out of misplaced moral pride. Plantinga was right that nature is bound up in contradiction—so if the spiteful nerds ran off with the order and weaponized the matrix, how does a man grounded in reality construct actual purpose without falling into their trap?
He was arguing with me on X earlier this afternoon about his book Whitepill when the news broke that Sen. John Curtis was trying to create a federal version of Utah’s old guest worker program. For those who don’t remember this Tea Party-era cheap labor program, Utah was sued by the Obama administration which succeeded in blocking the guest worker program from taking effect.
“Utah Sen. John Curtis announced the introduction of a bill on Monday that would create a voluntary state-sponsored visa program, allowing state legislatures to expand their temporary migrant workforce.
The legislation, introduced with Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly, appears to mirror a 15-year-old proposal passed in Utah as part of the 2011 Compact on Immigration, but which never received federal approval.
Curtis’ bill would mark a major reform to federal immigration law, if it can make its way through congressional gridlock, by letting states manage their own state-level guest-worker initiatives based on local labor demands. …”
The truth is that the GOP never stopped pushing for amnesty. Comprehensive immigration reform was pushed during the Biden administration. The DREAM Act never went away. The Dignity Act is introduced in every Congress. Lindsey Graham died a MAGA hero after spending his entire career in the Senate pushing for various amnesties like his last attempt to grant legal status to Afghan refugees.
DHS Secretary Mullin: "We have naturalization ceremonies every single day in the United States. In fact, we're real close to 900,000 individuals that have been naturalized in the last 12 months. There is a legal system to go through." pic.twitter.com/FElL0nHFTH
Oklahoma GOP Governor Kevin Stitt: "I think what the American public loves is that me and the governor of New York can agree on a lot of issues on immigration reform." pic.twitter.com/Byabyv1wmm
? INFURIATING: Markwayne Mullin is ONCE AGAIN encouraging illegal Haitians and aliens with Temporary Protected Status to seek PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS
This guy is a JOKE
Make them apply for legal status back in their HOME COUNTRY. NOT while they’re here. pic.twitter.com/KAnUN7mNNv
According to DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin, ICE has deported approximately 356,389 people in FY 2026 while over 900,000 new immigrants have been naturalized. He talks about how he worked for two years with No Labels on a push for comprehensive immigration reform.
Mark Levin says he doesn’t give a damn if the war against Iran leads to a global economic depression or even a World War, as long as Israel is protected.
Levin says the United States military must bomb the targets he chooses them to bomb.
Trump posts meme suggesting he wants to run for an illegal third term, then follows that up with posts suggesting he wants to annex Greenland and Venezuela pic.twitter.com/N1rfxPcYPc
The gravitational force of the black hole underneath the GOP is getting stronger every week. He isn’t going to just lose the midterms. He is going to lose us the next decade like George W. Bush.
Note: “The Great One” Mark Levin has redefined the MAGA brand.
?? (@ImBreckWorsham) August 17, 2026
