Europe 2.0, Beyond Brussels: The End Of The European Union As We Know It

Europe has reached the end of an era. Not the end of its history, but the end of its false form. For decades, the European Union served as the great substitute project of a continent that no longer dared to think politically. It promised peace without power, order without a people, unity without roots, and prosperity without cost. That was its founding lie, and it was a lie from the very beginning.

Political order does not grow out of procedural routines, commission papers, or moral self-incantation. It grows out of peoples, interests, borders, loyalties, and the willingness to defend what is one’s own. Legitimate authority rests on a people and its consent, not on an apparatus and its expertise. That older idea—that government draws its life from the governed rather than from the competence of its administrators—is precisely what Brussels has spent two generations trying to administer away.

That is why today’s EU is not the high point of European history but its bureaucratic state of exhaustion. It is too centralized to be free and too artificial to be binding. It commands an immense body of rules and possesses no sustaining political soul. It has institutions, but not the kind of historically grown legitimacy that holds a community together across generations.

And so it answers every crisis with the same reflex: more centralization, more redistribution, more standardization, more discipline. What is sold as the solution is only the problem enlarged.

Europe is not failing because there is too little Brussels. Europe is failing because there is too much Brussels. It is failing because of a political class that no longer sees the continent as a historical space but as an object of administration. It is failing because of an ideology that treats every organically grown difference as a defect and therefore regards peoples, traditions, and national particularities as raw material to be processed. And it is failing because of a functional elite that has learned to disguise power as morality and to pass off its own interests as universal values.

There is a name for this kind of governance: the administrative state—the permanent, unelected layer that survives every election, answers to no voter, and grows whether the public wants it to or not. Brussels is that layer raised to the continental power and freed from even the inconvenience of a national electorate. There is no European demos to vote the managers out. That is not a flaw in the design. It is the design.

The real scandal of Europe today is not even its material mismanagement but its intellectual arrogance. The Union behaves as though it could suspend history—as though cultures could be harmonized like technical standards, as though political loyalty could be decreed the way one issues a packaging regulation. As though a continent of radically different historical experiences, economic structures, demographic trajectories, and security realities could be pressed into one standardized form without damage. Yet the damage is already visible. The EU is not unifying Europe. It is wearing it down.

Keep reading

98-Year-Old Man Beaten with Broomstick and Chair by Democratic Socialists of America Campaign Worker Over Political Pamphlet Argument in Brooklyn Lobby

A 98-year-old man was brutally attacked by a 27-year-old woman handing out campaign flyers for a Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) candidate in a Brooklyn apartment building lobby at roughly on Thursday afternoon.

The elderly victim was left with minor head injuries after he was punched, kicked, and struck with a broomstick and a metal chair.

Tashara Abel, 27, was stuffing reelection flyers into mailboxes for Anthony Beckford, a DSA member and New York State Committee Member running for re-election as a Democratic district leader in the June 23 primary, when the elderly man walked in, and the two began arguing over the campaign materials, police and neighbors said, according to a report from the New York Post.

Abel “repeatedly punched and kicked the older man” before striking him with the broomstick and a metal chair, cops said.

Surveillance photos of the suspect leaving the building were released by police.

The victim was treated for his head injuries at the scene and declined being transported to the hospital.

CBS News reports:

Neighbors said they know the victim.

“He’s a fairly nice guy, so everyone who walks up and down here, either with their kids or are delivering stuff, like, they know who he is,” said neighbor Pierre Verna. “He’s a good guy, been around for a long time. So hopefully he’s alright.”

“Why would someone want to do something like that to someone like that? It’s heartbreaking. It’s sad. I don’t know. I’m confused as to why. What was the reason for that?” another neighbor said.

Beckford’s campaign told CBS that they are “reviewing the incident.”

“I am currently reviewing the situation to better understand the full circumstances, and I have personally reached out to the voter involved to ensure he is doing well and has the support he needs,” the statement began.

“While volunteers may operate independently, anyone associated with my campaign is expected to conduct themselves with respect and professionalism at all times, and if it is determined that an individual connected to my campaign acted inappropriately, appropriate action will be taken,” the statement continued.

“We will continue to monitor this matter closely and remain prepared to cooperate with the appropriate authorities as needed, as our priority is maintaining a safe and respectful environment for all residents.”

Abel has been charged with three counts of assault, burglary, and criminal possession of a weapon.

Keep reading

The Praxian Genocidal Kill Chain — Part 2

In Part 1, we discussed how a group of Silicon Valley oligarchs, the self-professed “Praxians,” have seized control of the Trump administration and have aligned themselves with the “startup nation” of Israel. In my latest book, The Technocratic Dark State, I refer to the Praxians as NEONERDS, but we’ll continue to use their own moniker in this series of articles.

In Part 1, we also explored Praxian companies’ practical symbioses with Israeli SIGINT, especially Unit 8200. The evidence strongly indicates that the October 7th Hamas attack, which the Israeli Zionist Likud government cited as the justification for its genocidal destruction of Gaza, was a LIHOP false flag attack, in which an unknown number of Israelis were evidently killed—not by Hamas, but by their own military. That the attack proceeded unimpeded as it did was officially attributed primarily to SIGINT “failures.” Thus, the strong possibility exists that the Praxians participated in the extraordinary sequence of supposed SIGINT mistakes, oversights, and miscalculations that allegedly enabled Hamas to attack Southern Israel virtually unopposed.

The result of this LIHOP false flag attack was the deployment of the Praxians’ genocidal kill chains in Gaza. And now we have a larger Middle East conflagration. Not only have Israel and the US jointly attacked Iran, but the Israeli government, with Praxian kill chain assistance, is attempting to do to Lebanon what it has already done to Gaza. In Part 3, we shall see how the Praxians’ fingerprints are also observable in so-called intelligence “misjudgments” that led the US, for otherwise inexplicable reasons, to attack Iran.

Also discussed in Part 1 was how the Praxians have used their signature investment strategy—which they call “accelerationism”—to disrupt everything from markets to international relations by deploying “creative destruction” as their version of a “revolutionary tool.” Indeed, just as the Praxians’ accelerated “digital kill chain” is central to the devastation of Palestinian lives, so is it now featuring in a “new kind of war” in the Middle East.

Keep reading

Russia-China Summit Advances Multipolar Vision, Analysts Say

Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping concluded a two-day summit in Beijing on May 20, 2026, signing roughly 40 cooperation documents and adopting a joint declaration on a multipolar world order, according to state media reports [1]. The declaration rejects the idea of a single ideological center and advocates for civilizational diversity, according to analysis by Ladislav Zemanek, a non-resident research fellow at the China-CEE Institute and expert of the Valdai Discussion Club [2]. Zemanek wrote that the partnership “is not a crusade against the West. It is a revolt against unipolarity — against the idea that one civilization, one ideology, and one political model should dominate the entire planet indefinitely” [2]. The summit came just days after Xi hosted U.S. President Donald Trump, a timing analysts described as deliberate [3].

Background of the Partnership

Russia and China first issued a joint declaration on multipolarity in 1997, according to historical records cited by analysts [2]. At that time, the Soviet Union had collapsed and American unipolarity seemed unchallenged, but both powers sensed the instability of a world organized around a single ideological center, Zemanek wrote [2]. The current partnership is rooted in opposition to unipolarity and perceived Western dominance of international institutions, officials said. Zemanek described the partnership as “a revolt against the idea that one civilization should dominate the planet indefinitely” [2].

Scholar Glenn Diesen notes that the relationship has evolved despite a historical power imbalance, including Russia’s appropriation of more than 1.5 million square kilometers of Chinese territory during the Qing Dynasty [4]. However, Diesen also observes that confrontation without established rules has spiraled from Ukraine to Syria, underscoring the need for major powers to consult on consequential issues [4]. The 2026 summit marked the 25th anniversary of the Russia-China Treaty of Good-Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, which laid the foundation for the strategic partnership [1].

Keep reading

Democrat Running to Replace Pelosi Opened Women’s Prisons to TRANS Inmates and Eased Laws on SEX OFFENDERS

For nearly four decades, Nancy Pelosi represented San Francisco in Congress and became one of the most powerful Democrats in American history. Now, as California voters decide who will replace her, one candidate has emerged as the frontrunner: State Senator Scott Wiener.

Most Americans have probably never heard his name.

That is exactly why his record deserves scrutiny.

Wiener is not just another California Democrat running in a deep-blue district. He is one of the clearest examples of how far the modern Democrat Party has moved from ordinary American values. If elected to Congress, he would bring one of the most extreme records in California politics to Washington.

In the primary race for California’s 11th Congressional District, Wiener advanced to the November general election against San Francisco Supervisor Connie Chan. According to recent reports, Wiener led the primary field while Chan, who was backed by Pelosi, finished second. 

The race is now a contest to determine who will inherit one of the safest Democrat seats in the country.

But while the media will likely describe Wiener in polite terms as a “pro-housing” lawmaker or an “LGBTQ rights advocate,” voters deserve to know the rest of the story.

Wiener authored SB 145, a bill that changed sex offender registration rules for certain adults convicted of sexual activity with minors when the age gap is within ten years. Supporters claimed the bill addressed unequal treatment in California law. 

But for many parents, the obvious question was why California lawmakers were focused on weakening sex offender registration requirements in cases involving minors at all.

Wiener also authored SB 107, which made California a refuge state for minors seeking so-called “gender-affirming care.” In practice, the law placed California on the front lines of the transgender medical movement and shielded certain records and proceedings from out-of-state laws. 

For parents across the country who believe children should not be pushed into irreversible medical decisions, this was not moderation. It was radicalism.

He also pushed SB 357, which repealed California’s loitering law related to prostitution, making it harder for law enforcement to respond to prostitution and trafficking concerns in communities already struggling with public disorder.

This is the pattern. On issue after issue, Wiener has used state power to advance the priorities of California’s progressive activist class, even when those priorities collide with public safety, parental rights, and basic common sense.

That is why his congressional campaign matters nationally.

San Francisco is one of the bluest districts in America. Whoever wins Pelosi’s seat will almost certainly become another reliable vote for the Democrat agenda. 

Keep reading

Mamdani: ‘ICE Should Be Abolished’ — ‘No Way to Reform This Kind of Cruelty’

Saturday on MS NOW’s “The Weekend,” New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) should be abolished.

Co-host Eugene Daniels said, “Just over the river here in new Jersey, there’s the Delaney facility. There are folks there that are on hunger strike over the conditions. What’s your reaction? And I guess, more importantly for New Yorkers, what prevents a facility like that from opening here in New York?”

Mamdani said, “I think there are a few things. One is a reaction of pain and seeing what people have to go through in these kinds of facilities. And these are conditions that they offend the conscience of so many, not just here in New York City but frankly, across the country. This is partially why I have put forward a vision alongside so many others to say that ICE should be abolished, that there is no way to reform this kind of cruelty that we’re seeing endemic in the way that immigration is being enforced across the country. When it comes to our city, we are proud of our sanctuary city policies. We are proud of the policies we’ve put forward, and also the executive orders we’ve put forward to ensure that every single agency is complying with those policies.”

Daniels said, “What do you say to people who say language? And there’s Democrats in DC who say language like, abolish ICE or unhelpful for the political health of the Democratic Party?”

Mamdani said, “I think if we we’ve listened to them before and look where we are. I think it’s time to develop a new vision for this party, one that is unflinching in its beliefs and also uncompromising in its principles.”

Keep reading

Radical Professor at NYC’s New School Calls to Dismantle America ‘By Any Means Necessary’ While Defending Iran’s Terror Regime

In a chilling display of ideological derangement, a political science professor at The New School in New York City took to the podium at a Democratic Socialists of America meeting to champion the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and declare her desire to see the United States brought low.

Corinna Mullin’s “Islamic Revolution Teach-in” wasn’t an academic exercise in nuance—it was a brazen endorsement of America’s enemies wrapped in the language of class struggle and anticolonialism.

This isn’t the isolated rant of a fringe activist. It’s a window into the moral inversion that has captured significant portions of American higher education, where terrorist organizations are recast as defenders of the working class and the world’s most powerful republic is painted as the ultimate oppressor. Mullin, who previously led destructive anti-Israel protests at CUNY that caused millions in damage, now teaches at The New School after her reinstatement following termination.

During the hour-and-a-half session, Mullin praised Iran’s military for depleting U.S. weapons stockpiles and claimed the regime had achieved “phenomenal results” through its indigenous industry.

“We need to bring the empire down by any means necessary,” she declared, framing Iran’s actions as a blow against American power. She went further, defending the IRGC—a U.S.-designated terrorist organization responsible for the deaths of countless innocents, including Americans—as a protector of workers and the embodiment of resistance.

Keep reading

Socialist Mayor Responds After Seattle Residents Use Steel Planters to Block Streets from Criminals

Desperate Seattle residents putting up steel flower planters as barriers to block off their streets to quell runaway crime have finally drawn the attention of the city’s socialist mayor.

Mayor Katie Wilson said this week that Seattle is “acting now” on shootings and drug and human trafficking-related crime after being pressed by a local news anchor on why citizens had to take matters into their own hands before City Hall did anything.

The location at issue is the neighborhood hit by reoccurring violence tied to Aurora Avenue on the city’s north side.

Fox 13 co-anchor Hana Kim told the mayor:

We’re hearing from residents saying there are constant shootings there, bullets going through homes, human trafficking is up, prostitution is up. Desperate residents put up steel planters to block some of the crime. They say it was working, but then the city took it away and said that they need to have a permanent solution, so they want to study it. But at what point do you act?

“So we are acting now,” Wilson responded. “A number of members of my team… were up doing a walk with the neighborhood a few days ago, and I totally understand why people put the barriers in the streets.”

Residents along the corridor spent Memorial Day weekend constructing the barriers out of metal planters, concrete blocks, and other items to block streets “after weeks of shootings, high-speed chases, and crime concerns tied to prostitution, trafficking, and alleged turf wars,” Fox News reported.

One resident, Peter Orr, told KTVB 7, “It’s either this, or bullets in my neighbor’s houses.” The Mayor was mocked online for her residents taking such drastic action to ensure their own safety.

Conservative commentator Paul Szypula wrote on X, “When progressive policies result in neighborhoods literally barricading themselves off… that says everything.”

Keep reading

Far-Left Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson Can’t Even Stick to Her Own Woke Boycott

Leftists love a good boycott until, of course, it interferes with something they enjoy.

Last year, far-left Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson virtue-signaled her anti-capitalism “pro-labor” views to her base and urged them to boycott coffee giant Starbucks.

In November, while speaking at a Starbucks Workers United rally outside the recently closed Reserve Roastery on Capitol Hill, Wilson said, “That is why I am proud to join them on their picket line and proud to say loud and clear, I am not buying Starbucks and you should not either.”

In a recent interview, however, Wilson admitted she can’t even stay committed to her own performative woke directives.

During an interview published on Wednesday with FOX 13, Seattle co-anchor Hana Kim asked Wilson if she still supports the boycott.

“I had the pleasure of visiting the Pike Place Market Starbucks a little while ago, and I ordered, I think it was a blueberry muffin latte that was like a staff creation.”

“I guess I broke my boycott,” Wilson continued.

“And yeah, but I, you know, I don’t know. What do you want me to say about that?”

Wilson’s decision to prioritize wokeness over the economic interests of her community’s people has had real-world consequences.

Wilson, however, has laughed at the notion that millionaires are leaving the city over new and higher taxes supported by her and her cohorts, saying ‘Bye!’ as she shrugged it off glibly.

Keep reading

Democrat Candidates Hate on Trump with Ease but Struggle to Talk Policy

Democrat candidates across the country have been speaking out against President Donald Trump with ease but appear to struggle to answer basic policy questions on the campaign trail.

Democrat lawmakers and candidates alike have hurled insults at President Trump’s administration and the commander-in-chief himself. Referring to Trump as a dictatorNazifascistHitlerevil personmurderer, and more is simply par for the course. However, when it comes to their own positions and policies some Democrats appear to struggle.

In New Jersey, Democrat congressional candidate Rebecca Bennett was asked if “people should stop trying to kill the President” given the numerous assassination attempts in recent years — the latest incident unfolding at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner.

She could not even answer that simple question, remaining silent while a staffer waved a sign in the questioner’s face.

Meanwhile, over in New Hampshire, congressional Democrat Stefany Shaheen refused to condemn scandal-plagued Graham Platner.

Keep reading