China appears to have replicated a next-generation counter-drone system we first covered in mid-July. The system uses a multi-barrel hemispherical array that reduces much of the latency associated with conventional turrets, shortening the sensor-to-shooter engagement cycle. Beijing’s apparent interest reflects the design’s potential as a next-generation counter-UAS system capable of engaging drone swarms approaching simultaneously from multiple directions.

X user Drone Wars revealed that Chongqing Jianshe Industry, a Chinese state-owned arms manufacturer specializing in light weapons, developed a multi-barrel weapon concept designed to counter drones approaching from multiple directions.

Drone Wars added more color:

The patent describes several barrel assemblies connected to a common propellant chamber. Each assembly uses a feed tube containing spherical projectiles, with a spring mechanism automatically moving the next projectile into position after firing. According to the design, propellant gas drives a locking block during firing, closing the feed opening and preventing gas from escaping. Once pressure drops, a return spring moves the block back, reopening the feed path and allowing the next projectile to enter the firing position. The concept reportedly allows multiple barrel assemblies to be mounted at different angles, enabling simultaneous fire in several directions. The design appears intended to increase the likelihood of engaging small drones approaching from different angles.

China’s Chongqing Jianshe Industry (Group) Co., Ltd. has reportedly developed a multi-barrel concept intended for countering unmanned aerial vehicles.

The patent describes several barrel assemblies connected to a common propellant chamber. Each assembly uses a feed tube… pic.twitter.com/AfBCMVNZTv

— Drone Wars (@Drone_Wars_) August 13, 2026

Circling back to our report last month, titled “Sub-Second Detect-To-Fire”: Futuristic Dome Turret Could Be US Military’s Answer To Drone Swarms, China’s answer to Picket Defense Systems’ multi-barrel hemispherical array appears very similar.

“Fixed multi-barrel hemispherical array: no slewing delay. Sub-second detect-to-fire. No dead zones, no blind spots, no reaction time,” Picket wrote in a slide deck.

This week in the counter-UAS market, Northrop Grumman unveiled a chain gun designed to defend critical infrastructure from drone swarms.

The skies are changing. Defending against one threat isn’t enough anymore. Our Raid Hunter™ is built to meet the challenge with precision-guided gunfire and the speed needed to help protect what’s critical. pic.twitter.com/Meuqyg04oY

— Northrop Grumman (@northropgrumman) August 11, 2026

We suspect a procurement supercycle for drone and counter-drone systems will kick off next year.

How to profit:

• “Only The Beginning”: How To Profit From The Asymmetric Warfare Boom
• Unusual Machines Jumps After Trump Slaps 100% Drone Tariff In “Hard Decoupling” From China
• This American Drone-Motor Company Is Positioned For “Massive Procurement Tailwind”
• Wall Street Zeroes In On This “Pure-Play” US Attack Drone Company

Drone swarms with fully automated kill chains will only increase demand for next-generation counter-UAS systems, such as multi-barrel hemispherical arrays.

North Korea has issued a severe warning over the upcoming joint military exercise between the United States and South Korea, characterizing it as a rehearsal for an aggressive war and that it is is ready to respond.

North Korea’s Foreign Ministry described Friday that these planned drills look different, and will be more dangerous, compared to all prior ones of the past-half decade, in that they appear offensive in nature as the exercise will focus on modern warfare tactics.

The 10-day Ulchi Freedom Shield exercise will kick off this coming Monday, August 17, and will see tens of thousands of military personnel from the United States, South Korea participate – but also other allied countries such as Australia.

“The US announced that the forthcoming exercises are quite different from the ones of the past five years and intended to master the ability of fighting a war on the basis of the new aspects of modern warfare,” the North Korea condemnation reads. 

“By doing so, it did not conceal its aim to complete preparations for the substantial military confrontation with the DPRK. This is tantamount to an admission that the exercises, which the US and the ROK describe as ‘annual’ and ‘defensive’ ones, are a rehearsal for an aggressive war,” the ministry added in a statement published by Korean Central News Agency (KCNA).

US military magazine Stripes has admitted that growing North Korean defense cooperation with Russia has given new impetus and shape to the joint war games:

North Korea’s growing military partnership with Russia and the battlefield experience its troops have gained in the war with Ukraine is shaping how U.S. and South Korean forces prepare for a potential conflict on the peninsula, a senior United Nations Command officer said Thursday.

Australian army Lt. Gen. Scott Winter, deputy commander of U.N. Command, said the allies are accounting for Pyongyang’s increased use of technology, its ballistic-missile development and lessons learned by North Korean troops supporting Russia as they prepare for Monday’s start of Ulchi Freedom Shield.

The command is “very conscious” that North Korea has used its relationship with Moscow as an opportunity to test ballistic missile systems and gain contemporary battlefield experience, Winter told reporters during a briefing on the exercise at the Press Center in Seoul.

Meanwhile North Korea has further stated: “It is our consistent principle of ensuring security to respond to a new level of a threat with a new level of a deterrent,” and so the country “will more clearly express its stance on the enemies to cope with any threats and challenges through the responsible and decisive exercise of the right to legitimate self-defense.”

North Korea threatens ‘overwhelming’ response to US-South Korea joint military drills — KCNA

Pyongyang claims the exercise that begins August 17 is not merely ‘defensive’ but rather ‘provocative’, simulating modern warfare, including drone, electronic and cyber operations pic.twitter.com/D9cjx5OcgC

— RT Intl (@RT_on_X) August 14, 2026

In Ukraine, President Zelensky has this month been highlighting a deepening role by Pyongyang in helping Russia militarily, including alleged use of North Korean ballistic missiles on Ukrainian cities.

Interestingly, Zelensky is using this narrative to try and goad South Korea into changing its policy and export heavy weapons, including anti-air defenses, to Ukraine.

Authored by Pepe Escobar via ‘Geopolitics Prime’ substack,

It took only a few Yemeni missiles on Saudi refineries to wake up “leadership” vectors of the Ummah; not over 100,000 Palestinians killed in Gaza by the death cult.

The Mecca Sunni NATO pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkiye and Pakistan remains a puzzle. Or dodgy sub-standard theatre – complete with photo ops and sparse intel sharing. The full text has not been released. Everything is quite vague, only stressing “collective deterrence”.

Against whom, it’s in the eyes of the beholder. All options – Eretz Israel, US-Israel, India (in case of attacking Pakistan) – might apply. The operative concept is “might”. Add to it Turkiye’s myriad NATO constraints: a viper’s nest in itself.

Significantly, Turkiye informed Iran before signing the Mecca deal. Extra layers of spin even promote Iran joining the deal in a later stage, as Riyadh in theory rejects military strikes on Tehran, and Iran might be covered by Pakistan’s nuclear umbrella.

Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, flanked by Turkiye’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, left, and Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, right, signing a joint defence agreement in Mecca, on August 7, 2026

Geography, once again, will dictate matters. Turkiye will remain in NATO – because Turkish elites are essentially Atlanticist. Saudi Arabia would have to perform miracles to extricate itself from the US security umbrella – and Indian labour. Pakistan’s priority is China and the New Silk Roads, plus the IP gas pipeline from Iran. Mecca is essentially Deterrence Theater.

A different, more intriguing scenario would point to the instrumentalization of Greater Turan – a key Turkiye objective – to the benefit of the US/Zionist combo. That would point to a neo-Ottoman remix, now reconfigured as the leadership of comprador Arab affairs. As in Ankara recreating the Ottoman hierarchy with itself at the center – as a matter of “saving” Zionists and Salafis from themselves.

It seems that the Mecca spark came from MbS himself (no one really knows, as things in Riyadh are so opaque). As Riyadh is being deprived of exporting oil via the Red Sea by Yemen – and might even lose their oil wells if things get rough – why not bet on benign neo-Ottomanism?

Why the US can never lift sanctions on Iran

Oil export routes through and around the Strait of Hormuz. Source: International Energy Agency, February 2026.

Meanwhile in Iran, under a revamped – by Leader Mojtaba Khamenei – Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), the solidified consensus is that Tehran will never compromise, especially under the current “no war, no peace” status.

Washington would have to meet a set of very harsh conditions before the Strait of Hormuz reopens, including:

1. The end to US threats and “insults”;

2. Permanent end to US wars against Iran and its allies in Palestine, Lebanon, Yemen, and Iraq;

3. Lifting of the American naval blockade and withdrawal of all US forces;

4. No less than $300 billion in compensation for war damages;

5. Lifting of all sanctions;

6. Unconditional release of all frozen assets;

7. Iran’s right to charge up to 7% on cargo transit;

8. A ban on US and Israeli vessels;

9. A 20% violation toll on ships if conditions are breached.

Call it an intimation for a US surrender: a capitulation on every front – from “follow the money” to military expulsion, end of sanctions and total Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz.

Even grains of sand across the Old and New Silk Roads are aware that humongous US debt is avid for new mechanisms to be fed with control over natural resources – from oil and gold to rare earth minerals. And these natural resources must be priced in US dollars and the petrodollar.

Iran – the key crossroads of Eurasia – has absolutely everything the US needs. Yet it’s sovereign, independent and intimately aligned with the Russia-China strategic partnership.

So this has all the makings of a Forever War. Washington will never lift sanctions on Iran. That’s politically – and geoeconomically – impossible. And Washington, whoever is in power, will never accept Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz, administrative fees included, because that seals, in practice, the imperial failure to use economic sanctions as its “diplomatic” tool of choice.

The result is that some of the serious consequences of the war unleashed on February 28 are already quite clear. Those include the possible financial destruction of the GCC, complete with the collapse of their ruling regimes; Yemen’s nearly inevitable geographical expansion; virtually complete international isolation of the death cult; a massive global economic crisis in tandem with a US financial crisis; and Iran’s accession to the status of prominent West Asia power, prominent Eurasia power, and prominent Global South power.

All that implies a massive geoeconomic game-changer facilitating a much faster rise for BRICS – and BRICS+ – complete with the solidification of Shanghai as the ideal solution for Global South capital to secure their savings.

Watch out for the “Eurasian Axis”!

The Empire of Chaos, Lies, Plunder and Piracy will not take any of that lying down. So the chessboard will continue to be destabilized even in nodes that in theory are controlled by the Sovereign Independents.

Enter the Caspian Sea – a key node of the International North South Transportation Corridor (INSTC), one of the premier connectivity corridors of 21st century pan-Eurasia trade, linking BRICS members Russia, Iran and India to Central Asia while bypassing Western sanctions and NATO-controlled maritime chokepoints.

Hybrid War in the Caspian perfectly fits the imperial scenario of provoking negative systemic fallout expanding beyond Russia and Iran all the way to China and Europe. After all China regards the Caspian as a key connectivity channel between Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects and Central Asia and Europe.

So the Caspian could become the apex of a geopolitical divide near the center of Eurasia, contraposing Washington/Tel Aviv/Kiev to the BRICS/SCO Sovereign Independent civilization-states.

Enter, once again, Turkiye – now as the possible missing link in the Zionist axis drive to connect both wars (NATO on Ukraine, US/Israel on Iran): after all they are the one and same war from the beginning.

Still it will be a hard sell to seduce Sultan Erdogan to go after Russian and Iranian strategic assets in the Caspian, even indirectly via Azerbaijan. An even more complex replacement would be Kazakhstan, which for all of its “multi-vector” policies is a full SCO member, a full Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) member and a BRICS+ partner.

Turkiye’s actions should be ultimately measured by the official drive to strengthen the Organization of Turkic States (OTS; Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan are both members) and what they might come up with to try to choke Iran’s geopolitical maneuvering.

Leaders of the Organization of Turkic States at an informal summit in Turkistan, Kazakhstan, May 15, 2026

Once again: it’s all about how they will play the Greater Turan card across the Caucasus and especially Central Asia, with their vast reserves of oil, uranium, lithium and critical minerals.

Moscow is carefully observing it all, with extreme discretion. Incidentally, last November Kazakhstan became the first Central Asian “stan” to join the Abraham Accords, in connection with a massive US-Kazakhstan minerals deal.

History Repeating is always quirky: we’re back to the original, late 19th century Russia-Britain Great Game. MI6 after all fully supports Greater Turan – as a premier counterpunch to the Three Sovereigns, Russia, Iran and China. Or what Trump has recently defined, for the first time ever (Elbridge Colby whispering in his ear?) as the “Eurasian Axis”.

At the National Museum in Astana, Kazakhstan, there’s a flashy panel representing all Turkic peoples, over 40 ethnic groups. Uygurs are in the mix, as well as Kazakhs and Azeris. But to translate that into Turkiye moving as a great player across Eurasia – complete with support from fake mythological narratives – is a whole new ball game.

The whole drive is not more sophisticated than creating a market for outright Turkic nationalism, with the Central Asian “stans” incorporated at best as junior partners.

Mecca as a Hail Mary pass

As the imperial pressure over The Three Sovereigns won’t relent, interlocked signature moves make all the difference. For instance: China investing in the Wakhan Corridor in Afghanistan as an extra road to reach Iran.

The Wakhan Corridor at Afghanistan’s eastern edge, where a proposed highway would create a direct land connection with China.

It’s The Great Game all over again: the Wakhan Corridor came out of nowhere at the end of the 19th century to “protect” British India from Russia’s advances in Turkestan. It connects with China’s Xinjiang for only 70 km or so, as I saw during my Pamir Highway travels before Covid.

This is one of the most high-altitude strategic borders on the planet. Only 5 months ago, Beijing came up with a new county in Xinjiang, Cenling, overlooking the border. Everything in this mountain wilderness is run from Kashgar, where the $60 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) begins.

Translation: on top of the China-Iran railway – previously bombed during the war on Iran by the Americans – this is an extra overland path from China to Iran bypassing the maritime routes, susceptible to Trump’s blockades.

China, in trademark win-win mode, will go all the way betting on both options simultaneously: CPEC, via Pakistan, and the Wakhan, via Afghanistan.

To round up our travels across selected spots of the New Great Game: in the end everything will be decided in West Asia. And that brings us back to the Mecca Sunni NATO pact.

This sharp analysis points to Mecca as a Hail Mary pass linked to the current sore lack of petrodollar recycling by the petro-monarchies – the mechanism propping up that monster, unpayable US debt; the pyramid of derivatives; and Wall Street’s solitary AI mega-bubble.

And this is what’s really driving the imperial desperation to settle something, anything with the Persians.

Because Iran has defined the prime geoeconomic battleground for the RICs (Russia, Iran, China, the new Primakov triangle), much more efficiently than endless BRICS discussions: the collapse of the GCC petrodollar racket.

Without this racket, a financialized neo-colonial empire run by remote control is absolutely impossible.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

As of August 1, 2026, wildfires and landscape fires have burned 112.3 million hectares of land across the globe, an area roughly the size of South Africa.

This visualization, via Visual Capitalist’s Sofie Gilbert, uses data from the Global Wildfire Information System (GWIS) via Our World in Data to show where that burning is concentrated in 2026 as of August 1.

The data includes prescribed burns, agricultural burns, and uncontrolled wildfires.

Africa Is the Epicenter of Global Fire Activity

More than half of the world’s burned land so far in 2026 is in Africa.

The data table below shows the land area burned for every country as of August 1, 2026:

Much of this reflects deliberate seasonal burning. Across sub-Saharan Africa, fire is a long-standing tool for clearing land, managing pasture, and preparing fields for planting. Even so, the scale is striking: Africa has recorded roughly 26 times as much burned area as the United States so far in 2026.

The Democratic Republic of Congo leads all countries with 13.6 million hectares burned, an area roughly the size of England. Angola follows at 7.5 million hectares, South Sudan at 7.0 million, and the Central African Republic at 6.0 million.

Major Fire Seasons Beyond the Global Leaders

Burned-area totals alone do not measure wildfire severity or risk, particularly because the GWIS dataset includes agricultural and prescribed burning. Still, several countries outside the global leaders have experienced significant uncontrolled wildfires in 2026.

Spain has experienced one of the year’s most severe fire seasons. Driven by extreme heat and drought, wildfires had scorched approximately 180,000 hectares as of August 1, an exceptionally high total for this point in the season. A massive fire in Ávila became the largest in Spanish history, and with simultaneous fires raging across France, combined evacuations across both countries surpassed 300,000.

Canada has recorded 2.0 million hectares burned as of August 1, with fires active across multiple provinces. The 2026 season follows the country’s record-breaking 2023 season, which burned approximately 15 million hectares according to Natural Resources Canada, seven times the historic national annual average.

The United States has recorded 2.4 million hectares burned, with Oregon and Washington experiencing some of the most severe ongoing fires. More than 100 large wildfires were actively burning as of early August, driven by drought conditions affecting more than a quarter of the country’s land area.

As four decades of U.S. wildfire data show, the number of fires has declined over time while the total land burned has increased, pointing to fires that are fewer but more intense.

Australia Stands Apart in the Southern Hemisphere

Outside Africa, Australia has recorded the largest burned area at 11.8 million hectares. That ranks second globally behind the Democratic Republic of Congo and accounts for nearly all of Oceania’s 11% share.

The data table below shows a regional breakdown of land area burned in 2026 so far:

Asia accounts for 18% of global burned land. Myanmar leads the region at 4.3 million hectares, followed by India at 4.0 million. Thailand, Laos, and China each add between 2.3 and 2.7 million hectares.

South America contributes 7% of global burned land, led by Venezuela at 3.0 million hectares and Brazil at 2.0 million. Europe accounts for just 3%, with Russia responsible for most of the region’s 3.3 million-hectare total.

If you enjoyed this graphic, check out How Much CO2 do Wildfires Contribute Globally? on Voronoi.

Andy Laperriere, Piper Sandler’s head of US policy research in Washington, wrote in a note on Thursday that explained both parties are moving left on economic policy as populist measures gain support across the political spectrum. His big-picture view is that “hard-left and socialist candidates” are damaging the Democratic brand primarily through deeply unpopular positions on open borders, defunding the police, and transgender politics. In effect, the party’s socialist class is willing to sacrifice broader electoral viability to defend nation-killing policies that most voters reject.

Policies with cross-party support include a $15 federal minimum wage, a temporary 10% cap on credit card interest rates, restrictions on Wall Street’s purchases of single-family homes, and expanded government intervention lowering drug prices.

Even Republican voters back several of those proposals by wide margins, suggesting the post-election policy threat to markets will extend beyond Democratic control of Washington.

Here’s where the numbers are striking: About 80% of Republicans support banning large institutional investors from buying single-family homes, 79% favor capping credit card rates, and 75% back a $15 minimum wage. Across all voters, 63% support higher taxes on corporations and billionaires, while 59% favor government-provided health coverage.

Laperriere pointed out that President Trump and JD Vance have helped move Republicans away from Milton Friedman-style free-market economics by framing trade, corporate power, and economic transactions in increasingly zero-sum terms.

Laperriere said Democrats face a different kind of problem, noting that the party’s socialist and progressive economic proposals are often popular, but its positions on policing, immigration, and gender remain deeply unpopular. Only 29% of voters support abolishing ICE, 24% back transgender athletes competing outside their biological sex, and 11% favor abolishing the police.

Laperriere noted that two-thirds of Democratic voters now hold a favorable view of socialism, partly because younger folks have no lived memory of Soviet bread lines, the Berlin Wall, or the Vietnamese “boat people” who fled communism.

Furthermore, as we’ve outlined, the failed socialist experiment in South America has resulted in a once-in-a-generation shift to common-sense right-wing leaders, with Trump-backed Abelardo de la Espriella taking power in Colombia just a week ago. 

The political shift has extended far beyond Colombia. In recent years, voters across Bolivia, Peru, Honduras, Ecuador, Argentina, Chile, and El Salvador have either rejected socialist governments or moved decisively against far-left parties.

Laperriere argues that younger Democratic voters lack any living memory of the “boat people” and therefore have little historical context for understanding how socialist and communist systems fail. But the warning signs are not confined to the Cold War era; rather, years of left-wing governance in South America that have coincided with currency crises, persistent inflation, capital flight, institutional deterioration, and rising crime that resulted in failed states, such as Venezuela and Cuba, are more than enough to show youngsters that socialism has failed – yet again. Latest figures show that there are nearly 800,000 illegal aliens from Venezuela in the US – and we wonder why … 

More from Laperriere:

We want to make two related points in today’s piece. First, voters across the political spectrum are more open to progressive/populist economic ideas than perhaps most investors think – and both parties (if Vance is the GOP nominee) are going to increasingly offer the voters leftof-center economic policies. The hard left and socialist candidates are not swimming upstream when they call for higher taxes on the wealthy, price controls, and more government entitlements. It’s their ideas on the police, the border, and gender identity that will hurt them politically. Second, Democratic voters are fed up with their own establishment for two main reasons: a sense their leaders are feckless when it comes to challenging Trump and the fact that a significant and growing share of the Democratic voting base is hostile to Western civilization. 

We argued in our recent piece, A Policy Bear Market, that both parties increasingly evince an open hostility or at least a wariness to free markets. As we noted in that report, JD Vance is running against Milton Friedman and market fundamentalism. President Trump has tapped into a growing sense that the system is rigged – and over time has convinced more Republicans this is true. He has a zerosum view of economic transactions in which one side is, in his words, getting screwed. It’s true there has always been economic populism on the right, and as we often noted you could call it ‘populism’ because it’s popular. It’s popular to say we won’t touch your benefits, to make the other guy pay higher taxes, and to scapegoat other people for the price you have to pay for drugs, gasoline, or anything else. But as the table below shows, a lot of ideas we generally associate with the left end of the political spectrum enjoy broad or at least considerable support among Republican voters. The move to the left on economic policy isn’t limited to Democratic voters.

And of course there has been a seismic shift to the left among Democratic voters. We noted in a recent piece that two-thirds of Democratic voters have a favorable view of socialism. Part of the reason is it has been a long time since ordinary voters have seen socialism in practice. Ask a group of people who grew up in the 1970s or 1980s what ‘boat people’ means and most of them will be able to tell you it’s people who got on leaky boats (or put their children on them) to flee communism and seek a better life. It’s most associated with immigrants from Vietnam but also Cuba and other places. See President Reagan’s brief 1982 Christmas radio address for a moving story of US Navy sailors rescuing some Vietnamese in a desperate situation to get a sense of the phenomena. 

During the Cold War, socialism didn’t have much purchase with voters because images of desperate people fleeing communism, the bread lines in the Soviet Union, and the fact that the guns mounted on the Berlin Wall pointed inward were there for all to see. There were a few exceptions (like Bernie Sanders, who honeymooned in the Soviet Union), but it was obvious to most voters that socialism doesn’t work.

But the Berlin Wall fell more than 35 years ago and socialism is rarely practiced anywhere in the world today. Ask a younger group of people what ‘boat people’ means and you get blank stares. A whole generation of people have grown up having seen nothing of the kind. Instead, a generation of young people has been taught in many schools (especially elite ones) that America (and Western civilization more broadly) is racist and rotten. This view is held disproportionately among young and highly educated white voters. 

This is the coalition that is fueling the insurgent campaigns that have taken out most Democratic House incumbents who have lost their primaries this year. They hold not only progressive or even socialist economic views; they are hostile to Western civilization. They view borders and the police as the vestiges of racism. As the table above shows, these views (in contrast to some of their economic views) are wildly unpopular. Francesca Hong, who narrowly lost the Wisconsin Democratic primary for governor this week, posted a few years ago that we should cancel Thanksgiving because it is “celebrating colonialism.” We couldn’t find a poll result for cancelling Thanksgiving, but imagine defending that in a general election. 

Nonetheless, she received more than 38% of the vote this week. That may be roughly the share of the Democratic primary electorate (which is much smaller than the Democratic general electorate, but nonetheless picks the candidates) that is hostile to Western civilization. Along with frustration with their leaders for being ineffective at challenging Trump, Democratic voters have been in a mood to vote out incumbents. The chart on the following page shows that 10 incumbents have been defeated in primaries this year, the most in a non-reapportionment year (in which incumbents end up running against each other or in territory they haven’t represented before) going back to the 1950s. Most of the incumbents who have lost were Democrats who lost to younger, more left-wing candidates. The turmoil in the Democratic Party has a lot of similarities to the forces that propelled Trump to the Republican nomination in 2016. 

As a quick aside, of course there are other explanations for the shift to the left on economic issues. Corporate profits account for a larger share of GDP. Wealth is increasing faster than incomes, and that disproportionately benefits the wealthier people who hold assets. A decade of zero rates – and the return to more normal rates – has priced many younger people out of the housing market. There was the spike in inflation. There has been a steep decline in manufacturing employment during the past several decades (though not manufacturing output). And so on.

Regardless of the causes, the bottom line for investors is both parties are moving to the left on economic issues. The socialists and the progressive left have taken unpopular positions, but it’s their social agenda that is likely to sink them politically. Many of these more left-wing economic policies are popular (including among many Republicans) and may be become law down the road.

Yet the nonprofit ecosystem of billionaire-backed foundations, far-left NGOs, Democratic Socialists of America activists, and progressive corporate media has little incentive to highlight the political shift across the Americas. The political backlash undermines the core narrative that capitalism is inherently destructive and that socialism will succeed if implemented correctly next time.

The Trump administration could exploit that vulnerability by expanding its messaging around Latin America’s rightward turn. The objective would be to remind younger voters that socialism has miserably failed, and that its consequences always end in disaster: inflation, currency crises, capital flight, institutional decay, soaring violent crime and rising insecurity.

Related read: South America Just Rejected Socialism. So Why Is North America Buying It?

Why do Americans protected by the 2nd Amendment still need to get permission and approval from the ATF to have a rifle with a barrel under 16 inches, or a particular brand of stock, or a suppressor that, in most cases, doesn’t silence a firearm at all but simply makes shooting it easier on a person’s hearing?  Why, for 92 years, have citizens had to pay for a tax stamp and send their fingerprints to the government for guns that should be considered a constitutional right?

This is largely due to the National Firearms Act of 1934, passed under the highly overrated Franklin D. Roosevelt Administration.  The law became a permanent annoyance to every gun owner in the US and a lucrative revenue stream for federal agencies; at least, until now.  

Finally, after nearly a century, the law is being erased.  But how?  

The legality of the NFA relies heavily on the existence of a $200 tax stamp.  The government did not ban covered items outright in order to avoid a clash with 2nd Amendment protections.  Instead, they added a tax to various firearms and related accessories, then made the processing of the tax and approval on the purchases an arduous affair.  Until the Trump Administration stepped in, NFA approval on any particular item could take up to a year. 

This clunky process was deliberately designed to dissuade citizens from purchasing certain firearms and attachments.  For people suspicious of government lists, the fingerprinting and applications made them not want to bother.  Possession of any of the items covered under the NFA is considered a serious federal crime with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.

However, when Congress passed Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” in 2025, this included a provision which lowered the NFA transfer tax to $0.  With the tax stamp gone, the legal loophole which made the NFA possible was eliminated.  Now, an army of legal challengers have brought their case to federal courts to remove the NFA entirely, and they have succeeded (for the most part).

Expectations within the gun community were reserved (gun rights advocates have long waited for this moment and remain anxious that the DOJ will try to ruin the party with an appeal).  But, this does not seem to be the case.  Trump’s DOJ missed the first 7-day deadline for an appeal.  They also have another 60-day deadline, but reports suggest that the DOJ has no intention of interfering with the court’s ruling. 

Rumors are swirling that Trump was personally involved in the DOJ decision to support the removal of the NFA by refusing to appeal.  Reportedly, according to Rep. Andrew Clyde who has been leading the charge on the legal fight, Trump has confirmed that there will be no further DOJ challenges to the NFA decision. 

So what does this mean?  The federal government will be issuing guidance over the next 60 days on how FFL holders and gun shops can proceed with the transfer of items listed in the NFA.  At first, coverage is limited to the plaintiffs involved in the court ruling (and their customers), however, the DOJ has the power to nationalize the court’s decision, effectively making the NFA null and void for everyone everywhere (this is now a likely outcome).

This means, suppressors, short-barreled rifles (SBRs), short-barreled shotguns (SBSs) and other items could be purchased without tax stamps, fingerprinting and wait times.  A basic background check (Form 4473) will remain in place.  It may take another couple of months, but it appears that the NFA is effectively dead thanks to the Trump Administration.  Gun owners had to suffer for nearly a century, but the long battle is ending.  

Meanwhile, the Hughes Amendment is still a problem, preventing the sale or transfer of machine guns made after 1986.  But it’s all about winning one fight and moving on to the next, and the end to the NFA is an epic accomplishment; one which most gun owners never thought they would see in their lifetime.