Author: HP McLovincraft

Seeker of rabbit holes. Pessimist. Libertine. Contrarian. Your huckleberry. Possibly true tales of sanity-blasting horror also known as abject reality. Prepare yourself. Veteran of a thousand psychic wars. I have seen the fnords. Deplatformed on Tumblr and Twitter.

Polls Show Europe Wants War

The latest polling from Europe exposes the hypocrisy behind the entire war campaign. Europeans have been frightened into supporting larger military budgets, common European debt, weapons for Ukraine, and an EU defense structure, but when they are asked whether they would personally pick up a rifle, the enthusiasm suddenly disappears. They support war in theory as long as Ukrainians, professional soldiers, or somebody else’s children are forced to die for it.

The European Council on Foreign Relations surveyed 19,481 adults across 15 European countries in May 2026. The results were presented under the absurdly triumphant title “Europeans are ready to defend themselves,” yet the underlying figures tell a far more complicated story. Europeans may be prepared to borrow money and purchase weapons, but most are not prepared to bear the physical cost of the policies they endorse.

The EU’s Spring 2026 Eurobarometer found that 81% support a common European defense and security policy, while 76% believe Russia’s invasion of Ukraine threatens EU security. Another 76% said the EU should continue supporting Ukraine until a “just and lasting peace” is achieved. Those phrases are deliberately vague.

Keep reading

CRAZY TOWN: Masked Woman at ‘Socialism 2026 Conference’ in Chicago Explains Why Fitness is Fascist

Socialists are currently attending the ‘Socialism 2026 Conference’ in Chicago and there are dozens of insane videos from the event that are already going viral on social media.

In this one, a masked woman explains why socialists must reject the idea of fitness, because to do otherwise would play right into the hands of fascists. Is this some sort of bizarre reaction to RFK Jr. and MAHA? No one would be surprised.

You will notice that this woman is masked. In 2026. In fact, it looks like almost everyone at this event is wearing masks. These are the people who loved the Covid-19 lockdowns. They’re pining for the return of those glory days.

Partial transcript via Stu Smith:

“The More Dysgenic, the Better”: Beatrice Adler-Bolton Says the Left Must Give Up the “Fantasy of Being Fitter Than the Fascists”

At Socialism 2026, Adler-Bolton argues that “fitness is a measure of relative disposability under capitalism” and says the goal should not be to become “more useful to the ruling order.”

She says the left should not try to beat fascists “at their own game” by becoming “fitter, more eugenic.”

“In fact, the more dysgenic, the better, I think.”

She closes by arguing that revolution is not “a contest between optimized and properly prepared bodies” and that the very idea is itself fascist.

Keep reading

The Real Elites Vs. The Ruling Elites

Always and everywhere, political institutions are controlled by elites. It doesn’t matter if the regime type is democratic or monarchical. It doesn’t matter if there is a written constitution or not. All political institutions – and certainly every sovereign state – are run by a group of elites who control the means of coercion.The myth of “rule by the people” is precisely that: a myth.

But this leaves a big question open: who are the elites? Wilfredo Pareto, that pioneer of Italian elite theory, convincingly suggests that elites are simply those people who are most skilled in their respective fields. Being skilled does not suggest any sort of virtue or beauty, of course, and we cannot assume that any member of the elite will be more moral or refined than any, say, middle-class mechanic.

In the case of political elites, to be “elite” simply means to be the most effective at organizing and commanding political action. This can be done toward both virtuous ends or evil ends. The political elites excel at the gaining and wielding of political power. Nothing more. In hereditary monarchies, for example, the monarch is a monarch because his ancestors were more effective at using violence – and at stealing and killing – than were their competitors. Their descendants are able to remain in the elite through effective political scheming to maintain their positions. In democracies, those who gain and maintain power are effective at deceiving the voting public and at currying favor with the ruling coalitions of various interest groups. They’re not “the elite” because they are especially virtuous or well educated. They simply excel at cultivating the knowledge necessary to wield the power of the state against their enemies and against potential rivals.

Economic Elites vs. Political Elites

There is, however, often confusion as to the difference between economic elites and political elites. One could say that economic elites are those who are most skilled at the management of property. Yet, the nature of the economic elites depends largely on what type of regime exists within society. In a society that has a mostly market system, the economic elites are those who are most productive in the free marketplace. These are the people who are skilled at entrepreneurship, sales, logistics, investing, and all other aspects of a freely functioning market. In a mostly free society, the economic elites are free to spend most of their time on their activities in the marketplace, and they are thus rewarded for spending their efforts in improving their own productivity. Moreover, all of society benefits from these sorts of economic elites. This is because rewards in the marketplace stem from delivering more goods and services to more people at a price that a growing number of people can afford.

Things are different in a society where the economy is dominated by the state – and thus by the political elite. In such a society, the economic elites are those who are most skilled at using the power of the state to achieve success in the state-regulated marketplace. In this case, the economic elites are those who are able to partner with the regime to obtain policies that benefit the elites through the manipulation and regulation of the market. These policies include bailouts, state-backed monopolies, and an easy-money-fueled financial system. In this system, the economic elites are able to maintain and enhance their positions and their wealth through effective political action, and by serving the political elites instead of customers in the marketplace.

When this happens, we cannot assume that the economic elites are there because they add value to society. Rather, the economic elites in this latter system are parasitical. They rely on the exploitation of others to maintain their positions and to expand their market share. One of the most dramatic examples of this can be seen in the response to the financial crisis that began in 2008.

Had the marketplace been allowed to function, many large banks and other firms would have been bankrupted, and their property repurposed by other, more efficient owners and managers. Those new owners could have become a new economic elite. But thanks to the intervention of the incumbent political elites, failing firms were saved through the redistribution of wealth from the productive classes to hand-picked, politically connected incumbent firms and owners. Thus, firms like Citicorp and AIG were bailed out, new regulations imposed, and firms like JP Morgan greatly expanded their market share. The Federal Reserve’s mass purchasing of mortgage-backed securities rescued a large portion of the financial sector from insolvency. As a result, most of the economic “elite” we find in the financial sector owe their positions to political action rather than any actual skill in the marketplace. Sure, these people are fond of telling themselves that they are rich because “the market” values them so highly. In reality, they are successful because lobbyists have succeeded in propping up their firms and ensuring, through constant monetary inflation, growth in their portfolios.

But this is just one example. In any society where the political elites are prolific spenders, or engage in widespread regulation of the economy, the economy is continually distorted in a way as to favor the politically well connected at the expense of everyone else. For example, the economic “elites” who rely heavily on government contracts – e.g., Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, the founder of Flock Safety, et al – are not in the elite because they are especially productive in a free market. They are in the elite because they are adept at seizing the property of taxpayers through the tax-and-spend mechanism.

Note that in this interventionist system, the real economic elites – the people who would have risen to the top of an actually free economy – are crowded out and kept down by government action that favors certain firms. Who are these would-be elites? We’ll never know, and instead we are left with our counterfeit billionaire class which is “elite” only in their skill at exploiting people who do real work in the private sector.

Keep reading

Far Left Texas Democrat James Talarico to Hold Campaign Event in Los Angeles for Some Reason

If you were running for office in Texas, wouldn’t you hold all of your campaign events in Texas?

The only reason to ask this question is that James Talarico, the far-left Democrat running for Senate in Texas, is planning to hold an event in Los Angeles, California, for some reason. Is this so all of his far-left friends in Hollywood have a chance to meet him and donate cash to his campaign? Why else would he be going there?

It makes sense if you think of it that way. Hollywood leftists are probably his biggest fans.

FOX News reports:

Texas Dem candidate to hold high-dollar Hollywood fundraiser while GOP gathers in Dallas: ‘Fake cowboy’

Texas Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico is set to travel to Los Angeles in September for a high-dollar fundraiser with Hollywood celebrities, according to a report.

Politico reported that “Lost” co-creator Damon Lindelof and his wife, Heidi, will host a fundraiser for Talarico in Brentwood on Sept. 10. Tickets for the event start at $500 and go as high as $13,500, according to the outlet. This will be Talarico’s second Hollywood fundraiser in a few months. The first was held in June and was described by Page Six Hollywood as a “glitzy Dem fundraiser” at the home of Hollywood producer Peter Chernin. Fox News Digital reached out to the Lindelofs and Chernin for comment.

Meanwhile, Talarico’s opponent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, will gather in Dallas for the Republican National Committee’s midterm convention, along with President Donald Trump and other Republicans. The same night Republicans rally in Dallas, former President Barack Obama will headline a Democratic House fundraiser in New York, according to The New York Times. The events put prominent Democrats on the coasts while Republicans gather in Texas…

Talarico is taking heat from Republicans for his out-of-state fundraising. RNC spokesperson Zach Kraft told Fox News Digital that “it is no surprise that James Talarico feels more comfortable in crazy liberal California than when his handlers force him to wear a fake cowboy hat and rent a pickup truck to pretend to be a ‘real’ Texan.”

Nothing about Talarico is genuine.

Keep reading

Ex-Muslim Criticizes Islam, and for Leftists, It’s Time for a Virtue-Signaling Party

Grab your hazmat suit: There has been a severe outbreak of “Islamophobia” in Los Angeles. But don’t worry: the intrepid Mayor Karen Bass is on the job. “Islamophobia,” she declared Friday, “has no place in Los Angeles.”

Bass was late to the party. She made this pronouncement a day after Lindsey P. Horvath, supervisor of Los Angeles County’s third district, denounced the same “vile and dangerous Islamophobia” and added: “It should alarm every one of us: an attack on one community is an attack on us all.” And Horvath was writing two days after the Nexus Project, which combats antisemitism but is apparently branching out, said about the same incident: “This is bigotry, and it should never be met with applause in any room, let alone one at a Jewish event. We call on the sponsoring organizations to condemn this without equivocation.”

Even that was slow on the uptake. It was back on Monday when the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued its marching orders, claiming that the alleged “Islamophobia” was “the same sort of rhetoric that has fueled a rise in anti-Muslim bigotry and violence, including the attack on the Islamic Center of San Diego. The sponsors of this summit should apologize, repudiate these remarks, and support justice for all people, here and abroad.”

The problem for Bass and all the others who were piling on and clutching their pearls over this supposedly “Islamophobic” event was that the speaker who had so enraged Hamas-linked CAIR, such that it had to call out the politicians that it carries around in its pocket like so many nickels and dimes, was not some redneck, knuckle-dragging bigot answering a casting call for white supremacists from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Instead, the speaker that inspired all this posturing and virtue signaling was Mosab Hassan Yousef, who is the son of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, a cofounder of Hamas. While CAIR and Bass and the rest cry about alleged “bigotry,” they’re apparently hoping that no one will notice that the target of their venom knows what he is talking about.

What Mosab Hassan Yousef said that is driving everyone crazy was this: “And there is no room for Islam dominance, especially here in the United States. Let me be very clear about this. I personally, I as an American, I as a taxpayer, I don’t want Muslims in America. Get the f**k out of the United States. Go back to the s******e where you came from and reform your own countries. This country is perfect and it’s much better without your Islamic belief system. Do I need to be more clear than this?”

Mosab Hassan Yousef grew up as a Muslim, among some of the most committed and knowledgeable Muslims in the world. He has, however, rejected it and embraced Christianity, and now he minces no words in speaking about this violent and supremacist ideology. Many will find his words about wanting Muslims out of America to be too strong, but no one can honestly say they’re based on bigotry or ignorance, or even on dislike of Muslims as human beings. He is speaking this way because he has firsthand experience regarding the brutality, inhumanity, and oppression of Islamic law.

Keep reading

Trump Admin Drafts Policy to Let Married Stay-at-Home Parents Collect Child-Care Aid Instead of Paying Strangers to Raise Their Kids

The Trump administration is drafting a Health and Human Services policy that would, for the first time, let a married parent who stays home with the children collect federal child-care money that Washington has spent thirty years routing almost exclusively to day-care centers.

The New York Times, citing people familiar with the talks and a draft document, reports the change is a priority for Vice President JD Vance and would tap the Child Care and Development Fund, the 1990s program built to help low-income parents pay for care so they could work or go to school.

Typical aid runs about $9,000 per child a year.

Under the draft, a married couple in certain income brackets could use that assistance for “parent-based childcare,” meaning one spouse stays home while the other works at least 35 hours a week.

“The change would create the only federal subsidy to pay parents to stay home and raise their children, one of the most significant efforts to date by the Trump administration to harness federal funds to promote a traditional view of families,” the NYT reports.

No new act of Congress is required for this change.

The Times reported, as if it were a negative, “The policy change would effectively create a government incentive for parents to stay home with their children, an idea embraced as part of a broader conservative effort to advance policies that promote more mothers staying at home.”

A federal program that will pay a stranger to raise a child and will not pay a mother or father to do it is not neutral.

Keep reading

Gloria Steinem: The CIA, White Feminism, Intersectionality & COINTELPRO

The obituaries have settled into their shape. Gloria Steinem, feminist icon, dead at ninety-two, a life well lived. Somewhere below the tributes, below the aviator glasses and the Ms. covers, a short paragraph appears. Yes, there was the matter of the CIA. But she addressed it head-on, the paragraph says, and besides, she called the Agency liberal and honorable. That paragraph’s doing quiet work. It’s built so the reader forgives and forgets in the same breath.

We’re not here to withhold or grant forgiveness. We’re here to read the ledger.

The facts aren’t in dispute, and they were never secret. From roughly 1959 to 1962, Steinem directed the Independent Research Service, an operation funded almost entirely by the CIA, whose purpose was to send non-Communist American students to the World Youth Festivals in Vienna and Helsinki to blunt Soviet influence. The money moved through a chain of cutout foundations before it reached her. Ramparts exposed the arrangement in March 1967. Steinem didn’t deny it. She defended it, and said that if she had the choice she’d do it again. Take her at her word. The question that matters isn’t what was in her heart. The question is what the state was buying, and what it was destroying at the same time.

Because there’s a second column in this ledger, and the tributes never print it.

While the CIA was underwriting a liberal, gender-first, anti-Communist internationalism through people like Steinem, the same state was running COINTELPRO. That program operated from 1956 to 1971, and its Black nationalist directive, opened in 1967, named the goal plainly in Hoover’s own memos: prevent the rise of a messiah who could unify the movement. This wasn’t surveillance in the abstract. It was Fred Hampton dead on his mattress in December 1969 in a raid coordinated with the FBI. It was the systematic gutting of SNCC and the Black Panther Party. It was Assata Shakur driven into exile and Angela Davis put on trial for her life. Reach further back and the pattern holds. Claudia Jones, a Black Communist who in 1949 theorized the superexploitation of Black women, the triple burden of race and class and sex decades before the vocabulary caught up, was deported by that same state in 1955.

Set the two columns side by side. One feminism received laundered money and a soft landing in the popular memory. Another current, the one carrying the class analysis and the anti-imperial edge, received infiltrators, indictments, deportation orders, and bullets.

Both statements are literal. This is what we mean when we say the state has a revealed preference. You don’t need to prove that any single person engineered anything. You only need to read what was resourced and what was repressed.

This is where the hagiography’s favorite complaint collapses. Mainstream liberal feminism is often faulted, correctly, for abstracting gender away from class and race, for treating the boardroom ceiling as the frontier while the floor gave way underneath poor and colonized women. The usual explanation is intellectual immaturity, a movement that simply hadn’t yet learned to think in more than one variable. That’s a comforting story, and it’s false. The analysis existed the entire time. It was never missing from feminism. It was carried by the tradition the state was busy dismantling.

Claudia Jones named the interlocking structure in 1949. Frances Beal wrote Double Jeopardy in 1969 out of SNCC, and the Third World Women’s Alliance built organization around it. The National Black Feminist Organization formed in 1973. The Combahee River Collective, in 1977, stated it as flatly as it’s ever been stated, that the major systems of oppression are interlocking, and that a politics adequate to Black women’s lives had to confront race and class and sex and sexuality at once. Kimberlé Crenshaw gave the framework its legal name, intersectionality, in 1989. None of this was a late correction to feminism. It was feminism’s most rigorous line, developed in real time, by the women the funding never found.

So the class-blindness of the feminism that got the CIA’s money and the magazine covers isn’t an accident of the calendar. It’s downstream of a choice. The currents that insisted on class and empire were the currents the state spent a decade and a fortune trying to break. What remained, what could be safely elevated, was a feminism that named patriarchy but left the ownership question alone. The single-axis frame wasn’t the movement’s growing pain. It was, in part, the movement’s survivors, the ones permitted to survive.

Keep reading

Chinese criminals posed as Holocaust victims’ descendants to get German citizenship

A Der Spiegel investigation published Thursday has uncovered an alleged criminal network that helped people, mainly from China, pose as the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Jews persecuted by the Nazis in order to obtain German citizenship and passports.

According to the report, some of the applicants were Chinese nationals seeking to escape law enforcement in their own country and were able to do so with the help of German authorities that accepted fraudulent family histories linking them to Jewish victims of Nazi persecution.

The adoption of Jewish identities by Germans and others is not new and has sometimes been explained by a desire to distance oneself from the legacy of the nation that committed the Nazi crimes, or to claim moral authority and authenticity when criticizing Israel.

Keep reading

WHO’S LEAKING AMERICA’S MILITARY SECRETS? Top Pentagon Officials Forced to Take Polygraphs After Classified Weapons Stockpile Information Reaches Media

Some of America’s highest-ranking military officials were subjected to polygraph examinations during a sweeping Pentagon investigation into the leaking of highly classified information about the nation’s weapons stockpiles.

President Donald Trump was reportedly furious after sensitive details concerning America’s supply of sophisticated weapons appeared in media reports.

According to leftist CBS News, several dozen officials were questioned earlier this summer, including officials assigned to U.S. Central Command and other combatant commands.

The scale of the polygraph operation was described as extraordinarily rare.

Although high-ranking military and civilian officials with access to top-secret information routinely undergo periodic polygraph examinations, sources told CBS that the large number of officials summoned at once indicated that investigators were conducting a targeted leak probe.

The questioning reportedly covered a range of national-security matters, including whether officials had provided sensitive military information to members of the media.

Two sources claimed that none of the officials failed the questions specifically designed to identify the leaker.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Dan Caine was reportedly not among those polygraphed.

The New York Times first reported the broader hunt, saying investigators put roughly 50 members of the Joint Staff through polygraphs in August after a wave of stories about depleted stocks of long-range missiles, Patriot interceptors, and other finite munitions as the United States fights Iran.

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told CBS Friday night the Department “does not comment on internal personnel or investigative matters but takes all leaks of classified national security information extremely seriously and investigates accordingly.”

“Securing classified information is critical to ensuring the security of the United States and of our troops deployed around the world,” Parnell said.

Keep reading