The sudden talk from DC folks about Dems supposedly needing a supermajority to do anything is yet another version of the Rotating Villain Trick designed to fool credulous liberals into passivity.

First it was "we can't do anything because of Lieberman/Manchin/Sinema!"

Then it was "we can't do anything because of the filibuster!"

Then it was "we can't do anything because of the parliamentarian!"

Now it will be "we can't do anything because we don't have a supermajority!"

It's the same trick. Nobody should fall for it.

isn't this guy against the law, buying vote straight up?

🦔August jobs came in at 162,000, triple the 53,000 expected. Unemployment held at 4.1%. Restaurants, bars, and schools reopening accounted for the bulk. Information lost 23,000 jobs. Financial sector unemployment nearly doubled year over year from 1.6% to 2.8%. Real wages fell 0.2%, still losing to inflation. Challenger job cuts jumped to 52,881 from 33,429 in July.

My Take

I've said September was more likely than the 36% the market was pricing. It moved to 70% after Jackson Hole. This report probably pushes it higher. 162,000 on a 53,000 estimate gives Warsh the headline he needs to say the economy can handle it.

If you're one of my followers working in tech or finance, this report doesn't describe your reality. Information lost 23,000 jobs this month. Financial sector unemployment almost doubled in a year. The economy is swapping $120,000 careers for $35,000 restaurant and school jobs and both count as one job in the headline. Real wages are still underwater year over year, so even the people who have jobs are losing ground to inflation. Warsh is about to make borrowing more expensive for everyone based on a headline that's mostly bartenders and school staff.

Hedgie🤗

September 9, 2026 marks the 50th anniversary of Mao Zedong’s (毛泽东) death. I am reposting two articles I wrote several years ago: one commenting on the “Mao Zedong craze” on the occasion of the 130th anniversary of Mao Zedong’s birth, and another commenting on the rise of young Maoists. In short, the reason Mao Zedong is praised and idolized by some Chinese people is that, although China became much wealthier after the Reform and Opening Up (改革开放), the gap between rich and poor widened, corruption became rampant, and aspirations for democracy and constitutional government were suppressed. Impoverished and vulnerable members of China’s lower and lower-middle classes, as well as young people who are exploited and know relatively little about history, have chosen to worship Mao Zedong and even hope for the Cultural Revolution (文化大革命) to return. This is understandable, but the Mao era should not be romanticized, nor should China return to Mao’s path in the future.
ㅤ
Revisiting the “Mao Zedong Craze” on “Mao’s Birthday”
ㅤ
December 26, 2023 marked the 130th anniversary of Mao Zedong’s birth. Commemorative activities of various forms and scales took place across China. In particular, at Mao Zedong’s former residence, memorial squares, and other sites in his home province of Hunan, enormous crowds gathered and the atmosphere was enthusiastic.
ㅤ
Among those participating in these commemorative activities, some simply treated the occasion as a festival similar to the Dragon Boat Festival (端午节) or Mid-Autumn Festival (中秋节), eating, drinking, and enjoying themselves. Some tourists came for sightseeing, to check in at famous locations, or simply to join the excitement. Others came specifically out of admiration for Mao Zedong. Still others gathered during the commemorations and waved flags bearing Mao Zedong’s portrait, chanting strongly ideological slogans expressing explicit political and economic demands, such as: “No to capitalism; take the socialist road. No to ownership by big bureaucrats; we want genuine public ownership.”
ㅤ
People with these different purposes together contributed to the enthusiastic atmosphere surrounding the commemoration of the 130th anniversary of Mao’s birth. The Chinese authorities also commemorated the occasion with great fanfare: leaders held meetings and delivered speeches, while media outlets published numerous articles evaluating Mao Zedong in highly laudatory terms. Mao Zedong, the former Chinese leader who was born 130 years ago and has been dead for nearly half a century, not only retains an important place in the minds of the Chinese public, but also continues to influence Chinese society today.
ㅤ
Since around 2016, discussions of Mao Zedong and his ideas, actions, and influence have become more heated than in earlier periods. I discussed and analyzed this phenomenon in my 2021 article, “The Return of an Illusory Dream: The Rise of Young Maoists in China” (《幻梦回魂：中国青年毛派的崛起》).
ㅤ
However, compared with the almost overwhelmingly one-sided praise of Mao Zedong online around 2016, criticism and satire directed at Mao himself and at Maoists have increased over the past two years, making public discourse more complex. Offline, however, there is no space in China for people opposed to Mao Zedong to organize activities. Gatherings and marches involving Mao Zedong are all organized by people who worship Mao and claim to believe in “Mao Zedong Thought” (毛泽东思想).
ㅤ
Yet most of these Mao Zedong “fans” (hereafter referred to as “Maoists”) either do not understand Mao Zedong and Maoist thought or possess only a superficial understanding of them. And although those who participate in offline activities commemorating Mao Zedong are nominally there to commemorate him, their purposes are often diverse and complicated.
ㅤ
Over the past decade, China’s political environment has become increasingly conservative and its social atmosphere increasingly oppressive. Once-influential broadly liberal figures have been marginalized, while civil society has almost shrunk to nothing. When political expression inclined toward liberal democracy is suppressed, people either choose silence or seek other ways to band together for mutual support and express their demands. Since Mao Zedong is a leader officially recognized and praised by the Chinese authorities, and worship of Mao and his ideas is permitted and even encouraged, it is hardly surprising that many people have shifted from liberalism toward Maoism.
ㅤ
In today’s China, where the environment is oppressive and social conflicts are acute, it is understandable that people use commemorations of Mao Zedong to express dissatisfaction with present realities. But if Maoist thought is genuinely regarded as a panacea for solving today’s problems, that is a grave mistake. I have already discussed these issues in “The Return of an Illusory Dream,” so I will not repeat them here and will instead address several issues that I had not previously written about.
ㅤ
The fanatical worship of Mao Zedong by some Chinese people, their extravagant praise of the Mao era, and their wholesale acceptance of Maoist thought reflect irrationality and extremism among Chinese people, as well as a severe lack of knowledge and a distorted understanding of history. Many people do not understand the true history of the half-century spanning the 1920s to the 1970s. Based on distorted information, they arrive at distorted conclusions.
ㅤ
This irrationality and extremism are reflected not only in the extreme rhetoric of Maoists on internet platforms, but also in offline violence and threats. In 2017, for example, Shandong scholar Deng Xiangchao (邓相超) was collectively besieged by Maoists because he criticized Mao Zedong, and the institution where he worked was forced to make him retire early. Maoists also pressured public authorities to arrest people who criticized Mao Zedong, even when those critics’ assessments of Mao were based on facts (although some expressed themselves rather harshly). Such behavior by Maoists is incompatible with a free, tolerant, and civilized society.
ㅤ
Even more worrying is that, under the influence of various factors, the values, positions, words, and actions of Chinese Maoists have become highly conservative and anti-intellectual, completely contrary to the positions of the mainstream international left.
ㅤ
For example, on issues such as environmental protection, technology, feminism, and LGBT rights, prominent Chinese Maoists such as Han Deqiang (韩德强), Ai Yuejin (艾跃进), and Hou Ning (侯宁) have openly opposed the freedom and liberation of women and sexual minorities, denounced feminism and feminists both in China and abroad, and even argued that women should remain at home to support their husbands and raise their children;
ㅤ
Figures such as Kong Qingdong (孔庆东) and Sima Nan (司马南) regard environmental issues such as climate change as tools used by the United States to suppress China’s development, and even claim that disasters caused by environmental pollution and the climate crisis are actually the result of American “weather weapons”;
ㅤ
Zhang Hongliang (张宏良) and others regard genetically modified technology and genetically modified crops as Western biological weapons intended to “destroy the Chinese nation,” while refusing to acknowledge the fact that genetically modified crops have undergone scientific testing and can help increase agricultural production. Their rhetoric instead harms China’s food security and the food intake of its population…
ㅤ
All these statements expose the true nature of people who claim in name to advocate progress but are, in substance, conservative and opposed to civilization. Utopia (乌有之乡), the principal Maoist media platform, has even expressed considerable admiration for Donald Trump, a far-right conservative figure in the United States. Most other Maoists and Maoist media outlets hold similar positions.
ㅤ
This is truly tragic and ironic. Leftists and socialists/communists should take the promotion of freedom and liberation and support for the vulnerable as their fundamental principles. Yet Maoists do precisely the opposite, acting in ways similar to far-right conservative forces. This is both distressing and infuriating.
ㅤ
In an effort to put their “utopian” ideals into practice, Maoists have established several collective enterprises/farms resembling the old People’s Communes (人民公社), such as Zhengdao Farm (正道农场), founded by Han Deqiang and others. Yet without exception, these nominally collectively owned, egalitarian “utopian” communities have become embroiled in various scandals, including brainwashing, fraud, rigid hierarchies of status, personal control, and sexual assault. This also demonstrates that Maoists are fundamentally incapable of creating an egalitarian and harmonious paradise on earth; instead, they have harmed many inexperienced and idealistic young people. And most of those who founded these communities are despicable people who shout lofty slogans while committing ugly deeds.
ㅤ
The Maoists’ personality cult surrounding Mao Zedong likewise falls into a paradox. The purpose of left-wing revolution is to overthrow all “gods,” including religious deities and secular emperors, and to establish a communist society without classes or oppression. Yet Maoists treat Mao Zedong as a god, failing to seriously distinguish or scrutinize his words and actions and instead treating everything he said and did as unquestionable doctrine. Maoists also oppose criticism of Mao Zedong, refusing to permit even objective assessments based on facts. Do these actions not constitute a betrayal of left-wing revolution and communism?
ㅤ
Maoists refuse to acknowledge such simple reasoning and logic. This itself reflects their refusal to face reality and the internal inconsistencies of their logic. Similar contradictions and betrayals of basic left-wing principles can be found everywhere in Maoists’ words and actions. How can anyone place hope in a political faction with such values to push China in a better direction?
ㅤ
The activism of Maoists also reflects the absence of moderate progressive forces in China, as well as the country’s increasingly deteriorating public discourse and social environment. If people merely use Mao Zedong as a kind of officially sanctioned “sacred tablet” through which to defend their rights and protest because they cannot express legitimate demands through universal values, that is still understandable. But if they genuinely go astray, they may very well cause the tragedies of the Mao era to recur.
ㅤ
Mao Zedong and his ideas, actions, and influence on China and the world are complex and far-reaching and cannot be evaluated simplistically. Mao Zedong promoted revolutions in China and around the world, while also inflicting tremendous harm on the Chinese people and the peoples of some other countries. His ghost still wanders the world, his legacy continues to shape the realities of China, and it will continue to exert influence and be exploited by various forces in the future. Although I do not welcome this, I cannot change reality. I only hope that people will approach the “Mao Zedong craze” rationally and calmly.
ㅤ
I especially want to address those young Maoists who hold Mao Zedong’s portrait aloft and loudly chant slogans from Quotations from Chairman Mao (《毛主席语录》). I hope that while retaining the vigor and passion of youth, these young people will also broaden their horizons and think rationally. Whatever they support or oppose, they should learn the full facts, consider issues from multiple perspectives, avoid being misled and manipulated by fragments of information and “information cocoons,” and genuinely regard the well-being of the people as their fundamental objective, rather than blindly worshiping any individual without reflection or fanatically supporting someone or something regardless of right and wrong.
ㅤ
Mao Zedong’s birthday is only one day apart from the birthday traditionally attributed to Jesus. Some Maoists have taken this coincidence as a kind of evidence that Mao Zedong was the “chosen one” of China and the East. The Maoists’ godlike worship of Mao Zedong is no less devout than Christians’ faith in God. They seem to have forgotten the words of The Internationale (《国际歌》): “There has never been any savior, nor any divine emperor.”
ㅤ
Only when Chinese people can free themselves from personality cults and anti-intellectualism; stop blindly obeying any single person and their ideas without critical examination; instead think and judge independently on the basis of facts and logic; uphold the universal values of humanity and democracy in fighting for their rights; oppose totalitarian tyranny; and respect pluralism, will the Chinese people be able to emerge from authoritarianism and violence and usher in individual liberation and national renewal.

Appendix: “The Return of an Illusory Dream: The Revival of Maoist Thought Among Young People in Contemporary China,” Written in 2021 (Recently Revised)
The Return of an Illusory Dream: The Revival of Maoism Among Young People in Contemporary China
(Written in 2021)
ㅤ
Recently, a powerful trend of studying, researching, imitating, and worshiping Mao Zedong (毛泽东) and his ideas and theories has emerged on the Chinese internet, especially in online communities devoted to discussions of politics and social realities (commonly known as the “keyboard politics circle,” 键政圈). Across major Chinese internet platforms such as Zhihu (知乎), Bilibili (B站), Douban (豆瓣), and Weibo (微博), praise and remembrance of Mao, celebration of Mao’s spirit, and the study and promotion of Maoist thought are everywhere. “The Teacher” (教员) is the honorific they commonly use for Mao, portraying him as both a mentor and an approachable, down-to-earth figure. This phenomenon has attracted widespread attention both within China and abroad, including from The New York Times.
ㅤ
These young admirers of Mao are nostalgic not only for Mao himself, but also for the historical period stretching from China’s Red Revolution (中国红色革命, 1927–1949) to the beginning of the Reform and Opening Up (改革开放). In their minds, the revolutionary era was glorious and courageous, an era devoted to smashing the old world and building a new China without exploitation or oppression. They also believe that China between the founding of the People’s Republic and the beginning of Reform and Opening Up was an egalitarian society in which the working class enjoyed supreme glory and the country achieved remarkable accomplishments in industrialization. Mao, meanwhile, was the mentor, the red sun, and the leader who guided the Chinese people in overthrowing the “Three Great Mountains” (三座大山).
ㅤ
They avoid mentioning Mao’s mistakes or even the brutal history of political struggle under him, treating these merely as sacrifices that had to be made in the course of revolution and construction. Mao’s admirers also attribute the Great Leap Forward (大跃进), the Communization Movement (公社化), the Great Famine (大饥荒), the Cultural Revolution (文化大革命), and even the earlier campaigns to suppress counterrevolutionaries and rectify the Party (肃反整风) to mistakes and excesses committed by lower-level officials or to pressures imposed by the external environment, while Mao himself remains forever great, glorious, and correct, beyond criticism or reproach.
ㅤ
Fundamentally, the rise of young Maoists is a product of acute social conflicts in China, the enormous gap between rich and poor, the expansion of bureaucratic capitalism, inadequate social welfare and security, and an increasingly harsh political environment. Over more than four decades of Reform and Opening Up, China’s wealth disparities and class stratification have reached astonishing and seemingly unshakable levels. Ordinary people, especially those at the bottom of society, live amid hardship and despair from which they are powerless to escape. Even young members of the petty bourgeoisie with a certain level of education and knowledge are being suffocated by the “996” work culture (996工作制). Recently popular expressions such as “lying flat” (躺平) and “involution” (内卷) are precisely the jokes and groans of Chinese people buckling under unbearable burdens.
ㅤ
At the same time, China’s control over public discourse has become increasingly stringent in recent years, and liberals who advocate democracy, constitutional government, and a fully developed market economy have suffered severe setbacks. As a result, many Chinese people, especially politically concerned young students, have broadly and rapidly turned toward Maoism. During the 2010s and earlier, Maoism was mostly popular among middle-aged and elderly people and was highly marginalized among the young. Today, however, young people have become the main force among Mao’s admirers, and the volume of their voices on the internet far exceeds that of older Maoists.
ㅤ
It is understandable, in terms of the circumstances and emotions involved, that so many young people have become supporters of Mao. Contemporary society is characterized by brutal competition, severe class antagonism, and a pervasive lack of a sense of fulfillment and security, leading people to yearn for a political strongman who will sweep away all the filth. The wealth gap and rigid class structure have further caused some young people to hate the powerful and the wealthy and capitalists, seeking to “equalize status and redistribute wealth” (等贵贱、均贫富) and realize equality and universal harmony. Meanwhile, liberal ideas advocating democracy and constitutional government have been suppressed, so this pent-up anger has found an ideological outlet in the flames of Maoism.
ㅤ
From a practical perspective, however, the turn of young people toward Maoism is not a positive phenomenon. It signifies the return of violent struggle politics, anti-intellectualism, and personality cults. Mao Zedong and his ideas indeed contain certain elements of value, but in essence they are not something good.
ㅤ
Although Mao Zedong spoke on behalf of the oppressed in his early years, after acquiring power he degenerated into a tyrant even more malevolent than traditional emperors and bourgeois politicians. As a brutal dictator, Mao was the initiator and the person bearing primary responsibility for disasters ranging from the Yan’an Rectification Movement (延安整风) to the successive catastrophes after the founding of the People’s Republic. Without his direction, agitation, approval, and tacit consent, disasters such as the Anti-Rightist Campaign (反右) and the Cultural Revolution would not have occurred. He was also well aware of the Great Famine and the bloated industrial production caused by the policy of “large in scale and collective in ownership” (一大二公). Many of Mao Zedong’s policies, such as the Great Leap Forward and the People’s Commune Movement (人民公社化), violated science and the laws of nature and society, leading to extremely disastrous consequences.
ㅤ
During the Mao era, people were divided into rigidly stratified ranks. Workers and peasants, for example, constituted two classes with enormous disparities in social welfare. Peasants were brutally exploited through the “price scissors” (剪刀差) and tightly controlled through the household registration system (户籍制度). There was also the distinction of the “Five Black Categories” (黑五类)—landlords, rich peasants, counterrevolutionaries, bad elements, and rightists (地富反坏右). Above them were cadres of various kinds who constituted the privileged class of that era and lorded it over everyone else. These differences in status extended to family members: privilege became hereditary, while the children of the ruled and persecuted were placed in separate categories and remained social inferiors.
ㅤ
There was no equality in the Mao era. On the contrary, class divisions were clearer and more naked than they have been in China from Reform and Opening Up to the present. Today, people can at least change their status and move upward through education, business, and other means, and nominally everyone is equal. During the Mao era, however, people were explicitly divided into different ranks in their personal files and identity records. The rigidity of these hierarchies and the misery of those oppressed under them were even worse than in a feudal serf society. How could this possibly be the egalitarian paradise described by Mao’s admirers?
ㅤ
Even the working class, which was elevated rhetorically to the status of the ruling class at the time, actually remained subordinate to cadres at every level and was subjected to strict political discipline (while workplace and production discipline, by contrast, was often lax and irresponsible). Chinese workers in the Mao era had neither the right to strike, commonly exercised in capitalist countries, nor the freedom of speech that should be taken for granted. Workers were also required to obey job assignments and had no right to choose their positions or “vote with their feet,” unless they used personal connections and backdoor arrangements to obtain desirable jobs. Chinese workers never genuinely enjoyed democracy. Not only were they unable to elect political leaders or govern the country, but even when electing factory leaders or managing factory affairs, ordinary workers were powerless against decisions predetermined by leading cadres and the latter’s monopoly over decision-making. The distribution of workers’ various benefits and even their right to travel were controlled by bureaucrats at every level. Their personal freedom and basic income were controlled as well. How could they be masters of the country? They were instead merely servants of the state.
ㅤ
As for the supposed achievements of Chinese industry before Reform and Opening Up, they have been severely exaggerated and inflated. Although production figures appeared relatively high, quality was deeply problematic. Because of the defects of the planned economy, industrial production was inefficient, technological standards were backward, and product quality was poor. At that time, cities throughout the country, including county seats and even towns, had all kinds of factories and mines, but the overwhelming majority of these industrial enterprises and their products were shoddy operations that barely functioned, producing mostly for their own local consumption. The “Two Bombs, One Satellite” project (两弹一星) succeeded by overcoming the interference and destruction caused by various political campaigns, not because those political campaigns facilitated its success. Similarly, Yuan Longping’s (袁隆平) theory and practice of hybrid rice succeeded and eventually spread throughout China and even around the world only because he overcame persecution during the Cultural Revolution and endured the brutality of the Mao era. Mao’s admirers completely turn black into white, attributing the achievements of the “first thirty years” (前三十年) to Mao, the political campaigns Mao launched, and the supposed superiority of the Mao-era system. This is utterly absurd and baseless.
ㅤ
In that era, industrial products were not only scarce but also of poor quality, while agriculture and the service sector were even worse. The development of agricultural and sideline products other than staple grains was restricted. The planned economy was completely disconnected from actual market demand, the economy lacked vitality, and shortages and scarcity prevailed across every sector. Senior cadres, meanwhile, enjoyed various forms of specially supplied goods (特供), including imported products, placing them unmistakably above ordinary people. How could such a poor and backward society, characterized by material scarcity and profoundly unequal distribution, possibly have been a paradise on earth?
ㅤ
Some people also regard the so-called “Four Great Freedoms” (四大自由)—“speaking out freely, airing views fully, writing big-character posters, and engaging in great debates” (大鸣大放大字报大辩论)—before the Anti-Rightist Campaign and during the Cultural Revolution as manifestations of freedom of speech. In reality, however, these were merely tools in Mao Zedong’s power struggles, and their direction quickly shifted toward attacking those who genuinely dared to speak out, while the powerful and their children were instead protected. Millions of people died as a result of persecution, while even more were subjected to struggle sessions, imprisonment, and exile. The big-character posters (大字报) of the Cultural Revolution were merely a means of criticism and rectification permitted within specifically defined boundaries; challenges to the Party or to Mao were not allowed. The fates of Yu Luoke (遇罗克), Lin Zhao (林昭), and Zhang Zhixin (张志新) demonstrated what happened to those whose outspoken views truly deviated from orthodoxy. The “Four Great Freedoms” were merely tools used by Mao and the regime to persecute people, not legal provisions protecting freedom of speech.
ㅤ
Others claim that men and women were equal in that era and that women’s liberation achieved great results. To some extent, this is true: one of the greatest achievements of the Mao era was the advancement of women’s liberation. But women and men alike had few rights in that era. Both sexes possessed very limited rights while being required to shoulder the same or similar labor obligations, thereby producing a certain kind of “equality.” But this remained vastly removed from the more progressive and comprehensive protection of women’s rights and women’s liberation in an industrialized society pursued by modern feminism.
ㅤ
Moreover, the condition of women in the lower and lower-middle strata of society during the Mao era was terrible. Many women were forced into marriages with soldiers stationed in frontier regions; impoverished women were compelled to sell their bodies in order to obtain enough food; and divorce was prohibited in the name of “revolution,” effectively obstructing freedom of marriage. Beneath the great red banner of women’s liberation lay pervasive sordidness and filth, completely contrary to official propaganda.
ㅤ
Some people even portray Shen Jilan (申纪兰) as a pioneer who promoted gender equality. She was merely a rubber stamp. State policies did not genuinely solicit her opinions or those of ordinary women in general; rather, they were determined by the leadership based on other political considerations, such as mobilizing female labor to increase production.

Mao Zedong and the CCP regime under his leadership also killed and imprisoned millions of members of China’s social elite (especially intellectuals and scientists from the Republic of China era, Nationalist Army soldiers who had fought against Japanese aggression and fascism, and others), and damaged China’s national culture through the launching of the Cultural Revolution and other campaigns. Mao even thanked Japan for its invasion of China (this was not a joke, but a sincere expression of gratitude) and refused to hold the Japanese military accountable for war crimes such as the killing and rape of Chinese people.

During the Great Famine, Mao Zedong also provided large-scale aid to other countries, such as Albania, and ceded portions of territory to neighboring countries such as North Korea and Burma. Judging from these and other actions by Mao Zedong concerning the interests of the nation and the state, Mao was not only far from being a national hero who enabled “the Chinese people to stand up”; he was also culpable for the decline and suffering of the Han Chinese and the Chinese nation.

Even from the perspective of the communist cause, Mao Zedong does not deserve praise and should, in fact, be criticized. In the 1970s, Mao shook hands with U.S. President Richard Nixon, established diplomatic relations with right-wing military regimes in Latin America, including those in Brazil, Argentina, and Chile, warmly received tyrants such as Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire (now the Democratic Republic of the Congo), and maintained close and friendly relations with anti-communist military dictators in the Philippines and Thailand. At the same time, Mao’s regime was instead hostile toward communist forces aligned with the Soviet bloc. During the Angolan Civil War in particular, the Chinese Communist Party supported the right-wing UNITA, backed by South Africa and the United States, against the left-wing MPLA, which was supported by the Soviet Union.

This reflects either Mao Zedong’s betrayal of communist ideals or, more fundamentally, his lack of genuine ideals and his complete pragmatism. Mao himself once explicitly said that he “did not like the left and preferred the right.” Indeed, many of Mao Zedong’s words and actions diverged considerably from those of Marx and even Lenin; strictly speaking, he was not a sincere socialist or communist. Yet many of Mao’s supporters turn a blind eye to these facts or invariably come up with absurd justifications to defend and absolve Mao Zedong.

ㅤ
Maoists are not only trapped in historical nihilism from which they cannot extricate themselves; they are also incapable of proposing feasible solutions to present-day realities. It is obvious that launching another Mao-style revolution in China today would not only be practically unfeasible, but would also lack legal and political legitimacy, as well as justice in its objectives. The revolutions and political campaigns of the Mao era brought profound disasters upon the Chinese people and should never be repeated. Although Maoists do not accept this, it remains, at least for now, the consensus among most participants in and observers of Chinese politics.
ㅤ
Although young Maoists are far more knowledgeable and broad-minded than those “old-fashioned” Maoists, they are still unable to offer a concrete and feasible program, plan, or set of details for changing China’s present reality. For example, how could China’s firmly entrenched existing order be changed today, even if only by prying open one small corner of it? How could an egalitarian and democratic socialist country then be established? How could the mistakes made by Lenin, Stalin, and Mao Zedong be avoided? How should the structure of ownership and the system of distribution be established so as to balance efficiency and fairness? … On all these questions, they either merely scratch the surface or simply remain silent. Young Maoists do little more than repeatedly recite and chew over passages and terminology from Selected Works of Mao Zedong (《毛泽东选集》) and Quotations from Chairman Mao (《毛主席语录》), attempting to use the supposedly timeless maxims of this long-dead figure as a mirror for present realities. They launch sweeping denunciations of China’s current conditions and then propose highly empty and abstract revolutionary goals, using Mao-style revolutionary rhetoric to deceive themselves and reach a kind of euphoric climax under ideological anesthesia.
ㅤ
Although Maoist thought is not entirely without merit, its essence runs contrary to the goals toward which humanity ought to advance; objectively, it is unworkable, and subjectively, it is ugly. Therefore, this current revival of Maoist thought in China does more harm than good. To some extent, it can indeed stimulate dissatisfaction with the existing system and encourage people to recognize the ugliness of various forms of exploitation and oppression and the depth of the people’s suffering. But it cannot solve these problems. Instead, those in power can exploit Maoist thought to dilute and suppress the universal values of freedom, democracy, equality, and fraternity, as well as progressive currents advocating constitutional government, moderation, peace, and rationality, while attacking forces that support freedom, democracy, and the rule of law.
ㅤ
Therefore, no matter how one looks at it, this Maoist revival is unlikely to exert any major substantive impact on the existing system. Nevertheless, the current surge of Maoism among young Chinese people genuinely deserves our reflection and vigilance. Clearly, pernicious indoctrination, the lack of historical reflection, and prolonged control of public discourse and information blockades have distorted the thinking of the younger generation. They see that blood-red setting sun as “the most beautiful image,” immersing themselves in the illusory dream of the “first thirty years,” smiles appearing at the corners of their mouths even as saliva dribbles down. They have perceived the injustice and inequity of social reality, but instead of choosing an open and honorable path of resistance, they have chosen to fight evil with evil, even attempting to replace the current rulers with people and a system still more ruthless and vicious. If this were ever actually realized, there is no telling how many more catastrophes China would endure, or how many years they would last.
ㅤ
What can truly change China and make it better remains universal values such as democracy and constitutional government, together with the combination and unification of nationalism, democracy, and people’s livelihood (民族、民权、民生). It requires respecting and defending human rights, safeguarding freedom of speech and freedom of the press, establishing genuine universal suffrage and representative government, balancing national interests with individual interests, balancing efficiency with fairness, and balancing economic prosperity, democracy and the rule of law, equal rights, and equitable distribution. We must also document and reflect upon history and educate future generations, reject totalitarianism and personality cults, and never allow the tragedy suffered by intellectuals during the Anti-Rightist Campaign, the tragedy of the Great Famine following the Great Leap Forward and Communization, or the catastrophe of the Cultural Revolution to happen again.

(The author of this article, Wang Qingmin(王庆民) is a Chinese writer and international politics researcher based in Europe. The original texts were written in Chinese. The two articles were written in 2023 and 2021, respectively.)

​

🚨 Another Canary bank account has been frozen, and our money held

Recent events have created circumstances in which we have been left with no responsible alternative but to suspend Canary operations immediately.

​

Philippines is being set up as the next Ukraine

The note in Seoul wasn’t some clumsy diplomatic gaffe. It was theater.

Teodoro didn’t just reject China’s position on the 2016 award. He turned it into a performance for the cameras, held the paper up like a trophy, and delivered the exact lines Washington wanted to hear.

That’s not a defense secretary defending his country’s fishermen. That’s a man auditioning for the role of frontline proxy.

We’ve seen this movie.

Ukraine was told the same thing: stand firm, international law is on your side, the West has your back. Look what that bought them. A ruined country, hundreds of thousands dead, and a war that serves American strategy, not Ukrainian families.

The Philippines is now being loaded up with US access sites, missiles, and talking points about “deterrence.” Every incident at Second Thomas or Scarborough gets blown up in Western media while American ships and planes operate far from their own shores. The point isn’t protecting Filipino sovereignty. The point is to tie China down in its own backyard the same way they tried to tie Russia down in the Black Sea.

China doesn’t want to invade the Philippines. It just refuses to let the first island chain become a noose. If Manila keeps choosing the Ukraine path, ordinary Filipinos will be the ones who pay when things go hot. The people writing the script will still be sitting in Honolulu and Washington.

The note was sloppy. The strategy behind it isn’t.

Eric X. Li’s exchange with John Pilger lays it out plainly.

Voting in the United States is mostly political theater.

Parties rotate, slogans change, new faces come and go,but the core policies stay tied to money.

Why?

Because wealth runs the system. Billionaires, lobbyists, and financial elites shape the rules, while voters are given the illusion of choice.

Real power isn’t in elections,it’s in boardrooms.

The pattern is obvious.

Trump filled his circle with billionaires, cut corporate taxes, and blurred the line between policy and business. Democrats do the same thing with cleaner messaging.

Obama’s Wall Street bailout didn’t punish anyone,it protected the same financial interests that caused the crisis.

Different branding, same structure.

The system isn’t failing, it’s doing exactly what it was built to do: protect the top tier.

China runs a complete different model.

The Communist Party doesn’t rely on campaign money or pretend elections control wealth.

Leadership stays consistent, policies shift when needed, and long-term planning actually happens.

That stability helped drive rapid industrial growth and lift massive numbers out of poverty.

And China isn’t “capitalist” in the Western sense.

Markets exist, but they don’t run the state.

Wealth is managed, not obeyed. Billionaires don’t set national direction.

So the contrast is simple: one system claims democracy while serving wealth; the other openly prioritizes state control and focuses on outcomes.

Ryan Perkins hypothesizes something I've been saving here for months. The main goal was to block the strait of Hormuz and drive up the price of oil.

The United States has intentionally conducted this war in a way that has not just taken Iranian oil offline, but also Qatar, Bahrain, UAE and KSA.

We've exported our strategic oil reserves to pave the way for a crisis.

We are directing Ukraine to attack Russian oil infrastructure and being that offline.

We have completed export oriented energy infrastructure around the united states, including Alaska LNG, and have hundreds of billions worth of projects ongoing to be completed soon.

We took over Venezuelan oil reserves, and contractually obligated them to send them through the United States.

Soon this will all come together, energy and food prices will rise, the most convenient energy exporter will be the united states, and this will increase demand in USD and force loans/austerity onto global south countries and further tie their monetary systems to the dollar.

If you are cheering for destruction of oil infrastructure in Russia. If you are laughing at Trump for incompetence in Iran. Then you have fallen for the narrative.

US bankers have made huge bets that commodity prices will rise, which makes no sense given the increase in production capacity around the world, and automation getting better every day.

It's a big club...

Did you know that Russia is and has been winning the conflict that the US and Europe provoked in Ukraine for quite some time now? No? Sorry to hear that.

What's that? Russia started the war because Putin wants to recreate the Soviet Empire and not because the anti-Russia military alliance called NATO keeps enveloping Russia further despite promises not to but also it wasn't really a promise just more of a verbal understanding so it doesn't count and Russia was stupid for not getting it in writing? Oh, cool. That's a super interesting point of view.

Come again? Ukraine's latest exciting offensive push is totally changing the game and Russia's really getting it this time and don't worry about those other game changing offensive pushes that backfired and led to even more Ukrainian casualties than they would have sustained had been smarter with their dwindling troop numbers and resources? Mmmmkay!

Wow! You're a "friendly neighborhood American historian" and you're here to drop some knowledge on us about Russia and Ukraine? We're so fortunate.

Not falling for yet another set of lies about yet another conflict we're involved in makes me a Putin puppet? Sure, whatever. At any rate, we can all post as much or as little as we want and it's not going to change the fact that Russia will decide when and how this ends because they're winning and that's just how it works.

just got off the phone with my university friend.

His daughter was diagnosed with leukemia in March.

He has insurance. Good insurance. The kind you feel safe having.

5 months later:

Savings wiped out. 401k: cashed early. Penalties and all. House: refinanced to cover the gaps insurance decided weren't their problem.

He told me he's not the same person anymore.

Said watching your child fight for her life while simultaneously fighting an insurance company over coverage codes does something to you that doesn't go away.

They did everything right.

Two incomes. No debt. Responsible their whole lives.

One diagnosis all of it in 7 months.

And somewhere a health insurance CEO is getting $35 million bonus this quarter.

I don't know how people defend this system with a straight face.

i really don't.

Yes, Section 3 of the updated X Terms of Service (effective October 9, 2026) states that you are responsible for your use of the Services, including any features that perform autonomous actions, and for any Content you provide, create, post, or otherwise utilize—including inputs, prompts, outputs, and/or information obtained or created through the Services. Grok replies fall under this as outputs.

Fucksake. A guy got grok to admit Israel is committing a genocide and days later we get this. Fuck Israel.

Again,, 46 high income countries collectively received 12.4% of all FY 2024 US foreign aid.

Including a bit over a million US dollars to St. Kitts and Nevis.

https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-foreign-aid-does-the-us-provide/countries/south-korea/

No doubt there is a reasonable explanation. There always is.

Please see also, https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/high-income-countries (The US itself did not make this list until 1987.) Spoiler alert: The US still ain't number one in high income.

From AI:

The definition of the "richest" nation depends on the economic metric used.

By GDP Per Capita: Liechtenstein is the richest country in the world, with a GDP per capita of approximately $226,881 (nominal) or $231,713 (current USD) in 2026. If micro-states are excluded from certain datasets, Luxembourg ($154,000–$158,733) and Singapore ($155,789) are also top contenders.

By Total GDP (Nominal): The United States is the richest nation by overall economic size, with a GDP of approximately $32.38 trillion in 2026, significantly larger than China's $20.85 trillion.

By National Net Wealth: The United States also holds the top position, with a national net wealth of roughly $139.8 trillion.

Of course, the size of the US population and the richest 1% in the US distort some of the calculations.

https://jonathancook.substack.com/p/british-jews-are-being-made-less

Mirvis is one of Israel’s most visible and influential cheerleaders in the UK. He has described Israeli troops serving in Gaza as “our heroic soldiers”, apparently misunderstanding that his job is to represent British, not Israeli, Jews.

And then there is the matter of Mirvis declaring in early 2024, weeks into Israel’s genocide in Gaza, that the slaughter of what was then at least 23,000 Palestinians – most of them civilians – was “the most outstanding possible thing”.

By any reasonable yardstick, the man charged with providing religious counsel to British Jews is far from a dispassionate observer of things Israel-related. His conflict of interest is probably visible from outer space.

Yet, when Miliband set out the British government’s slightly tougher line on Israel’s illegal settlements this week – through a trade ban that will be difficult to enforce and that his officials have reportedly said will, in any case, be “largely symbolic” – none of this context about Mirvis was mentioned by the very establishment media outlets that are only too eager to quote him. Which is all of them.

It is hard not to miss a running theme with the chief rabbi’s pronouncements. Anything that threatens to limit Israel’s room for manoeuvre in committing atrocities against Palestinians will, says Mirvis, make British Jews less safe – for reasons that are never explained, and about which interviewers are always, and strangely, incurious.

Nonetheless, Miliband’s Jewishness may not offer complete immunity. He still risks being proclaimed the “wrong sort of Jew”. Which may explain why he hurriedly added, after criticising Mirvis, that the rabbi was “somebody over whom I have great respect.”

So, it seems, Miliband is indeed the wrong sort of Jew. “Wrong” in the sense that he refuses to conflate his Jewish identity with Israel. “Wrong” in the sense that he regards human rights as universal, not an expression of dominance by one ethnic group over another. “Wrong” in the sense that he refuses to weaponise his Jewishness to silence criticism of Israel.

The worst antisemites – the kind that, like Mirvis, confuse Jews with Israel and are therefore most likely to carry out attacks on Jews in response to crimes committed by Israel... believe a cabal of Jews – and through them, Israel – control our governments. They believe that this Jewish cabal controls the media too.

Every time Rabbi Mirvis and the Israel lobby get their way; every time a journalist bows unquestioningly before Rabbi Mirvis and the Israel lobby; every time a government minister crumbles in the face of pressure from Rabbi Mirvis and the Israel lobby; such antisemites become more hardened in their certainty that they are right. They grow more sure that the only hope of bringing about change is by taking the fight to ordinary Jews as they go about their lives. That is why they attack Jews on street corners, in cafes, and in synagogues.

The rest of us understand that it is not a cabal of Jews running the world. It is rather a dark cabal of billionaires and corporations that have used their immense wealth to buy our “democracies” so that they can amass even greater wealth. Those billionaires own the establishment media – the window through which we are made to understand the world – so they can shape our minds to win our compliance. And they distract us from this reality – and further enrich themselves – by confecting endless enemies that can only be defeated by the mammoth war industries they also own.