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.

Canada’s government debt projected to hit $2.44 trillion, nearly double since 2007: Fraser Institute

Canada’s combined federal and provincial government debt is projected to nearly double from pre-2008 financial crisis levels, reaching an estimated $2.44 trillion, according to a new report from the Fraser Institute.

The report, titled The Growing Debt Burden for Canadians: 2025 Edition, says combined government net debt has ballooned from roughly $1.21 trillion in 2007/08 to more than $2.3 trillion today, with debt continuing to climb. 

Researchers warn that the debt load is growing faster than the economy itself. The combined federal-provincial debt-to-GDP ratio has risen from 53.2 percent in 2007/08 to nearly 75 percent.

“Government debt — federally and in most provinces — has grown substantially over the past 17 years,” said Fraser Institute fiscal studies director Jake Fuss, co-author of the report. 

The report measures “net debt,” meaning total government liabilities minus financial assets held by governments. The study argues that persistent deficits today will translate into higher taxes and higher debt servicing costs in the future. 

Debt interest payments are already becoming a major expense. Another Fraser Institute study estimates federal and provincial governments will spend a combined $92.5 billion on debt interest payments in 2024/25 alone. 

On a per-person basis, the combined debt burden varies widely across the country. Alberta has the lowest combined debt per person at roughly $40,939, while Newfoundland and Labrador has the highest at nearly $68,861 per resident. Quebec and Ontario also rank among the most indebted provinces per capita.

The Fraser Institute describes itself as an independent, non-partisan public policy think tank.

Keep reading

RFK Jr. Faces Backlash After Hantavirus PREP Act Declaration

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is facing backlash from some in the medical freedom movement after he announced last week that he signed a “targeted PREP Act” declaration to develop and deploy medical countermeasures for hantavirus.

In a post on X, Kennedy said the declaration “helps remove barriers to research and response efforts” for the recent outbreak that has garnered significant media attention during recent weeks.

“HHS is taking this situation seriously and will continue working to protect public health and support the safe development of potential treatments and countermeasures,” he said.

Critics accused Kennedy of contradicting his previous strong stance against the use of the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act, or PREP Act, during the COVID-19 pandemic, and betraying the values of the medical freedom movement.

Defenders argued that the declaration is narrow in scope and timing — it covers only one generic drug, favipiravir, and lasts only until July 18, 2026.

The PREP Act authorizes the health secretary to issue a declaration that exempts manufacturers and distributors of a vaccine or treatment that addresses a public health emergency from legal liability for injuries caused by those products.

The PREP Act became extremely controversial during the COVID-19 pandemic, because it granted blanket liability protection to COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers — including Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax — for nearly every type of injury caused by the vaccines.

As a result, vaccine-injured people have struggled to be recognized, cared for and compensated for their injuries. Vaccine-injured people and the groups representing them have challenged the act’s constitutionality in multiple lawsuits, but have failed to get it overturned.

The Biden administration extended the COVID-19 countermeasures PREP Act declaration through the end of 2029, even though the administration declared the pandemic over.

Kennedy has not rescinded that declaration, despite calls for him to do so.

Keep reading

The Danger Of Chris Murphy’s Collectivism

Senator Chris Murphy’s new book Crisis of the Common Good, released today, warns that six “cults” have poisoned American life: profit, globalism, technology, consumption, credentialism, and corruption. He calls for a revival of collectivism and the “common good” to restore meaning and connection. The message sounds noble until you notice how many of these cults Murphy and his party actively practice while telling the rest of us to reject them. That hypocrisy is not just rhetorical—it reveals why his brand of collectivism is dangerous.

Start with the cult of profit. Murphy condemns corporations for putting earnings above workers and communities. Yet as senator he has backed massive spending packages, green-energy subsidies, and regulatory regimes that deliver windfalls to connected corporations and unions while raising costs for small businesses and families. Connecticut’s own high taxes and business exodus under decades of Democratic governance show the results of this selective outrage. Murphy’s comfortable lifestyle, built on public salary and elite donor networks, hardly models sacrifice for the common good.

The cult of globalism fares worse. Murphy criticizes the flattening of local communities by international forces. In practice he has supported expansive immigration, climate accords that bind U.S. policy to global bureaucracies, and trade arrangements that accelerated manufacturing decline. His “common good” apparently includes open labor markets that depress wages in working-class towns—the very places he claims to champion. True localism would prioritize American workers and sovereignty, not abstract global citizenship.

On technology, Murphy correctly flags social media’s damage to young people. But his party long partnered with Big Tech for content moderation that suppressed dissenting views while amplifying progressive narratives. The same elites who decry “addiction” benefit from the platforms’ power when it serves their ends. Genuine reform would break monopolies through competition, not more Washington control that inevitably favors the connected. Let us not forget he’s all over Instagram, Facebook, and X right now hawking the book, attacking opponents, and building his brand. He uses the platforms daily to enrich his influence while calling for government to regulate their “predatory” side.

Credentialism is Murphy’s personal tell. A Williams College and UConn Law graduate, he rose through the very elite institutions that gatekeep opportunity and devalue trades and practical skills. His policy prescriptions—student-debt transfers and expanded federal higher-education spending—primarily aid those already on the credential ladder while ignoring the skilled trades that built middle-class America. The man who preaches against credential worship is its product.

Consumption and corruption close the circle. Murphy attacks materialism yet pushes entitlement expansions that substitute government checks for productive work and family responsibility. He demands money be removed from politics while thriving in a Democratic fundraising ecosystem fueled by tech, Hollywood, unions, and dark-money networks. His “common good” is curiously selective: centralized power is fine when it advances progressive priorities.

Murphy’s collectivism is not the organic cooperation of families, churches, and local associations. It is top-down state power that crowds out individual responsibility, weakens civil society, and concentrates authority in Washington bureaucracies. History is clear: such approaches erode the very communities they promise to save. The real path to meaning and connection runs through limited government, free enterprise tempered by virtue, strong families, and decentralized decision-making—not another layer of federal programs sold as moral renewal.

Keep reading

Belgian Remigration Activist Convicted of “Hate Speech” Over Factual Lecture on Migration, US State Slams Ruling

A controversial court ruling in Belgium is igniting outrage across Europe, after nationalist activist Dries Van Langenhove was convicted for delivering a lecture that cited crime statistics and criticized the impact of mass immigration—raising fresh concerns about the future of free speech on the continent.

The 33-year-old former member of parliament was found guilty by a Leuven court of “incitement to hatred” and “dissemination of ideas,” following a speech at KU Leuven in early 2024. Critics say the ruling sends a chilling message: even fact-based arguments can now be criminalized if they challenge the prevailing narrative.

Van Langenhove was fined €4,000 (approximately $4,300), adding to a growing list of legal penalties he has faced in recent years. He had previously been sentenced over content posted by others in a private group chat—an outcome his supporters say underscores a broader crackdown on dissent.

At the center of the case was a two-hour lecture that moved beyond its original topic to address migration, crime, and societal change. The speech touched on issues that millions of Europeans are increasingly concerned about—but which are often treated as taboo in official discourse.

Van Langenhove argued that mass immigration is linked to rising crime, housing shortages, and growing strain on public services. These claims, backed by statistics, formed the basis of the charges against him.

He also challenged the dominant explanation of inequality. Rather than accepting structural racism as the sole cause, he argued that differences between groups play a role—an argument widely debated but increasingly restricted in public forums.

“People are not equal, animals are not equal, plants are not equal,” he said during the lecture. The statement was seized upon by the court as evidence of wrongdoing.
Judges acknowledged that his statements were based on data and statistics. However, they ruled that presenting such facts in a way that could create a “hostile atmosphere” was sufficient to justify a conviction.

Crucially, the court made clear that direct incitement to violence was not required. It was enough, they argued, that speech could lead to a general sense of “intolerance.”

That standard, for critics, effectively dismantles meaningful free speech. It allows authorities to punish opinions based not on their truth, but on how they are perceived.

The ruling has reignited comparisons with the United States. Under the First Amendment, even controversial or offensive speech is protected unless it directly incites violence.

The U.S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, Sarah B. Rogers, chimed in on the ruling, warning that policymakers worried about the rise of the so-called “far right” should stop criminalizing accurate, data-driven political speech about mass migration — as the Belgian court’s ruling against Dries Van Langenhove explicitly does. She argued that such prosecutions simply hand a monopoly on these issues to people willing to be labeled “racist,” giving them sole ownership of arguments that large segments of the public see as important and true.

Keep reading

Even Therapists Have Become a Data Mine

There was a time when people could still speak privately. You could sit across from a therapist, talk about your marriage falling apart, your depression, your fears, your finances, or the darkest moments of your life believing those conversations would remain between two human beings. That world is dying rapidly because everything now must be digitized, stored, analyzed, and monetized.

A woman using the therapy app Talkspace discovered that transcripts from her therapy sessions ended up being produced in court during litigation involving her former employer. Let that sink in for a moment. These were not vague notes scribbled down by a therapist. These were detailed digital records discussing her personal life, emotional state, relationships, and finances. The machine remembered everything.

This is what society has become. They tell people to seek help, open up, trust the system, use the apps, go digital, and then they quietly turn human vulnerability into searchable data.

People still fail to understand the danger because they continue believing these technology companies are merely offering services. They are not. They are harvesting human behavior at industrial scale. Every click, every message, every location, every search, every emotional breakdown becomes data to be stored forever.

Talkspace executives reportedly bragged to investors about building one of the largest mental health data banks in existence containing roughly 140 million exchanges between patients and therapists. Human suffering itself is now an asset class. Depression has become data. Trauma has become machine learning material. Your private thoughts are now inventory sitting on corporate servers.

When someone went to therapy, the therapist might keep handwritten notes locked away in a cabinet somewhere. Those notes were incomplete, temporary, and human. Today every word can be transcribed, archived, searched, copied, subpoenaed, breached, or fed into artificial intelligence systems. The conversation never dies because the machine never forgets. And people wonder why society feels colder and less human.

What happens when people realize their darkest thoughts may someday appear in court? What happens when employers, insurance companies, governments, or AI systems can gain access to deeply personal psychological information? You destroy trust itself. People stop speaking honestly. They stop trusting institutions. They begin living cautiously because they know every word may someday be weaponized against them.

This is where the entire digital age has been heading from the start. First they harvested shopping habits. Then browsing history. Then location data. Then biometrics. Now they are harvesting the individual’s inner psychological life. Nothing is sacred anymore because everything has a price.

Keep reading

The Great “Red Hat” Psyop: How the Establishment Co-Opted MAGA

The official narrative spoon-fed to the masses is that the MAGA movement is a grassroots, anti-establishment rebellion aimed at dismantling the uniparty, ending forever wars, and draining the swamp. We are told day in and day out that the system is terrified of this populist uprising, but when we strip away the partisan cheerleading, we are witnessing one of the most successful psychological operations in modern political history. The establishment didn’t defeat the populist uprising; they bought it, rebranded it with a red hat, and used it to manufacture consent for the exact neoconservative, state-expanding policies the movement initially swore to destroy.

If a Democrat had expanded the surveillance state, spiked the national debt, unilaterally banned firearms accessories, and filled their cabinet with Wall Street mega-donors and war hawks, the right would have revolted in the streets. Because there is an “R” next to the name, however, they cheer and beg for more. The state is not shrinking in the slightest. It is merely under new management, and the boot on your neck has simply been painted a different color.

If you want to understand how a purportedly anti-war movement was so easily hijacked by the establishment, look no further than the grifter class of MAGA influencers who actively manufactured consent for the pivot. Social media personalities like Catturd and Gunther Eagleman—alongside prominent digital operatives like Benny Johnson and Jack Posobiec—spent the entirety of the campaign posturing as staunch non-interventionists. They loudly decried the military-industrial complex and the endless funding of foreign proxy wars. Yet, the moment the administration changed hands and the military crosshairs shifted toward sovereign nations like Iran, these same influencers entirely abandoned their supposed principles. They are now openly salivating over the prospect of flattening a sovereign nation, cheering on the exact same neoconservative warmongering they built their alternative-media brands opposing. It raises a glaring, uncomfortable question: are these digital operatives simply spineless sycophants, or are they quietly being paid to parrot the uniparty’s new, blood-soaked marching orders?

The sheer hypocrisy of this digital vanguard is especially sickening when contrasted with those who actually held the line. Before his brutal assassination, Charlie Kirk was one of the most outspoken voices against the neoconservative push for a war with Iran. Regardless of where one stood on his broader politics, Kirk used his massive platform to fiercely oppose the very foreign entanglements the current administration is now aggressively pursuing. Had he not been killed, there is little doubt he would be standing firmly against this blatant betrayal of the anti-war platform today. Instead, the influencers who rushed to fill the void have chosen the path of least resistance. They now operate as state-sanctioned PR firms for an aggressive military agenda simply because the bombs are authorized by a president wearing a red tie. By transforming genuine anti-interventionist sentiment into rabid partisan cheerleading, these grifters provided the ideological cover necessary for the state to march the country right back into the endless wars the base initially voted to escape.

Consider the campaign promise to end the forever wars, pull out of foreign entanglements, and put “America First.” The empirical reality of the administration’s foreign policy is a direct continuation of the military-industrial complex’s most aggressive ambitions. The administration has stacked its ranks with hawkish neoconservatives and previous “never-Trumpers,” such as Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and even Lindsey Graham, all of whom prioritize regime change and unyielding military support for Israel over domestic liberty.

Dropping bombs and violently coercing the US taxpayer to fund a global military empire in the name of a foreign country is a blatant violation of human freedom and constitutional limits. The state continues to extort the working class to fund foreign militaries and interventions, regardless of the populist rhetoric spilling from Trump’s podium. This is not America First; it is the empire first, Israel first, Lockheed Martin first, and it is funded by the silent theft of the American citizen.

Keep reading

House Passes E15 Bill as Government Panics Over Energy Crisis Begins

Congress is pushing nationwide year-round E15 gasoline because they are worried about fuel supply disruptions and soaring prices as the war cycle intensifies. They call it “consumer choice” and “energy independence,” but when you strip away the political marketing, what they are really doing is diluting the fuel supply because they are terrified of shortages and price spikes.

The House just passed H.R. 1346, the Nationwide Consumer and Fuel Retailer Choice Act, by a vote of 218-203. The bill would permanently allow year-round sales of E15 gasoline nationwide. E15 is gasoline blended with 15% ethanol instead of the standard 10%. Congress and the EPA are presenting this as some patriotic victory for farmers and consumers while pretending Americans are not noticing what is really taking place.

The government keeps saying E15 lowers prices at the pump. Of course, it does on paper. You are blending more ethanol into the fuel supply. Ethanol contains less energy per gallon than pure gasoline. That means your mileage declines and your tank empties faster. People end up buying more fuel more often while politicians brag that prices “fell” a few cents per gallon. Americans are paying more for less while Washington pretends this is economic progress.

The EPA openly admitted the purpose behind the emergency waivers was to “prevent disruption in America’s fuel supply” as the Iran war pushed energy markets into panic. They are not doing this because the economy is strong. They are doing this because they are worried about supply itself.

“President Trump is unleashing American Energy Dominance, and today’s action will directly lower prices at the pump and gives a clear demand signal to our domestic biofuels producers. Allowing the summer sale of E-15 will provide drivers more options at the pump, and deliver a bigger domestic market for American farmers,” said U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins. The government is congratulating itself for putting lipstick on a pig. Trump spent years condemning Biden’s energy policies that led to elevated prices for different reasons. Washington does not want voters to look at an $ 8-per-gallon situation and suddenly realize that government policy has failed yet again because politicians continually act in their own self-interest while jeopardizing the entire country. The people always suffer when government instigates war. Quite unfortunate as Trump promised to keep America out of the Middle East, but somewhere along the way he morphed from a businessman into a politician. Human nature is consistent.

Governments dilute and stretch what they can at the beginning of a crisis. They lower standards quietly while telling the public everything is under control. You see it in currencies, banking, food quality, and now fuel. The objective is always the same: make a limited supply appear larger. Could this improve consumer sentiment regarding energy? People are still going to pay more at the pump. The end result is higher prices which equates to angry and fearful consumers. It is absolutely insulting for our overlords to question our intelligence in this manner. They genuinely believe we are too stupid to notice.

Keep reading

SOCIALISTS GOING DOWN: Spanish Anti-Corruption Police Raid the Headquarters of PM Sánchez’s PSOE Party in Probe of Illegal Funding

The Spanish Socialists are crumbling under multiple corruption investigations.

Today (24), Spanish anti-corruption police have raided the headquarters of PM Pedro Sánchez’s socialist PSOE party.

This is yet another damaging development in a season of scandals that have sparked talks about the government having to resign and hold snap elections later this year.

Visegrad24 on Telegram:

“The agents were sent to secure evidence for an ongoing probe into the alleged illegal financing of the country’s ruling party.

The raid comes just days after the socialist former PM José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero was indicted on corruption charges linked to the Venezuelan regime.

Today’s raid is linked to an unrelated investigation overseen by Spain’s Anti-Corruption Prosecutor.

Many in the closest circle around PM Sanchez, including his wife and brother, are already under criminal investigation for corruption.”

Keep reading

Federal Court Strikes Down Landmark Fluoride Ruling on Technicality — ‘Not the Science’

 A federal appeals court has vacated a landmark decision that found fluoridated drinking water poses an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals did not challenge the substance of the lower court’s findings — that fluoride is toxic to children and ought to be regulated. Instead, the court based its decision on procedural issues related to the lower court’s handling of the litigation.

The case will now go back to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, where District Judge Edward Chen will be required to exclude all scientific evidence that became available after 2020.

Michael Connett, attorney for the plaintiffs, told The Defender the court “instructed Judge Chen to travel back in time to 2020 and make this ruling based on a stale factual record.”

Connett said the directive to ignore years’ worth of evidence on fluoride’s dangers runs counter to the intent of the TSCA — which is to protect hundreds of millions of Americans from substances that are harmful to human health.

The federal appeals court ruling, handed down late Thursday, stemmed from a lawsuit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) brought by consumer advocacy groups including Food & Water Watch, the Fluoride Action Network (FAN), and Moms Against Fluoridation.

The groups sued after the EPA refused to consider their 2016 citizens’ petition asking the agency to regulate fluoride.

After two bench trials, Chen ruled that fluoride at the federally recommended concentration of 0.7 milligrams/liter (mg/L) posed an “unreasonable risk” to children’s health and ordered the EPA to regulate it accordingly.

However, the 9th Circuit panel said the lower court violated the “party presentation principle” — a legal doctrine requiring courts to act as neutral arbiters rather than taking control of a case’s factual development.

Connett said the decision was “a very expansive and unprecedented application of the party presentation principle.” He said that to date, “this principle has really only been applied to situations where judges raise new legal issues, not where judges use procedural mechanisms to resolve the issues presented.”

Keep reading

Pete Hegseth Details Trump’s Orders for Department of War to Protect Nigerian Christians

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth detailed President Donald Trump’s instructions for the Department of War to protect Christians in Nigeria who were being targeted and murdered by ISIS terrorists.

Giving some examples of what the establishment media does not focus on when it comes to President Trump and the Department of War, Hegseth pointed to the plight of Christians in Nigeria.

“I just want to note one more thing to give you a sense of how committed this president is. Maybe a year ago he heard the call of Nigerian Christians who were being targeted and killed by ISIS in Nigeria, and he said, ‘Pete, I want the War Department to focus on ensuring that we do everything we can to protect those Christians,’” Hegseth revealed during Tuesday’s Cabinet meeting.

“Partnerships like that can take time behind the scenes, but he never wavered on it,” he continued, explaining that they put out their assets and have successfully killed one of the ISIS heads inflicting harm on Nigerian Christians.

“Over the last month — and there hasn’t been much coverage of this — we killed ISIS’ number two in Nigeria, who is most responsible for killing Christians and trying to target the U.S. homeland, and have since — because of the intel we gathered — killed hundreds of ISIS members who were targeting and killing Christians in Nigeria, creating a whole new opportunity there,” the secretary revealed.

“So, there’s a lot of things we do that the media pays attention to, and a lot of things the President empowers the department to do on behalf of the American people that he deserves great credit for,” Hegseth continued, noting that the American people are happy with what the president is doing as evidenced by the increased recruitment rates.

“Thanks to the investments that you’ve made in this department, firing on all cylinders for the second year in a row, we’re at historic recruitment rates,” Hegseth said. “Last year we said that here, this year we beat it even faster. The American people are excited about what you’re bringing to our department.”

Keep reading