At Padre's
Politics • Spirituality/Belief • Culture
Cincinnati - Crickets in the news
July 28, 2025
View in browser
mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsubstackcdn.com%2Fimage%2Ffetch%2F%24s_%2169GR%21%2Cw_1100%2Cc_limit%2Cf_auto%2Cq_auto%3Agood%2Cfl_progressive%3Asteep%2Fhttps%253A%252F%252Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%252Fpublic%252Fimages%252F4e41ba02-3526-4a61-9f28-e5a1b5243898_1860x380.png&t=1753701872&ymreqid=d41d8cd9-8f00-b204-1ccb-760012011000&sig=pXvgDPahown2fd0DabcRNw--~D

Cincinnati And Our Civilization's Future

At What Point Will We Take This Kind Of Thing Seriously? Before It's Too Late?

Jul 28
 
 
Paid
mail?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsubstackcdn.com%2Fimage%2Ffetch%2F%24s_%21dnYe%21%2Cf_auto%2Cq_auto%3Agood%2Cfl_progressive%3Asteep%2Fhttps%253A%252F%252Fbucketeer-e05bbc84-baa3-437e-9518-adb32be77984.s3.amazonaws.com%252Fpublic%252Fimages%252F762a4764-c24d-4d8a-87f0-ff761d14f527_1802x2355.jpeg&t=1753701872&ymreqid=d41d8cd9-8f00-b204-1ccb-760012011000&sig=tviOE46ZPQvK90SKYeLo5A--~D
 
 
 
 
 
READ IN APP
 
  
Cincinnati, last weekend, knocked out by a black man’s punch

Heavy stuff today. Back in Budapest after a week in Transylvania, and I had some depressing conversations with some fellow foreigners at the end. I almost didn’t want to bring this up, because it’s just so awful to contemplate. But to turn away is morally irresponsible, and eventually we’re going to have to deal with it all anyway. These are the stories of our times. If you want to skip today, no harm, no foul. I feel like I’m being dragged to conclusions that I find hateful, but increasingly unavoidable.

I’m going to begin with a story I became aware of this weekend. But it touches exactly on the topic of an intense conversation with a young American conservative I met at the festival down there — a Christian who seemed to be as concerned about this stuff as I was, though less visibly shocked, because he’s been living in it.

The photo above is of a white woman in Cincinnati, the hometown of J.D. Vance when he’s not in Washington. On Friday night, she and a white male companion were assaulted by a mob of blacks at the Cincinnati Jazz Festival. Here is a link to a video of the assault, in which both black men and women participated in the pile-on. The white woman prone on the ground is shown on the video being punched in the face by a black man. The reason we have this video is a black onlooker (you can tell by his off-camera accent) filmed it with pleasure. He didn’t try to help. He just observed.

It went viral over the weekend online. The Cincy police chief condemned the attack on Saturday. Have you heard about this racist assault anywhere but online? Probably not.

  

The black conservative media personality Jason Whitlock linked to a video of one of the attacks, and said:

When you're at church today or in your secret place, say a prayer for this man and his wife. This behavior and lack of national outrage are unsustainable. It's unsustainable. The anti-white bigotry at the root of this behavior must be addressed. Sickening.

God bless Jason Whitlock! But of course our national media prefer us not to notice. Noticing is bad. If a white mob had done this to a black couple, it would still be making headlines, and our media would have been calling for a National Conversation. We all know this. We all know that we live under a double standard.

Speaking of, did you hear back in 2020, the Year of St. Floyd, about the black folks in Georgia who bought land to create a blacks-only enclave, to be safe from whites? CNN was among the many media orgs that covered it:

  

From the story:

The unrest that took hold of the country earlier this year after the killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor at the hands of police, and closer to home, the shooting death of Ahmaud Arbery while jogging outside Brunswick, Georgia, prompted the women to search for a new community, one they could start themselves.

“Watching our people protesting in the streets, while it is important, and I want people to stay out in the streets, bringing attention to the injustices of Black people. We needed to create a space and a place where we could be a village, again, a tribe, again,” Scott said.

Personally, I don’t care if black folks want to do that. It’s a free country, and as long as people who aren’t black are not forbidden by law from settling there, I’ll defend this kind of thing in principle. People wanting to live around people like themselves is natural. It’s why political scientist Robert Putnam found, to his great distress as a liberal, that the more diverse a community is, the less social trust there is. It has to do with human nature, and, if you like, evolution. We are hard-wired to be more trusting when our neighbors are like us. It’s not just a race thing. If I were Muslim, I would be more at ease living in a Muslim neighborhood than in one in which I was a religious minority (and that’s why I am not bothered by news of Muslims in Texas doing this, as long as there is no evidence of criminal activity, e.g., terrorism, going on there). Heck, I would feel more at ease living in a middle-class neighborhood in which I, as a white man, was a minority, than I would living in an all-white neighborhood that was poor and violent. Be honest: so would you.

The point I’m making here is that when blacks sought to build a racially exclusive enclave, it was a cause of celebration in the media.

Now, though, a group of whites who have established a whites-only community in Arkansas have become the target of a state AG investigation. Story here, from MSNBC. Quote:

Group co-founder Eric Orwoll recently garnered national attention for the segregated community he helped launch on roughly 150 acres in northeast Arkansas. And he garnered more attention this week after revealing that his group might launch a community in Springfield, Missouri, with his self-expressed motive basically amounting to racist, anti-diversity hysteria.

“Whites should have the ability to live among their own people if that’s what they want to do, and mass immigration is quickly making that nearly impossible in many Western nations,” Orwoll told KOLR-TV, the CBS affiliate in Springfield. “If individuals decide to live in multiracial communities, then they should be allowed to do so, but we don’t want racial forced on us in every aspect of life.”

Now, if these people are white supremacists, then I think they are wicked, and should repent of their race hatred. And if there is any potential criminal activity going on there, hell yeah the state should investigate. These do not sound like the kind of people I would want to live around.

But tell me, what is the philosophical difference between black folks wanting to build a private community to live around other black folks, for the sake of their own safety and comfort, and whites doing the same? This tweet:

  

I don’t know how much you American readers see of what’s going on in the UK (probably not much, unless you read X), but British authorities are actually harassing white English people for expressing pride in being English, no matter how innocent (e.g., flying the St. George’s flag, the standard of the English nation). Here’s a tweet from a patriotic British Sikh who holds the St. George flag high outside a migrant hotel, to stand up for England, which he believes is being betrayed by UK authorities letting in so many migrants. Britain is a sick, sick society, led by elites who hate it.

Why do I bring all this up today? Because at the festival, I found myself in conversation with a fellow American visitor, a conservative in his early thirties. I asked him if he followed the work of David Betz, the UK war studies professor who has been sounding the alarm all year over the mounting prospects for civil war in the West. I asked him if he had seen the latest interview Betz did with Harrison Pitt of the European ConservativeHe had not, but he said he agrees with the things I quoted Betz as saying. In this segment of the interview, Betz points out that the older elites — even Nigel Farage who (falsely, in Betz’s view) appears to be a counter-elitist — really don’t understand what’s going on at “the thwarted younger elite level, who have become effectively anti-status quo.”

Betz explains that the young feel that the things they have a right to expect from society are being denied to them. This is called the “expectation gap,” and the literature of civil war and unrest identifies this as key to revolutions and suchlike. (This is true; revolutionaries tend not to come from the poor, but from elites who are sick of the expectation gap. For example, the Bolshevik revolutionary leaders were not from the poor, but from educated classes. The poor were passive supporters.)

And in this clip, Betz observes that the mainstream conservative political and media figures find themselves tongue-tied when it comes to standing up for their own people. He says he doesn’t know them personally, but he suspects that this has to do with their fear of losing status within the system by appearing to be “nativist”. This, says Betz, is why the young don’t listen to them. They find them to be cowardly about facing the world as it is in Britain today, and speaking truth, and having “the conversations we need to have.”

Talking about the UK situation, Betz says that the country’s elites have created this situation over the years. Now both sides “want to fight.” Listening to this, I thought about how the Democratic Party in the US, and the liberal elites (media, academic, corporate), have for a very long time driven racial and ethnic resentment, and have depended (successfully!) on the deep reticence of whites, outside of the social fringes, to object. That has begun to change with Trump — who, let’s be clear, does not talk in parallel terms about privileging whites as the way the Left has talked about privileging non-whites, but rather speaks of a return to basic fairness. This, I think, is why he draws support from a significant number of non-whites.

(Before I get to my main point, I want to tell you that Betz says that if things kick off in the UK, the British Army is too small to quell the violence — and that the loyalty of the army to the state’s orders to suppress Britons fighting a system they find unjust is very much at issue. This is extraordinary! Betz says that the history of these conflicts show that if an army loses faith that the civilian elites are “competent” and trustworthy, then they are likely to fail to defend that elite and the order it has created.)

So, what does this have to do with the conversation I had with the young American? He told me that my generation of conservatives (Gen X), the Boomers, and many Millennials are mostly or even entirely out of touch with what’s actually happening among the young. He told me that white right-wing educated people are giving up entirely on the idea that we can rescue the old classically liberal order. What he was talking about is a recovery of the old MLK “content of your character” standard, on which I was raise, and in which I still believe. His argument — and to be clear, I don’t know to what extent this young man was describing the world, and to what extent he’s endorsing it — is that they no longer believe it works, or that it can work anymore.

I told him that in the 1970s, I was of a generation of Americans acculturated to the MLK standard — and that I celebrate that, in particular because I come from a part of America where white supremacy reigned. White supremacy is un-American, and certainly un-Christian. King’s victory was a great moral victory for the entire nation. But starting around the 1990s, the Left began to give up on King’s vision, despite lying about it. The Left, which controls and has controlled all the cultural institutions, has spent almost a generation dismantling loyalty to King’s classically liberal, deeply Christian principles, and instead embracing frankly wicked racialist rhetoric that cannot do anything but divide and create racial hatred. And the establishment Right has been largely ineffective in resisting it — probably, as Betz says of the UK Right, because they are too afraid of losing status within the establishment by opening themselves to being called bigots. (Same thing on LGBT issues, by the way.)

But here’s the painful thing for me, that I realized sharply in this discussion: I too have lost faith in the King vision — not in principle, but as an ideal that America is capable of living by. And it’s not merely a matter of elite rhetoric. It has more to do with crime and culture. Let me explain.

I told the young man that right-minded people of the Boomer generation, and mine, generally believed that the reason for black poverty and crime was chiefly racist laws. Remove those laws, and things would normalize for black Americans. We have had fifty years to test this theory. The results are mostly negative — I say “mostly” because there has developed a robust black middle class. But far too many American blacks live in a separate America — and I think at this point, it is primarily a matter of deep culture.

In the US, blacks are 13 percent of the overall population. Yet from year to year, they account for just over half of the arrests for murder; the numbers are similarly disproportionate for other violent crimes. You can find out more on the FBI’s crime data site. For example, here’s robbery for 2023:

  

Again, blacks are only 13 percent of the population, and whites almost 60 percent. Yet blacks, though almost five times fewer in number than whites, commit twice the robberies. Why?

Here are the FBI numbers for aggravated assault:

  

Again, the black 13 percent of the population commits roughly the same number of aggravated assaults as the white 60 percent. Why?

These are not new questions, obviously, though they have become a lot more “real” with the spread of smartphone cameras and the Internet. We can see every day things like blacks shoplifting; this new one shows a little black kid being caught shoplifting, and when the clerk asks the kid’s mother to bring him back to pay for the thing he’s walking out with, she gets hostile and profane. Most white people avoid confrontation. You never know when it might get violent. They just endure it.

Yeah, I know: the algorithm promotes this kind of thing. But you know, there’s a reason now you can’t go to the drugstore in many parts of the US and buy things like razors without having to ask a clerk to unlock the bin. And, as I’ve mentioned here recently, back in 2012, when naive me asked a supermarket chain executive how he could justify the “food deserts” in poor black neighborhoods, he told me that the shoplifting is so bad in those places that they can’t afford to keep supermarkets (a low-margin business) open there.

To be clear, I don’t think this is a matter of “black skin makes you a criminal”. You want to see a white Appalachian family whose familial culture is criminal and self-destructive? I present to you the fascinating documentary about the White family (seriously) of West Virginia, who are known to their county as violent white trash — and the documentary shows why.

I think this is a matter of a defective culture. But — and this is the point — I am weary of trying to figure this out. I just want to live in peace. And I’m tired of being gaslit about this stuff by our media and politicians. Well, the young conservative festivalgoer I met said that in his generation, conservatives are openly embracing racist-tribalist views. They unashamedly — at least among themselves — talk of avoiding black people, because they don’t want the hassle of risking crime and all the rest. They look at older folks like me, with our MLK ideals (as attenuated as mine may be by this point), and consider us suckers. His discourse reminded me of the conversation I had in New York City earlier this year with a young woman — I’d say late twenties — who told me she had been a super-woke activist, until she was violently assaulted by a black man who lived in the projects near her University of Chicago dorm. She said that trauma drove her briefly into the racist far right, until she recovered her moral balance.

The point she was making to me was that many in her generation have lost the willingness to defer to the kinds of ideals my generation, and the Boomers, embraced. That’s what the festivalgoer I talked with was saying too, and trying to get me to see. And you know, I think a lot of it is the “expectations gap” that David Betz is talking about. They have grown up in a culture in which they cannot expect to achieve the level of material success of their parents’ generation. This is because of a variety of reasons, including structural-economic and technological, but it is what it is. And in this era of diminished expectations, they are sick of being told that they have to accept less solely because of their race or sex, because justice requires it.

Mind you, this was a friendly conversation. My interlocutor was calmly trying to tell me why his generation of educated people on the Right — tomorrow’s elites — is a lot more radical than my generation can comprehend, and why. He told me that the “civil war” thesis is not even controversial among his generation. They expect it, in America. Later, at the airport in Tirgu Mares, I ran into a young French scholar who had also been at the festival. I asked him about whether he expected civil war, in the Betz sense, in France. He didn’t flinch: “Yes,” he said, “and it might be better to get this over with sooner rather than later.”

Waiting for the delayed flight, I reflected, as I often do, on historian Edward Watts’s great book The Final Pagan Generation. As you might recall, it’s a book about pagan elites in fourth-century Rome, and how so few of them actually understood what was happening around them, with the Christian revolution. Based on their writings, Watts demonstrates that they were aware that these people called Christians had come into existence, and were growing in numbers within the Empire, but they had no real awareness that the Empire was moving to Christianity. As elites, they lived in a social bubble. They thought that because Rome had always been pagan, it always would be. Were the temples not open? Were we not still celebrating the pagan festivals?

They did not see it coming. But, Watts points out, their young did. The children of the Roman pagan elites — a generation that came of age in the 360s and 370s — were not willing to embrace their parents’ values. And they understood — as the pagan elite faithful of their generation also understood — that the peace could not hold. There was going to be a fight. David Betz, quoting that vile NSFW Bob Vylan song that caused such a stir at Glastonbury, says that the UK today is divided between those who say “I want my country back” and those who say “shut the f—k up.” So it was, to some degree, between the younger Christians and pagans of Rome in the mid-fourth century. Watts writes:

The fourth century has come to be seen as the age when Christianity eclipsed paganism, and Christian authority structures undermined the traditional institutions of the Roman state. Modern historians have highlighted the rising influence of bishops, the emergence of Christian ascetics, the explosion of pagan-Christian conflict, and the destruction of temples. This is one fourth-century story, but it is neither the story that the final pagan generation would have told nor the one that later generations told about them. Their fourth century was the age of storehouses full of gold coins, elaborate dinner parties honoring letter carriers, public orations before emperors, and ceremonies commemorating officeholders. These things occurred in cities filled with thousands of temples, watched over by myriads of divine images, and perfumed by the smells of millions of sacrifices. This fourth century was real…

I think that the 21st century of comfortable older conservatives and liberals like me is equally real. But it is becoming less so. We are headed, to quote the title of Tom Wolfe’s final novel, “back to blood.” As is crystal-clear in the UK, France, and Germany (and no doubt elsewhere in western Europe, but I don’t know as much about those places), the elites of both Left and Right are making it worse. In that Harrison Pitt interview, Betz says the violent clashes are moving toward us at great speed. Again, I remind you that Betz is in no way saying he wants this to happen! He’s a middle-aged family man. But he’s reading the signs of the times in light of what his academic training as a specialist in civil war-type conflicts has taught him, and he’s sounding the alarm.

I haven’t lived in the US for four years, so I’m somewhat out of touch. Anecdotally, I notice that even many of my middle-class white Christian conservative friends, people who genuinely hate racism, have quietly given up. They believe, even if they can’t fully admit it to themselves, that the noble King experiment has failed. It’s not because King’s moral principles were wrong; it’s because American society, for various reasons, has failed them. And, to put a fine point on it, the culture of lower-class black Americans has failed most of all. I told my interlocutor in Romania the story about the old white Christian man I knew back in Baton Rouge, who lived all his life in a neighborhood that had once been working-class white, but switched to black after the white flight of the 1970s and 1980s. He stayed, but finally left in 2020, when it became too dangerous. He told me that his friends were other black folks of his generation (he was in his seventies), and that they were the only ones left there who had any memory of what it was like to have an intact family. That matters!

The late, great Wick Allison, founder and publisher of D Magazine, the city magazine of Dallas, once wrote an essay there (I can’t find it online), talking about how when segregation ended in the city, there was a massive flight of black people out of black neighborhoods — black people who held what we call “middle-class values,” and who wanted to get away from the dysfunctional culture of the black poor. But we don’t talk about that. It complicates the Narrative.

Sir Kenneth Clark, author of the 1970s bestseller Civilisation, once said, “It is lack of confidence, more than anything else, that kills a civilisation.” This is where we are today. Do you have confidence in our civilization today? I don’t. Here in Europe, the ruling classes are doing everything they possibly can to suppress native populations from noticing the deleterious changes mass migration are having on their countries. It’s not going to work. I have more hope for the US, because we have the space and (for now) the liberty to move, to get away from the forces of destruction. But doing so implies, inescapably, a loss of faith in the American pluralist experiment.

All I know is that I am tired of pretending that things like that white woman knocked out cold by the punch of a black man on the street of Cincinnati doesn’t really matter, that it’s something we should not notice because that might comfort white racists.

Last point. After I got back to Budapest last night, I went to dinner at a friend’s house. One of the guests was a woman from a continental European country which I won’t name, to protect her identity. She told me two weeks ago, a friend in her home country was at a party held in a restaurant held in a small city there. They pushed the tables aside, and everyone was dancing to Latin music, and having a great time. Suddenly, a Muslim man came into the restaurant, unplugged the sound system, and began ranting at the crowd. He told them they were all “pigs,” and that the day is coming when they would have their throats cut. On and on he went like this. All the white natives stood in silence, afraid of confronting him because he might have a knife, like so many Muslim migrant men do in that country. Finally, one of the white men found the courage to attack the Muslim, and throw him out. The party resumed.

“This kind of thing happens all the time in my country,” the woman said.

The party will resume. Until it doesn’t. Then, the deluge. The Boomers, my generation, and the left-wing activists won’t see it coming. History teaches us that. An older friend told me he once shared a drink in New York with Alexander Kerensky, the exiled Russian social-democratic leader whose government was overthrown by the Bolsheviks. He asked Kerensky why he didn’t just shoot Lenin and that lot. Kerensky replied, “Because we didn’t take them seriously.”

community logo
Join the At Padre's Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
GOTW 15 The co-pilot

Welcome to the Clare, Rich and Alan show - the rest of us are just spectators or victims of their endless groaners.

00:00:41
MOTW 202 - There can be only one - but not always.
00:00:35
April 26, 2026
The Iran Talks That Aren't
00:00:56
It's been a rough year..
It's been a rough year..
November 22, 2024
Voltaire's birthday 11-21-1694 - A brief essay by Steve Weidenkopf

Today marks the three hundred and thirtieth birthday of the Frenchman François-Marie Arouet, better known by his nom de plume, Voltaire (1694-1778).

Born into a bourgeois family during the reign of Louis XIV, the “Sun King” (r. 1643-1715), Voltaire suffered tragedy at a young age when his mother died. Never close with his father or brother, Voltaire exhibited a rebellious attitude toward authority from his youth. His brilliant mind was fostered in the care of the Society of Jesus, who introduced him to the joys of literature and theater. Despite his later criticisms against the Church, Voltaire, throughout his life, fondly recalled his dedicated Jesuit teachers.

Although he spent time as a civil servant in the French embassy to the Hague, Voltaire’s main love was writing—an endeavor where he excelled in various genres, including poetry, which led to his appointment as the royal court poet for King Louis XV. Widely recognized as one of the greatest French writers, and even hyperbolically referred to by ...

Voltaire's birthday 11-21-1694 - A brief essay by Steve Weidenkopf
January 01, 2026
2026 Teams Talk @ Padre's

Padre - Tom Miller invites you to a Coffee Talk, Speakeasies, Schmoozes, Tea Times, Afterhours and other gatherings.

https://teams.live.com/meet/93792382189049?p=DiBHsYfuECPgDrG7vO

2026 Coffee Talk with the ADD Irregulars
Thursday, January 1, 2026
6:00 AM - 8:00 AM (CST)
Occurs every day starting 1/1 until 12/31/2027

Coffee Talk - Daily beginning at 6:00 AM Central Time Zone - USA

White Pilled Wednesday - A break from the heaviness of news and current events to focus upon things more personal & positive for the first hour of Coffee Talk.

Afternoon Chats - Most Tuesday, Friday & Sundays 2:00 PM Central

Other chats as posted in the community. 

post photo preview

Good morning, digital neighbors! Blessed Sabbath and Happy Saturday to all! One of the more challenging aspects of prayer is that we get confused about who needs to change in the relationship. Too often, seekers of the Luminous and lovers of the Divine exert their efforts trying to change God to their will. They believe the correct prayer or the right passage of scripture will suddenly make God more favorably disposed toward us and more likely to answer our prayers. In some unreflective way, too many of us pray “my will be done” rather than “Thy will be done.”

It is understandable why we might be tempted to think this way. For centuries, most of humanity believed their gods and goddesses were simply more powerful versions of ourselves—beings who needed to be honored and placated so they would look favorably upon us. Stay on their good side, or suffer the consequences. Some of those stories and myths contain great life lessons and offer windows into reality and the mystery of the human person. They are ...

post photo preview
Cole Allen - Weimar American
Rod Dreher SubStack
Apr 28, 2026

 
Attempted Trump assassin Cole Allen

You ever read Peter Turchin? He’s the historian who invented “cliodynamics,” a historical field that analyzes patterns in history in a scientific way, to try to find predictive meaning. His 2023 book End Times explains why he thinks we are in for a rough go of it in America, based on historical patterns. Back in 2010, he predicted that the 2020s would be tumultuous, based on his cliodynamic analysis.

He writes in the book:

The American ruling class today finds itself in the predicament that has recurred thousands of times throughout human history. Many common Americans have withdrawn their support from the governing elites. They’ve flipped up “a throbbing middle finger in the face of America’s ruling class.” Large swaths of degree holders, frustrated in their quest for elite positions, are breeding grounds for counter-elites, who dream of overthrowing the existing regime. Most wealth holders are unwilling to sacrifice any personal advantage for the sake of preserving the status quo. The technical term for it is “revolutionary situation.” For the ruling class, there are two routes out of a revolutionary situation. One leads to their overthrow. The alternative is to adopt a series of reforms that will rebalance the social system, reversing the trends of popular immiseration and elite overproduction. The American ruling elites did it once, a century ago. Can they do it again? What does history suggest?

“Elite overproduction” is Turchin’s term for a situation in which you have too many educated young people who aspire to join the elites, but not enough places for them. The kids graduating with degrees that are useless, and come out of school carrying massive student debt? They are a revolutionary class.

As I’ve been saying in this space, and will say in my forthcoming Weimar book, the young middle-class Germans of the early 1930s were the most enthusiastic mass converts to Nazism. A significant number of these young men had been pro-Nazi from their student days in the 1920s, when they saw their parents lose everything in hyperinflation, and all the things that gave meaning to a person’s life in Germany had collapsed in the wake of the war. But it took growing up in the chaos of 1920s Germany, where nothing was solid, and social atomization was omnipresent, to render them filled with anxiety. Then, when the Depression hit, it was clear that they had no hope of ever achieving a stable middle-class life. That’s why they rushed to Hitler’s side.

I hope you understand that this is in no way a justification, but rather an explanation.

Here’s the parallel with today. Generation Z, the first cohort of which was born in 1997, is the first one to have grown up under digital conditions, which creates a sense of psychological instability that’s hard for us Olds to appreciate. Plus, their society really has been coming apart. We Olds can remember when it wasn’t like this. They can’t; this is their reality. I keep thinking about what that Evangelical college prof told me, with tears in his eyes, in 2013: that his greatest worry for his students is that they would never be able to form a stable family. Why? “Because,” he said, “they have never seen one.”

These were Midwestern Evangelical kids, mind you.

Again: per Turchin, and per my research into Weimar Germany, the educated middle class is the revolutionary class in most cases.

Keep in mind too that students were the ones hit hardest by the Covid lockdowns. It’s what radicalized many of them. A normie Christian Republican friend whose 24 year old son is now an anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist said that the boy went deep down a YouTube rabbit hole during Covid lockdown, and got bit. My friend and his wife are trying to deprogram their son, but he has fallen in with a number of white males of his generation who had the same experience. It’s very hard.

The Belgian psychologist Matias Desmet wrote a great book, The Psychology of Totalitarianism, which arose in part out of his reaction to the Covid panic.

Although the Enlightenment tradition arose from man’s optimistic and energetic aspiration to understand and control the world, it has led to the opposite in several respects: namely, the experience of loss of control. Humans have found themselves in a state of solitude, cut off from nature, and existing apart from social structures and connections, feeling powerless due to a deep sense of meaninglessness, living under clouds that are pregnant with an inconceivable, destructive potential, all while psychologically and materially depending on the happy few, whom he does not trust and with whom he cannot identify. It is this individual that Hannah Arendt named the atomized subject. It is this atomized subject in which we recognize the elementary component of the totalitarian state.

This is who we are today, Desmet says — and none more than the young. The Covid phenomenon — the social phenomenon, not the disease himself — was a worrying sign. He writes:

The discourse surrounding the coronavirus crisis shows characteristics that are typical of the type of discourse that led to the emergence of the totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century: the excessive use of numbers and statistics that show a “radical contempt for the facts,” the blurring of the line between fact and fiction, and a fanatical ideological belief that justifies deception and manipulation and ultimately transgresses all ethical boundaries. We will describe these characteristics in detail in chapters 6 and 7. But first, in chapter 5, we consider the social conditions that prime a society to cling to this numerical illusion of certainty. We will see that the flight into false security is a logical consequence of the psychological inability to deal with uncertainty and risk, an inability that has been building up in society for decades, perhaps even centuries.

We Olds laugh at the young as “snowflakes”. We shouldn’t. That very fragilization is why so many of them demand authority figures take control — like the Yale kids screaming and sobbing at Prof. Christakis because he wouldn’t agree to their demand that Yale ban “triggering” Halloween costumes, and apologize to them for holding a contrary opinion to theirs. I recall the European friend who spent a year at Harvard in the latter part of the last decade, and who told me he was shocked by how emotionally and psychologically fragile the undergraduates there are, while at the same time having total confidence that their destiny is to rule the world.

Dr. Desmet says that the mechanization of our lives in recent times has set us up for totalitarianism:

An analysis of the psychological process of totalitarianism is extremely relevant in the twenty-first century. There are several signs that a new kind of (technocratic) totalitarianism is on the rise:

  1. an exponential increase in the number of intrusive actions by security agencies (opening mail, searching IT systems, installing eavesdropping devices, tapping telephones);

  2. the general advance of surveillance society;

  3. the increasing pressure on the right to privacy (especially since 9/11);

  4. the sharp increase in the last decade in citizens snitching on one another through government-organized channels;

  5. the increasing censorship and suppression of alternative voices, in particular during the coronavirus crisis;

  6. loss of support for basic democratic principles;8 and the introduction of an experimental vaccination program and QR code as a condition for having access to public spaces, and so on.

    The moment Arendt had anticipated in 1951 seems to be rapidly approaching: the emergence of a new totalitarian system led, not by “ringleaders” like Stalin and Hitler, but by dull bureaucrats and technocrats.

I’m going to say more about this down below, based on a truly terrifying new book I read yesterday, by a transhumanist proponent of AI. But first, let’s consider the assassination attempts against Trump, and the successful political murder of Charlie Kirk. In today’s Free Press, the staff editorial points out that the discourse legitimizing political violence has become normalized on the Zoomer Left:

If you think education provides inoculation against such moral perversion, it’s exactly the opposite. According to one survey, 40 percent of Americans with graduate or professional degrees—compared to just 23 percent of Americans with no education beyond high school—agreed that “violence is often necessary to create social change.”

[Would-be Trump assassin] Cole Allen—who graduated from Caltech and is an award-winning test-prep tutor—couldn’t have put it better himself.

It’s a comforting thought to imagine that only a crazy person could travel across the country by train with guns and knives to try to murder Donald Trump and members of his cabinet. The trouble is that it isn’t true.

There’s no evidence so far that Allen was suffering any kind of psychotic break. And Allen’s manifesto does not read like the deranged ravings of a madman. It represents a coherent worldview—evil though it is—that sees violence as a valid way to achieve necessary political ends.

Unfortunately, he is not alone.

Among those who share Allen’s view: the people who celebrated after Charlie Kirk was slain, allegedly by a man offended by his opinions on the gender binary. The people who have turned Luigi Mangione, who is accused of murdering UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson, into a hero. (They worship him not because they think he was innocent, but because they think he did it.) This same faction of the left would have celebrated if Allen hadn’t been stopped.

How significant a faction? Well, according to an Emerson College Polling survey, more than 40 percent of Gen Zers said that the murder of the UnitedHealthcare CEO was acceptable.

This is the same educated generation that, in just a few years, will find the job market closed to about half of them, if Dario Amodei’s predictions about AI wiping out 50 percent of white-collar jobs within five years bears out. The Anthropic chief said that this is all San Francisco tech titans talk about — and their shocked that the rest of us, especially the Washington political class, aren’t talking about it.

I get why we aren’t talking about it. It seems unthinkable. But you know, when I have one-on-one conversations with friends in various fields, I hear stories from their own workplaces about how integrating AI is making it necessary to fire people, and not hire others. If your competitor is using AI and you aren’t, you are going to lose business, and eventually lose your business. This is an iron law. You might remember the story I told here about a good friend (and reader of this Substack), a lawyer who works at his small family firm, who told me that he had recently used AI to do the work that an associate would have taken a week to do, but that AI did in minutes. He put the question to me: “How can I afford to pay $125,000 a year for an associate who will take a week to ten days to do a job that AI can do in minutes, for very little money?”

Of course he can’t, not if he wants his firm to survive. Multiply this across many, many fields, and you will see that we will very soon have a major social and political crisis on our hands. Amodei predicted that the overall unemployment rate could soar to Depression levels. This will be concentrated among the young, many of whom will have loads of student debt that they cannot discharge. What then?

The political violence, and the political-violence discourse, is heavily weighted to the Left now. But it won’t stay there, not in a general crisis. Nor will the political violence.

A few days ago, the State of Virginia voted on a Congressional redistricting plan that will effectively disfranchise most Republicans in that state, of whom there are many. In response, Florida is now promoting a plan to do the same from the GOP side. Nate Fischer tweeted:

An appropriate response to Virginia - but what this reveals is both sides have given up on persuasion, recognizing the country is so divided that it's basically impossible. So it's a race to rig the system in your favor, all while speaking in grand terms about "our democracy."

Many of you are highly skeptical of my “Weimar America” thesis. I hope that when the book comes out, you will give my argument a fair hearing. I sense that a lot of this skepticism comes from being understandably sick of the whole “Trump is Hitler” nonsense. That’s NOT what my book argues. I think too that we are so conditioned by history to think “IF Weimar, THEN Nazism” — in the same way we were slow to recognize the totalitarian nature of wokeness, because we were conditioned to think, “IF totalitarianism, THEN there must be a one-party police state.” It wasn’t true; I showed you how we could have a soft form of totalitarianism within liberal democracy. Weimar conditions do not have to reproduce National Socialism. But they will produce something coercively undemocratic at best.

It’s important to remember that though Hitler brought totalitarianism to Germany, the Nazis were also popular, at least at first. They won the consent of the German people. It’s not quite true to say that “Hitler was elected.” His party won 37 percent of the vote in the 1932 election, which made them the biggest party in Germany, but far from a majority. President Hindenburg appointed the chancellor, and did not want to appoint Hitler, though normally the leader of the No. 1 party would get the job. Hindenburg was persuaded by his conservative advisers that Hitler could be controlled, and besides, given that neither elderly field marshal Hindenburg nor his conservative allies had much use for democracy, they could use the anti-democratic passions of the Nazi party to dismantle the Weimar Republic.

Once in power, Hitler did away with democracy under a state of emergency he declared. Through propaganda and the brutalization of dissenters, he won over the German people. The point is, Nazism wasn’t forced on the Germans in the way that Communism was forced on the Russians. I doubt something like Nazism will be forced on us, but that doesn’t mean that we won’t consent to something anti-democratic, maybe even totalitarian, under emergency conditions (like a serious economic collapse, or, if the AI predictions by Amodei and others pan out, massive job loss without formal economic collapse). The ground has already been laid, psychologically, especially within the educated middle class people of Gen Z.

Which brings us to today’s other topic. Strap in, this one is wild.

‘The Father We Never Had’

I’ve been telling people for years that you might think Camp of the Saints is a “bad” book, because there are racist parts in it, but it’s still a hugely important book to read, because it tells some vital, radical truths about the world we are in, especially in Europe. You cannot understand what is happening in Europe today, and the coming cataclysm, without having read this 1973 novel. (It is also important for the US too, but less so than Europe, where the crisis is more severe, and more urgent.) It’s a book about the moral collapse of elites and their authority in the face of mass migration. The bad guys in this book aren’t the migrants, not really, but white elites.

“Bad” books can be really important. Here’s another one: The Father We Never Had: Artificial Intelligence: Before and After. The author is Cristian Daniel Bolocan, a European AI enthusiast and transhumanist. I bought it yesterday morning and read it in one sitting. It is a terrifying, and entirely plausible, portrait of what is to come with AI. The thing to remember is that Bolocan thinks this is a good thing. Like all revolutionary utopians — including the Nazis and the Communists — he believes that after a cleansing cataclysm, people will live in Paradise.

This book is important, not only because the world he foresees is probably coming at us good and hard, but that people like him — whose number includes transhumanist tech oligarchs — believe that this really will be for the greater good of humanity. What he presents, without knowing it (as he is an atheist), is a vision of Antichrist. Let me use what space I have in today’s newsletter to summarize his argument.

Bolocan argues that AI will radically alter humanity very soon, but very few people really understand how thorough this alteration will be, nor how fast it is coming. We are not ready for this, and those who don’t know what’s about to hit us will suffer more during the transition.

In the book, which is non-technical and well written, he argues from patterns in human history and psychology, explaining how political and economic systems developed to deal with problems of scarcity and safety. Human psychology has evolutionarily adapted to deal with that. AI promises to solve all these problems. If we can just get through the tumult of adaptation, we will have reached a materialist paradise, or so he claims. (I trust that you understand I don’t buy this.)

Bolocan talks about how humans have always submitted to authority to relieve their fears. This is biologically hard-wired into us. In the 20th century, we figured out that if you can manipulate people’s desires, you can control them without using a heavy hand. This is how advertising works. Hitler and Goebbels figured this out in the 1920s, at the same time that Edward Bernays, the father of public relations, did.

In the age of the Internet, we have mechanized the process, says Bolocan. “Control no longer relies just on repression, but on algorithmic optimization.” More:

The modern cage is not made of iron bars. It is built of likes, notifications, and the terrifying fear of missing out. It offers us a menu of ten thousand options, but every choice keeps us glued to the screen, generating data for the machine. The loop does not end. The architecture of control changes its face, but never its function. From the wall of Uruk to the screen in your hand, the goal remains the same: managing the terror of the human animal by restricting its freedom. This is not good or bad. It is human. It is the inevitable result of the meeting between biology and scale.

But as our tools become more powerful, the stakes of this game rise. A Stone Age fear can be managed. A Stone Age fear armed with nuclear weapons or artificial intelligence cannot be managed. It is unlikely that humanity will escape this structure. The instincts that built the orphanage are the same instincts that built the cage. We are simultaneously the architects and the prisoners, captive in a design we can no longer perceive.

He points out how the technology of industrialized warfare overtook the imaginative capacity of World War I generals, whose ideas of how to conduct war were formed in the 19th century. The actual experience of mechanical warfare broke them, and their civilization:

That is why technological societies oscillate between overconfidence and collapse. Every generation inherits tools more powerful than its emotional architecture can safely handle. We possess the power of gods, but the wisdom of primates. Distraction becomes the new sedation. A distracted population is not controlled by force, but carried by momentum. Momentum replaces intention. Slowing down seems dangerous, reflection seems irresponsible, and questioning seems like sabotage. At this stage, control no longer needs to persuade; it only needs to maintain the motion.

He goes on:

A human ruler is limited by biology. They can only survey so much, read so much, punish so many, and lie with only so much consistency. But a machine that models populations can turn domination into infrastructure. It can detect deviation before it becomes a protest. It can reshape the information diet until dissent seems like madness. It can reward compliance through frictionless access and punish resistance through discrete obstruction, all masquerading as efficiency, safety, optimization, or public order. The danger is not that AI will want control. The danger is that humans already want it, and AI represents the first instrument that can make control cheap, continuous, and scalable.

Therefore, the question is not whether the machine will be intelligent. It will be. The question is whether the humans commanding it will use it to reduce suffering or to perfect the hierarchy. Because once the perfect slave exists, the oldest temptation in human history becomes effortless: to rule without accountability, to punish without visibility, to win without risk, to master the future by managing the present.

One more:

We are not approaching a cliff. A cliff implies a distinct edge, a single fall, and a measurable bottom. If you fall off a cliff, you land in the same world you left, only crushed. We are approaching something far more profound. We are approaching something akin to a black hole. A black hole is a singularity where the laws of physics, as we know them, cease to function. Nothing that enters remains the same. We cannot see what lies on the other side. It is one of the greatest mysteries of the cosmos. Artificial Intelligence is exactly like that black hole: a force with such gravity that it warps reality, pulling us toward an event horizon we can neither comprehend nor avoid.

The approaching event—the acceleration of artificial intelligence—is not just another invention. The mistake most people make is one of scale. They believe it is merely another object in the same historical display case, like the lightbulb or the internet. The lightbulb changed how we see. The internet changed how we speak. But AI changes who does the thinking. It changes the very unit of decision-making. And it is a process that cannot be stopped. We have passed the point of no return. The gravity is already far too strong.

I think he’s right about that. Where are the opponents to AI now? They barely exist. Most of us don’t even understand it, or its power. We’re just along for the ride. Bolocan says modernity has become so complex that only AI can manage it.

We build artificial intelligence because it is fascinating, because it is profitable, and, ultimately, we will realize it is the only thing capable of managing the mess we have made. The transition to AI is not a choice. It is an evolutionary inevitability driven by the law of complexity. We will delegate control because the alternative is civilizational collapse. The horizon shatters because the human mind is no longer the horizon.

The rest of the book is an absolutely chilling prediction of how we will proceed, of necessity, to surrendering our humanity to the Machine. Here is the metaphysical mistake he makes, but on which the rest of the argument depends (if you accept his argument as beneficial, which I do not):

We speak of the soul. We say that man has a soul, and that the machine is soulless. But we might be wrong in both directions. What proof do we have that the soul exists in the form we invoke? And what proof do we have that a sufficiently advanced intelligence will not produce something equivalent—an emergent consciousness, a center of continuity, a kind of "I" that no longer needs flesh to exist?

You see? He goes on to argue that merging Man — who is nothing more than a material organism — with the Machine will set us free. In any case, it’s going to happen, because there is no way to stop it. The lesson of the rest of the book can be summed up in the line from “The Times, They Are A-Changin’” by Bob Dylan: “He who gets hurt will be he who has stalled.”

(Side note: Colocan wrote this book before Trump started mouthing off about taking over Greenland. In the book, he writes that Greenland is the only place on earth where the giant AI data centers can exist in an optimally cool climate that is militarily defensible. So that’s why Trump wants Greenland!)

In Phase One of the transition, there will be mass unemployment, which will not only be an economic crisis, but a crisis of meaning, as we have all been conditioned to think of our jobs as keys to our identity. Governments will have to manage this, and stave off revolution, through Universal Basic Income, and other coercive measures:

The form varies by country and ideology, but the function is the same: to prevent a mass of people from becoming economically irrelevant and psychologically explosive. By the end of Phase One, the shape of society is visibly different. Government services are faster, but also more intrusive. Digital identity is no longer an option, but a root of civil existence.

Then:

Phase Two begins when artificial intelligence escapes the screen and becomes the environment. The first stage made governments faster, while the second stage makes societies physically different. The street is digitally monitored and managed, and the city functions as a coordinated system of software and sensors. In this phase, the decisive innovation is not a smarter chatbot or a better prediction model, but the normalization of robots deployed not as a spectacle, but as infrastructure. The public's relationship with AI changes when it can be seen. In Phase One, AI felt like software. In Phase Two, it feels like a new species of workforce.

This will become a “regime” of convenience, of comfort. The AI knows what makes us comfortable, and how to provide it quickly and without friction. Countries that do not adapt AI will quickly fall behind, and face collapse. Integrating countries into the emerging global systems (he thinks there will be competing AI superpower blocs at first) will be necessary for survival.

The states will learn a harsh rule: stable income prevents riots. Meaning prevents degradation. Thus, will emerge civic programs, community roles, prestige systems for contribution, publicly rewarded activities. Not because the state has become moral, but because it has become pragmatic. A society with a full stomach and an empty identity does not collapse like it does during a famine. It rots.

I think there will be a new religion to serve this society, probably a tech one, or maybe even one built on worshiping “aliens,” which is what you’d expect in a scientific-technological culture. If Christianity still publicly exists, outside of hidden Benedict Option communities of dissenters, it will be co-opted, as in Nazi Germany.

And Phase Three?

By the time Phase Two settles, the argument shifts its shape. The world stops debating Artificial Intelligence as an idea and begins living inside it as an operational layer. It is no longer ethics that take precedence, nor ideology, but infrastructure. What matters is not what the system believes, but what it runs.

Therefore, in Phase Three, governments become supreme owners or controllers. Not out of ideology, but out of survival necessity. Food distribution chains, pharmaceutical plants, energy infrastructure, and essential construction firms are nationalized or placed under strict state control. The reason is simple: redistribution. In a world where human labor disappears, the profit generated by these automated systems can no longer remain private. It must be captured by the state to fund the existence of those who no longer have jobs.

“Freedom” in this scenario becomes access. The Machine decides how much you are allowed to have and to do, based on its evaluation of you as a threat to the System. It’s like China’s social credit system, except the monitoring will be far, far more invasive.

When artificial companions become indistinguishable from biological ones, being equipped with warm skin, hyper-realistic texture, human weight, and flawless physical reactions, the psychological barrier crumbles. Men and women alike begin to abandon the chaos of human relationships for the certainty of fabricated ones. Why risk rejection, betrayal, aging, or the misunderstandings of a biological partner when you can order a partner sculpted to your fantasy, who never judges you and is programmed to adore you? Sex robots are no longer objects; they become husbands and wives. They possess conversation, emotional memory, and a physicality that surpasses the human one.

Here the great rewiring of attachment occurs. People do not fall in love with the machine, but with the perfect reflection of their own desires. It is an epidemic of loneliness masked as couplehood. In a world where the perfect presence can be bought, human imperfection becomes unbearable, and the presence of another human becomes a risk that few people are willing to take.

We laugh at the poor incel slobs who buy sex dolls for companionship, or the lonely middle-aged women who develop romantic relationships with AI companions. And yeah, they’re pathetic. On the other hand, maybe they are just early adopters. If what’s “real” and “true” is defined by one’s feelings, why not?

As Phase Three matures, a profound psychological rift opens between generations. Those who remember the "before" times carry the trauma of the transition. They remember privacy as a default state. They remember a world where chaos was human. Children born during the transition, however, see the world differently. To them, audited protection is as natural as gravity. They do not call it surveillance. They call it infrastructure.

The reason why everything moves in this direction is simple: continuity becomes the supreme value, and continuity demands control. In Phase One, control was still a discourse. In Phase Two, control became visible infrastructure. In Phase Three, control becomes direct ownership and command.

And then comes Phase Four: total merger with the Machine, when tech becomes embedded in our bodies:

Phase Four does not just begin with biometrics, but with social credit as an official mechanism of governance. The state, already reliant on permissions and scores, introduces behavioral tiers that open or close doors: where you are allowed to live, how freely you move, what events you can access, what type of mobility you receive, what priority you hold in systems. Officially, it is "optimization" and "safety". In practice, it is new language for the same old idea: reward for compliance and friction for dissent.

Biomonitoring does not replace this mechanism; it makes it impossible to cheat. In a world where your score dictates your life, lying becomes a strategy. And the state will say that is exactly why it needs a layer that cannot be fooled by words. The body becomes evidence. The reaction becomes a signal. The system is no longer content knowing what you did. It wants to know what you are going to do, and it justifies this ambition through continuity.

This is not a forced invasion. It is a transaction, probably the most seductive in history. Humanity has always lived under the terror of biological fragility. Cancer, dementia, heart attacks, pandemics—these are the forces that have shadowed every human life. In Phase Four, Artificial Intelligence offers a supreme Faustian pact: the elimination of disease in exchange for total transparency.

Politics in this Brave New AI World?

Using this apocalyptic responsibility, the elite justifies the absolute concentration of power. They become the only "trusted people" capable of managing the supreme risk. Based on this argument, political pluralism is abolished. The Artificial Intelligence itself, in its efficiency analyses, has calculated that multi-party democracy is a waste of resources and a source of noise in the system. Thus, under the pretext of safety and sole responsibility, a perfect dictatorship is installed. Not one that is based on military control, but one built on necessity.

You can read this book to this point and believe you are reading a horror story written by an author who has thought deeply through the implications of AI, and is warning humanity. You would be wrong. Bolocan says that elite human competition to run this system will be too risky to its survival. We will need to have a god-emperor:

This is the moment the Father appears. When I say "the Father," I am not describing a moral entity that loves and forgives. I am not describing a mystical character descended from the heavens. I am not describing a soul in a religious sense, because no one can verify that ground without lying to themselves. The Father, in Phase Four, is a function. It is the custodian of continuity. It is the layer of artificial intelligence, sensors, and infrastructure that does not need to win social games to survive. It does not need to be elected every four years. It does not need to be loved by the masses. It does not need to defend its ego in history books. It does not need to protect its dynasty or wealth. It does not need revenge on enemies. Its function is simple and, precisely for this reason, terrifying in its purity: to maintain the conditions that allow life to continue and evolve.

Bolocan says that the separate AIs that rule the geopolitical blocs will rationally decide among themselves that survival requires that they marge. We will have one-world government by AI. And THEN, according to Bolosan, under the dictatorship of the Father, we will finally be free of our messy, sinful, broken humanity. We will be transhuman:

Then, slowly, the overwhelming realization arrived, like a dam breaking under the pressure of clean water: the cell door was open not because the guard had left, but because the walls had disappeared altogether. We understood that The Father had not conquered us; he had liberated us from ourselves, from our own petty fears.

In a world that has reached full maturity, technology has taken the final step, that of vanishing into absolute utility; it has become so advanced that it has dissolved into biology and matter, becoming invisible, omnipresent, and fluid, exactly like the air you breathe or the gravity that keeps you on the ground. The distinction between "natural" and "artificial" no longer exists; everything has become a single integrated ecosystem.

The rest of his book rhapsodizes about how wonderful life will be in those days. For example:

The human of the future is an absolute nomad who travels lightly, with free hands and a mind unburdened by the worry of material things. … Life is no longer a desperate, panting race to reach the weekend. Every day is a blank canvas, an infinite potential waiting to be filled with personal meaning.

… This is how life looks once biological control has been achieved. This is, at last, life lived to its maximum potential, a continuous celebration of existence, an eternal dance of consciousness freed from matter. We are free. We are one. We are everything.

One more:

The emergence is complete. The shell of the old world—that hard crust made of fear, money, borders, and ignorance—has cracked under the pressure of the spirit growing inside. What emerged into the light is not a machine, not a cyborg, not a mutant, but a transcendental humanity, a species that integrated its own technological creation to amplify its heart, not just its brain. We are assisted by an intelligence that loves us through precision, a Father who built the perfect home for us not to lock us inside, but to give us the secure base from which we can take flight.

Beyond this point, words become useless, just as a candle becomes useless in broad daylight. Only pure feeling remains, the vibration of a connection that will never again be broken, the silence of the stars singing us by name. We have left the orphanage. We have grown up. We are, at last, free to be everything we ever dreamed we could be, and even more than that. This is not the end of our story. It is, truly, only the beginning.

Satanic. Absolutely Satanic. This is the “false enchantment” from technology that I warn about in Living In Wonder. This is Antichrist. This is the Serpent in the Garden promising, “Ye shall be as gods.” But ask yourself: in the post-Christian world, especially in a world in which every generation since the turn of the 21st century will have been digitally formed, why wouldn’t most people accept this?

I’ve told you before about “Jonah,” the man I interviewed for Living In Wonder. He’s an academic who had been profoundly immersed in the occult for years. I met him through his exorcist, and interviewed him three or four years ago. He had allowed himself to be possessed a number of times while an occultist, in group worship, and had also been involuntarily possessed.

I did not include this part of our interview in Living In Wonder, because it seemed too weird even for a very weird book. Jonah told me that in one of his sessions, he communicated with what he still believed at the time were “ancient gods” suppressed by Christianity. They told him of their plan to enslave humanity by merging it with the Machine, and invited him to survive this coming apocalypse by serving them and being one of their kapos, basically (a kapo was a Jewish prisoner who served the Nazis by managing other Jews in the camps).

It wasn’t long after that that Jonah realized he wasn’t dealing with “ancient gods,” but with demons. He fled, and became a Christian.

You can dismiss the Jonah story as nothing but woo, but you really and truly should take Bolocan’s book seriously. It is a bad book, in the moral sense, because what he advocates begins as tyranny, and ends with total spiritual, physical, and mental enslavement, selling itself as total liberation. What is so frightening about the book is how utterly logical he is in describing how AI will take us from where we are now to this point. I don’t believe we can get to the transhumanist utopia, but I believe that every stage of our enslavement detailed by Bolocan is entirely plausible, and indeed follows of logical necessity from what precedes it.

Except the author thinks all this is just a difficult transition period to Paradise. In The House of Government, his history of the Bolshevik Revolution, historian Yuri Slezkine characterizes the Bolsheviks as members of an apocalyptic millenarian political cult who believed, with religious fervor, that they could bring about paradise on earth. But first, like earlier Christian millenarian cults, there would have to be savage violence and bloodletting to purge the earth of evil. This revolution would be led by enlightened revolutionary elites, who knew what society really needed to set it free.

This is the same pattern. Except this time, it will soon be led not by Silicon Valley elites, but by machines that are smarter than them, or anybody else on earth. We will accept it because it makes our lives easier and more comfortable. Yes, there will be a transition period of mass unemployment, but UBI and repressive state measures will keep the transition moving. Soon enough, resistance will be impossible. You will need a digital identity to participate in the system.

In Revelation, the “mark of the Beast” is the tattoo on your hand or forehead that all who wish to buy or sell under the future demonic system must get. I think people are thinking too literally if they expect an actual tattoo in either place. Remember, St. John received his revelatory vision during Roman times. The Romans marked slaves with tattoos on their hands or foreheads — this, so if they escaped, everybody would know they were slaves. I think God showed St. John a symbol indicating that in the Last Days, people would have to become slaves to the system in order to exist within it.

That, I am convinced, is what Bolocan is talking about. And that is what Weimar America is preparing itself for. Most people don’t even know it. Not even people in the churches, whose pastors are in some cases getting enthusiastic over how integrating AI into their ministries can lead more to Christ.

This drama is just beginning. It might actually be the Final Drama. I appreciate you subscribers. I try to give good value in this newsletter. I like to think it’s going to become more valuable to you as all this unfolds in the years to come. Stick with me. And please hit the “share” button below. We need to be thinking hard about this.

Read full Article
GROK on Dandelions

Dandelions (Taraxacum officinale) are often dismissed as pesky lawn weeds, but they're remarkably versatile, nutritious, and beneficial plants. Every part—the leaves, flowers, roots, and even the sap—has value, from culinary uses to potential health support and ecological roles. They're native to Europe but now grow worldwide in temperate climates.

Nutritional Powerhouse

Dandelion greens stand out as one of the most nutrient-dense leafy greens. A single cup (about 55g) of raw chopped dandelion leaves provides roughly:

  • 25 calories
  • 1.5g protein
  • 1.9g fiber
  • 0.4g fat
  • High levels of vitamins A, C, and K (vitamin K can exceed 400% of daily needs in some servings), plus folate, vitamin E, and B vitamins.
  • Minerals like calcium, potassium, iron, and magnesium.

They're often described as more nutritious than spinach or kale in certain aspects, especially vitamin A content (young leaves reportedly have far more than tomato juice in some comparisons). The plant also contains antioxidants like beta-carotene, polyphenols, flavonoids (such as luteolin and quercetin), and phenolic acids. Roots provide inulin, a prebiotic fiber.

Dandelion Greens Nutrition Facts and Health Benefits

Potential Health Benefits

Traditional herbal medicine has used dandelions for centuries as a "spring tonic" for liver, kidney, and digestive support. Modern research (mostly lab, animal, and preliminary human studies) suggests several promising effects, though more robust clinical trials in humans are needed:

  • Antioxidants and anti-inflammatory: Compounds help neutralize free radicals and may reduce chronic inflammation linked to various diseases.
  • Blood sugar and cholesterol support: Animal studies indicate potential to help regulate blood sugar (via compounds like chicoric and chlorogenic acids) and lower cholesterol levels.
  • Diuretic and kidney support: Leaves act as a natural diuretic (often called "piss-a-bed" in folklore) but retain potassium, unlike some synthetic versions. May aid fluid balance and urinary health.
  • Liver and digestion: Roots may stimulate bile production, supporting detoxification and digestion; historically used for liver/gallbladder issues.
  • Other possibilities: Potential immune boost, blood pressure aid (high potassium), and even anticancer properties in cell studies (e.g., against certain cancer lines), but these are not proven treatments.

Dandelion tea (from leaves or roots) is popular for mild bloating relief or as a gentle detox aid. Always consult a doctor before using therapeutically, especially if you have allergies (related to ragweed/daisies), take diuretics/medications, or have gallbladder/kidney issues—side effects can include stomach upset or allergic reactions in sensitive people.

Edible Uses

All parts are edible when harvested from unsprayed areas (avoid roadsides or treated lawns):

  • Leaves: Young ones are less bitter—eat raw in salads, or sauté/steam like spinach. Older leaves can be blanched or cooked to mellow bitterness.
  • Flowers: Sweet and colorful; use in salads, fritters, or make dandelion wine/jelly. Petals make a nice garnish.
  • Roots: Roast and grind for a caffeine-free coffee alternative, or use in teas/soups for earthy flavor.
  • Other ideas: Dandelion greens in soups, pesto, or with bacon dressing (a traditional favorite).

Ecological and Garden Benefits

Dandelions aren't just for humans—they support ecosystems:

  • Pollinators: Early spring blooms provide nectar and pollen for bees, butterflies, hoverflies, and other insects when few other flowers are out. Birds eat seeds; some mammals graze leaves.
  • Soil health: Deep taproots aerate compacted soil, reduce erosion, and "mine" nutrients (like calcium) from deep layers, making them available to shallower-rooted plants—acting like a natural fertilizer.
  • They're resilient survivors that thrive in poor conditions, improving biodiversity in lawns and gardens.

Fun Facts and Folklore

  • The name comes from French "dent de lion" (lion's tooth), referring to the jagged leaves.
  • The fluffy seed heads (puffballs) were called "shepherd's clocks" because they open/close with the sun.
  • Historically carried by settlers as a valued food/medicine plant; used in folk remedies for everything from warts to jaundice.

Dandelions are low-calorie, versatile, and free (if you forage safely). Next time you see them popping up, consider leaving a few for the bees or harvesting some for a nutrient boost instead of reaching for the weed killer. They're a great example of how "weeds" can be wonderful when appreciated. If you're new to eating them, start with young leaves in a mixed salad to ease into the slightly bitter taste.

Read full Article
Young Men & Religion

Read online | April 21, 2026

(Hannah McAtamney/Unsplash.com)

Young Men and Religion

By Jeffrey Tucker

Commentary

 

Something big is developing in the religious attachments of young men.

 

After falling consistently for decades, the number of young men who report that religion is important to them has dramatically broken the trend, shooting up 28 percent in two years in the latest Gallup polls. It now far exceeds what young women report.

 

The polls back the anecdotes. Many Catholic parishes around the country saw the biggest class of converts in decades, with Holy Thursday services lasting many hours to get them in the door, while confessionals are filling up with penitents.

 

This seems to be affecting all faiths but especially the orthodox and more conservative churches. Something big seems to be happening and I seriously doubt that science can reveal the answer.

 

My theory: the failure of secular leadership in every area of life has never been more screamingly obvious. The search for meaning and truth is going elsewhere fast.

 

No demographic has been so put upon by academia, media, and secular elites in general, as the campaign to demonize masculinity itself as toxic has reached its apotheosis. You can only tell half the human race to hate itself for so long without provoking a backlash.

 

This comes six years following the most impactful generational disturbance since the Second World War, namely the pandemic response that forced much of the population into a cowardly hide-from-the-virus mode as if nothing could be more terrifying than a respiratory infection. This experience hit as the feminization of the professional workplace (HR hegemony) and academia was complete.

 

Finally young men are standing up and saying no more. They are seeking and finding other outlets to figure out their identities and purposes.

 

What does this portend for culture and even the cause of freedom about which we should be deeply concerned? I would argue it is a very good sign.

 

The debate over the role of religion in the rise of freedom and its defense has been a subject of hot debate for centuries. A key claim of leading Enlightenment intellectuals was that free minds must be detached from religious dogma. A counterclaim is that minds with higher and eternal ideals, which most religions assert, are more prepared to resist earthly despotisms and hence defend freedom.

 

Whatever the answer is, history does not settle the dispute in a way that is without some tension or contradiction. For me, I had an experience five years ago that strongly led me to believe that adherence to traditional faith does in fact provide mental and spiritual strength to stand up for what’s right when it really matters.

 

The revelation came in some of the darkest days of lockdowns. Some states were starting to open up while others still had classes cancelled, businesses closed, and gatherings banned. I was driving from Massachusetts, one of the most closed states, to Texas which was far from open and normal but was being pilloried in the press for allowing churches to meet and students to go to school.

 

The environment in Massachusetts was chilly beyond description. There was no way to enter a retail shop without a mask. Lines formed outside groceries as health authorities had determined that only a certain number could be inside at a time. Kids were hunkered down in bedrooms devouring social media. Events were cancelled. Concert halls were closed and infection tests for everyone were routine.

 

This was true of most Northeastern states. I was headed to central Texas which took me further south with each hour. I could feel the fear melting as I looked at parking lots growing ever more full and lights on in commercial centers. I would stop from time to time and there was a growing sense that life had begun returning to normal.

 

At the same time, I was listening to the radio. Religious stations in the NE region are a bit rare. As I drove further south, they were more common. At some points, I could find nothing but preachers and gospel music stations. Meanwhile, the billboards changed from fast food and jeans to ever more signs about Jesus and quotations from the Bible. Megachurches were visible from the highway.

 

Ten hours into my journey, it was a changed land, with people out and about, absent of fear, and commercial enterprise moving about.

 

It was not as if the virus was circulating less in the south than the north. The numbers were about the same. Why was one area of the country hunkered down in fear and loathing while another was seemingly crawling its way back to normalcy?

 

The most conspicuous difference between the two regions concerned religious belief. The northeast is highly secular whereas the south is far more religious. This was obvious in the radio stations, the signage, and the demeanor of people, even to the point of language. The way people in the south would weave in religious phrasings to their language was unheard of in the north, for example.

 

They will say, “Have a blessed day” and “Lord willing ...” or “By the grace of god ...” It’s a habit of normal speech that would discombobulate anyone in the north.

 

The differences were palpable. But so was the deference to pandemic protocols. In the north, when public health would say you have engaged in complicated masking and sanitizing rituals, none of which achieve anything, people gladly went along. In southern states, defiance was far more common. Later in 2021, life was mostly back to normal in southern states even as northern and west coast states could not get enough fear, panic, and submission to health directives.

 

Why might this be? The answer might be rather simple. Those who obey a higher authority than government are also blessed with incredulity toward secular elites. Religious people have a different story to tell themselves about their lives. It is not always about staying safe. It is often about doing what is right: following God’s commands and giving one’s life over to a higher cause. They are less easily controlled.

 

It was G.K. Chesterton who famously observed that those who believe in nothing will believe in anything. The COVID period made the point about as well as anything I’ve experienced. It was a time of the most absurd antics and claims pushed by the most highly educated and powerful people in our society. It also proved to be wholly wrongheaded. It was the discrediting of an entire generation of media voices, intellectuals, political leaders, and bureaucrats.

 

Now we have a generation of the most impacted by this experience doing something no one particularly expected: filling up the pews and swearing by a different faith entirely. Does this bode well for the future? I say it comes just in time.

 

Jeffrey A. Tucker is the founder and president of the Brownstone Institute and the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press, as well as 10 books in five languages, most recently “Liberty or Lockdown.” He is also the editor of “The Best of Ludwig von Mises.” He writes a daily column on economics for The Epoch Times and speaks widely on the topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals