Mark Pol

Question everything.

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@CilComLFC

[John Carter @martianwyrdlord]

We're banning raves, because we don't want you having fun where we can't watch you. By the way let me tell you about Woodstock.

We're cracking down on underage drinking. It's bad for you. Yeah of course we hit up the pubs at your age it was great.

We're banning smoking, but just for you - the smoking age will go up one year every year. Oh yes of course, we used to be able to smoke inside everywhere, it was great really.

We're banning flavored vapes. We don't have any evidence they're bad for you, you just like them too much.

We're banning dodgeball during recess, someone might get hurt. Yeah we really enjoyed dodgeball too.

We're banning flirting, because it might make the girls uncomfortable.

We're locking you in your room for the next two years. Yes we know you're in no danger from the virus, but we're worried that you'll get us sick. By the way you have to take this needle if you want to leave your room again. Yes, twice. Well there will be boosters too. No, we aren't worried about side effects, that doesn't effect us at all.

We're closing the frat houses, because we don't want you having fun without our permission. Please join these officially sanctioned university clubs instead.

We're bringing in labor from the third world to work the service jobs, so you can't have a summer job.

You need to go to university to get a good job. By the way we're raising the price of tuition. Oh look we're raising it again. Don't worry there are loans. At interest.

Actually we're giving the good jobs to the foreigners we just imported, to make up for our racist past. We are very good people. No of course we aren't sacrificing anything. You just have to take one for the team.

Also, we're giving the foreigners the houses. We needed to increase real estate prices. For our pensions, you see. Sadly no, you'll probably never be able to afford one yourself. By the way don't forget to pay your taxes. Need to support those pensions somehow! Eh? No, we're giving ourselves tax breaks of course. Seniors discount you know.

Oh by the way, that one thing you still have, now that we've banned joy and kicked every ladder out from under you? That social media stuff you kids like? You guessed it! We're banning that too! Just for you though, we're still going to watch AI videos on Facebook. It's for your safety, you see. We've noticed that you're all getting rather irate, and we think it would be better for your mental health if you shut up for a while. Why don't you just go outside?

Eh? No of course we aren't going to stop Ahmed and his twelve illiterate cousins from raping your sister, that would be culturally insensitive, which would make us feel very bad, and we can't have that.

[Creative Deduction @CreativeDeduct]

By the 1930s many Western intellectuals reluctantly realised that classical Marxism had failed and the proletariat wasn’t revolting. But then a group of exiled German Marxists led by Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, Erich Fromm and Herbert Marcuse decided to change the battlefield.
Instead of economics, they targeted the “cultural superstructure”: family, religion, tradition, sexual norms and the very idea of objective truth. Their weapon was Critical Theory - a relentless campaign of negative criticism designed to portray every Western institution as inherently oppressive and capitalism as not just economically flawed, but psychologically and morally corrupt.
Marcuse gave the strategy its most powerful tactical manual in his 1965 essay “Repressive Tolerance”: true liberation, he argued, required “liberating tolerance” - tolerance only for progressive ideas and outright intolerance for conservative or “regressive” ones. Free speech, in other words, was only legitimate when it served the revolution.
The intellectual poison of the Frankfurt School was extraordinarily influential and as its graduates and intellectual heirs colonised universities, media, NGOs and corporate HR departments, Critical Theory evolved into today’s identity politics, DEI mandates and cancel culture - a cultural Marxism that attacks the individual in the name of group grievance. What began with a small circle of German émigrés in the 1930s now shapes the moral vocabulary of much of the Western elite. The result has been a softer, more pervasive authoritarianism: the dictatorship of the politically correct.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Hello Julia, sans aucune ironie, c'est top que tu prennes le temps de te renseigner. Mais le problème quand on lit Marx aujourd'hui, c'est qu'on prend pour acquis sa prémisse de départ, alors qu'elle a été démontée scientifiquement il y a plus de 150 ans.

Toute la pensée de Marx repose sur la théorie de la valeur-travail. L'idée que la valeur d'un bien vient de la quantité de travail nécessaire pour le produire. Si tu acceptes cette prémisse, alors oui, tout son raisonnement tient. Le capitaliste "vole" la plus-value du travailleur, l'exploitation est mathématique, la révolution est inévitable.

Sauf qu'en 1871, trois économistes (Menger en Autriche, Jevons en Angleterre, Walras en Suisse) découvrent indépendamment la même chose : la valeur n'est pas objective, elle est subjective et marginale.

Un verre d'eau dans le désert vaut une fortune. Le même verre à côté d'une rivière ne vaut rien. Le travail incorporé est identique. Donc le travail ne détermine pas la valeur. C'est le consommateur qui valorise un bien selon son utilité marginale dans un contexte donné.

Exemple concret : tu peux passer 1000 heures à tricoter un pull moche que personne ne veut. Selon Marx, ce pull a énormément de valeur (beaucoup de travail incorporé). Selon la réalité, il ne vaut rien. Parce que personne n'en veut.

À l'inverse, Bernard Arnault crée des milliards de valeur non pas parce qu'il "exploite" mais parce qu'il a su anticiper et organiser des désirs humains à grande échelle. La valeur est créée par la coordination, pas extraite par le vol.

Cette découverte (la révolution marginaliste) a invalidé tout l'édifice marxiste. Pas pour des raisons idéologiques, pour des raisons scientifiques. C'est pour ça que plus aucun département d'économie sérieux au monde n'enseigne Marx comme un cadre d'analyse valide. On l'enseigne en histoire de la pensée.

Maintenant, le truc important. Si ton intention en lisant Marx c'est d'aider les pauvres (c'est une intention noble), alors tu vas être surprise par ce qui suit.

Regarde les chiffres de la Banque mondiale. En 1820, 90% de l'humanité vivait dans l'extrême pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, moins de 9%. Cette chute historique ne s'est PAS produite dans les pays qui ont appliqué Marx. Elle s'est produite dans les pays qui ont libéralisé leur économie.

Chine post-1978, Vietnam post-1986, Inde post-1991, Pologne post-1989. À chaque fois qu'un pays libéralise, des centaines de millions de gens sortent de la pauvreté en une génération. À chaque fois qu'un pays applique Marx (URSS, Cambodge, Corée du Nord, Venezuela), c'est la famine et les goulags.

Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est l'expérience la plus massive jamais menée en sciences sociales. Plusieurs milliards de cobayes humains, sur un siècle.

Donc paradoxalement, si tu aimes vraiment les pauvres, la position la plus cohérente n'est pas d'être marxiste. C'est d'être pour la liberté économique. Parce que c'est empiriquement la seule chose qui a jamais sorti massivement les gens de la misère.

Pour creuser, je te recommande trois lectures qui vont changer ta vision :

"La Loi" de Frédéric Bastiat (court, lumineux, gratuit en ligne)
"La Route de la Servitude" de Hayek
"Économie en une leçon" de Henry Hazlitt
Bonne lecture, et vraiment chapeau de chercher à comprendre plutôt que de rester dans tes certitudes. C'est rare.

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@Antideloul @KimDotcom RATO!!! 😂

[miss white @cinecitta2030]

Wake up babe there’s a Portuguese Catholic priest who mixes Gregorian chants with industrial techno house music

[mescojono @mescojono]

Cuando publican la foto perfecta para poder hacer el meme del día. #NicolasMaduro #DonaldTrump

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@theLUCASTDS @DrewCouver56 The difference is that the convoy was a Canadian protest for the rights and freedom of Canadians. These protests are from a regional conflict on the other side of the world that has little to do with most Canadians and is gradually importing the conflict to Canada.

[Jim Chimirie 🇬🇧 @JChimirie66677]

Shabana Mahmood's asylum overhaul looks, at first glance, like a serious attempt to restore control. It isn't. It is a piece of political theatre designed to calm a restless country without touching the forces that reshaped it.

Britain is living through the aftermath of decades of demographic engineering carried out without public consent. Towns have changed, services have buckled, and the country has been told to treat all criticism as moral failing. Against that backdrop, Mahmood's reforms come dressed as toughness: temporary refugee status, no automatic family reunion, military-site camps, tighter rules. The government wants the public to believe it has finally woken up.

The dinghies are the centrepiece of this performance. They dominate the news, so they dominate the rhetoric. But nothing in these reforms will cut the numbers in any meaningful way. The traffickers don't study White Papers. The people paying them aren't frightened by 30-month visas instead of five-year ones. And without a working returns pipeline to France or any safe third-country scheme with real scale, the boats will keep coming. This package may change how long people stay after arrival – it will not stop them arriving.

Look closer and the picture sharpens. The tough talk is confined to the smallest, most photogenic part of the problem. The boats make the headlines, so the boats are punished. Meanwhile the vast machinery of mass immigration – student routes, work routes, family routes, asylum claims via legal entry – rolls on untouched. The real drivers of Britain's population surge remain pristine.

What this package truly delivers is not border control but bureaucratic expansion. The centrepiece is the digital ID: a state-controlled pass that every worker will need to prove the right to earn a living. It is sold as a tool against illegal labour. In reality it builds the scaffold for something far larger – a society where access to work, housing and services sits behind a government-managed gate. Immigration is the excuse; digital surveillance is the inheritance.

Alongside that sits a Home Office rewarded for failure. The department that lost control of the system now gains more power, fewer checks, and a tighter grip over the lives of those caught in its net. One appeal, fewer safeguards, broader discretion – the same machine that let the backlog explode now writes itself fresh authority in the name of efficiency.

The most striking omission is the one that matters: no reckoning with numbers. No recognition that it is the sheer scale of immigration that has driven social cohesion to breaking point. Mahmood's reforms try to cordon off asylum from the wider debate, as if Britain were not already living with the deep, daily consequences of relentless, uncontrolled inflow.

The government wants credit for appearing hard while keeping the fundamentals unchanged. It wants to calm a public it never listened to, without admitting that the public was right. This is not an attempt to restore the nation’s confidence in its borders; it is an attempt to preserve the old settlement under fresh branding.

A serious plan would face the country as it is: strained, fragmented, and tired of being told to ignore its own eyes. It would mean confronting the legal and constitutional barriers that make true control impossible – leaving the ECHR, scrapping the Human Rights Act, and replacing a rights regime built for another age with laws fit for this one. Mahmood's blueprint does none of this. It asks Britain to accept one more illusion: that the problem begins and ends with asylum seekers. It doesn't – and until the real drivers of this transformation are named and tackled, no amount of Whitehall wording will deliver control, trust, or stability.

"The dinghies are the centrepiece of this performance. They dominate the news, so they dominate the rhetoric. But nothing in these reforms will cut the numbers in a meaningful way."

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@Martyupnorth_2 The best way to protest land acknowledgements is disrupt them by singing the national anthem “O Canada”. If enough people join in it will completely demoralise those performing the acknowledgements.

[Mark Pol @markpol]

A Spanish politician’s plan to destroy the “far right” is to nationalise energy companies, implement rent controls nationwide and give citizenship to all illegal immigrants.

It’s scary how much support these Marxists have.

Spain is cooked! 🇪🇸💥

[Ione Belarra @ionebelarra]

Presidente, nuestro país sólo tiene dos opciones, o reventamos a la derecha o la derecha reventará a la gente.

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@j0ker937 AI generated garbage… muted!

[Mark Pol @markpol]

The government of British Columbia, Canada was litigating land claims with native tribes for 6 years without notifying present owners. Now private property land rights of all residents in the entire province is uncertain.

[Steve Kooner MLA @SteveKooner]

My constituents are very concerned about the Cowichan Tribes case in regards to their private property. I urge my constituents to join me tomorrow at the following programming:

On Tuesday, October 28:

The City of Richmond will host an information session at the Sheraton Vancouver Airport Hotel at 7:00 p.m. to provide updates and answer questions.

Before this session, there will be a community rally at 5:00 p.m at the Bowling Green Road Carpark across from the hotel.

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@Martyupnorth_2 Eyebrows up!

[Mark Pol @markpol]

The Pakistaní rape gangs in UK is a cultural issue. Unless this is addressed it will never stop.

[SK @SteCK1878]

@realMaalouf Why would they change?

[Mark Pol @markpol]

Tax revolts are starting in Spain.

[Alt Right España 𝕏 @AltRightEspan]

Los concejales socialistas y del BNG, obligados por los vecinos a encerrarse durante horas en el ayuntamiento tras aprobar la subida del recibo de la basura en Cangas de Morrazo, Pontevedra.

[Israel News Pulse @israelnewspulse]

Why does Spain’s Prime Minister hate Israel so much?

Spanish satire has the answer.

A recent article revealed that Pedro Sánchez’s hostility toward Israel is just a distraction from his own political scandals — and now, a Spanish satire show is roasting him for it.

This video deserves more attention.

Share it!

[Markus Villig @villigm]

Europe now has 0 companies left in the global top 25.

What needs to happen for that to change by 2030?

[Imtiaz Mahmood @ImtiazMadmood]

Iranian women warn that they see the alliance between communism & Islamism grow in the West, the same coalition that overthrew the Shah & introduced an Islamist regime that has had Iran in a stranglehold for 46 years.

Western university students play with forces they don't understand.

[Mark Pol @markpol]

@EsterMunoz85 ¡Olé! Están rompiendo el contrato social.

¡Es hora de una revuelta fiscal!