Thanks to socialism, the average Zimbabwean became a trillionaire before @elonmusk 💪

The only thing the Big Build built is the Road to Serfdom.

This man proves the UK isn’t free - exiled and made destitute for views the government didn’t like, while no one protests. It’s ludicrous, says Peter Hitchens.

A farmer dies in April 2026. His son inherits the farm. The farm has been in the family since 1847. The farm consists of: 300 acres of grazing pasture, a farmhouse built in 1892, a barn, a milking parlour, two tractors of varying ages, a Land Rover that runs about 70% of the time, and a herd of 180 Hereford-cross cattle. On paper, the farm is worth approximately £3.2 million. This is because land near him has been bought recently by a London hedge fund looking for carbon credits, which has dragged the comparable value of every field within forty miles upward to a number nobody local can justify. In cash, the farm produces a profit of about £28,000 a year in a good year. In a bad year it loses money. The son also works as a fencing contractor three days a week to keep the operation viable. The inheritance tax bill on a £3.2 million estate, even at the reduced 20% rate, comes to approximately £140,000 after the increased threshold is applied. The son does not have £140,000. The son has never had £140,000. The son has £4,200 in his current account and an overdraft. The son sells 60 acres to a developer to pay the tax. The developer puts solar panels on the 60 acres. The remaining herd cannot be sustained on the reduced land. The herd is sold. The barn becomes a holiday let. A different family eats Brazilian beef this Christmas without knowing why the price went up. The Treasury collects £140,000. The land never produces British food again.

The single idea that explains everything. Legal positivism. Most Australians have never heard the term, yet it is the quiet philosophical revolution that dismantled the original Australia. Legal positivism is the belief that whatever the Parliament passes and the courts uphold is automatically legitimate law — there is no higher moral, natural, or historical authority. If the state declares it, it is law. End of story. This single philosophical shift is the master key that unlocked every major problem we face today. Because once you accept that the state can redefine the nation without the consent of the people, then everything else follows. And here is the brutal truth: If you are truly Australian — if you are proud of this nation and how it was built, if you believe in the original compact between the people and the state — then you are forced to reach one unavoidable conclusion: The current managerial state is morally illegitimate. It has no moral right to rule over us. It changed the fundamental character of this country without ever asking the Australian people for their consent. It replaced the old constitutional compact with a new post-national order, and then declared its own actions lawful under the rules of legal positivism. Every grievance we see — mass immigration without consent, the erosion of free speech, the institutional inversion of ASIO, the expanding surveillance powers — all of it flows from this one philosophical root. Of course they will call this destabilising. But questioning the moral legitimacy of the state has always been the first step toward real change — because no system that has lost its moral foundation deserves to endure. Legal positivism didn’t just change the rules. It replaced the moral foundation of the nation with raw state power. And that is why the old Australia and the current managerial state are fundamentally incompatible.

Simulation illustrates what happens when the following 2 survival strategies are pitted against each other: White dots: treat everyone the way you want to be treated Red dots: treat your in-group the way you want to be treated; treat others as a resource to extract from What can we learn from this? [📽️: @black_pilled]

Whenever a politician mentions "help with the cost of living “, substitute the words "help get us re-elected."

The Welcome to Country ceremonies act as a form of absolution for affluent white urban dwellers who prefer not to confront the reality of actual indigenous experience.

Моя любимая краткая история СССР. Как только умер Ленин, оказалось, что второй человек в партии, товарищ Троцкий - предатель. Каменев, Зиновьев, Бухарин и Сталин свергли Троцкого и изгнали из СССР. Но через пару лет оказалось, что Каменев, Зиновьев и Бухарин тоже враги и вредители. Тогда доблестный товарищ Генрих Ягода их расстрелял. Чуть позже Ягоду, как вражеского агента, расстрелял Ежов. Но через пару лет оказалось, что и Ежов не товарищ, а обычный предатель и вражеский агент. И Ежова расстрелял Берия. После смерти Сталина, все поняли, что и Берия тоже предатель. Тогда Жуков сверг и расстрелял Берию. Но вскоре Хрущев узнал, что Жуков враг и заговорщик. И сослал Жукова на Урал. А чуть позже вскрылось, что и Сталин-то был врагом, вредителем и предателем. А вместе с ним и большая часть политбюро. Тогда Сталина вынесли из мавзолея, а политбюро и примкнувшего к ним Шепилова разогнали честные партийцы, во главе с Хрущевым. Прошло несколько лет и выяснилось, что Хрущев был волюнтаристом, проходимцем, авантюристом и врагом. Тогда Брежнев отправил Хрущева на пенсию. Вскоре Брежнев умер, и выяснилось, что он был маразматиком, вредителем и причиной застоя. Потом было еще два маразматика, который никто и запомнить не успел, потому что дохли, как мухи. Но тут пришел к власти молодой, энергичный Горбачев. И оказалось, что вся партия была партией вредителей и врагов, но он-то сейчас все исправит... Тут-то СССР и развалился. А Горбачев оказался врагом и предателем.

You can kill (so called )innocent people with a drone as Obama did but it’s a crime when you’re honest enough to look them in eye when you do it.

Iran was trying to use the North Korean model to get a nuke: create sufficient conventional deterrence so you won’t be challenged in acquiring one (it’s called the Seoul Hostage Problem). This has been explained over and over since day one. Everyone claiming shifting goalposts or no imminent threat has been lying. The reason North Korea was allowed to get nukes is because Seoul (and its 10 million inhabitants) is within artillery and rocket range of North Korea. During the 1994 nuclear crisis, the Clinton administration seriously considered airstrikes on North Korea’s Yongbyon reactor but backed off precisely because of the artillery threat to Seoul. Iran was trying to accomplish the same by stockpiling missiles and drones which would have had the same deterrent effect. The proof is what Iran has been doing in the past month: attacking all its neighbors in order to pressure the US to stop attacking it Beyond this, they were building medium-range ballistic missiles that could reach Paris and London, meaning all of Europe could be held hostage as they built a nuclear bomb. The reason Iran has not built a nuclear weapon until now is not because it couldn’t, but because it knew it would be attacked and denied this capability. So by allowing them to continue developing this conventional deterrence, you would be allowing Iran to get a nuclear weapon. And unlike North Korea, Iran is led by an eschatological death cult Reagan saw nuclear mutually assured destruction (MAD) as both morally bankrupt (because of the innocent-body-count problem) and dangerously fragile because it assumed flawless rationality between adversaries…this means it only takes one irrational actor to destroy the world. Working backwards from the conclusion that Iran’s Islamist regime must never have a nuclear weapon, it was necessary for the US to attack Iran to deny it the conventional capacity to hold the entire eastern hemisphere hostage. Every European leader knows this and behind the scenes praises the US for this action. But they are cowards, held hostage by their own internal Muslim populations, and so adopt these ridiculous public positions. This was never about Israel. And if your argument is that Iran should be allowed to get a nuclear weapon then you are a fool and a traitor to western civilization…you’re a useful idiot

Good explanation of nihilist philosophy

Unrealized gains tax for Gen-Z: You buy a Pokémon card for $50. Someone offers you $500 for it. You say no. You love that card. You're keeping it. The government says: "Cool, but that card is worth $500 now. You owe us $100 in taxes." You: "…I didn't sell it." Government: "Don't care. Pay up." You don't have $100 lying around. So you're forced to sell the card you love just to pay a tax on money you never received. Next month? That card drops back to $50. Your card is gone. Your money is gone. And the government shrugs. That's a wealth tax on unrealized gains. They don't pay you back the tax... Now picture this. Your mom calls you crying. She has to sell the house she raised you in. Not because she can't afford it. She's lived there 30 years. It's paid off. But some website says it's worth more now and the government says she owes $15,000 she doesn't have. So she sells your childhood home. The kitchen where she made you breakfast. The doorframe where she marked your height every birthday. Gone. To pay a tax on money that was never real. Now picture the opposite. Your dad put everything into his small business. For 20 years he built it from nothing. One year the business is "valued" at $2 million on paper. He owes a massive tax bill. He empties his savings. Sells his truck. Borrows money. Pays it. Next year the market crashes. His business is worth $200,000. He lost everything to pay a tax on a number that doesn't exist anymore. Does the government give him his money back? No. Does the government give him his truck back? No. Does the government care? No. They sold this idea as "taxing billionaires." But billionaires have armies of lawyers, offshore accounts, and trusts. They'll be fine. You know who won't be fine? Your mom. Your dad. Your neighbor with a small business. The farmer down the road who's had the same land for four generations and now has to sell it because dirt got expensive. You're not taxing wealth. You're taxing people for owning things. It's like getting a parking ticket for a car you might drive somewhere someday. They want you to own nothing and be happy. To fund the fraud, waste and abuse of the welfare state they created. There is enough money. More tax isn't needed. It's all a lie. But you've been gaslit into believing this is a rich vs poor debate. I hope you understand what's at stake.

One for Richie Benaud.

Ilhan “Vinegar Tits” Omar

The two Muslim shooters are the snakes. The 800,000 Muslims are the grass.

Socialism is the politicisation and monetisation of envy of which there is an endless amount. You can make money out of all the seven deadly sins.