AskGrandpa

Seek truth, use facts! Respect and protect the bill of rights. Free speech must survive. Discuss topics for understanding. All questions should be asked.

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Wisdom for all politicians!

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

And they say they are objective? Bring back media integrity!

[Patrick Webb @Patrickwebb]

BREAKING: The three major U.S. broadcast networks, ABC, CBS, and NBC, have yet to report on DNI Tulsi Gabbard’s recent declassification regarding Anthony Fauci’s cover-up of the COVID-19 pandemic.

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

A quote from Holly Peterson of the Wall Street Journal: “As a nation, we need to relearn how to respect the value of an opposing view on the same topic, admit how weird, off-balance and dogmatic we’ve become and have the courage to disagree out loud. “ We must change our attitudes, listen and work to mutual solutions for our problems. @VDHanson @JDVance

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Education should teach one how to
Listen
Question sincerely,
Compare answer to facts, and
Think and draw conclusions.
But we should also learn how to communicate our question, responses and beliefs effectively.

This will separate us from the pseudo intellectuals generated by the colleges. #think

[Thomas Sowell Quotes @ThomasSowell]

“There have always been ignorant people, but they haven't always had college degrees to make them unaware of their ignorance. Some people imagine that they are well informed because they have memorized a whole galaxy of trendy dogmas and fashionable attitudes.”

— Thomas Sowell

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

This would prevent voting by those living off government funding. Seems logical to me! Bring back land ownership requirement for voting. @greggutfeld

[Glenn Beck @glennbeck]

Was it just me, or did Barack Obama seem very passive-aggressive while lecturing us on how the Founders "fell short?" And I love how he threw in that the Founders only let "white men who owned property" vote. Because it proves that he has NO IDEA what he's talking about.

The Founders didn't care about your gender. They cared if you had a stake in the game. If you owned property, you could vote, no matter your gender. Honestly, we should bring that logic back—if you aren't paying taxes, why should you get a vote on how everyone else's money is spent?

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Agree and while there were tight times, in hindsight they were some of the best years for our family. Would not trade it, and the life lessons we learned for anything. As for Miss Warren, she does not appear to value facts and problem solving over gathering power. How else could she ignore, or not see her findings? Unfortunately, we as a country lose.

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

@BskiMike22802 You just hit a grand slam! How many of us started with one income and a 975 square foot home? A side benefit was we were surrounded by people in the same boat and we made life long friends. Going back to this stage with a stay at home parent would be great for society! @VDHanson

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

https://t.co/O8L57yaurE

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

This guy calmly brings logic into an equation.

[Thomas Sowell Quotes @ThomasSowell]

Thomas Sowell explains why today's intellectuals are so different from those of the past.

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

https://t.co/O8L57yaurE

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

In the end, facts always win out! Rhetoric without facts are lies or wishes.

[Bjorn Lomborg @BjornLomborg]

20 years ago, An Inconvenient Truth put climate change at the center of global debate, shaping politics, influencing leaders, and inspiring a generation of activists.

Two decades later, we can assess not just its impact, but its accuracy. Many of the film’s most alarming predictions did not materialize, while many of the policies it inspired have proven costly and ineffective.

The lesson? Panic is a poor guide for public policy. Focusing on innovation, adaptation, and economic development can do far more to help both people and the climate—at a fraction of the cost.

https://t.co/EIJyuNeFU1

https://t.co/PTSyFXF4vt

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

So hospitals own doctors who bill patients insurance companies which are owned by the hospitals. No possible conflicts or collusions with this set-up. But what if the Hospital is a non-profit and the insurance company is for profit? Can the profits be shifted to the Hospital to avoid taxes? @VP @VDHanson @TuckerCarlson @greggutfeld @MariaBartiromo

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Nice statement!

[Pamela_Marie @pam_justpam]

@jeffreytucker One thing is for sure, our own government is far more dangerous than the aliens. Thank God for Trump and his team.

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Puts it all in perspective. I wonder if liberals understand these facts.

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

https://t.co/55re26yO6s

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

I encourage all following me to read @BskiMike22802 excellent post. Worth the time for educational purposes and to help us grow when discussing issues. Resolution does not mean one person wins and one loses, it means after reviewing all the facts we resolve to pursue the following action! Thanks again Mike for moving the world forward toward this goal! @VDHanson

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

https://t.co/tDD9m2AKia

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Fact!

[Michelle Maxwell ™ @MichelleMaxwell]

It is OUR money!!

Thank you Mr Secretary
Concerning Social Security payments, my contributions were made for over 40 years on every salary I received. Those jobs may not have always been the work I wanted to be doing at the time, BUT I always had a job. The Social Security check is now (or soon will be) referred to as a "Federal Benefit Payment?" I'll be part of the one percent to forward this.
I am forwarding it because it touches a nerve in me, and I hope it will in you. Please keep passing it on until everyone in our country has read it. The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a "Federal Benefit Payment." This isn't a benefit. It is our money paid out of our earned income! Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too. It totaled 15% of our income before taxes.
Congress took our money and used it elsewhere. They forgot (oh yes, they knew) that it was OUR money they were taking. They didn't have a referendum to ask us if we wanted to lend the money to them. And they didn't pay interest on the debt they assumed. And recently they've told us that the money won't support us for very much longer. And now, to add insult to injury, they're calling it a "benefit", as if we never worked to earn every penny of it.
Just because they borrowed the money doesn't mean that our investments were a charity!
Let's take a stand. We have earned our right to Social Security and Medicare. Demand that our legislators bring some sense into our government.
Find a way to keep Social Security and Medicare going for the sake of that 92% of our population who need it. Then call it what it is: Our Earned Retirement Income.

Please, for the sake of our country, share this message. It's important!!!

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

@BskiMike22802 once again uses facts and provides receipts to refute a politicians emotional claims of persecution. I would expect better acting from the governor of the state that is home to Hollywood! Cry harder @GavinNewsom

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

MOST CORRUPT PRESIDENT IN HISTORY? LET ME HELP YOU WITH THAT, GOVERNOR.

— THE BACKBONE PROBLEM —

Oh, I genuinely feel for you, Governor. I do. You posted a five-minute video about political persecution while your wife stood beside you looking appropriately aggrieved, and I almost felt something.

But then I remembered something I cannot quite shake.

This is the same man who said Greg Abbott "doesn't have the backbone." That Greg Abbott. The Governor of Texas who has been in a wheelchair since 1984 because a TREE FELL ON HIM AND SEVERED HIS SPINE. The man who lost the use of his legs in a single afternoon and still shows up to work every single day running the second-largest state in the country.

And YOU are going to talk to us about backbone.

Right. Let us work through this carefully. Because — and I say this with the precision of a man who has spent sixteen years teaching teenagers the difference between evidence and assertion — you have made a very large claim, and the receipts are not cooperating with your narrative.

— YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT WEAPONIZING THE DOJ? SIT DOWN. —

You said Trump "directed his Department of Justice to investigate you." And your proof is... the investigation exists. That is the entire argument. He has a DOJ. It is investigating people near you. Therefore: weaponization. Political persecution. Hit list.

Governor, I would like to introduce you to a concept called a standard of evidence. I teach it to teenagers. Some of them grasp it faster than you appear to be doing right now.

But since you raised the topic of DOJ weaponization — let me help you with that. Because I actually have some examples. The kind with documentation.

The Clinton campaign hired Fusion GPS. Fusion GPS hired a British ex-spy named Christopher Steele. Steele compiled a dossier of bombshell allegations that Trump was a Russian asset colluding with the Kremlin. The entire corporate media apparatus ran with it for three years, and the country burned over it.

It was fiction.

Not my word. Steele's OWN PRIMARY SOURCE told the FBI in February 2017 that the information he provided was — I am going to let this one sit for a moment — "bar talk, hearsay, and not reliable."

Bar talk. They ran a presidential-level intelligence operation on BAR TALK. Then the FBI used that dossier to obtain FISA surveillance warrants against Carter Page — an American citizen — four times. They knew by February 2017 that the source had recanted everything. They never told the FISA court. Legal obligation. Ignored. Deliberately.

Declassified documents released by DNI Tulsi Gabbard in July 2025 show that in August 2016, CIA Director John Brennan personally briefed President Obama on intelligence suggesting the CLINTON CAMPAIGN was manufacturing the Russia narrative specifically to frame Trump. The FBI was told. Nothing happened. Crossfire Hurricane rolled on anyway.

THAT is what documented weaponization of federal intelligence agencies against a political opponent actually looks like, you magnificent snollygoster. Not a subpoena for your wife's nonprofit tax filings. An actual coordinated conspiracy between a sitting administration, the intelligence community, and the opposing candidate's campaign to frame an incoming president for crimes they invented wholesale.

Would you like me to continue? Because I have considerably more pages of this, and I am a trained educator with excellent pacing.

— OPERATION ARCTIC FROST: 92 TARGETS. $50 MILLION. ZERO CONVICTIONS. —

Here is a number I want you to sit with. 92.

That is how many Republican organizations Biden's Autopen Department of Justice placed under investigation in Operation Arctic Frost, run by Jack Smith beginning in April 2022. Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley released the whistleblower documentation in September 2025. Documented. Real. Not a tweet.

The target list: the Republican National Committee. The Republican Attorneys General Association. Turning Point USA. The Conservative Partnership Institute. Trump's fundraising PACs. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani. Eight sitting United States senators. People whose collective crime was being Republican and supporting the wrong candidate.

Fifty million taxpayer dollars. Ninety-one felony counts.

Every. Single. Substantive. Charge. Dismissed, dropped, or overturned.

You want to stand at your podium and explain to me again which administration was weaponizing law enforcement against political opponents? Because the man you are accusing was on the receiving end of a $50 million federal targeting operation against 92 Republican organizations that produced exactly zero convictions. And you want me to be outraged about subpoenas for donor records from a nonprofit that paid $3.7 million to your own household?

The audacity is actually impressive. I have encountered some weapons-grade stupid in my career, but this particular vintage has a certain artistic quality to it.

— YOUR CORRUPTION RESUME, HOWEVER —

Now. On to YOUR situation. Because this is where the story gets genuinely interesting.

DANA WILLIAMSON. Your Chief of Staff. Indicted in 2025 on federal fraud charges. Pleaded GUILTY in 2026. Your hire. Your trust. Your administration. Convicted.

What is next — your administration will demonstrate it has never had a senior official convicted of federal fraud...

...wait. I was just informed that already happened.

There is more.

Your wife's nonprofit, The Representation Project, has been paying Jennifer Siebel Newsom approximately $150,000 per year in personal salary, PLUS another $150,000 annually to her for-profit production company for "writer, director, and producer" services. Over thirteen years. That works out to roughly $3.7 MILLION flowing from a tax-exempt nonprofit directly into your household — a nonprofit that somehow keeps running deficits despite receiving millions in donations. Fascinating business model.

The donors funding all of this? PG&E. Kaiser Permanente. AT&T. Comcast. The exact companies simultaneously lobbying YOUR desk for favorable regulatory outcomes while writing checks to your wife's organization.

"We have NOTHING to hide."

Governor, I have heard more coherent arguments from a drunk parrot. That is not a defense. That is a challenge. And the IRS 990 filings are already public record.

Here is what makes this genuinely spectacular: these investigations reportedly originated from WHISTLEBLOWER COMPLAINTS filed under BIDEN'S AUTOPEN. Not Trump. Not a MAGA conspiracy. The administration you are currently eulogizing on camera with great theatrical sorrow — that administration opened the inquiries that are now knocking on your door.

Your Chief of Staff committed fraud during an era when Democrats loved you. Your wife's nonprofit raised money from your regulated industries. These investigations predated the current administration.

You are less effective than a solar-powered night light and you want to give us a lecture on corruption.

— $180 TO $280 BILLION: CALIFORNIA'S LASTING LEGACY —

Your state lost an estimated $180 to $280 BILLION to fraud under your governance. Unemployment programs. Medi-Cal. Welfare systems. Federal task forces have been formed. Prosecutors — including from eras before this administration — are working through it. And before you reach for the Trump deflection, these investigations stem largely from local whistleblowers operating inside your own government.

Your state has the highest gas prices in the continental United States. Your homeless population GREW by 31.6% since you took office while the national rate DECLINED 10%. California hosts approximately ONE THIRD of the country's entire homeless population while representing only 12% of the U.S. population. Your budget deficit hit $12 BILLION in spring 2025. Two major refineries are closing, with analysts warning prices could reach $8 per gallon.

And now you are standing at a podium telling the country that YOU are the one being persecuted.

You campaign like a rockstar and govern like a participation trophy that got left out in the sun.

— THE MOST CORRUPT PRESIDENT IN HISTORY. LET US LOOK AT THAT CLAIM. —

You called Trump "simply the most corrupt President in American history." That is a remarkable assertion. As someone who has spent a career explaining to teenagers that an assertion without evidence is just a loud opinion, allow me to walk you through what documented corruption actually looks like — so you have a useful reference point going forward.

Alvin Bragg — the Manhattan DA who CAMPAIGNED ON A PROMISE to prosecute Trump — spent four years rifling through business records looking for a felony. His own team called it the "zombie case" because the legal theory kept dying and had to be resurrected. He manufactured a felony by stacking expired misdemeanors on an obscure election law provision that had NEVER been previously prosecuted in New York history. The trial judge refused to recuse despite his daughter working for Democratic political consulting firms running anti-Trump ads. The jury was instructed they did NOT need to agree on what the actual underlying crime was.

Bipartisan legal scholars — including commentators who publicly dislike Trump — called it a "house of cards" in real time. That is not MAGA. Those are legal academics uncomfortable with what they were watching in a Manhattan courtroom.

Fani Willis — Fulton County DA — indicted Trump while having hired her ROMANTIC PARTNER to run the prosecution at $654,000 over two years. He used that money for vacations. She testified she paid him back in cash. The judge found her testimony not credible. She was sanctioned. She was removed from the case. Her own county could not produce valid chain-of-custody records for the 2020 election ballots her prosecution was supposedly protecting the integrity of.

Three federal judges issued sweeping nationwide injunctions against the elected president while sitting on the boards of, or personally connected to, organizations that were plaintiffs or financial beneficiaries of those same rulings. Articles of impeachment filed against all three, separately, by different members of Congress. Conflicts documented and specific.

The FBI had Hunter Biden's laptop — authenticated — in December 2019. They sat on it for nearly a year. Three weeks before the 2020 presidential election, 51 former intelligence officials coordinated with the Biden campaign to publicly call it Russian disinformation. They knew it was real. A subsequent poll found 17% of Biden voters said they would NOT have voted for him had they known the laptop story was accurate.

Now YOU tell ME which president I should be calling the most corrupt in American history. And I am going to need something considerably more substantive than your five-minute video, because I left my crayons at home and I have no interest in helping you color a narrative the actual evidence refuses to support.

— OH, AND ABOUT THOSE EPSTEIN FILES —

Since you raised the transparency banner so dramatically — you did say you have NOTHING to hide — I would be doing a disservice to this conversation if I did not note that your name appears in the Epstein files. Alongside Bill Clinton (referenced over 13,000 times in some document datasets), Al Gore, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, Larry Summers, and a rather extensive collection of Democrats who spent months demanding Epstein transparency before going conspicuously quiet once the documents actually arrived.

I am not saying anything happened, Governor. I am saying that for someone performing "nothing to hide" with this level of theatrical conviction, there are some questions out there that have not received what one would call an enthusiastic and forthcoming response from your party.

Your promises, apparently, have a longer shelf life than your transparency.

— QUINN'S LAW #2. THE MIRROR YOU CANNOT LOOK AT DIRECTLY. —

Jim Quinn's Second Law of Liberalism: "If you want to know what liberals are up to, pay attention to what they accuse conservatives of doing."

You accused Trump of weaponizing the DOJ. Your party ran a $50 million 92-target operation against the entire Republican political apparatus. Your party coordinated with intelligence officials to suppress authenticated criminal evidence involving their own candidate three weeks before a presidential election. Your party fabricated a dossier from bar talk and used it to obtain federal surveillance warrants against American citizens. Your party put a prosecutor who was sleeping with her lead attorney in charge of trying to imprison the opposing presidential candidate.

And now you are at a podium claiming persecution because people are asking questions about your convicted Chief of Staff and your wife's nonprofit donor list.

Quinn's Law #6, while I am here: "Facts are the enemy of liberalism." These facts live in declassified documents, congressional testimony, federal appellate filings, and public IRS 990 records. They have been sitting out in the open the entire time. They just counted on you not going to look.

What is next — you are going to accuse someone of blurring the lines between nonprofit donors and government policy decisions...

...wait. I just re-read the lobbying registration records for PG&E, Kaiser, and AT&T alongside your wife's donor list simultaneously. Funny how that works.

If ignorance is bliss, Governor, you must be the happiest man in Sacramento.

But what do I know — I am only a medically retired Army combat medic, published textbook author, and science teacher who has spent sixteen years explaining to teenagers that you cannot call something a CONCLUSION unless the evidence actually supports the claim. And the evidence, Governor, is not supporting yours.

@JoJoFromJerz @GuntherEagleman @catturd2
#MAGA #Trump

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

So let’s change this now.

[mike bski @BskiMike22802]

No, Senator Gillibrand. Republicans do not want to "cut" your Social Security.

They want to END it.

And before you clutch your pearls — let me explain the difference between cutting a thing and FREEING you from it, because judging by this graphic, that distinction ran right past you like a deer across the interstate.

Here is what you are actually defending.

Take an average American. Started work in 1981. Earned the national average wage every single year of his life. Over 46 years, he and his employer were FORCED to surrender 12.4 percent of every paycheck — roughly $250,000 — into your beloved system. What does he get back? Maybe $2,100 a month, IF he lives long enough to collect it. And when he dies, there is no account with his name on it. No balance. No nest egg. Nothing for his kids. Nothing for his grandkids. The money does not pass down. It evaporates.

Now run that EXACT same money — same dollars, same 46 years — into a Thrift Savings Plan invested in an S&P 500 index fund. The same TSP our military uses. Through the 2008 crash, the 2022 downturn, every ugly year included.

That same worker retires with somewhere north of TWO MILLION DOLLARS.

He could draw more than four times what your check pays him, every single month — and the balance keeps GROWING. And when he dies? His children inherit the rest. Generational wealth. A head start. A family that climbs instead of starting from zero every single generation.

So let us put your two parties side by side, since you were kind enough to bring a map. You brought the map; you just skipped the math, which tracks.

What Democrats leave your kids when you die: $0.

What Republicans — starting with George W. Bush in 2005, when he proposed personal retirement accounts and your party, running on dial-up in a fiber-optic world, shrieked that letting people OWN their own money was "destroying Social Security" — want your kids to inherit: a MILLION dollars and then some.

Read that twice. Bush tried to let working Americans build wealth their families could KEEP. Your side called it an attack on the elderly. Quinn's First Law of Liberalism: liberalism always produces the exact OPPOSITE of its stated intent. You named it "Security." You engineered a machine that guarantees your kids start broke. Mission accomplished.

And here is the part that should make every working family furious. A system that leaves your children NOTHING is not a bug to your party. It is the product. A population with no inherited wealth is a population that needs the next government check, and the one after that, and votes accordingly. The antebellum South understood the value of a permanent dependent class. So does your fundraising team. Different century, same arithmetic.

This is not complicated, Senator. It is grade-school compound interest — which I realize is weapons-grade material in your caucus.

And spare me the lecture from someone who wrote her own pension. You and your colleagues draw a FERS pension on TOP of the Social Security the rest of us are chained to, so forgive me if I do not take retirement advice from a woman who made certain she would never have to live on the thing she is fundraising to "protect."

What is next? You ask me to flip four Senate seats to "protect" the very system quietly looting my grandkids' future... wait. You already did that. That IS the post.

But what do I know. I am only a science teacher who can run a compound-interest calculation without a staffer holding the crayons.

@catturd2 @GuntherEagleman @JoJoFromJerz
#MAGA #Veterans #Trump

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

It is time to eliminate the color bar. Judge all based upon merit. Then we all win.

[terry schappert @terryschappert]

Take a moment to read this - it's from someone I regularly interact with on here. Someone who consistently has funny and thoughtful takes.
Oh, and she's a black woman.

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

Interesting take on the times. Ask @VP

[Mike Netter @nettermike]

This article was written by a 26 yr old college student by the name of Alyssa Ahlgren, who's in grad school for her MBA. What a GREAT perspecitve..👍🏽

My Generation Is Blind to the Prosperity Around Us!
I'm sitting in a small coffee shop near Nokomis (Florida) trying to think of what to write about. I scroll through my newsfeed on my phone looking at the latest headlines of presidential candidates calling for policies to "fix" the so-called injustices of capitalism. I put my phone down and continue to look around.

I see people talking freely, working on their MacBook's, ordering food they get in an instant, seeing cars go by outside, and it dawned on me. We live in the most privileged time in the most prosperous nation and we've become completely blind to it.

Vehicles, food, technology, freedom to associate with whom we choose.These things are so ingrained in our American way of life we don't give them a second thought.

We are so well off here in the United States that our poverty line begins 31 times above the global average. Thirty One Times!!!

Virtually no one in the United States is considered poor by global standards. Yet, in a time where we can order a product off Amazon with one click and have it at our doorstep the next day, we are unappreciative, unsatisfied, and ungrateful. ??

Our unappreciation is evident as the popularity of socialist policies among my generation continues to grow. Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently said to Newsweek talking about the millennial generation, "An entire generation, which is now becoming one of the largest electorates in America, came of age and never saw American prosperity."

Never saw American prosperity! Let that sink in.

When I first read that statement, I thought to myself, that was quite literally the most entitled and factually illiterate thing I've ever heard in my 26 years on this earth. Many young people agree with her, which is entirely misguided.

My generation is being indoctrinated by a mainstream narrative to actually believe we have never seen prosperity. I know this first hand, I went to college, let's just say I didn't have the popular opinion, but I digress.

Why then, with all of the overwhelming evidence around us, evidence that I can even see sitting at a coffee shop, do we not view this as prosperity? We have people who are dying to get into our country.

People around the world destitute and truly impoverished. Yet, we have a young generation convinced they've never seen prosperity, and as a result, we elect some politicians who are dead set on taking steps towards abolishing capitalism.

Why? The answer is this,?? my generation has only seen prosperity. We have no contrast. We didn't live in the great depression, or live through two world wars, the Korean War, The Vietnam War or we didn't see the rise and fall of socialism and communism.

We don't know what it's like to live without the internet, without cars, without smartphones. We don't have a lack of prosperity problem. We have an entitlement problem, an ungratefulness problem, and it's spreading like a plague."

[AskGrandpa @RLenio]

So how do we change this?

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Tout le monde pense que le monde libre a gagné en 1989, à la chute du mur de Berlin.

C'est faux.

Et c'est exactement pour ça que le monde est aujourd'hui en feu.

Ce qui est tombé le 9 novembre 1989, c'est un appareil.

Une économie planifiée, un empire militaire, un mur de béton. Ce qui n'est pas tombé, c'est l'idée. L'idée que le monde se divise en oppresseurs et en opprimés. L'idée qu'il existe une égalité finale à atteindre, par tous les moyens. L'idée que tout ce qui existe (la famille, la nation, le mérite, l'héritage) est une structure de domination à abattre.

Cette idée-là n'était plus dans le bâtiment quand le bâtiment s'est effondré.

Il faut reprendre la chronologie, parce que tout est dans la chronologie :

Le communisme économique avait un défaut fatal : il était réfutable. Il promettait l'abondance, il produisait des famines. Il promettait l'émancipation, il produisait des barbelés. Budapest 1956, Prague 1968, L'Archipel du Goulag publié à Paris en 1973, les boat people de 1979 : à chaque décennie, le réel envoyait sa réfutation. Les boat people étaient une réfutation flottante, visible depuis les plages.

Alors l'idéologie a fait ce que fait tout organisme menacé : elle a muté.

La mutation a un nom, et j'en ai raconté la généalogie ici : la French Theory.

Foucault a déplacé la guerre du terrain des faits, où le communisme perdait à chaque fois, vers le terrain du savoir lui-même.

S'il n'y a pas de vérité, s'il n'y a que des rapports de pouvoir déguisés en savoir, alors plus aucune famine, plus aucun mur, plus aucun goulag ne peut réfuter quoi que ce soit.

La French Theory n'a pas enterré le marxisme.

Elle l'a rendu irréfutable.

Et la mutation a des dates. Toutes antérieures à 1989.

1934 : l'École de Francfort, chassée d'Allemagne, s'installe à Columbia. La critique de l'économie devient critique de la culture.

1964-1965 : Marcuse, exilé allemand devenu professeur américain, remplace le prolétariat défaillant par un nouveau sujet révolutionnaire (les minorités, les étudiants, les marginaux) et écrit noir sur blanc que la tolérance doit être accordée aux mouvements de gauche et refusée à ceux de droite.

Octobre 1966 : le débarquement a une date précise. Université Johns Hopkins, Baltimore. Derrida, Barthes, Lacan présentent la pensée française aux campus américains.

1967 : Rudi Dutschke lance le mot d'ordre, la longue marche à travers les institutions.

1968 : les révolutions de rue échouent partout.

Qu'importe. La révolution ne passera plus par la rue, elle passera par la salle de classe.

1975-1985 : Yale, Berkeley, Columbia absorbent la théorie, qui devient le système d'exploitation des humanités.

1987 : Allan Bloom publie The Closing of the American Mind pour donner l'alerte. Un million d'exemplaires vendus.

L'université le traite de réactionnaire et passe à autre chose.

L'Amérique avait son Aron, elle en a fait la même chose que nous du nôtre.

Puis arrive le 9 novembre 1989.

Le Mur tombe. L'Occident célèbre. Fukuyama avait déclaré la fin de l'Histoire dès l'été, avant même la chute. On démantèle les missiles, on encaisse les dividendes de la paix, on déclare le match terminé.

Nous avons célébré notre victoire sur une adresse vide. L'idéologie avait déménagé vingt ans plus tôt. Nous avons gagné contre les chars et perdu contre les chaires.

Pendant ce temps, l'autre empire communiste faisait la lecture inverse. Pékin avait écrasé Tian'anmen dans le sang cinq mois avant Berlin. Sinistre, mais lucide sur un point : la Chine savait que la guerre était idéologique.

Elle a choisi : abandonner l'économie marxiste, garder le contrôle du récit. L'Occident a fait l'exact opposé : il a gardé le marché et absorbé l'idéologie. Trente-cinq ans plus tard, regardez qui construit des centrales et qui déboulonne ses statues.

Vous voulez la preuve que c'est le même logiciel ? Faites la table de correspondance.

La lutte des classes est devenue la lutte des identités.

Les koulaks sont devenus les privilégiés.

L'autocritique maoïste est devenue le privilege checking. Les commissaires politiques sont devenus les DEI officers.

Le samizdat est devenu le compte shadowbanné.

La nomenklatura a quitté Moscou pour Davos et Bruxelles.

Et le paradis ne s'appelle plus la société sans classes : il s'appelle l'équité, l'égalité des résultats.

Exactement ce que je décrivais ici il y a quelques semaines.

On me dira : il n'y a pas de Goulag.

C'est vrai. C'est même tout le génie de la version 2.0.

Le communisme dur devait briser les corps parce qu'il ne tenait pas les esprits.

Le communisme mou tient les esprits : il lui suffit de briser les carrières.

Pas de camps, des services RH.
Pas de procès de Moscou, des excuses publiques.
Pas de Sibérie, la mort sociale.
Demandez aux émigrés du bloc de l'Est installés en Occident ce qu'ils ressentent en traversant une université américaine en 2026.
Ils reconnaissent l'odeur.

Et voilà pourquoi le monde est en feu.

Une civilisation a passé trente-cinq ans à enseigner à ses propres enfants qu'elle était le problème. Résultat : elle ne sait plus défendre ses frontières, transmettre son héritage, ni même nommer ses ennemis.

Quand la présidente de Harvard, devant le Congrès, répond que condamner un appel au génocide « dépend du contexte », vous voyez le logiciel tourner en production.

Et les prédateurs du dehors lisent cette faiblesse comme un livre ouvert : Moscou teste, Pékin patiente, l'islamisme avance dans les rues de nos capitales.

Le feu extérieur n'est que la conséquence du désarmement intérieur. On ne brûle bien que les maisons qui se sont vidées de leurs défenseurs.

Le Mur n'est pas tombé. Il s'est déplacé. Il ne sépare plus l'Est de l'Ouest : il passe désormais à l'intérieur de chaque institution occidentale, entre ceux qui construisent et ceux qui déconstruisent.

La première guerre froide s'est gagnée avec des missiles et du PIB. La seconde se gagnera avec des écoles, des médias libres et des modèles d'IA. Celui qui écrit les valeurs dans les machines écrira le prochain 1989.

Cette fois, ne nous trompons pas de victoire. Au travail.