Saudi is now on the verge of a devastating collapse.
And this will most likely trigger a global famine.
The Houthis have conquered Mocha, Dhubab and Hisn Murad.
All the nearby islands are gone too.
The entire Yemeni coastline is under their control.
Now the East-West pipeline has been completely destroyed.
This means Saudi can no longer export 90% of their oil.
They can't export their phosphate or urea either.
Amonia. Sulfur. Methanol. Petrochemicals.
There's absolutely no way of exporting any of them.
This is going to cut global food production in half.
India, Brazil, Europe, America, Pakistan and several countries will most likely end up facing severe food shortages.
The Strait of Hormuz is shut down as well.
Saudi's leaders made multiple requests to Trump to bomb Yemen.
Trump rejected all of them.
Saudi is now in talks with Pakistan to join forces and bomb several key infrastructure sites in Yemen.
Because,
Saudi's economy is in total shambles.
They are desperately trying to secure a $72 billion loan from the World Bank now.
Thousands of Saudi forces have started surrendering to Yemen too.
Multiple energy sites in Abha, Najran, Jazan and Khamis Mushait have been completely destroyed.
Saudi Aramco is selling stakes in pipelines, sulfur facilities and terminals to pay dividends.
That's why Saudi is becoming increasingly desperate for a large scale attack on Yemen to stop the Houthis.
If Saudi collapses, millions of families around the world will starve.
This is turning into a humanitarian apocalypse.
Most updated version I have of this chart: last 18,000 years of geomagnetic strength. Clearly visible (from left to right) is the Younger Dryas low, Noah event low (7 ka min), and the modern decline.
Chart two shows the modern decline itself and the free-fall we have been in for the past couple hundred years. We are on the doorstep of rapid climatic changes not seen in thousands of years
Official “poverty” in America is not what most people think it is.
Thomas Sowell points out that what Washington defines as poverty would be considered upper-middle class in Mexico. Most people in that category have microwave ovens, central air conditioning, and at least one car — many have two. The average person classified as poor in the US has more living space than the average European.
This is not poverty by any historical standard.
The real catastrophe is not material want. It’s the breakdown of behavior, the explosion of crime, and the loss of basic safety that came with the same non-judgmental mindset that built the modern welfare state.
Sowell grew up in Harlem with no television, no car, and almost no books in the house — yet he could walk out at midnight to buy a newspaper without fear. Today that would be unthinkable.
Poverty in America is no longer mainly about what people lack. It’s about the squalor of behavior that policy helped create.
The real issue is not whether inequality exists. It is whether government should be given the power to engineer results.
Sowell argues that once the state starts assigning status to groups, freedom shrinks for everyone. The process itself is the danger, regardless of the noble intentions behind it.
He rejects the claim that Black people demanded equality of results through quotas. The data, he says, shows otherwise. What is presented as “the black position” is often just the position of certain intellectuals and activists speaking on their behalf.
Freedom to achieve unequal outcomes has historically done more for the poor than government programs that try to assign them a place.
Stephen Kotkin explains the real reason Marxism keeps attracting intellectuals and young people, even after the body count.
It is not because the theory works. It is because it offers something far more seductive: total, rapid transformation and a special role for the intellectual class.
In a market system, ordinary people make their own decisions. Under Marxism-Leninism, the intellectuals get to make the decisions for everyone. They become the engineers of society. Workers and peasants are treated as people with “false consciousness” who need to be led.
The ideology flatters the people who believe they are smarter than the rest of society. That is why the blood does not put them off. The power is worth the cost.
Reminder: the BBC, which endlessly accuses its ideological opponents of spreading ‘misinformation’, gave Jason Arday repeated and major slots on their headline shows, editorial roles, interviews and vast amounts of free fawning publicity. Meanwhile BBC Verify didn’t fact check a single one of his claims at any point.
All it took to collapse an entire sect of gender ideology was two alpha males declaring they identify as women and entering the WNBA draft.
I’m going to show you the genius of what they just did.
The two ex-NBA players Enes Kanter Freedom and Royce White didn’t argue against the absurd premise that gender is fluid. That’s a losing play.
The better play is to enter the illusion and destroy it by taking the illusion to the logical extreme. So that’s exactly what they did.
They embraced the premise that gender is fluid and took it to the logical extreme by declaring for the WNBA draft. Now they are forcing liberals to face the absurdity of their own ideology.
Gender ideology’s core claim is that sex is irrelevant and identity is sovereign. “Trans women are women.” Self-ID is enough.
Now the WNBA, which is in many ways a major liberal institution, faces a big dilemma. They have to either:
A: Allow the two to enter the WNBA draft. Admit “woman” is just a feeling (This is absurd and destroys the product).
or
B: Draw a line and say they don’t qualify. That concedes self-ID is not enough and biology matters. This would be a public abandonment of the liberal doctrine.
Either path burns the ideology to the ground, which is hilarious.
Take notes everyone. Two dudes literally just made one of the greatest persuasion plays of the decade.
Here's something truly funny in the darkest possible manner.
The "unflattering" traits listed as characteristic of white culture—even white supremacy culture—by institutions such as the Smithsonian share one fundamental psychological feature in common:
They are all indications of—are you ready for it—the Big Five trait conscientiousness.
Conscientiousness is the best known personality predictor of life success after general cognitive ability (otherwise known as intelligence).
So this means that the idiot leftists who developed and promoted such material proclaim their antiracism by insisting that the very trait most associated with productivity, reliability, diligence, and success is a flaw, unique to white people.
Hard work is key to success.
Work before play.
Delayed gratification.
Future orientation.
Planning.
Punctuality.
Self-reliance.
Respect for authority.
Pure conscientiousness.
"Yo--those n-words shore are lazee..."
Sincerely,
The Democratic Socialists of America
You can't make this stuff up.
In truth, by the way, racial differences in the major personality traits are negligible.
Argentina’s behavioral crisis in the World Cup final has brought to light traits many of us in Latin America have internalized and that we need to come to terms with.
In many countries, emotional self-control and the ability to admit mistakes are seen as virtues. A behavioral problem in parts of Latin America is that there are social circles where the opposite is often celebrated.
This is the idea that someone who remains in control of their emotions is a coward or, depending on the situation, a traitor.
If someone offends you, your family, your team, the reaction that is celebrated in these circles is not restraint but flipping the table. The more berserk you go, the more you show that you care. That is a harmful value to hold, and also, one that many of us once shared. I certainly had it internalized when I left Chile 20+ years ago. In fact, I’ve spent much of my adult life trying to unlearn what I grew up believing was the socially acceptable behavior.
The second trait is an unwillingness to admit mistakes. You can always find an excuse, move the goalposts, or, once again, start a fight instead of publicly accepting that you’ve made a mistake. Admitting fault is a sign of weakness. Defending a losing position is a symbol of courage or, in sports, a test of loyalty.
Together, these two traits are behavioral dynamite. People explode because they cannot admit fault, and double down. Instead of learning from their mistakes, they become prisoners of them.
I grew up watching football with my father. When I was 10 or so, I was learning what was right and wrong from the way he interpreted the game. This included behavior both on and off the field. Only later in life did I realize that every penalty he called for, or contested, had little to do with the play itself. Whether a call was fair depended entirely on which team benefited. He was happy if his team received a nonexistent penalty or an opposing player got an undeserved red card.
These traits are among the things that pushed me away from the continent. They are certainly not exclusive to Latin America or the Southern Cone. I’ve encountered them in people all over the world. In an important sense, these are behaviors that all of us exhibit as children. What strikes me as unusual from the place I am from is having been part of social circles where these behaviors were not seen as flaws of character but as virtues to be admired, celebrated, and enforced.
These excessive forms of pride are not conducive to learning. They make it psychologically difficult to update one’s beliefs, accept responsibility, or improve. Although they become particularly visible in sports, they are by no means confined to them.
Something I am proud to have learned is to apologize quickly and often. Not because it is too difficult, but because it was like learning a new language at old age. That doesn’t mean becoming a pushover. But I’ve learned that a man who never apologizes cannot be a man of integrity, because we all make mistakes.
Argentina’s behavior on and off the field during the World Cup final was, to me, a particularly blatant expression of values that many people continue to defend. In some circles, these attitudes have become intertwined with ideas of national identity and loyalty. Yet they are shackles that ultimately limit our development, not because they make us lose a football match, but because they make it harder for us to learn from our mistakes.
The right thing to do now is the least likely: offer an honest apology. If my interpretation is even partially correct, we are more likely to see the opposite. Never back down. Never apologize. Never control your emotions. There is such a thing as having the wrong values. I hope that one day we can do better.
Jay Dyer on Tucker: Global elites want a “Global Brain” Golem — and transhumanism is their false god.
JAY DYER:
“One of the main lies is that all of this is secular… it’s all science-based, it’s materialism.
There’s a consistent pattern among the elite: humanity is overpopulated, we must have global governance, a United world religion, full spectrum dominance.
Jacques Attali… we’re going to have a global brain — the golem. You’ll lose your individuality when you’re linked into it.
At the spearhead of all of this is the transhumanists. Julian Huxley coined the term.
Huxley said any theology or ideology that allows significant individuality has to be erased so we can create the blob… the big amorphous blob.
Mass migration to eliminate distinctions.
They worship the idea of evolution… a controllable priest class steering us toward the singularity, the omega point.
That’s their religious eschatology. The Christian one is God returns. Theirs is: I become God.
”This is the real endgame they’ve been pushing for decades.
If you are not willing to kill or die for your own most treasured values, you should think carefully before welcoming in migrants who would do both for theirs.
The UK Treasury quietly scrapped its numeracy test because basic math was a "hurdle" for minority candidates.
Let that sink in.
The people in charge of the nation’s money, debt, taxes, and economic policy decided that competence in numbers was problematic.
This isn’t diversity.
This is institutional self-sabotage.
I went to the Morocco vs. Haiti game in Atlanta yesterday. One thing immediately caught my attention.
Right after scanning your ticket at the entrance to Mercedes-Benz Stadium, there were groups of people handing out "Muslim Hospitality" pamphlets. They showed where to pray and which food was halal. Then, just a few steps inside, there was a large sign with the same information.
It didn't feel like simple visitor assistance. It felt like the promotion of a religion.
The stadium doesn't hand every fan a printed map, stadium rules, or event information, those are all available online. Yet for Islam, there were printed pamphlets being handed to everyone and an entire team dedicated to distributing them.
No other religion had volunteers handing out pamphlets at the entrance. There were no Christian hospitality teams, no Jewish hospitality teams, no Hindu or Buddhist pamphlets, only Islam.
This is a soccer match, not a religious event. If someone wants to pray, there are churches, synagogues, temples, and mosques for that.
The irony is even greater considering that, according to many Islamic scholars, professional soccer itself is considered haram, and FIFA generates revenue from sponsors such as Budweiser. Yet instead of addressing that contradiction, there is an organized effort to promote Islamic practices inside the stadium. @FIFAWorldCup@FIFAcom