TakForDetElon

The stage after capitalism is not socialism, it is alcoholism.

[Inez Stepman ⚪️🔴⚪️ @InezFeltscher]

It’s because the left always is comparing America to their imaginary utopia, and the right is comparing America to every other human civilization in history. It’s also why we experience profound gratitude.

Unconstrained vs constrained view strikes again.

[Flopping Aces @FloppingAces]

This is the most brain-dead, nation-destroying bullshit I’ve ever seen dressed up as compassion.

These goddamn socialists want Medicare for All, free housing, $10 a day childcare, free college, living wages, federal jobs for everyone, and open borders with no ICE so tens of millions can flood in tomorrow and start claiming every single benefit on day one. No limits. No vetting. No consequences. Just pure fucking fantasy.

And when you ask how the hell they’re paying for it, they still have the balls to say “tax the billionaires.”

What a crock of shit.

You’re looking at a 32% payroll tax increase, a 42% VAT, middle-class marginal rates slammed up to 55%, and top earners getting fucked at 85-95% plus wealth taxes on top. The rich still won’t cover this. The middle class and working people get the shaft while their wages get crushed and their neighborhoods get turned into waiting lists and shortages.

Hospitals will be war zones. Housing will be a goddamn joke. The whole system will ration everything while these clowns keep pretending it’s moral. It’s not moral. It’s suicidal.

You cannot hand universal benefits to unlimited people with no enforcement and no brakes and expect anything but collapse. Debt exploding, services dying, trust gone, and the country turned into something unrecognizable.

These fucking idiots aren’t building paradise. They’re setting fire to the last working republic on earth because their ideology is too stupid to understand basic math and human nature.

If you vote for this shit, you deserve exactly what’s coming.
(article below)

[The Rational Animal 🤔 @theobjectivist]

I understand the point, and it's worth taking seriously. Yes, you must work to live. But look at why that's true, because the reason changes everything.

The need to produce isn't imposed by employers or capitalism. It's imposed by nature. A man alone on an island must fish, build, and grow or he dies. That's not a threat from another person. It's the basic condition of being alive. Food, shelter, and clothing don't exist until someone makes them.

So when you say work is "forced" by the threat of starvation, that threat comes from reality itself, not from the man offering you a job. He didn't create your need to eat. He's offering you a way to meet it, a trade, his wealth for your effort. That's not coercion. Coercion is a gun. An offer you can refuse, even a hard one, is the opposite of force.

And here's the part the resentment hides. The employer isn't your enemy in this. He's the one who built the thing that lets you meet nature's demand without fishing alone on a rock. The men who produce the most, the ones who create the factories, the tools, the jobs, are the greatest benefactors of all, because they multiply what every worker can earn far beyond what he could alone.

That's why the moral debt runs the other way. We don't owe our lives to the takers. We owe an enormous debt to the producers, whose ability raises the standard of living of everyone beneath them. The man who gives you a way to live has done you good, not harm.

[The Heretical Liberal 🇨🇦 @Rob_ThaBuilder]

Yup. The values that made you a liberals in the 90's and 00's make you.....something else today.

I grew up and have identified as a liberal my whole life, because the liberal values from back then aligned with my personal values. Today, the political left actively undermines these values:

The Left Then: Free speech as the bedrock of a free and open society, even unpopular speech. The concept of "i may not like what you sat, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" was a guiding princeple ✅️

The Left Now: Criminalizing speech that runs afoul of Leftist dogma ❌️

The Left Then: "Equality for everyone under the law" ✅️

The Left Today: "Certain interest groups/demographics should be treated differently under the law and be given special privileges that others do not" ❌️

The Left Then: Fiercely defending secularism. Freedom FROM religion is just as important as Freedom OF religion ✅️

The Left Today: Islam must be catered to and respected, including in the public square ❌️

The Left Then: Womens rights ✅️

The Left Now: Men can be women ❌️

The Left Then: Sensible and thoughtful immigration can be a huge strategic advantage for Western nations ✅️

The Left Now: Mindless open borders migration is the only moral position, and if you have concerns, you're racist ❌️

The Left Then: "Everyone should be proud of their culture & heritage" ✅️

The Left Now: "Everyone should be proud of their culture heritage except white ppl, who should be ashamed and be happy to see it destroyed"❌️

I don't know what my political identity is. I cant see myself ever becoming a conservative, my values are still rooted in classical liberal thought. But I know the current political Left has lost it's way, and it is primarily our responsibility - as liberals - to start speaking out loudly against it. Wokeism is a foreign invader, a parasite that tries to convince us that it IS liberalism and cannot ve separated from it. This is incorrect.

You absolutely can be - and should be- an anti-woke liberal.

[Handre @Handre]

Walter Duranty knew people were starving. He wrote that they weren't anyway.

From his comfortable Moscow apartment, the New York Times correspondent filed dispatch after dispatch in 1932 and 1933 assuring American readers that talk of famine in Ukraine was, in his words, "an exaggeration or malignant propaganda." Meanwhile, the Holodomor killed somewhere between 3.5 and 7 million people. Stalin requisitioned the grain, sealed the borders of starving villages, and let entire regions collapse into death and cannibalism. Duranty saw the reports. He had the sources. He chose Stalin.

Duranty privately told a British diplomat, Sir William Strang, in September 1933 that "as many as 10 million" had likely died. Then he went back to his typewriter and produced the line "there is no actual starvation." He calculated that access to the regime, the famous interviews, the prestige of being the man who explained the Soviet experiment to America, was worth more than the truth. The market he served rewarded him for it. The Pulitzer committee handed him their 1932 prize for correspondence. They have never revoked it.

This is what central planning always buys: not just the bodies in the field but the men with pens who explain why the bodies don't count. Every engineered scarcity needs its Duranty. Someone has to stand at the edge of the mass grave and assure the readers back home that the five-year plan is working, that the eggs are necessary for the omelette (his actual phrase). The state directs the grain. The court intellectual directs the narrative. Both jobs pay well.

Free market economists spent the entire 20th century explaining that you cannot run an economy by command without producing exactly this: shortage, terror, and a press corps competing to flatter the men who caused it.

The famine ended, and the Pulitzer sits on the wall at 620 Eighth Avenue to this day.

[Jacob Shell @JacobAShell]

I would sometimes point this out last decade to socialist colleagues and friends: that unlike 20th century socialist states, which had lots of clearly defined long-term development plans (sometimes successfully achieved, EG in China or if we want to call them "socialist" then in Scandinavia), 21st century western millennial socialism is very armwavey and vague on all questions about long-term development.

Sometimes 2010s socialists would answer by pointing to a green economy or carbon zero or solarpunk or something like that as the long-term vision for development. But this was very half-baked since this "solarpunk" vision wasn't actually defined in a way that made development its core function; nor did it entail tariffs against carbon-dirty producer regions whose imports would obviously economically crush local "green" producers. And frankly, I think they didn't really mean any of that, that there was no development vision, and the "green new deal" / solarpunk thing functioned purely as a tactical thing to say in conversation, and that's it.

We're seeing more explicitly in the 2020s what was there all along in the 10s: this is not a developmentalist form of socialism, it's a redistributionist form. The outcome won't be Chongqing and it won't be Iceland. The reason intersectionality looms so large is it generates an easy formula -- implicit and unstated if the situation calls for that -- for calculating how the finite pot of wealth is to redistributed.

I think I can hear the retort: but NYC, SF and Boston are already tippity-top First World. There's no more "development" to be done. The only question that remains is a more equitable distribution of the benefits. But this response just reveals a kind of bovine lack of imagination. Life expectency could always be longer, transport could always be better, tech and the arts could always be more innovative. The world has become uglier, so solving that problem, the aesthetic one, is another frontier.

In many ways the Chinese strategy has generated certain kinds of futurist infrastructures and landscapes, which I've called "0th World," which are actually ahead of anything rich people in Manhattan experience. I don't want to exaggerate this (anyone who spends time in China knows that it's mostly 2nd world, not 0th), but the point is that while 21st century western socialists advocate that the West basically rest on its laurels, with the only key question being how to redistribute those laurels, in the meantime, the future is being imagined and built somewhere else.

[Flopping Aces @FloppingAces]

Democrats just got reminded that the socialist wing they spent years feeding was never actually on a leash.

It was just waiting until it was big enough to stop pretending.

Carville finally coughed up the word “schism” like something rotten had been stuck in his throat. Van Jones is suddenly warning that the activist “army” is growing and that moderates better get off the couch before “people like this and worse” take over the party. Bill Maher ... Bill Maher! ... is saying his vote may be in play if Democrats keep marching toward open anti-capitalism and prison abolition.

Now the nervous “moderates” are rolling out a “Promise to America” coalition because they finally noticed the people they dismissed as fringe are winning elections, beating incumbents, and setting the terms.

Spare us the shock.

These weren’t harmless little progressives who got carried away at a campus rally. They were useful radicals. The party kept them around to energize the base, terrorize Republicans, and make the old guard look reasonable by comparison.

The adults pretended they were in charge.

Then the pets grew teeth.

Now they’re taking safe seats in New York, demanding the keys, and the same Democrats who spent years defending them are acting stunned that the monster stopped asking permission.

Newsom isn’t even bothering with the soft sell anymore. He’s calling for a nationwide wealth tax because “the system is fundamentally broken.” No serious explanation of what it fixes. No plan. No math. Just envy in a tailored suit.

The Democrat Party told America the communist element was marginal, harmless, and imaginary.

The second that lie stopped working, the whole tent started cracking in public.

Carville, Jones, and Maher didn’t suddenly find principles.

They just realized the radicals they used to manage are no longer manageable.
(article below)

[Students For Liberty @sfliberty]

In 1960, newly independent African leaders had a choice: capitalism or socialism.

Almost all of them picked socialism.

A Ghanaian economist named George Ayittey spent forty years documenting what happened next.

His findings are in print, and almost nobody outside Africa wants to hear them. 🧵

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@Handre The Fed prevented deflation. Deflation harms borrowers, wiping out farmers and choking investment spending. The Fed did the right thing.

[Thomas Mayer @Thomasfvs8ize]

Ehrlich gesagt interessiert mich weniger, ob SpaceX im Jahr 2030 tatsächlich 1 Billion Dollar Umsatz erzielt.

Mich beschäftigt eine andere Frage.

Warum entstehen solche Visionen heute fast ausschließlich in den USA und kaum noch in Europa?

Ob am Ende 300 Milliarden, 500 Milliarden oder tatsächlich 1 Billion Dollar Umsatz erreicht werden, ist für mich nicht der entscheidende Punkt.

Entscheidend ist, dass amerikanische Unternehmen weiterhin versuchen, ganze Industrien neu zu definieren.

In Europa wird dagegen häufig darüber diskutiert, wie bestehende Strukturen verwaltet oder geschützt werden können.

Vielleicht liegt genau darin der eigentliche Unterschied.

SpaceX steht nicht nur für Raketen, Satelliten oder künstliche Intelligenz.

SpaceX steht für die Überzeugung, dass Zukunft gestaltet werden kann.

Diese Denkweise war einst eine große europäische Stärke.

Heute begegnet man ihr leider immer seltener.

Ob Musk sein Ziel erreicht, weiß niemand.

Aber ich habe zunehmend den Eindruck, dass die größte Gefahr nicht darin besteht, Innovation zu überschätzen.

Sondern darin, ihre Wirkung zu unterschätzen.

[James E. Thorne @DrJStrategy]

For the record.

SpaceX, Hayek, and the Progressive War on Wealth Creation

The progressive left clings to the fantasy that wealth is manufactured by the state and its pet technocrats rather than by entrepreneurs who risk their own capital to create real value.

In their mythology, government planners are the heroic “designers” of prosperity, while the private sector is a problem to be taxed, regulated, and morally lectured. As Hayek warned, “the more the state ‘plans’ the more difficult planning becomes for the individual,” and progressives are determined to make individual planning all but impossible.

Their entire project rests on a basic fraud, confusing redistribution with creation. Social-democratic and socialist progressives boast about “fairness” and “equity,” but their toolkit is nothing more than confiscation and reallocation, slicing the same pie thinner while pretending they’ve baked a new one.

Hayek’s point that “there is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal” goes straight over their heads, they weaponize the latter to justify endless expropriation from those who actually produce.

The manufactured outrage on the progressive left over the SpaceX IPO is not about fraud, abuse, or failure, it is about their ongoing indoctrination campaign to portray success, risk-taking, and genuine wealth creation as moral crimes. A private company goes from “10 percent chance of success” to one of the most valuable enterprises on earth, and their instinctive response is not admiration or curiosity, but rage that such achievement is even allowed to exist. They see Elon Musk’s trillionaire status not as the byproduct of extraordinary innovation and execution, but as a kind of cosmic theft that must be punished by the tax state.

This is entirely consistent with the broader progressive project, socialize resentment, demonize entrepreneurial gains, and condition the public to believe that any concentration of wealth outside the state is inherently illegitimate. Hayek saw this coming decades ago when he warned that central planning steadily erodes the scope for individual initiative, because the logical end of their ideology is a public that no longer dares to think in terms of independent ambition or long-term wealth building. Progressive leaders feed this mindset daily, insisting that “rigged” markets and “oligarchs” are the problem, while cleverly leaving the state, and its favored constituencies, as the only acceptable repositories of power and resources.

Their reaction to SpaceX is a case study in this pathology. A company that has slashed launch costs, expanded human access to space, and built critical strategic infrastructure is reduced in their rhetoric to a symbol of “inequality” and “greed,” precisely because it exposes how much more effective decentralized, risk-taking capital can be than bureaucratic planning. The message encoded in their fury is clear, do not build, do not risk, do not aspire, unless it is under the watchful, confiscatory eye of the state.

$SPCX

[Harold__Finch @HaroldWren22]

First observation: there will be no deal. The ceasefire will end & the war will re-commence.

Second observation: the US has been flooding the Theater with reinforcements, resupplies & performing maintenance on air assets non-stop, & re-arming warships. The force is ready & its larger than its ever been.

Third observation: every key player left in the regime surfaced from their hide holes & safe houses during this ceasefire. The regime ‘negotiation’ team sent to stall America. The IRGC thugs who showed up in Islamabad to stop the Iranian Regime delegation from making any deals. The midlevel staffers going between the IRGC thug leadership & the IRGC cannon fodder still shooting at ships.

All of them broke cover & came back up on the grid. From that point on, they were visible to the human intelligence networks watching them, the persistent ISR assets watching 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without pause— spy satellites, stealth & non stealth drones, manned reconnaissance aircraft. From the moment this ceasefire started, everyone who is a key player in Iran’s continued resistance came back on the grid & have been surveilled ever since.

The intelligence mosaic is fully fleshed out & these targets are being tracked in real time, and the strike plans created with the help of AI are already set & planned.

When the ceasefire ends, the strikes will be begin with such rapid speed, & precision it will be much more savage & fearsome than the first round.

Fourth observation: Iran received drones, SAM missile systems & radars & intelligence from China during this ceasefire & this is still ongoing. This is what’s driving the remnants of the IRGC to continue the war. They do not fully comprehend what is set to take place, or how completely unable to counter it or survive it they are. That’s partly due to history, partly due to institutional arrogance of IRGC, & partly & most importantly because China & Russia simply do not understand our full capabilities— in terms of intelligence collection, planning, speed we can act on those things, & how good our situational awareness of the battlefield is.

That last one is the key: the disconnect— how clear & complete our granular picture all the way up to the grand strategic picture is, compared to how blinded & how fragmented the situational awareness of the Iranians is.

That last part is what really, really scares Russia & China— the vast gap in cognitive capabilities & situational awareness capabilites between the US & them scares them because its a gap they cant bridge, & beyond that the speed we can act on that clear picture is something they cant match.

This war is going to restart after the ceasefire ends, & all hell is going to break loose— & the ferocity of what comes next is going to genuinely surprise the IRGC fanatics driving events in this direction.

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@VerminusM Correct. You have to destroy them until you reach the point that the remainder recognize the futility of their hatred. You aren't there yet with Hamas, etc.

[Sana Ebrahimi Ledene @__Injaneb96]

This one broke me today.💔

A 38 year old nurse and mountaineer named Saleheh Akbari and her husband Ahmad Khodaei opened their home to wounded protesters who were too scared to go to hospitals on Jan 8 and 9, because the regime was hunting them down.
They treated them.
Hid them. Saved lives.

A few days later, on January 12, security forces raided their house. Ahmad wasn’t home yet, so they waited.
When he walked in, they jumped him and started beating him.
Saleheh threw herself between them to protect her husband.
They shot her in the heart. Point blank. Right in front of Ahmad, and their little 8 year old.

She died in his arms.
The grief destroyed him.
Ahmad couldn’t carry it.
He wrote one last letter to his wife, said goodbye to the world and posted it on his Instagram. He took his own life.

Two hearts that only wanted to help people, gone.
Because they dared to show humanity in a regime that has none.

This is what bravery looks like in Iran.
And the world keeps scrolling.
Share this.
Their story deserves to be heard. 💔

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@Mandy1398991 @NiqabNancy The watermelon means that she is green (climate change) on the outside, and red (communist) on the inside. Just like Greta. The poultry leg simply means that she likes to eat.

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@NiqabNancy I'd call for help for you, but my internet is down.

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@wil_da_beast630 Sowell is over 90. Too old to enjoy the job. I would pick Wilfred Reilly.

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@moseshessstan Kids use "goyslop" as a word without any knowledge of what a "goy" means. It will enter our language without any connection to Judaism.

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@realtalkstruth Well, if I were to pray 5 times a day, this would be a good place to do that. On the other hand, were my wife's sister's son to be orphaned, we could probably make a nice bedroom for him here.

[TakForDetElon @TakForDetElon]

@angel_nowar Yeah, you never should have gone in that direction. You should have paid attention to the history of the region and then to what happened on Oct 7. You should have sided with civilization against barbarism. Now you are a barbarian, and nobody likes you except the scum.