StatCounter

Tuesday, December 9, 2025

"When An Old Friend Takes Her Own Life"

"When An Old Friend Takes Her Own Life"
by Charles Hugh Smith

"When an old friend takes her own life, your own life is irrevocably diminished. What seemed to matter before no longer matters, and what seemed to make sense no longer makes sense. My friend had recently moved 1,000 miles away, to a town which had long extended a magnetic draw on her. But she knew no one there, and since her work was all done on computer, she toiled alone. Like any other human being in those conditions, she was lonely. Yes, she had a loyal companion in her dog, and two very close friends here in California, and a constellation of lesser friends like me; but it was not enough at a critical moment.

She'd had those moments before, and been saved: just as she'd gathered the pills to swallow, a friend had called, and she'd gotten past that moment of dark obsession. Of all the past days' memories and thoughts, one returns: what if I had sensed her despair and called her at that moment? And why didn't I sense her need for reassurance and human contact at that critical hour? I have often dreamed of her, and had done so just the week before; it was a vivid dream, not at all alarming, and I'd recounted it to her in an email. She'd made no response, and I'd given it no further thought. Was the dream a premonition? No; but perhaps it was a signal, if not of distress, then of some tendril of distress.

It is convenient is think our friends resilient, just as it is convenient for adults to believe children are resilient when turmoil or tragedy strikes the family. Yes, children are resilent--they are human beings. But they are not endlessly resilient, and their quiet after death or upheaval is not resilience or resolve, it is the numbing of terrible pain.

And so this false reliance on resilience nags at me; I was too self-absorbed to think through the underlying conditions in my dear friend's life, and how lonely she might feel. Her childhood was not positive, nor was her family more than grudgingly supportive; there were always squabbles over money and demands for fealty she could not meet. She was resilient, but only just so; and I should have been alert to the proximity of her limits.

But I am also keenly aware of the limits of my influence in her life; though we each wish with all our hearts that we could have saved her in that moment of supreme temptation and pain, there are limits to our influence.

If you think of your oldest, closest friends - I have known and loved her for 37 years now - then we cannot recall all the thousands of words exchanged or spoken, or the thousands of hours spent together. We recall some few words and scenes, and it is those few we have to cherish and ponder. But what caused us to recall those moments and not others?

We are ripe to influence and connection only rarely; even our closest friends only influence our thinking and emotions at certain unpredictable junctures. After the fact, often when things have gone awry, we remember what they told us, or the comment they made off-handedly, or perhaps most rarely, their earnestly offered advice which we'd promptly ignored.

And so I hold two uncomfortably conflicting truths: that I could have been, and should have been, a better friend to her these past few months, when she needed all her friends' presence and understanding. But feeling this, and knowing it to be painfully true does not alter the limits of my influence in her life. Perhaps I could have contacted her in just the right moment, when my call or words could have tipped her away from that terrible decision; but more likely, that is a vain hope of a heartbroken friend, looking back from the periphery of her life.

For there are limits to us, this poor amalgam of brain and emotion; yes, faith can help, pets can help, friends and family can help, medication can help, insight can help, resolve can help -but none of these, or all of them put together, is guaranteed to overcome the darkness within us at its bleakest. The sufferer must be attuned to that particular wavelength at that moment in time; and if they have spun beyond our reach, then our ability to save them is lost as well.

Those of you who were born with minds which don't follow the happier pathways, the easier pathways, know that the "normal" person cannot understand the despair felt by those prone to one or more of the many madnesses which plague the human mind and spirit. Yes, we all know despression and anxiety, but those blessed with standard-issue minds will never experience the bottomlessness the others experience.

In a peculiarity of natural selection, or God's will (perhaps, despite the false labeling imposed by language, they amount to the same thing), the human spirits with the most enthusiasm for life, the ones with the poet's spark, the ones with the keenest sensibilities and sensitivities to life, are the ones most often drawn to that terrible cliff of self-destruction.

Some may mock Thanatos, the urge to self-destruction, the yin to the will to live's yang, as illusion. But it is real, and if you have not felt it, then count your blessings.

It is ironic, and tragic, that the selfish among us, the bitter types who have soured on life and who tap an endless well of bile to blame others for their own difficulties, or those who always find the energy to trumpet their own self-glory, never end their own lives. They cling on, as if the will to sow discord and ego are indestructable. No, it is the fragile ones, the thoughtful ones, who are drawn to that dark edge, and who jump; for life is too painful to bear at times, and they think not of faith or the love of their friends and family, but of escape.

It is an illusion, a cherished one, and one I wish was true, that love alone can save a lovely soul in extremis. She was loved, dearly, and yet we who loved her could not save her. We cannot but wish with all our own lifeforce that we could have done so, but there are limits, even to love. How I wish I had felt an urge to pick up the phone and call her that day, that hour, in the hope that perhaps that simple act would have distracted her, or comforted her just enough to stay her hand. But I had felt no such urge, and so the moment was lost.

To wish for that is to wish for powers and strengths I do not possess; I am just another muddled, muddling-through human, struggling daily with my own weaknesses and demons, trying not to fail those I love in this life. But I cannot help but feel I failed her, and that haunts me, and will haunt me, even as I know that to want that power in her life is not the same as actually wielding it. Though it is natural to wish for a limitless ability to save such a dear soul, perhaps it is overstating our reach.

When an old friend takes her own life, then you come to know how little you knew of her and of her life in that distant town. There are limits on what a friend can know, at least a friend who is not in the inner circle; and perhaps even they cannot know.

We were close at times, something like cousins or perhaps at the very best, as she once told me, siblings; she had no brothers. There is no good analog or word for friendships with no romantic frisson between men and women. We did not look anything alike; I am tall and fair, and she was very petite, with skin and eyes far different from my own.

She was the much better writer, the one who deservedly won the notice of mentors and prize committees. In comparison, I am a plodder, the aspirant who rows along without attracting much notice because, well, I'm just not that good. I thought her beautiful, and liked looking at her; she had an enthusiasm for things, and life, which I admired and even envied at times.

Now she is gone, and my life is so much poorer. My only consolation, and it too is a poor one, is that I had just written her that I loved her very much, and had always loved her. She'd made no answering comment, for it was known, and understood; but I hope, in my secret heart, that it gave her some small solace to read it, and to know it was true."

"Life is an end in itself, and the only question as to whether 
it is worth living is whether you have had enough of it."
- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

"How It Really Is"

"Government Shutdown Imminent As Health Care Deal Collapses"

Full screen recommended.
Snyder Reports, 12/9/25
"Government Shutdown Imminent
 As Health Care Deal Collapses"
Comments here:

"Everything is Changing Right Before Our Eyes - This Affects Us All"

Full screen recommended.
Dan, I Allegedly, 12/9/25
"Everything is Changing Right 
Before Our Eyes - This Affects Us All"
"The truth about the economic crisis unfolding now is clear - everything is changing, from the housing market to risky investments. In this video, I share why the American dream feels out of reach for many, how generational shifts are impacting homeownership, and what you need to know about the current state of the economy. From unaffordable homes to skyrocketing debt, the challenges are real, but there are actionable insights to help you navigate this new reality."
Comments here:

Bill Bonner, "Massacre in Beziers"

The Death of Simon de Monfort at the Battle of Toulouse in 1218
"Massacre in Beziers"
by Bill Bonner

"Kill Them all. God will recognize His own."
- Simon de Monfort, perhaps repeating what 
was said by the Abbot of Beziers.

Baltimore, Maryland - "On the 22nd of July 1209, the crusader army arrived at the gates of Beziers. The town, in what is today Southwest France, was said to be a hotbed of wrongthink. They were there to confront the ‘bad guys’...heretics. These ‘Cathars’ neither robbed nor killed. They were worse; they stole souls. And so, a powerful army of crusaders and riff-raff, representing the regional hegemon, attacked.

But wait. The attackers faced much the same problem faced by the IDF in Gaza...or the US Navy in the Caribbean. All of the town’s residents were not heretics. Many of them were actually good Catholics. How were the attackers to know which was which? Simon de Montfort, the crusaders’ commander had his answer. “Kill them all,” he is alleged to have said. Which is what the crusaders did.

If there had been a ‘liberal’ media back then, it would have been outraged and appalled by the cruel, merciless and pointless “massacre in Beziers.” There was no such media to comment. But there is today, and it has finally gotten itself worked up to chronicle the backsliding of 21st century America to medieval standards. It is not so much the murder of people on boats...1500 miles from the US...who were allegedly going to commit a crime that causes their righteous blood to bubble up. But finishing off the survivors must have crossed some kind of line. For now, the video has been tucked away with the Epstein files. Still, it doesn’t take much imagination to have some sympathy for defenseless people adrift on the sea.

Killing shipwrecked sailors is an obvious crime...the worst kind of crime - senseless and intentionally wicked. Even in times of real war, enemy sailors are not gunned down in the water; they are plucked up and put in prisoner of war camps.

What is perhaps most amazing about this is that you can look all up and down the chain of command. You will find intelligent, thoughtful people. If they accidentally hit a puppy while driving home, tears might come into their eyes. Many go to church or temple, regularly recalling that we are meant to ‘do unto others as we would have them do unto us.’ Some identify as Republican. Others lean to the Democrats. But the remarkable thing is that all of them will commit murder if they get the ok from the higher ups. Senator Rick Scott: “Blow them to smithereens.”

Didn’t Senator Scott swear to uphold the Constitution? Has he never heard of the Ten Commandments? The Bill of Rights? Federal law prohibiting assassinations? The Uniform Code of Military Justice? Doesn’t he believe in the rule of law...and the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty? Where was the judge, jury...what was the charge...where was the evidence...what happened to due process?

The ‘liberal’ press dodges the interesting issues and focuses on the highest ups...and fixes the blame there. But the Trump gang has no monopoly on murder or indecency. It was Barack Obama who set the pace. James Bovard: "On February 3, 2010, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair stunned Washington by announcing that the administration was also targeting Americans for killing. Blair revealed to a congressional committee the new standard for extrajudicial killings: “Whether that American is involved in a group that is trying to attack us, whether that American has - is a threat to other Americans. We don’t target people for free speech. We target them for taking action that threatens Americans.”

One of Obama’s first targets - an Islamic cleric, born in the USA, Anwar Awlaki. Mr. Awlaki was saying things Mr. Obama thought he shouldn’t. So, when Awlaki fled the country, Obama set an assassination plot in motion. Did the ‘liberal’ press howl with indignation? Did it demand an impeachment...a trial...a hanging? Nope. Instead, the New York Times reported in 2010 that “there is widespread agreement among the administration’s legal team that it is lawful for President Obama to authorize the killing of someone like Mr. Awlaki.”

Two weeks after killing Awlaki, another hit took out his 16-year-old son who had no connection to any terrorist organization. He was with a group of people drinking tea. God could sort them out. The Washington Post was on the story too. It assured readers that not only was Obama within his rights, he would suffer no damage at the polls as a result of his murder of the Awlaki family: "77 percent of liberal Democrats endorse the use of drones, meaning that Obama is unlikely to suffer any political consequences as a result of his policy in this election year."

The Post was right. Even after the New York Times revealed that Obama was not just a killer, but a serial killer, he was re-elected. Like Stalin, he personally approved the list of victims: “Every week or so, more than 100 members of the government’s sprawling national security apparatus gather, by secure video teleconference, to pore over terrorist suspects’ biographies and recommend to the president who should be the next to die.”

Democrats and Republicans were okay with the killing spree. Rep. Peter King explained: “Drones aren’t evil, people are evil. We are a force of good and we are using those drones to carry out the policy of righteousness and goodness.” Mr. King was never even asked to explain how a ‘force of good’ could go on such a killing spree.  And none of the people responsible for massacres, assassinations, and senseless killing - neither terrorist nor narco-trafficker, neither crusader nor heretic...from Simon de Montfort (who died after getting hit in the head with a rock)...to Dick Cheney, Barack Obama and Pete Hegseth - may get what they deserve in this life. But you have to have faith; God will know what to do with them."

Monday, December 8, 2025

"2026 Predictions, I Hope You're Sitting Down"

Full screen recommended.
Canadian Prepper, 12/8/25
"2026 Predictions, I Hope You're Sitting Down"
Comments here:

"Moscow Christmas Decorations Tour 2025"

Full screen recommended.
Travelling With Russell, 12/8/25
"Moscow Christmas Decorations Tour 2025"
Comments here:

Musical Interlude: 2002, "An Ocean Apart"

Full screen recommended.
2002, "An Ocean Apart"

"A Look to the Heavens"

"Have you ever seen the Pleiades star cluster? Even if you have, you probably have never seen it as large and clear as this. Perhaps the most famous star cluster on the sky, the bright stars of the Pleiades can be seen without binoculars from even the depths of a light-polluted city. With a long exposure from a dark location, though, the dust cloud surrounding the Pleiades star cluster becomes very evident.
The featured exposure covers a sky area several times the size of the full moon. Also known as the Seven Sisters and M45, the Pleiades lies about 400 light years away toward the constellation of the Bull (Taurus). A common legend with a modern twist is that one of the brighter stars faded since the cluster was named, leaving only six of the sister stars visible to the unaided eye. The actual number of Pleiades stars visible, however, may be more or less than seven, depending on the darkness of the surrounding sky and the clarity of the observer's eyesight."

"Life Is Hard?"

"Life is hard? True - but let's love it anyhow,
though it breaks every bone in our bodies."
- Edward Abbey
"When I hear somebody sigh, "Life is hard,"
I am always tempted to ask, "Compared to what?"
- Sydney Harris
"We suffer more often in imagination than in reality. 
You want to live but do you know how to live? 
You are scared of dying but tell me, 
is the kind of life you lead really any different to being dead?"

"A Refining Process..."

“Life is a refining process. Our response to it determines whether we’ll be ground down or polished up. On a piano, one person sits down and plays sonatas, while another merely bangs away at “Chopsticks.” The piano is not responsible. It’s how you touch the keys that makes the difference. It’s how you play what life gives you that determines your joy and shine.”
- Barbara Johnson

"The 'Titanic' Analogy You Haven't Heard: Passively Accepting Oblivion"

"The 'Titanic' Analogy You Haven't Heard:
Passively Accepting Oblivion"
by Charles Hugh Smith

"You've undoubtedly heard rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as an analogy for the futility of approving policy tweaks to address systemic crises. I've used the Titanic as an analogy to explain the fragility of our financial system and the "glancing blow" of the pandemic: "Why Our Financial System Is Like the Titanic" (March 15, 2015)

But there's a powerful analogy you haven't heard before. To understand the analogy, we first need to recap the tragedy's basic set-up. On April 14, 1912, the liner Titanic, considered unsinkable due to its watertight compartments, struck a glancing blow against a massive iceberg on that moonless, weirdly calm night. In the early hours of April 15, the great ship broke in half and sank, ending the lives of the majority of its ppassengers and crew. Of the 2,208 passengers and crew onboard, 1,503 perished and 705 survived. The lifeboats had a maximum capacity of 1,178, so some 475 people died unnecessarily. Passengers of the Titanic (Wikipedia)

The initial complacency of the passengers and crew after the collision is another source of analogies relating to humanity's near-infinite capacity for denial. The class structure of the era was enforced by the authorities - the ship's officers. As the situation grew visibly threatening, the First Class passengers were herded into the remaining lifeboats while the steerage/Third Class passengers - many of them immigrants - were mostly kept below decks. Officers were instructed to enforce this class hierarchy with their revolvers.

Two-thirds of all passengers died, but the losses were not evenly distributed: 39% of First Class passengers perished, 58% of Second Class passengers lost their lives and 76% of Third Class passengers did not survive.

Rudimentary calculations by the ship's designer, who was on board to oversee the maiden voyage, revealed the truth to the officers: the ship would sink and there was no way to stop it. The ship was designed to survive four watertight compartments being compromised, and could likely stay afloat if five were opened to the sea, but not if six compartments were flooded. Water would inevitably spill over into adjacent compartments in a domino-like fashion until the ship sank.

What did the authorities do with this knowledge? Stripped of niceties, they passively accepted oblivion as the outcome and devoted their resources to enforcing the class hierarchy and the era's gender chivalry: 80% of male passengers perished, 25% of female passengers lost their lives. The loading of passengers into lifeboats was so poorly managed that only 60% of the lifeboat capacity was filled.

What if the officers had boldly accepted the inevitability of the ship sinking early on and devised a plan to minimize the loss of life? It would not have takes any extraordinary leap of creativity to organize the crew and passenger volunteers to strip the ship of everything that floated - wooden deck chairs, etc. - and lash them together into rafts. Given the calm seas that night and the freezing water, just keeping people above water would have been enough.

Rather than promote the absurd charade that the ship was fine, just fine, when time was of the essence, the authorities could have rounded up the women and children and filled every seat on lifeboats. Of the 1,030 people who could not be placed in a lifeboat, 890 were crew members, including about 25 women. The crew members were almost all in the prime of life. If anyone could survive several hours on a partially-submerged raft, it would have been the crew. (The first rescue ship arrived about two hours after the Titanic sank.)

Would this hurried effort to save everyone on board have succeeded? At a minimum, it would have saved an additional 475 souls via a careful loading of the lifeboats to capacity, and if the makeshift rafts had offered any meaningful flotation at all, many more lives would have been saved. Rather than devote resources to maintaining the pretense of safety and order, what if the ship's leaders had focused their response around answering a simple question: what was needed for people to survive a freezing night once the lifeboats were filled and the ship sank?

I think you see the analogy to the present. Our leadership, such as it is, is devoting resources to maintaining the absurd pretense that everything will magically re-set to September 2019 if we just print enough money and bail out the financial Aristocracy.

Whether we realize it or not, we're responding with passive acceptance of oblivion. The economy and social order were precariously fragile before the pandemic, and now the fragilities are unraveling. We need to start thinking beyond pretense and PR."
                        Full screen recommended.

The Daily "Near You?"

Saco, Maine, USA. Thanks for stopping by!

"Mass Collective Societal Suicide" (Excerpt)

"Mass Collective Societal Suicide"
by Jim Quinn

Excerpt: “Historians will look back at the wreckage of a once-great American civilization and not with wonder that tens of millions of people who were entirely dependent upon government welfare payments were nonetheless allowed to vote. Even to include millions of illiterate 3rd world aliens who snuck in, then were put on welfare, and were given driver’s licenses and social security numbers, so they could vote in elections to give themselves more welfare. Eventually, the historians will agree that America committed mass collective suicide, because obviously such insane policies could never be contemplated by a rational people.” – Matt Bracken
The United States and many other formerly western white developed world countries have been in the process of committing mass collective societal suicide for the past thirty five years, with a rapid acceleration over the last several years. The implications are vast, with the ultimate extinguishment of the white race baked into the demographic cake, unless massive changes in immigration policies are implemented and a cultural reversal in attitudes about having children takes hold. Neither seems likely at this point. The chart below paints a dire picture, but it is even worse than it appears.
The chart tells a story of which countries have embraced the mass suicide of their culture and those still resisting. The chart reveals the number of immigrants, but not where they came from and whether they arrived legally. So, Switzerland has the largest number of immigrants and a 66% increase since 1990, but the vast majority are from other European countries, as only 2% of their population are African. Iceland is another similar example, as the number of immigrants since 1990 has increased by a factor of six, but Africans still make up less than 1% of their population."
Full highly recommended article is here:

"This Is How China Is Rapidly Becoming The World’s Most Dominant Economic Superpower"

"This Is How China Is Rapidly Becoming The 
World’s Most Dominant Economic Superpower"
by Michael Snyder

"I don’t want China to be the world’s most dominant economic superpower. I am an American, and so I want the United States to be the world’s most dominant economic superpower. Unfortunately, the facts that I am about to share with you in this article cannot be denied. We consume far more than we produce, and we go into colossal amounts of debt in order to make that possible. Somehow we have convinced ourselves that this makes us an economic superpower. Meanwhile, the Chinese produce far more than they consume, and as a result they have far more money coming in than they do going out. This allows them to loan vast amounts of money to nations all over the planet, and that gives them tremendous economic leverage.

Despite everything that has happened this year, China has run a trade surplus of more than a trillion dollars for the first time ever in 2025…"China’s trade surplus roared above $1 trillion in November for the first time ever, despite the ongoing global trade war that has resulted in a steep drop in exports to the U.S. In the first 11 months this year, China’s overall exports grew 5.4% compared to the same period in 2024 while imports fell 0.6%, taking its trade surplus to $1.076 trillion this year as of November, up 21.6% year on year."

This is what economic dominance looks like. If you want to have a great economy, you have got to be great at making stuff. And China is better at making stuff than anyone else. China sells far more stuff to the rest of the world than it buys from the rest of the world, and that means that it has far more money coming in than it does going out. This enables China to lend out vast amounts of cash. In fact, at this point the rest of the world owes China about 5 trillion dollars. It is often said that the borrower is the servant of the lender, and that is certainly true in this case.

The primary reason why China sells so much stuff to the rest of the world is because they are able to make things very inexpensively… “Put simply, China’s price competitiveness is extremely strong,” said Xu Tianchen, a senior economist for the Economist Intelligence Unit in Beijing. “The main reason behind the continued growth of China’s exports … is not … because the overall size of global trade has expanded, but because China is claiming a larger share of the existing trade landscape.”

For a long time, cheap human labor was China’s main competitive edge. But now Chinese factories are replacing human workers with ultra-efficient robots. In fact, today there are more robots working in China than the rest of the world combined. Just think about that for a moment. That is crazy.

And the gap between China and the western world just continues to grow. If you can believe it, Chinese factories added almost 10 times as many robots last year as U.S. factories did…"China is the world’s most dominant power in automating its manufacturing - installing nearly 10 times as many robots in its factories as the United States, according to new data.Last year, more than half a million industrial robots were put to work in global factories - with 54% of them in China alone. According to the International Federation of Robotics, China, which is home to nearly a third of all global manufacturing capacity, installed 295,000 industrial robots, the highest annual total on record."

We are getting absolutely monkey-hammered by the Chinese. Shockingly, the total number of robots that U.S. factories added last year was actually lower than the total number for the year before…"In the US, meanwhile, companies put to work just 34,200 robots last year, according to the World Robotics 2025 Report. The 34,200 figure is 9% lower than the previous year, the report found."

Of course the Chinese are not just using more robots than anyone else. They are also producing more robots than the rest of the planet combined…"The move comes as Beijing accelerates its broader industrial strategy to lead in advanced manufacturing, a key pillar of the “Made in China 2025” initiative. As bne IntelliNews reported, China now produces more industrial robots than the rest of the world combined, with domestic players rapidly gaining ground in both hardware and AI-driven control systems. China is moving beyond being just the largest market for robots - it is becoming the core of global robot production. Chinese firms accounted for over 60% of global robot output in 2024, driven by subsidies, procurement programmes, and access to vast domestic datasets for training machine learning models."

Robots do not call in sick. Robots do not need to take breaks. Robots never complain. Robots do not need health plans. Robots don’t play around on the Internet when they should be working. Robots do not need to take vacations. Robots can work 24 hours a day. And many of the robots that the Chinese are now producing can actually recharge their own batteries. How can human workers possibly compete?

The Chinese can now make things at about a third of the cost that we can, and that gap is only going to get wider. When a group of top western executives recently visited China, they were “humbled” and “terrified” by what they witnessed…"Western automotive and green energy executives who visit China are returning humbled - and even terrified. As The Telegraph reports, the executives are warning that the country’s heavily automated manufacturing industry could quickly leave Western nations behind, especially when it comes to electric vehicles. “We are in a global competition with China, and it’s not just EVs,” Ford CEO Jim Farley told The Verge last month. “And if we lose this, we do not have a future at Ford.”

Many are hoping that winning the AI race will halt the decline of western economies. But that is far from certain. Today, approximately 50 percent of the world’s AI researchers are in China. We have some really good AI researchers too, but without a doubt it is going to be a very competitive race. In fact, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang created quite a firestorm of controversy when he recently stated that he believes that “China is going to win the AI race”…"Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang says Washington has lost its edge in artificial intelligence and warns that China will win the AI race. He cited the West’s cynicism, export controls, and favorable energy circumstances in China as the reason, claiming it is much easier for companies to access energy in the country.

The chief of the most valuable company in the world by market cap has long been saying that the U.S. ban on chip exports is a failure, and that the spread of its advanced semiconductors is vital for it to retain its competitive advantage globally. However, the ongoing trade war between the two powers has resulted in export bans of Blackwell chips from the White House on the one hand, and the CCP banning foreign AI chips from state-funded data centers on the other. Because of this, Nvidia’s market share in China has since dropped to basically zero, which probably led to Huang’s statement to the Financial Times. “China is going to win the AI race,” Jensen commented. He also added that “we need more optimism,” saying that the West’s cynicism is holding it back."

Winning the AI race is going to require vast amounts of energy, and this is one of the reasons why China may have an edge. Most Americans don’t even realize that China now produces approximately two and a half times as much energy as the United States does…"Meanwhile, China has dramatically expanded its energy output. The country now produces 2.5 times more power than the U.S., despite surpassing America only 15 years ago, Lord said. “America can’t out-AI China if China out-powers us, so the U.S. must prioritize developing reliable power,” he said."

The Chinese are feverishly constructing more nuclear power facilities, and they are way ahead of us when it comes to clean nuclear energy research. The bottom line is that we are in enormous trouble. We need to stop watching so much Netflix and start getting serious about competing with China.

In 2026, I expect our trade war with China to continue to heat up. And history has shown us that trade wars have a way of evolving into shooting wars. Let us hope that a military conflict with China can be avoided for as long as possible, because at this stage I don’t think that such a conflict would go well for us, because the Chinese have been rapidly modernizing their military as well. In just about every area, the Chinese are either catching up with us or have already surpassed us. Sadly, most Americans are so addicted to entertainment that they don’t even realize that this is happening."

"What Are The Facts?"

"What are the facts? Again and again and againwhat are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what the stars foretell, avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the un-guessable verdict of history - what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!"
- Robert A. Heinlein

And always remember...
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains,
however improbable, must be the truth."
- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, "Sherlock Holmes"

"Question Everything"

"Question Everything"
by Jeff Thomas

"The average person in the First World receives more information than he would if he lived in a Second or Third World country. In many countries of the world, the very idea of twenty-four hour television news coverage would be unthinkable, yet many Westerners feel that, without this constant input, they would be woefully uninformed. Not surprising, then, that the average First Worlder feels that he understands current events better than those elsewhere in the world. But, as in other things, quality and quantity are not the same.

The average news program features a commentator who provides "the news," or at least that portion of events that the network deems worthy to be presented. In addition, it is presented from the political slant of the controllers of the network. But we are reassured that the reporting is "balanced," in a portion of the programme that features a panel of "experts."

Customarily, the panel consists of the moderator plus two pundits who share his political slant and a pundit who has an opposing slant. All are paid by the network for their contributions. The moderator will ask a question on a current issue, and an argument will ensue for a few minutes. Generally, no real conclusion is reached - neither side accedes to the other. The moderator then moves on to another question. So, the network has aired the issues of the day, and we have received a balanced view that may inform our own opinions. Or have we?

Shortcomings: In actual fact, there are significant shortcomings in this type of presentation: The scope of coverage is extremely narrow. Only select facets of each issue are discussed.Generally, the discussion reveals precious little actual insight and, in fact, only the standard opposing liberal and conservative positions are discussed, implying that the viewer must choose one or the other to adopt as his own opinion.On a program that is liberally-oriented, the one conservative pundit on the panel is made to look foolish by the three liberal pundits, ensuring that the liberal viewer's beliefs are reaffirmed. (The reverse is true on a conservative news program.) Each issue facet that is addressed is repeated many times in the course of the day, then extended for as many days, weeks, or months as the issue remains current. The "message," therefore, is repeated virtually as often as an advert for a brand of laundry powder.

So, what is the net effect of such news reportage? Has the viewer become well-informed? In actual fact, not at all. What he has become is well-indoctrinated. A liberal will be inclined to regularly watch a liberal news channel, which will result in the continual reaffirmation of his liberal views. A conservative will, in turn, regularly watch a conservative news channel, which will result in the continual reaffirmation of his conservative views. Many viewers will agree that this is so, yet not recognize that, essentially, they are being programmed to simply absorb information. Along the way, their inclination to actually question and think for themselves is being eroded.

Alternate Possibilities: The proof of this is that those who have been programmed, tend to react with anger when they encounter a Nigel Farage or a Ron Paul, who might well challenge them to consider a third option - an interpretation beyond the narrow conservative and liberal views of events. In truth, on any issue, there exists a wide field of alternate possibilities.

By contrast, it is not uncommon for people outside the First World to have better instincts when encountering a news item. If they do not receive the BBC, Fox News, or CNN, they are likely, when learning of a political event, to think through, on their own, what the event means to them. As they are not pre-programmed to follow one narrow line of reasoning or another, they are open to a broad range of possibilities. Each individual, based upon his personal experience, is likely to draw a different conclusion and, thorough discourse with others, is likely to continue to update his opinion each time he receives a new viewpoint.

As a result, it is not uncommon for those who are not "plugged-in" to be not only more open-minded, but more imaginative in their considerations, even when they are less educated and less "informed" than those in the First World. Whilst those who do not receive the regular barrage that is the norm in the First World are no more intelligent than their European or American counterparts, their views are more often the result of personal objective reasoning and common sense and are often more insightful.

Those in First World countries often point with pride at the advanced technology that allows them a greater volume of news than the rest of the world customarily receives. Further, they are likely to take pride in their belief that the two opposing views that are presented indicate that they live in a "free" country, where dissent is encouraged. Unfortunately, what is encouraged is one of two views - either the liberal view or the conservative view. Other views are discouraged.

The liberal view espouses that a powerful liberal government is necessary to control the greed of capitalists, taxing and regulating them as much as possible to limit their ability to victimize the poorer classes. The conservative view espouses that a powerful conservative government is needed to control the liberals, who threaten to create chaos and moral collapse through such efforts as gay rights, legalized abortion, etc.

What these two dogmatic concepts have in common is that a powerful government is needed. Each group, therefore, seeks the increase in the power of its group of legislators to overpower the opposing group. This ensures that, regardless of whether the present government is dominated by liberals of conservatives, the one certainty will be that the government will be powerful. When seen in this light, if the television viewer were to click the remote back and forth regularly from the liberal channel to the conservative channel, he would begin to see a strong similarity between the two.

It's easy for any viewer to question the opposition group, to consider them disingenuous—the bearers of false information. It is far more difficult to question the pundits who are on our own "team," to ask ourselves if they, also, are disingenuous. This is especially difficult when it's three to one - when three commentators share our political view and all say the same thing to the odd-man-out on the panel. In such a situation, the hardest task is to question our own team, who are clearly succeeding at beating down the odd-man-out.

Evolution of Indoctrination: In bygone eras, the kings of old would tell their minions what to believe and the minions would then either accept or reject the information received. They would rely on their own experience and reasoning powers to inform them. Later, a better method evolved: the use of media to indoctrinate the populace with government-generated propaganda (think: Josef Goebbels or Uncle Joe Stalin).

Today, a far more effective method exists - one that retains the repetition of the latter method but helps to eliminate the open-ended field of alternate points of view. It does so by providing a choice between "View A" and "View B." In a democracy, there is always an "A" and a "B." This illusion of choice is infinitely more effective in helping the populace to believe that they have been able to choose their leaders and their points of view.

In the modern method, when voting, regardless of what choice the individual makes, he is voting for an all-powerful government. (Whether it calls itself a conservative one or a liberal one is incidental.) Likewise, through the modern media, when the viewer absorbs what is presented as discourse, regardless of whether he chooses View A or View B, he is endorsing an all-powerful government.

Two Solutions: One solution to avoid being brainwashed by the dogmatic messaging of the media is to simply avoid watching the news. But this is difficult to do, as our associates and neighbours are watching it every day and will want to discuss with us what they have been taught. The other choice is to question everything. To consider that the event that is being discussed may not only be being falsely reported, but that the message being provided by the pundits may be consciously planned for our consumption.

This is difficult to do at first but can eventually become habit. If so, the likelihood of being led down the garden path by the powers-that-be may be greatly diminished. In truth, on any issue, there exists a wide field of alternate possibilities. Developing your own view may, in the coming years, be vital to your well-being. In a world where narratives are carefully crafted and dissenting voices are drowned out, independent thought is your most valuable asset. In uncertain times, questioning everything isn’t just an intellectual exercise - it’s a means of survival."

"How It Really Is"

 

"Russia’s Biggest Mall At Xmas"

Full screen recommended.
Scottish Guy In Moscow, 12/8/25
"Russia’s Biggest Mall At Xmas"
"Join me - a Scottish guy living in Moscow - as I explore Europe’s biggest shopping mall, Aviapark, in the lead-up to Christmas, all while Russia is still under heavy sanctions. I expected empty shelves, quiet halls, and a gloomy atmosphere… but what I found was something completely different."
Comments here:

"The Collapse of Everyday Life in America Has Quietly Begun"

Full screen recommended.
The Unfolded States, 12/8/25
"The Collapse of Everyday Life
 in America Has Quietly Begun"
"Americans are reaching a breaking point in 2025 - a moment where the basic cost of living is rising faster than the ability of millions to keep up. What used to be routine monthly expenses have turned into financial stress signals, and more households are discovering that “normal life” is becoming harder to afford every single year. As this shift deepens, it is transforming every part of the U.S. economy. Behind the headlines and optimistic political messaging, a quieter collapse is unfolding - one that explains why utility bills feel unbearable, why rent refuses to fall, why debt is exploding, and why financial security is slipping away even for those who are doing everything right.

This video breaks down the true cost of living in America in 2025 - using verified public data, first-hand stories from households across the country, and a clear examination of the structural forces pushing families toward the financial edge. This isn’t exaggeration or fear-based commentary. It’s a realistic look at what millions are facing but few are talking about openly. A new era is emerging - one where the American household budget is stretched tighter than ever before. These pressures are not isolated. Together, they form a system that makes everyday survival feel harder each year - especially for working families, young adults, and anyone living paycheck to paycheck. This isn’t a temporary squeeze. It’s a long-term economic shift that is reshaping how Americans live, work, and plan for the future."
Comments here:
o
Full screen recommended.
RV Crisis, 12/8/25
"10 Big U.S. Restaurant Chains Are Empty 
and Overpriced in 2025 - Will They Survive 2026?"
Comments here:

Dan, I Allegedly, "95% of Black Friday Purchases Financed!"

Full screen recommended.
Dan, I Allegedly, 12/8/25
"95% of Black Friday Purchases Financed!"
"The shocking truth about Black Friday debt is here. Did you know 95% of Black Friday purchases were made using credit? In this video, I break down the wild stats behind how consumers are diving deeper into debt during the biggest shopping day of the year. With record-high interest rates and the rise of buy now, pay later programs, it's more important than ever to rethink how we manage our finances. I also share insights about paycheck-to-paycheck living, Christmas loans, and simple tips to avoid falling into these traps."
Comments here:
o
Full screen recommended.
Snyder Reports, 12/8/25
"Economic Emergency: 
Layoffs Surge as Fed Faces Make-or-Break Decision"
Comments here:

"11 Signs That Our World Is Rapidly Becoming A Lot More Orwellian"

"11 Signs That Our World Is Rapidly
 Becoming A Lot More Orwellian"
by Michael Snyder

"All over the globe, the digital control grid that we are all living in just continues to get even tighter. They are using facial recognition technology to scan our faces, they are using license plate readers to track where we travel, they are systematically monitoring the conversations that we are having on our phones, and they are watching literally everything that we post on social media. At this stage, many of us just assume that nothing that we do or say is ever truly private. We really do live in a “Big Brother society”, and the potential for tyranny is off the charts. In fact, people are already getting arrested for “thought crimes” all over the world. If we do not take a stand now, someday soon we could wake up in a world where there is essentially no freedom left at all.

The exponential growth of AI technology is allowing authorities to watch, track, monitor and control us like never before. If you are not alarmed by this, you might want to check if you are still alive. The following are 11 signs that our world is rapidly becoming a lot more Orwellian…

#1 UK authorities are rolling out “a country-wide facial recognition system” that will use AI facial recognition cameras to watch the entire population…"On Thursday, officials in the UK pledged to roll out a country-wide facial recognition system to help police track down criminals. The country’s ministers have launched a 10-week consultation to analyze the regulatory and privacy framework of their AI-powered surveillance panopticon - but one way or another, the all-seeing eye is on its way."

There’s just one tiny wrinkle: the AI facial recognition cameras have a tendency to misidentify non-white people. New reporting by The Guardian notes that testing of the AI tech conducted by the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) found that it‘s “more likely to incorrectly include some demographic groups in its search results” - specifically Black and Asian people.

#2 Of course the control freaks in the UK also monitor everything that gets posted on social media. One British man recently found this out the hard way when he was arrested for posing with a legally-owned gun in the United States…"A Yorkshire man was arrested over a photo he posted on social media featuring him holding a legally owned gun in the US. Jon Richelieu-Booth posted a photo of himself in August holding a gun on LinkedIn while he was on a holiday in Florida. He said he held the firearm lawfully, on private land and with full permission from its owner.

#3 If you do not believe that “thought crime” is real, just consider this next example. 11 police officers recently barged in and arrested a 34-year-old woman that was sitting naked in her own bathtub because she used offensive words while texting another woman on her phone…"The United Kingdom has become an authoritarian nightmare, and the United States must remain vigilant if it does not want to go down the same course. Elizabeth Kinney, a 34-year-old care assistant, was naked in the bathtub when 11 police officers barged into her home to arrest her.
Her crime was sending insults to another woman via text.

How would you feel if 11 police officers were staring at you while you were naked? As she was being informed that she had engaged in “malicious communications”, tears started flowing from Kinney’s eyes…"Kinney burst into tears as male officers denied her any privacy, and a female officer informed her that she was being arrested for “malicious communications and hate crime.” “The Crown place this offense in the highest category of its type due to the effect related to sexual orientation and the greater harm because it had moderate impact,” prosecutors insisted. Kinney faced ten years in prison, but her attorney begged for leniency. She has been ordered to perform seventy-two hours of community service, attend ten days of rehabilitation, and pay a fine of several hundred pounds.

#4 French President Emmanuel Macron wants the power to determine which media outlets will be allowed to speak to the public and which media outlets will be silenced…"Macron has in the last weeks intensified warnings on the risks of disinformation, on Friday calling for changes to French legislation that would allow “false information” online to be urgently blocked. He has also called for “professional certification” of outlets to distinguish sites and networks that provide reliable information according to ethical rules from others that do not. But at the weekend, the Journal du Dimanche Sunday newspaper, part of the influential media stable of right-wing tycoon Vincent Bollore, accused Macron in a front-page story of a “totalitarian drift” on the issue."

#5 Because he is a champion of free speech, the EU has been coming after Elon Musk for years. So it shouldn’t surprise any of us that the European Commission just fined his company 140 million dollars for supposed violations of the Digital Services Act…"The European Commission has issued a $140 million fine to Elon Musk’s X for violating the EU’s controversial Digital Services Act (DSA). The fine is likely to escalate tensions between the EU and America over free speech online. Bloomberg reports that the European Commission has imposed a €120 million ($140 million) fine on X, Elon Musk’s social media platform, for breaching the EU’s Digital Services Act (DSA). This marks the first penalty issued under the new censorship law, which aims to regulate online platforms and “protect” users from illegal content and disinformation.

#6 In recent years, we have seen so many controversial voices suddenly have their bank accounts shut down. Shockingly, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon is now publicly admitting that his company does “debank” people… As JPMorgan Chase Bank is under investigation by the state of Florida for alleged coordination with the Biden Department of Justice and Operation Arctic Frost, the chairman of the company is admitting to debanking certain customers, but says it has nothing to do with their political or religious affiliations. “We do debank them,” said JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon who appeared on “Sunday Morning Futures” with Maria Bartiromo on the Fox News Channel. “People have to grow up here and stop making up things and stuff like that. I can’t talk about an individual account."

#7 India wants to require that phone location services are always on so that the government can track people through their phones wherever they go…"You know what they say: If at first you don’t succeed at mass government surveillance, try, try again. Only two days after India backpedaled on its plan to force smartphone makers to preinstall a state-run “cybersecurity” app, Reuters reports that the country is back at it. It’s said to be considering a telecom industry proposal with another draconian requirement. This one would require smartphone makers to enable always-on satellite-based location tracking (Assisted GPS). The measure would require location services to remain on at all times, with no option to switch them off. The telecom industry also wants phone makers to disable notifications that alert users when their carriers have accessed their location. According to Reuters, India’s home ministry was set to meet with smartphone industry executives on Friday, but the meeting was postponed.

#8 A journalist in the Netherlands has tested AI-powered glasses “that can instantly identify strangers on the street”…"A Dutch journalist just tested a pair of AI-powered glasses that can instantly identify strangers on the street. No government database. No police system. Just public data and off-the-shelf AI. You look at someone and in seconds, their name, LinkedIn, and background appear before your eyes. The scariest part? You can’t really stop it. You can ban it, regulate it, add blinking red lights… but once tech like this exists, someone will always find a way to use it. Once these sorts of devices become widely available, there will be nowhere to run and nowhere to hide.

#9 A nationwide digital ID is being introduced in the UK, and soon you will not be able to get a new job without one…"Once introduced, digital ID will be used to verify a person’s right to live and work in the UK. It will take the form of an app-based system, stored on smartphones in a similar way to the NHS App or digital bank cards. The ID will include information on the holders’ residency status, name, date of birth, nationality and their photo. When he first announced the scheme, Sir Keir said: “You will not be able to work in the United Kingdom if you do not have digital ID. It’s as simple as that.”

#10 The digital ID program in France “is moving from pilot to scale”…"France’s national digital identity app, France Identité, has enabled the creation of more than 3.2 million digital IDs, according to new figures. Among these, approximately 525,000 identities have been fully certified, meaning that users have completed an in-person verification process at their local town halls. This means that more than half a million French digital IDs are ready for the EU Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet, according to Joerg Lenz, head of marketing at Namirial Group. “France Identité is moving from pilot to scale,” Lenz wrote on LinkedIn, following the TRUSTECH Event held in Paris on Wednesday.

#11 In Illinois, there is such overwhelming demand for digital IDs that some people are being forced to wait…"Mobile IDs became available in Illinois on Wednesday, but due to the high demand, some residents are finding themselves waiting a little bit longer. A number of residents trying to download the digital ID to their Apple wallet received the following message: “Due to the high volume, your state’s service is currently busy.” Users can then answer the question, “Do you want to be notified when it becomes available?”

This is where the entire world is heading. As the Big Brother control grid gets tighter and tighter, the stage is being set for unprecedented tyranny on a global scale. Tyrants of the past could only dream of having the sort of AI-powered tools that we possess today. If you do not submit to the digital gulag that is being constructed all around us, eventually you may not be able to buy, sell, get a job or open a bank account without proper digital identification. What would you do then? You might want to start thinking about that, because things are only going to get crazier from here."

"When They Say 'Democracy,' They Don't Mean 'Democracy'"

Norm Eisen, Lawfare Ninja Supreme
"When They Say 'Democracy,' 
They Don't Mean 'Democracy'"
by Jim Kunstler

"Imagine if the US and EU were still aligned on the censorship-by-proxy 
strategy. Few people realize how close we were to global totalitarianism." 
—Michael Shellenberger

"Western Civ is choking itself to death with lawfare in the name of “democracy.” If you think just a little bit past the sale, you will realize that few will say what they mean by “democracy,” including the most ardent “democracy” cultists. What it supposedly means is legal outcomes that the political left wants, not what the law, or the truth, or justice requires.

On the surface, the left pretends to want outcomes that favor their roster of designated victim groups: women, dark-skinned people, and sexual outliers, the familiar cast of characters with its tiresome scripts. But that’s not what they really want. They don’t really care about the “marginalized.” What they really want is power. The “marginalized” are just their clients and shock troops. They want to push everybody around, tell them how to live, and what to think, including the marginalized. If society has to get wrecked in the process, that’s okay — that will just make it easier to “build back better” to their advantage, or so their operating algorithm dictates. The left does not think past its own algorithms.

The “democracy” cultists are foremost against freedom of speech, because speech is what distinguishes human beings among the rest of the animal kingdom, and if you allow it, human beings are liable to develop ideas - ideas being the product of language - and especially ideas that make the “democracy” cultists uncomfortable. For instance, the idea that the “democracy” cultists don’t deserve the power they crave because they are dishonest, unscrupulous, and sadistic. Can’t have people thinking that, or saying it out-loud.

Censorship, the outright suppression of expressed thought, is the primary device for enforcing their version of “democracy.” The “democracy” cultists of the USA were especially avid for it the past decade after Mr. Trump came on the scene and offered to oppose the “democracy” cult’s plans to aggregate power. So, under the catspaw president “Joe Biden,” the FBI, CIA, the State Department’s Global Engagement Center, Stanford University’s Internet Observatory, the social media companies, and the White House itself worked sedulously to suppress the free expression of ideas, including the idea that they were all working to suppress free expression.

When Mr. Trump miraculously survived manifold attempts to stuff him in prison via lawfare and then, attempted murder, and managed to get re-elected, he put an end to the censorship shenanigans in government. That, in turn, became inconvenient to the “democracy” cultists in Europe who were, apparently, not busy enough destroying their own countries’ cultures and their economies. They put extra effort into suppressing free expression among their citizen-subjects: serious jail time for mean texts and mere casual statements on the street.

Now they are coming after the international speech platform “X,” liberated by Elon Musk three years ago at a $44-billion price. The European Commission, a body of unelected bureaucrats under the EU, created a so-called Digital Services Act to deal with the threat of free speech. After a two-year-investigation, the commission has leveled a $140-million fine against “X” for a series of specious offenses, such as not meaningfully verifying account authenticity [blue check marks] eroding trust in verified content. Mr. Musk objected, naturally. Veep JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, called it an “attack on American tech.” It’s more than that, of course. It’s an effort to wreck the company, which would eliminate the chief remaining public arena for free speech and genuine news worldwide.

I would expect Mr. Trump to respond shortly, perhaps with tariffs that make it impossible for the Europeans to sell their cars in the USA, or their wine, or whatever else is on offer. He will squeeze them until they drop this stupid crusade to destroy an American company. And then stand by and watch as “democracy” cultists in the USA complain about him defending free speech.

We have enough trouble with the “democracy” cult here at home. The Norm Eisen Axis-of-Evil has enjoyed endless “funding” from the dark money spigots of George Soros, British hedge fund billionaire Christopher Hohn, and Shanghai-based American billionaire Neville Roy Singham. Once the money-flows are turned off, you will see a lot less nuisance litigation aimed at perverting the rule of law and destroying the country. Norm Eisen and his colleagues operate out of a set of foundations and NGOs, chiefly Brookings and the outfit Eisen founded called the States United Democracy Center. They are mere money-launderers.

The federal judiciary is the “democracy” cult’s remaining praetorian guard. The federal judges, especially the Obama and Biden appointed ones, are making sure that Lawfare ninjas won’t be prosecuted for any crimes. The two latest examples: James Comey, case dismissed on procedural issues (for now) on his charge of lying to Congress. And New York AG Leticia James, let off the hook on a mortgage fraud rap by a federal grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia, probably a case of “jury nullification” and probably due to race - after the fashion of OJ Simpson skating on murder in 1995.

Unfortunately, the remedy of impeaching federal judges is unavailable due to the 60-vote majority required for removal in the Senate. It’s getting to the point where Mr. Trump might have to go medieval on the whole lot of them, declare the Insurrection Act, and move the action into military courts. Then maybe we’ll see who can handle the truth."
o
Full screen recommended.
The Psyche, 12/8/25
"How Democracy Lifts Idiots into Power"
"Why does democracy - a system built on freedom, equality, and collective decision-making - so often elevate charismatic, unprepared, and even dangerously incompetent leaders? Why do the masses repeatedly choose those who entertain rather than those who understand? And why do Plato’s 2,400-year-old warnings feel more accurate today than ever before? In this powerful and provocative video, we dive deep into Plato’s critique of democracy, exploring how a society driven by pleasure, impulsivity, ego, and emotional desire inevitably lifts the wrong people into positions of influence. 

This is not just political philosophy - it’s a psychological and cultural diagnosis of the modern world. Drawing from Plato, Aristotle, Carl Jung, Freud, Erich Fromm, and modern political psychology, this video reveals the hidden forces that shape public opinion, the unconscious desires that drive our choices, and the dangerous cycle that transforms democracy into tyranny. The final and most important insight: Democracy collapses not because of its leaders - but because its citizens abandon discipline, reflection, and virtue."
Comments here: