Earlier today, in our forensic analysis of the SpaceX IPO, we said that according to BNP estimates, the company’s inclusion into the S&P500 some 6 months after the offering would unlock $13.4 billion worth of inflows.

It turns out that that is not going to happen 6 months after the IPO. In fact, the earliest it may happen is 12 months after Friday’s break for trading… and realistically well after that. 

That’s because after the close today, S&P Dow Jones Indices said it would keep its existing eligibility requirements for main benchmarks like the S&P 500 Index, rejecting proposals that would have made it faster for mega-cap companies such as SpaceX to gain rapid entry into the benchmark after going public.

The index provider in a press release Thursday said it will not shorten the 12-month seasoning period for newly public companies it currently has or waive existing profitability and public-float requirements based on a company’s size, diverging from a broader industry shift embraced by rivals Nasdaq Inc. and FTSE Russell.

This is what S&P Dow Jones said in the press release:

“S&P DJI determined that exceptions to the financial viability, seasoning, and IWF requirements should not be granted solely based on market capitalization. The decision not to adopt the proposed exceptions preserves core index principles by maintaining consistent application of these key requirements. Although there may be trade-offs between strict adherence to these eligibility requirements and broad representativeness, the current methodology provides substantial market coverage and sector balance. As a result, the indices can continue to meet their stated objectives while preserving their role as representative and investable benchmarks for the U.S. equity market.

No changes will be made to the eligibility criteria including financial viability screens, seasoning period, or minimum IWF, for the S&P 500, S&P MidCap 400, or S&P SmallCap 600 as a result of the S&P Dow Jones Indices consultation on the treatment of MegaCap companies. Accordingly, there will be no changes to existing methodology for this index family.”

A more detailed breakdown of today’s announcement: 

The requirements that will now remain in place are:

• No changes to S&P 500 eligibility rules for mega-cap companies.
• Mega-cap companies will still need to wait 12 months after their IPO before being considered for S&P 500 inclusion.
• S&P will not waive profitability requirements for mega-cap companies. The company must have positive GAAP net income in the most recent quarter, and the sum of the most recent four consecutive quarters.
• S&P will not waive minimum public float requirements for mega-cap companies. At least 10% of a company’s shares must be publicly tradable (“free float”).

The S&P rejected proposals that would have:

• Reduced the IPO seasoning period from 12 months to 6 months
• Waived profitability requirements
• Waived minimum public float requirements

This means that the earliest SpaceX (as well as Anthropic and OpenAI after it) could be eligible to be added to the S&P 500 would now be June 2027.

The decision arrived as Wall Street has been grappling with a new reality: some companies are reaching unprecedented sizes before they ever enter public markets. The consultation, launched earlier this year, effectively asked whether index rules written for a different era should bend to accommodate companies that now arrive at a scale once reserved for mature blue chips in what has become known as the “fast entry” in industry parlance.

However, the push for quicker inclusion raised concerns among some investors who said rules around profitability, float and trading history exist precisely to prevent benchmarks from chasing hype. Furthermore, adding IPOs too quickly, they say, could expose passive funds to greater volatility and force them to buy shares before reliable market pricing is fully established.

Meanwhile, supporters say indexes should include massive companies as quickly as possible to reflect the market investors actually own, adding that these trillion-dollar firms can be economically significant long before they satisfy traditional index requirements.

“I am genuinely surprised,” said James Seyffart, ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. “But S&P is the market leader and they can buck the trend.”

Shocker for me to be honest. I genuinely assumed they would make the changes because everyone else was. But S&P Dow Jones is not changing their rules to allow for Fast Adds of Megacap IPOs

(We all know what happens when you assume) pic.twitter.com/tzrURWksPJ

— James Seyffart (@JSeyff) June 4, 2026

Unlike the S&P, Nasdaq changed its rules recently so SpaceX can join the Nasdaq 100 Index, a cohort of the largest non-financial companies listed on its exchange, in just 15 trading days, down from a three-month minimum. FTSE Russell adopted a similar approach, shortening the waiting time to five trading days. Indicatively, the Nasdaq addition would generate roughly half the passive inflows into SpaceX as an S&P includion would. 

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us

In the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution and the takeover of Russia in 1917 (largely funded by international elites), the new communist regime sought to implement what I would call “propaganda saturation” – An avalanche of policies designed to secure the red army’s political power by manufacturing false consensus.

It should be noted that, even at the peak of the Bolshevik movement’s influence, the reds only represented around 23% of the total Russian population and were never a majority. However, they had substantial monetary backing from overseas (read Antony Sutton’s extensive study titled “Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution). Think of this as an “NGO funded rebellion”, the kind of thing we are witnessing in America today with militant woke activists.

It was this international backing that gave the communists the boost they needed to take physical control of the government. But what they really needed was control over the general populace. One tactic they relied on in the early stages of the takeover was the use of a “Red Calendar”. If this phrase is unfamiliar to you, you’re not alone. Most people have never heard of it.

The Red Calendar was a propaganda program designed to eliminate and replace existing Russian holidays and religious observances with new, secular holidays. Foremost on the agenda for the Bolsheviks was the erasure of Christianity, which they viewed as a dangerous competing ideological influence that could one day undermine the government’s authority.

If the population’s first loyalty is to God, then the government and the party will always be in second place. This was unacceptable.

The Red Calendar established a series of special Marxist holidays revolving around labor movements and the revolution. The soviets would later declare special month-long celebrations of certain ideals, such as the “month of solidarity” or the “month of friendship.”

In short, the Red Calendar was a deliberate ideological tool: Old holidays weren’t always formally “banned” everywhere at once, but they were systematically deprioritized, persecuted, or culturally overwritten in favor of new communist ones.

Not to be outdone, the National Socialists (Nazis) in Germany and Italy also engaged in projects similar to the Red Calendar. This is just one of the MANY parallels between the Soviet Marxists and the Third Reich (Hitler consistently admitted that the concept of National Socialism was rooted in Marxism).

The Nazis targeted Christian holidays, but instead of relying on atheist or secular propaganda models, they used pagan alternatives. Christmas, for example, was changed to “Yule” or the “Winter Solstice” and the role of Jesus was systematically repressed or removed.

For the leftists who claim that the Nazi’s were pro-Christianity, sorry, but you are wrong yet again. Hitler despised Christianity in his private life and viewed it as a religion “for weaklings”. He spoke often about how he wished that the German people had a more militant religious tradition, similar to Islam.

In his postwar memoir, Nazi architect Albert Speer recalled Hitler complaining about Germany’s “wrong religion”. In secret, the Third Reich sought to establish a pagan religion which they felt was more aggressive:

“You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” – Adolph Hitler

The point is, socialists, whether nationalist or globalist, always seek to co-opt the existing culture of the countries they want to dominate. It’s one of the first things they do when they take over and the invasion is tailor made to subvert the specific culture being targeted. For the US, this looks less like a “workers revolution” and more like a coordinated insurgency of asylum patients against the traditional moral order.

The “gay rights” movement has long been at the forefront of this sabotage project, supported from behind the curtain by NGO’s like the Ford Foundation and communist groups like the Mattachine Society in the 1950s under Harry Hay.  Once again, Joseph McCarthy was right.

Their propaganda tactics are relatively unknown to the average American because they simply are not mentioned in public schooling or college academia. But, in researching the history of Red Calendar methods you might find yourself recognizing a familiar pattern.

Well, it’s the first week of June once again and in recent years, for the vast majority of Americans, the month of June has brought with it a sense of overwhelming exhaustion. A WHOLE MONTH officially recognized by the government as a celebration of “LGBT Pride”.  And yes, Pride Month is in every way an attempt by the far-left to bring back the communist Red Calendar.

Pride Month was first recognized by the federal government in 1999 under Bill Clinton (Mr. Lolita Express). It was expanded on by Barack Obama in 2009 to include transsexuals and Joe Biden flooded Pride programs with federal cash through USAID in 2021. He even went so far as to hold a pride celebration on the White House lawn which included guys with tits running around topless.

I can recall the national attitude towards gay people in 1999 was extremely accommodating. We were all indifferent and no one cared if someone was gay as long as they kept it away from children. Whatever people did privately was their business.

Zoomers like to pretend as if their mediocre activist movements are “changing the world” and bringing equality to minority groups, but Gen X already finished that job decades ago. In fact, one of the most popular shows on TV in 2003 was called “Queer Eye For The Straight Guy”, which featured a team of flaming gay dudes prancing around and taking straight guys on shopping sprees so that they would look less unkempt (and less masculine).

This was not an era of discrimination. Zoomer activism doesn’t solve problems, it creates problems.

The opposition started when the gay community, or whatever you want to call it, became the “LGBT” community. The opposition started when they became a political cult. Being gay suddenly meant joining a militant wing of the wider woke invasion into our social and governmental institutions. This is when “Pride” mutated into a monstrous blob; spreading beyond localized gatherings in liberal cities and turning into a national astroturf movement which everyone was forced to endure every summer.

ESG funding rained down on LGBT organizations through corporations and NGOs from 2015 onward. Not long after, Pride was everywhere. In our movies, in our TV shows, in our video games, in our comic books, in our sports, in our commercials, it was even on our food as companies slapped gay flags and activist mantras like “Love Is Love” on everything from candies to iced tea.

This was clearly a strategic effort hijack the cultural driver’s seat in the US. But the end, the inevitable end, was set in motion when Pride was injected into the public school system by far-left teachers unions. The agenda to indoctrinate children with transgender ideology and gay sexuality sealed the fate of “Pride Month.”

When the activists went after people’s kids, that’s when the greater majority of Americans started to realize that maybe, just maybe, the conservative “conspiracy theorists” of the early 2000s might have been right about a few things. Maybe, LGBT is not about equal rights? Maybe it’s about predatory politics, social control and the normalization of degeneracy?

Today, pride has imploded. Corporate sponsors have dried up along with ESG funding. The shutdown of USAID by the Trump Administration was integral to the death of LGBT Red Calendar celebrations because these groups relied heavily on government money to make organized events possible. As the money disappears, the real LGBT movement is barely noticeable. And, that’s the way it should be.

Anyone who makes their sexual orientation the very center of their identity is mentally ill, and no functional society should promote or celebrate mental illness. An even greater concern, though, is the exploitation of gay “victimhood” as a means to push socialism/communism/globalism.

It’s no coincidence that LGBT activism comes as a package deal with every globalist scam imaginable. To be “gay” these days means you are expected to applaud the deconstruction of the west, the death of free markets, the rise of climate change laws, the normalization of veganism, the end of freedom of speech (for everyone except communists), the systematic destruction of religion, etc.

There are gay people out their who don’t subscribe to any of these things, but the majority of them do, in many cases because they feel they are required to in order to fit in with the movement. It’s not enough to be gay, they have to be revolutionaries.

And this is why public support for gay issues is in decline in the US. This is why Pride Month was barely a blip on the gaydar in 2025 and it’s even less visible in 2026. By whoring out their community to the machinations of communists and globalists, gays really screwed themselves. Now, far less people are trusting.

Pride Month is, by itself, a kind of egomaniacal display of performative narcissism. That is to say, pride is not something to be proud of. Accomplishment is something to be proud of…but being gay is not an accomplishment. Many Americans now see Pride Month as nothing more than an act of self worship.

The pendulum is swinging back hard and I think the “persecution” the LGBT movement pretended to suffer from ten years ago might very will hit them hard in real life in the next few years. It was probably not the best idea to reanimate the communist Red Calendar or declare gays as idols to be worshiped for their “virtue”. The backlash is deserved.

In a first, China has banned four New Zealand Members of Parliament for a year over their visit to Taiwan, New Zealand’s foreign ministry says. The MPs learned of the ban – which the Chinese Embassy said could be reduced or waived with an apology – when they returned from the trip in May, local media reported on Thursday.

On Thursday, Chinese foreign ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning said: “Recently, certain New Zealand members of parliament, disregarding China’s serious concerns and firm opposition, wilfully paid a visit to China’s Taiwan region, violating the one-China principle and interfering in China’s internal affairs.

“In accordance with relevant laws of the People’s Republic of China, the Chinese side has decided to adopt measures against the individuals concerned, including denial of entry into China.”

This was the first time China has imposed travel bans on New Zealand MPs for visiting Taiwan – a move that “surprised” foreign minister Winston Peters, a ministry spokesperson said in a statement to the BBC. China claims the self-governed island of Taiwan as its territory, and has tried to restrict the island’s foreign engagements.

“New Zealand MPs have visited Taiwan for decades and such visits are not inconsistent with New Zealand’s One China policy,” the spokesperson said, quoted by the BBC.

In a statement on Thursday, the Chinese Embassy in New Zealand said the ban was a result of the MPs “disregarding China’s serious concerns” and insisting on visiting Taiwan as parliamentarians. The visit had sent “wrong signals” to Taiwan’s ruling Democratic Progressive Party and “Taiwan independence’ forces”, the statement said, adding that it constituted “interference in China’s internal affairs”.

The visit in May comprised lawmakers from the ruling coalition – Maureen Pugh, David Wilson and Laura McClure – as well as Duncan Webb from the opposition Labour Party.

McClure, from the ACT party, said the travel ban was “a type of foreign interference” and that she was “not going to apologize for visiting Taiwan”, the New Zealand Herald reported. She told Radio New Zealand that she was “quite surprised and shocked” by the ban as similar visits had happened for years previously. She added that New Zealand MPs “have the right to travel freely around the globe”.

“That is part of living in a free democracy,” she said.

New Zealand foreign minister Peters has instructed foreign ministry officials in Beijing and Wellington to discuss the matter with Chinese authorities to “better understand” the “departure from past practice”, the spokesperson said.

New Zealand established formal diplomatic ties with Beijing in 1972 and has since maintained a One China policy – the diplomatic acknowledgement of China’s position that there is only one Chinese government. New Zealand has formal ties only with Beijing, and not with Taipei. 

But like many countries, New Zealand has also maintained regular exchanges with Taiwan.

Last year, a group of New Zealand MPs met Taiwanese President Lai Ching-te during a trip to Taiwan. The Chinese embassy in New Zealand criticised the trip, describing the MPs as “colluding with ‘Taiwan independence’ separatist forces”.

Beijing also previously condemned a group of New Zealand lawmakers for attending a reception hosted by Taiwan’s de facto embassy in Wellington last October. 

Taiwan has previously accused China of trying to intervene in its diplomatic ties with other countries. Last month, Lai visited Eswatini – Taiwan’s only diplomatic ally in Africa – days after his government said a trip had been cancelled due to China pressuring African countries to bar him from flying over their territories.

That Eswatini visit was later brought up by Taiwan’s foreign minister Lin Chia-lung in a post about the New Zealand delegation’s visit.

“President Lai’s recent visit to Eswatini has once again made the world feel the challenges facing Taiwan’s diplomacy,” he wrote on Facebook.

Lin further noted that the visit by the New Zealand MPs “not only showed the support of the New Zealand Parliament for Taiwan, but also made the friendship between Taiwan and New Zealand stronger”.

China has sanctioned US lawmakers in the past for visiting Taiwan, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in 2022. The following year, China sanctioned US Representative Michael McCaul, claiming that his visit to Taiwan sent a “serious wrong signal to Taiwan independence separatist forces”.

Authored by Joseph Lord via The Epoch Times,

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on June 3, President Donald Trump decried communism, saying that the ideology leads to “death, destruction, and squalor.”

Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office on June 3, President Donald Trump decried communism, saying that the ideology leads to “death, destruction, and squalor.”

Trump said that the “free houses,” “free food,” and “free everything” offered by communist ideas “eventually …… pic.twitter.com/2h7uB6B5Zg

— The Epoch Times (@EpochTimes) June 4, 2026

Trump said that the “free houses,” “free food,” and “free everything” offered by communist ideas “eventually … ends, and it leads to death, destruction, and squalor—100 percent of the time.”

Trump was responding to a question from NTD, a sister outlet of The Epoch Times, related to a post he made on Truth Social the same day discussing communist ideology.

“Communists always do well with the voters, or as they would say, the people in the early years, but in the end, the country, state, or city goes to hell. Great violence proceeds at levels never seen before, and the entity dissolves into poverty, squalor, and crime,” Trump wrote in that post.

“Remember, breathtaking ‘popularity’ first, and then guaranteed death and destruction.”

The comments came as the eastern hemisphere entered June 4—the anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party’s brutal massacre of thousands of peaceful pro-democracy demonstrators in Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989.

Communism is an ideology and system that has directly caused the deaths of an estimated 100 million people worldwide, although some estimates indicate as many as 200 million. Today, the five communist regimes that still exist—in China, North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, and Laos—are among the world’s worst violators of human rights.

The president told reporters that his Truth Social post was inspired by his concerns about policies and candidates in places like New York and California.

The president specifically referenced New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, who openly ran his 2025 campaign as a self-described democratic socialist. Mamdani has drawn national reactions since his surprise victory over former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Republican Curtis Sliwa.

Democratic socialism describes an economic system under which the government provides certain key services, such as education and healthcare, through the use of a progressive taxation system. Critics have warned that such ideas work while the populace is wealthy but eventually fail, and lead to communist systems.

Before his election, Trump had been openly critical of Mamdani. The two said they had a strong working relationship since they first met in person in November 2025.

Trump has expressed personal admiration for Mamdani while maintaining his opposition to the New York Democrat’s politics—a tone he took again in his remarks on Wednesday.

“I watched [Mamdani in] New York, and you know, I liked him very much,” Trump said, adding a reference to Mamdani’s November visit and a second visit in February this year.

“He stood right here, and he’s been in the office a couple of times.”

Trump then said his ideological disagreements with Mamdani remain intact.

“He’s a smart guy, I don’t understand why he thinks it’s okay for all these companies that pay hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes a year to leave,” Trump said.

“You’re not going to have any tax base, and you’re going to end up in hunger and squalor and death and destruction.”

Trump was referencing warnings from chambers of business and other groups that the major companies and ultra-wealthy could begin to leave New York City as Mamdani moves to institute higher taxes on top earners in the city.

Trump said that while it’s harder to make the case for free enterprise, that system is the foundation of the United States’ success and global leadership.

“Free enterprise is tougher to sell, but that’s what’s made our country great, and that’s why it’s great again now,” the president said from the Oval Office.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity,

New York City’s vast underground network has become the unlikely focus of fresh alarm. Surveillance footage shared widely online shows teams of men lifting manhole covers in the middle of the night, descending into the sewers with flashlights, tools, and protective gear, then resurfacing hours later.

Police have investigated multiple such episodes, particularly in Brooklyn, yet their public message remains the same: no known threat to safety.

That reassurance has failed to settle nerves in a city still scarred by past attacks and struggling under years of unchecked migration and progressive governance.

Mole people? Treasure hunters? Something else?

Police are investigating a string of bizarre incidents involving mysterious groups of people entering and exiting New York City sewers through manholes in the dead of night.

Videos show different groups equipped with flashlights,… pic.twitter.com/MV1HxhOpr0

– Fox News (@FoxNews) June 3, 2026

When groups operate with apparent coordination in critical infrastructure after dark, the quick dismissal only fuels suspicion.

The pattern emerged in recent weeks. In Gravesend, Brooklyn, footage captured one group removing a manhole cover on McDonald Avenue. Several men in waders and boots emerged around 2 a.m. after hours below ground.

A separate incident in Williamsburg saw another group enter a manhole near Bedford and Hayward around 1 a.m. and exit roughly two and a half hours later. An earlier sighting in Astoria, Queens, showed similar behavior.

Who are these people dropping into New York’s sewer system?

The NYPD are baffled by the motive of the people who enter the sewers, leave no trace and seem to pose no threat to the wider public. https://t.co/5njhcLLfEW pic.twitter.com/zrvvN1kj1j

– Sky News (@SkyNews) June 3, 2026

Witnesses describe purposeful movement, gear suited for extended time in filthy, hazardous conditions, and vehicles staged nearby. The New York Police Department responded by sending its Emergency Service Unit and Canine Unit underground to inspect the tunnels.

The Department of Environmental Protection also inspected and reported no damage to equipment. Officials stated they found nothing nefarious and floated the possibility that the individuals were simply urban explorers or treasure hunters.

Videos of the incidents spread rapidly, prompting widespread questions about motives and security.

Are they planting bombs?

Another incident occurred in New York involving mysterious groups of people thought to be foreign, are entering and exiting manholes in the dead of night

“Videos show different groups equipped with flashlights, waders, and other gear disappear… https://t.co/AbjZ5LdY4T pic.twitter.com/hGx9d7IwCK

– MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) June 3, 2026

Public reaction has been blunt. Many see organized teams operating in a sanctuary city that has taken in large numbers of unvetted arrivals. The same online conversation that once focused on “mole people” quickly shifted toward fears of reconnaissance, sabotage, or terrorism.

Past terror attacks on New York infrastructure and the reality of foreign actors probing soft targets make the casual “no threat” line ring hollow to those paying attention.

Authorities correctly note that unauthorized entry into the sewer system is illegal and extremely dangerous. Toxic gases, flooding, collapses, and confined spaces turn it into a death trap for the unprepared.

Yet the absence of swift arrests or visible escalation to federal agencies has left residents wondering whether political optics or stretched resources are slowing a fuller response.

New York’s sewer network stretches for thousands of miles beneath streets, businesses, and sensitive sites. It is not some abstract curiosity. Coordinated nighttime access by unidentified groups equipped for prolonged underground movement is exactly the kind of activity that should trigger a serious security posture.

The city’s leadership, shaped by years of Democratic Socialist priorities and open-border policies, has repeatedly shown greater interest in managing narratives than confronting hard security realities.

Coverage from major outlets has documented at least three recent nighttime incidents across Brooklyn and Queens, with police maintaining their assessment even as footage continues to circulate.

Infrastructure protection should come first. Cities should not be left guessing about teams disappearing into vital systems while officials rush to label concerns as overblown. Here, the default seems to be reassurance before transparency.

Residents in the affected neighborhoods have voiced what many feel: this does not look like casual scavenging. It looks like preparation. Whether the goal is valuables, mapping, or something darker remains unknown. That is precisely the problem.

Recent surveys paint what might seem like an apocalyptic picture:  In the US, around 45% of men ages 18-25 do not approach women anymore to engage in dating or relationships.  Over 42% of all men have no interest in seeking out women for relationships or casual dates.  Around 30% of men over 40 years old have never been married and are not necessarily seeking marriage.  

In light of ongoing concerns about population decline around the world, the first thing most people might say is that men need to “step up” and fulfill their role in order to save the human species from a “Children Of Men” movie scenario.  However, this suggests that it’s men’s fault and that checking out of the current system is a bad thing.  It’s a narrow minded view.  

To be clear, the narrative of the “male loneliness epidemic” is a propaganda fantasy designed to shame men into returning to the liberal fold.  The truth is, men are not lonely, they are deliberately refusing to participate in order to make a point.  What we are witnessing is perhaps the most substantial mass boycott of liberal ideology in history as men go more conservative.  It’s a boycott the establishment media does not want to acknowledge. 

In a recent expose by The Guardian, the outlet dares to ask the forbidden question – Is the “Me Too” movement the reason men are opting out of relationships and liberal society?  Sadly, they barely delve into the truth of the matter and instead regurgitate the old standby excuses:  Men are afraid of women because of lack of emotional intelligence.  Men are having trouble navigating the new world of fluid gender roles and women’s independence.  Men are being lured into “toxic masculinity” by conservative movements, etc. 

Not surprisingly, the media rarely engages with straight men who study these changes from the male perspective.   If they did, they might get a better insight into what men today want want from life, from their careers or from relationships.  They talk often in dismay about the rush of young men into conservative ideals, but they never ask those men what it is about conservatism that attracts them. 

Why?  Because they don’t want to hear the answer.  They don’t care what men have to say.  So instead, they gather up a gaggle of female psychologists, jilted women and woke beta male activists and ask them “What is going on with men these days?” 

The idea of self improvement and striving for success has become the rallying cry for many men lost in the sea of the post “Me Too” world.  It makes perfect sense.  After a decade of feminist militancy and narratives painting men as walking time bombs on the verge of exploding into a deadly rage, men are no longer asking for validation from society or from women. 

Instead, they have set their own goals and measure their achievements according to their own peace of mind.  The power of the woke movement and feminists is in their ability to insert themselves into the role of judge and jury.  They do this by claiming constant victimhood, which they say earns them access to the halls of power and influence.  When the media talks about masculinity from an anthropological standpoint, they talk to the self-appointed woke experts (mostly women).    

When they do ask men, it’s usually from a liberal standpoint.  When they ask conservative men, they ignore the answers and attack the honest responses.   Last week a New York Times podcast set out to explore what they call the American Masculinity Crisis; not to understand why men and masculinity have been so demonized, but to complain about men returning to masculinity despite the political left’s best efforts to destroy it.  

“I think that we are in an abysmal state.  I think the reality is that we’ve always had patriarchy at the intersection of capitalism and white supremacy, and how those things feast on one another and lift one another. But I think right now, more times than not, the role models that these young boys and young men have are not only divisive and toxic but insidious and heinous, disgusting. Truly, I mean, the president of the United States is an alleged rapist. What does that mean? You know, the popular thing that boys are watching is largely M.M.A., right? So I think we’re in a horrible place…”

The idea of “toxic masculinity” is a woke feminist fallacy; a creation meant to shame men for their natural behaviors, their normal biological roles and the inherent ways they deal with the world.  The important thing to remember is that feminism has not been about equality for decades.  Women have had social equality and legal superiority over men in the west for some time now. 

Rather, feminism is about keeping men in line and under control to prevent any rebellion against the liberal epoch.  After all, women have no inherent power.  They gain power by convincing men to give their power away through government.  By convincing men to behave in the name of modern civility.  From the New York Times:

“I think, when we talk about masculinity, we have to talk about the patriarchy. And I think we see this as this system which harms everyone, including men…”

“I think if we can see ourselves as part of a system of patriarchy that harms all of us, and we are allies in this fight rather than men versus women, men oppressing women, then I think we can have a more productive conversation…”

In other words, masculinity and patriarchy is the left-wing version of “original sin”; a great crime against humanity that can only be defeated when men and women to come together…and submit to feminism.  Which means, men have to hand over all their power as the source of this great evil.  Men have to accept proper “management” to avoid falling into their darker ways.  If only these men would prostrate themselves before the benevolent woke gods and beg for forgiveness, then the world would be a much better place.

But why would they?  The idea that they get something in return is a proven lie.  They get no redemption, no peace.  Why not simply step on the neck of feminism, destroy it and take control?  It would be easy.  The only thing stopping this from happening is the hope most men have for a logical and reasonable discourse – The hope of honest reconciliation.  As long as feminism exists, however, this is never going to happen.

When the left-wing media opines on the lost generation of men, what they’re really doing is pretending to have empathy while scrambling to circumvent a full blown male rebellion against the liberal order. 

The “Me Too” movement was presented as a reckoning over abuse against women in professional spaces, but it ultimately became a power grab in which liberal women leveraged fake outrage to elevate the idea of “guilty until proven innocent.”  It weaponized mob justice against men as a way to steal jobs women didn’t earn or deserve, and steal political power they had no moral capacity to handle. 

It’s no mistake that the Me Too motto was “Believe all women.”  That’s a radioactive level of power.  

The real reckoning is going to be in the aftermath of Me Too.  There is a quiet but simmering movement of young men who are about to reassert their dominance in the society that cast them as monsters.  What progressives and feminists still don’t realize is that their actions have set an unstoppable freight train in motion.  By alienating men in the pursuit of political gain, they have created a juggernaut with little empathy for self proclaimed “victims”.