74.4 F
Chicago
Saturday, August 15, 2026
Home Blog Page 73

The Democrats’ Financial Situation Appears To Be Worse Than Previously Known

The Democrats’ Financial Situation Appears To Be Worse Than Previously Known

The Democratic Party’s money problems have been an open secret for months. Federal Election Commission filings from around six months ago showed the Democratic National Committee entering the final stretch of last year with barely $12 million in its campaign account and nearly $16 million in debt, most of it stemming from a loan the committee took out the previous month. Donations had slumped just as the party needed them most.

Since then, the political environment has arguably been extremely beneficial for Democrats, with President Donald Trump’s low approval ratings, the war with Iran, and high gas prices. Any one of those should have been enough to give the party the momentum necessary to get them out of their financial slump. Now, instead of turning the financial picture around, the DNC appears to be doing something stranger: hiding it.

According to a report from Axios, DNC officials required senior leadership to sign non-disclosure agreements before a private meeting on the party’s finances, a departure from the committee’s usual practice. Two people familiar with the conversations said the DNC requested the NDAs ahead of the recent finance meeting. The DNC asked its officers, high-ranking members of chair Ken Martin’s own team, to sign the agreements, the kind of people who typically never sign confidentiality paperwork before sitting down to talk numbers.

The senior officers’ meeting took place on June 25, five days before the Supreme Court handed down a ruling that upended the rules governing how parties fund their candidates. The timing alone tells its own story about how the DNC is managing its message heading into a midterm cycle it can’t afford to fumble.

Martin has spent months fending off a quiet but persistent crisis of confidence among Democratic donors, operatives, and even members of his own committee, all of them watching the Republican National Committee build a fundraising advantage heading into the Nov. 3 midterms that keeps getting harder to explain away. The numbers through the end of May make the gap plain. The DNC held just under $15 million on hand against $18 million in debt, while the RNC sat on $125 million with no debt at all.

The DNC declined to comment on why it required only its officers to sign confidentiality agreements before the finance meeting, and they’re trying to pass it off as inconsequential. Chris Lowe, the committee’s national finance co-chair, claimed that requiring officers and board-meeting attendees to sign NDAs is standard practice in the corporate world. Lowe added that senior DNC staff already operate under confidentiality agreements and argued it would be poor practice to discuss finance and political strategy at the highest levels without them in place.

A DNC official claimed that Martin’s committee has raised more money this cycle than the DNC did in 2017 and 2018, the last time Democrats headed into a midterm without the White House; however, it’s not clear whether that accounts for inflation.

Ultimately, the NDA strategy will not keep the party’s finances hidden, since those numbers will become public through Federal Election Commission filings. The agreements clearly exist for other reasons, such as protecting the internal deliberations, party infighting, donor threats, doubts about Martin’s leadership, and any strategic response to the Supreme Court’s ruling in NRSC v. FEC. The financial numbers clearly aren’t good, but what the party plans to do about them is likely what they’re really trying to hide.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 06:55

Gold & Tech: How The Whales Trick The Retail Plankton

Gold & Tech: How The Whales Trick The Retail Plankton

Authored by Matthew Piepenburg via VonGreyerz.gold,

Never in my 30+ years in the markets have I seen a monetary, precious metal and risk-asset setup more obvious yet more deliberately ignored than today.

Below, we look at the converging signposts screaming from the tech/AI sector and the equally obvious (yet deliberately downplayed) signals from a precious metals market entering a watershed turning point.

How the Whales Do Their “Magic”

As warned for years, and more recently here at the precious metals symposium in Florida, the insider whales (central and commercial banks, the BIS, the IMF and the shadow banking canyons of Wall Street) are clever little magicians.

They have a devious talent for manipulating (and destroying) the retail plankton by having the masses focus on their right hand while quietly gut-punching them with a banker’s hidden left hand.

Another Classic Tech Pump-n-Dump

Take, for example, the recent headlines from the tech sector in general and the AI rabbit hole in particular.

Despite a Fed-driven S&P which is historically over-valued by literally EVERY core valuation metric, all eyes of late had been salivating over the SpaceX IPO (trading at 100X revenues) and the Wall Street meme (and gambit) that AI will save the world.

This all-too familiar mania has been nothing short of hysterical—and for all the wrong reasons.

Behind this percolating, unprofitable and VC-funded madness lies (as always and as per usual) a cadre of over-levered banks sending/lending the markets at warp speed toward yet another debilitating credit (and then equity) crisis.

As warned in September of 2025, there’s much more to the AI “Great Dumbing” than just a wholesale slaughter of blue- and white-collar jobs.

In fact, a massive, contagious and AI-driven stock and bond bubble lies beneath the headlines which, with a little help from an equally toxic private credit and private equity threat, will soon send the global financial markets into yet another historical liquidity crisis.

As warned last year, the reckless over-investment by the Magnificent 7 “tech giants” (which comprise 1/3 of the US stock market cap) into the emerging AI mania “would soon move from over-bought to massively over-sold.”

AI: Hiding the Shameless Beneath the “Norm”

The nature of this over-concentrated mismanagement almost defies belief, as the AI bubble is driven by circular financing sins which deserve no redemption.

NVDA, for example, which makes the microchips that drive AI, invests billions in AI startups, who then buy AI chips back from NVDA, pushing its valuations moonward.

Microsoft, Google and Amazon are no less shameless.

Microsoft, for example, will place billions into OpenAI, who then sends that same money right back into Microsoft.

Google equally invests hundreds of billions into Anthropic, who then sends those same billions back into Google’s AI infrastructure. Amazon, playing the same game, tosses equal capital levels to Anthropic, who in turn invests that money straight into Amazon’s cloud servicing coffers.

These “magnificent” tech giants then have the gall to report AI-driven “revenue growth” on what is little more than an insider puff-job, the equivalent of me “investing” (giving) my son $1000 and then asking him to return the cash and calling that my “growth model.”

This Familiar Movie Doesn’t End Well

This, of course, is madness, and we (along with Apollo Research) are reminding YOU that there is in fact NO sign that the tech sector is making any real money at all from AI, other than from the companies selling to each other.

This incestuous pattern is eerily reminiscent of CISCO selling routers to dot.com startups in the late 90’s, which were funded by VC companies who were themselves funded by CISCO.

And we all remember how that -78% NASDAQ movie ended…

As of 2026, we now see a Mag-7 which has, with the help of those ever-wise TBTF banks in NYC, levered trillions into an AI gambit under the assumption that AI will make them more profitable in much the same way those same pre-08 banks thought ABS-packaged sub-prime mortgages would never fail.

And we all know how that -57% S&P movie ended too…

What’s even scarier, and not making the headlines today, is that those same banks have also seen that movie before. (Remember “Margin Call”?) After sending global markets to their knees in 2008, those same banks then issued themselves their highest bonus levels in history…

As for today, banks like Goldman Sachs are giving the retail plankton “research reports” on how undeniably significant technology like AI will save the world and the S&P.

Meanwhile, those same banks, and most notably the ever-clever JP Morgan, are quietly dumping their AI credit (junk bonds?) at a steady pace—you know, like profiteering rats leaving a ship before it sinks from their own lending practices.

Elon’s Bond Woes…

Folks, this is bad. But the hidden bad (as well as credit risk) doesn’t end in the oh-so magical AI sector. Elon’s SpaceX bonds are yet another tech-driven credit bug looking for a windshield.

Just after going public at a $1T valuation, SpaceX issued over $25B in bonds, and as of this writing, those bonds have already lost 10%.

We know that bonds are “boring” (and hence easily ignored). But as warned for years, the bond market is everything, and this latest credit signal from SpaceX is simply staggering in its implications.

Why?

Because those AI and SpaceX bonds (like those sub-prime ABS mortgages of the 2008 era) are likely part of your third-party-administered 401K and pension plans –just ticking away like a bad-debt time bomb as you read this.

From Crappy Bonds to Solid Gold

If the foregoing disconnect between media hype and hard math wasn’t bad enough, a far more lasting sea change in the global monetary system is unfolding right before our collectively closed eyes.

As the media and tourists/speculators (i.e., plankton) in the precious metals trade haggle over “peak gold” and decry short-term bear corrections in an otherwise obvious and misunderstood gold bull market, the big whales are calmly stacking metal in a deliberately manipulated fire sale as retail investors panic in the fog of daily price action.

Same Tricks, Different Asset

But again, this magic trick of blinding the plankton with hype/fear while the insider whales feast is nothing new.

The big banks from Wall Street to Hong Kong, as well as the central banks from Brazil to China, know that a UST and USD sinking under the weight of a 7% current accounts deficit and $3B/day in interest expenses on its $40T debt pile is no longer the world’s neutral collateral in actual practice.

This explains why there are more sellers than buyers of USTs.  

And this explains why sovereign bond yields are the highest in decades.

This explains why central banks now hold more physical gold than USTs.

This also explains why the COMEX has been seeing two years of physical gold (and silver) flying out its doors faster than $#!T through a goose to meet foreign delivery demands. This equally explains why central bank gold stacking has increased by 5X since Biden weaponized the USD in 2022.

Finally, this fully explains why Q1 of 2026 saw central bank gold stacking reach its highest pace in history, and why central banks net-purchased 41 tons of gold in May alone.

Love or Hate Em’—China Sees the Bigger Picture

And no one foresaw this incremental and now exponential decline in USD and UST hegemony better than the Chinese.

The PBOC just completed its 20th straight month of net gold-stacking, with a 15-ton purchase of gold in June.

Meanwhile, China imported more than 700 tons of the metal in the first 5 months of 2026 and over 14,000 tons since 2015.

Such farsighted preparation and strategic thinking (rather than flag-waving hopium) also explains why China’s largest bank, ICBC, along with four other major commercial banks, recently announced an end (effective July 24) of the paper trade (levered price fixing) of gold in favor of physical metal only—thereby undercutting (and giving a subtle middle-finger to) the paper-based farce of the NY COMEX exchange.

As the former head of the Shanghai exchange warned an overconfident West in 2014, soon China (with a partner in Hong Kong), rather than New York or London, would set the gold price, and this price will slowly become much fairer, and exponentially higher, when based on physical bars rather than paper claims.

In fact, much of that US gold is heading straight for China (see below), a nation that is essentially “de-paperizing” the gold market.

This obvious yet ignored direction of the golden “puck” also explains why Chinese citizens now invest more of their money into gold ETFs than stock ETFs.

In short, while Americans are being seduced by their “experts” into tech tops and scared out of gold-buys, the farsighted Chinese are encouraging their citizens to load up on real money rather than bad credit.

In short, each of the foregoing (and entirely media-ignored) signals confirm that China sees the longer-term direction of a gold-based monetary system(rather than gold-backed currency) far better than a debt-corned and media-misinformed West.

Rock Beats Paper

In this 2026 backdrop of trade, currency and now “hot” wars, China (and many other far-sighted nations and banks inside and outside of the BRICS+ coalition) are effectively loading their monetary guns with golden rather than paper bullets.

In other words, physical gold is no longer just another “asset,” “commodity,” or “metal” to compare against stocks, bonds or other “sectors.”

Gold is mathematically and objectively becoming the de facto global reserve asset and trusted collateral in a world now marked by an undeniable distrust in each other in general and the USD/UST in particular.

Building Their Arks Before the Rain

Stated even more simply, the central banks and central planners are preparing for a new monetary system which no one at FOX News, the WSJ or CNBC wants the US “plankton class” to see or understand.

As usual, the whales are quietly stacking precious metals in a self-made fire-sale while the retail plankton decry current price volatility as if gold were just another tech stock.

For now, and as warned even at gold’s highs in January, volatility can continue. Prices never move in a straight line, and bearish corrections are typical of secularly bullish turning points to shake out the minnows to enrich the bigger fish.

But for those who see the bigger picture (and direction) for gold, the question is not whether one times a bottom or waits for the perfect entry (a total mug’s game).

The real question is whether or not you see this generational turning point in the global monetary system and are building your golden ark before or after the rain?

Based on the signals above, the rain has already started, and the big boys are now busily building their arks. They are not looking at gold’s paper price today or tomorrow, but at gold’s physical and exponentially higher price, direction and role in the many years ahead.

Such knowledge confirms that if you grasp the history and math of gold, and posses the patience of an investor rather than a trader, this broke(n) world is literally handing you the greatest asset (and buy signal) in a generation—and one which will ensure and protect generations of wealth in the years to come.

This is not a “gold bug” fable but historical fact.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 06:30

Blackstone Just Made A Physical AI Bet On Actuator-Maker Powering Humanoid Robots

Blackstone Just Made A Physical AI Bet On Actuator-Maker Powering Humanoid Robots

Blackstone, the world’s largest alternative asset manager, is making a big investment in Futronic, a 33-year-old automotive supplier whose motion-control technology has been adapted for industrial and humanoid robots, according to Reuters.

The deal values the South Korean firm at about 1 trillion won ($676.04 million), according to a person with knowledge of the matter. -RTRS 

The deal comes just ahead of the expected rise of physical AI, with forecasts from top desks indicating that global robot deliveries could begin ramping up later this year before accelerating more materially in 2027.

A recent Deutsche Bank report shows that global shipments are poised to surge.

Latest coverage:

We previously provided readers with the report “Current State Of Physical AI: Everything You Need To Know,” offering a way to gain exposure to the industrial automation and humanoid robotics space. Read the full note here.

To sum up, the Blackstone deal suggests that the asset manager is positioning for the rise of physical AI, aiming to capture alpha through the company that produces actuators, motors, sensors, controllers, and other mechatronic systems.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 05:45

“Demand Signal Is Real”: US Bipartisan Senate Delegation Touts Defense Boom At Farnborough Airshow

“Demand Signal Is Real”: US Bipartisan Senate Delegation Touts Defense Boom At Farnborough Airshow

The Farnborough International Airshow kicked off on Monday and is one of the world’s largest aerospace, aviation and defense trade shows. It is held every two years at Farnborough Airport in Hampshire.

A Reuters report says that a bipartisan group of nine US senators urged allied European defense giants to expand production, as there is soaring demand for missiles, bombs, drones, and interceptors, and as Congress moves to boost defense spending.

Our message is encouragement to them to increase their capabilities to send the message that the demand signal is for real,” said Republican Senator Jerry Moran at the airshow.

Moran said, “We are doing the things in Congress that suggest that the demand is only going to grow.”

We need more demand to meet the demand for protecting our country.” He said the event allows lawmakers to talk, especially with Europeans, “to reiterate and recommit ourselves that the United States wants to participate in a global economy and global national security.”

Democratic Senator Jeanne Shaheen said that the group of senators represents a large swath of the US, where the aerospace industry is a large part of the local GDP.

Shaheen noted that the US had its biggest presence ever at Farnborough. She added that China has had an increasing presence at a separate air show in Paris.

“The fact that we have such a large presence is important not just to America’s industry but also to the partnerships that we need to have around the world to not only improve our ‌economic security but our national security,” Shaheen said.

Other exhibits:

As we’ve explained previously, President Trump’s war economy has accelerated amid a massive push to replenish missile and bomb stockpiles depleted by the ongoing conflict in the Gulf, as well as the Russia-Ukraine war. There is also a big push to procure ample supplies of low-cost drones and interceptors.

Ways to profit:

Eric Fanning, CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association, said US aerospace and defense exports have surged by as much as 25% over the past year. The industry supports more than two million US jobs.

“We are by far the global leaders,” Fanning said.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 04:15

Proposed US Deal For Saudi Nuclear Enrichment Is Without Safeguards

Proposed US Deal For Saudi Nuclear Enrichment Is Without Safeguards

Via Middle East Eye

The Trump administration has greenlit Saudi Arabia’s nuclear enrichment project, but with no safeguards in place to prevent the development of a bomb, CNN reported on Friday. 

The draft deal, viewed by the news outlet, showed Washington’s support for Riyadh’s civilian nuclear program is still awaiting President Donald Trump’s signature, despite US-Saudi negotiations concluding in October.

via AFP

Unnamed officials cited in the story indicated that the documents, which include the mandatory “123 agreement” and safeguards protocols, have not yet been sent to Congress, potentially for fear of bipartisan pushback.

It is unclear how long the president will wait, given Congress is likely to switch hands to a Democratic majority after the November elections, stymying his policy agenda. 

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and his advisors have long pushed for a deal that would allow them to enrich uranium, which they say the kingdom holds vast reserves of.

“We will enrich it and we will sell it and we will do a ‘yellowcake’,” Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman said last year, referring to a step in the process that comes after mining but before enrichment.

Nuclear umbrella

The Saudi push to be included under the US’s nuclear umbrella was a key issue during the Saudi crown prince’s visit to the White House in November last year. Days after Israel attacked Hamas negotiators in Qatar earlier in the year, Saudi Arabia signed a defence pact with Pakistan, the only nuclear-armed state in the Muslim world.

Pakistan is estimated to possess around 170 nuclear warheads. Saudi and Pakistani descriptions of the deal said it encompassed all military options.

The Americans’ nuclear talks with Saudi Arabia have been kept under tight wraps, but one former US intelligence official previously told Middle East Eye that the idea of extending protection to the kingdom could serve a purpose. “It would pull them out of the Pakistanis’ nuclear umbrella and make the Saudis feel better than the Qataris,” he said at the time.

In February, the Trump administration notified Congress it is pursuing a civil nuclear pact with Riyadh that does not include non-proliferation safeguards it has traditionally imposed on countries to prevent them from developing nuclear weapons. 

The language in the document also leaves room for Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium, as it stipulates “additional safeguards and verification measures to the most sensitive areas of potential nuclear cooperation” between the two countries, including enrichment and reprocessing, the report said. 

A nuclear deal with Saudi Arabia that does not explicitly prohibit the kingdom’s potential to enrich uranium in the future would be much more transformative for the region than a separate deal for F-35 warplanes that the Trump administration is pursuing. In nuclear agreements with foreign governments, for example, the UAE, the US made cooperation conditional on commitments that they will not enrich uranium or reprocess spent nuclear fuel.

The UAE, Morocco and dozens of European and Asian countries have signed the so-called “123 Agreements” with the US. US law generally requires a 123 Agreement to be in force before licensing significant exports of US-origin nuclear material or equipment to a foreign country.

In addition to a 123 Agreement, US lawmakers have insisted that the US require Saudi Arabia to submit to what is called the “Additional Protocol”, which allows the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) additional access to nuclear facilities, data, and undeclared sites.

The UAE, the only other Gulf state to have officially partnered with the US in nuclear energy, signed the Additional Protocol to its IAEA agreement in 2009.

Reuters reported, however, that the Trump administration sent a preliminary report to some heads of congressional committees in November, which it is required to send if it is not pursuing the Additional Protocol. The Reuters report underscores how Trump is putting deal-making at the centre of his diplomacy, even if it means chafing at the traditional concerns of the US foreign policy establishment.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 03:30

Ukraine’s Attack On Caspian Pipeline Consortium Aims To Destabilize Global Oil Markets: Kremlin

Ukraine’s Attack On Caspian Pipeline Consortium Aims To Destabilize Global Oil Markets: Kremlin

The Kremlin has accused Ukraine of orchestrating a plan to further destabilize global oil markets by carrying out drone attacks on the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC).

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in Monday remarks, “We are in solidarity with the Kazakh Foreign Ministry in its decisive condemnation of this crime against a civilian facility.”

via Caspian News

“We regard this attack as yet another confirmation of Bankova’s desire to further destabilize the situation on global oil markets,” the top diplomat emphasized, referencing the street houses the Office of the President of Ukraine.

“For it, ensuring global energy stability, as well as a respectful attitude toward foreign partners, in particular from Kazakhstan, with whom the Kiev regime allegedly wants to develop mutually beneficial and friendly relations, is an empty phrase,” she added.

The Caspian ​Pipeline Consortium (CPC) terminal, which is off Russia’s Black Sea cost, confirmed Sunday that it was forced to suspend oil loadings, after a pair of oil tankers came under attack here.

Specifically the Asia and Nissos IOS tankers were attacked, with the former having caught on fire as a result, which was subsequently extinguished by emergency crews.

“There were no injuries or ​fatalities amongst CPC staff or contractors. There was no ⁠oil spill,” CPC later clarified while confirming that the tankers remained afloat.

“At present, crude oil loading operations at the terminal have been suspended pending a full assessment of the consequences of the incident,” CPC also said, but stopped short of identifying what entity was behind the attack.

Kazakhstan’s foreign ministry was outraged. “Upon completion of this assessment, Kazakhstan reserves all rights ​available under international law to protect its legitimate ​interests, including ⁠seeking full compensation for the damage caused,” it said.

This isn’t the first time that sections of the key energy route have been targeted by Ukrainian drones. For example a key section of Caspian Pipeline Consortium near Novorossiysk was temporarily been taken offline in a November 2025 attack.

The consortium’s over 930-mile pipeline connects oil fields in western Kazakhstan and Russian offshore fields in the Caspian Sea to a marine terminal in Novorossiysk, which means the location serves as the main export route for Kazakh oil, and is one of the world’s largest oil conduits by volume.

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 02:45

Three-Quarters Of Refugee-Linked Households In Vienna Rely On Taxpayer Handouts

Three-Quarters Of Refugee-Linked Households In Vienna Rely On Taxpayer Handouts

Via Remix News,

Three-quarters of households in Vienna connected to migrants from popular asylum-origin countries are unable to support themselves without government benefits, according to figures analyzed by Statistics Austria.

The analysis, cited by Kronen Zeitung, covered approximately 103,000 households across Austria containing at least one recognized refugee, asylum-seeker, or person granted subsidiary protection from Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Somalia, or Chechnya in the Russian Federation.

Vienna recorded by far the highest rate of welfare dependence. About 75 percent of the households examined in the capital relied on minimum-income payments or comparable state support, meaning only one in four was considered economically self-sufficient.

Nationwide, 47 percent of the households included in the study could not support themselves independently, according to Exxpress.

For the purposes of the analysis, a household was considered self-sufficient when its income came from employment, pensions, unemployment insurance, or sickness benefits rather than minimum-income assistance and related welfare programs.

The findings stand in sharp contrast to the figures for Austrian households without an immigrant background. Depending on the state, between 90 percent and 93 percent of those households were classified as self-sufficient. Vienna again performed worse than the rest of the country, although its rate among non-immigrant households remained approximately 86 percent.

Integration Minister Claudia Bauer said the figures demonstrated the need to move welfare recipients into employment more rapidly.

“The welfare state should support people in becoming self-sufficient as quickly as possible,” Bauer told the Austrian newspaper. “It should never be attractive to live permanently on social benefits instead of providing for oneself and one’s family through work.”

The minister indicated that future policy would place greater emphasis on enforcing integration obligations. Recipients who refuse to participate in required integration measures could face reductions in taxpayer-funded benefits.

Officials have also pointed to Vienna’s removal of minimum-income support for people granted subsidiary protection. According to data from Austria’s Public Employment Service, unemployment among the affected group subsequently declined by more than one-third.

The government argues that the decline indicates many welfare recipients were capable of finding employment even under difficult economic conditions once benefit rules were tightened.

“Anyone coming to Austria must be able to provide for themselves and their families as quickly as possible,” Bauer said. “Work is the key to integration.”

While Vienna remains a hub for foreigners relying on taxpayer handouts, there are other areas across Austria where the percentages of foreign households raking in welfare benefits are disproportionate.

In January, separate figures showed that foreign nationals accounted for 72 percent of social-assistance recipients in St. Pölten, the capital of Lower Austria.

Of the city’s 1,278 benefit recipients, 528 (41 percent) were Syrian nationals. Another 99 recipients, representing approximately 8 percent, were Afghan nationals. Together, Syrians and Afghans accounted for nearly half of all recipients in a city with a population of approximately 56,000.

Austrian citizens accounted for 359 recipients, or 28 percent of the total, despite representing the large majority of the city’s population.

Read more here…

Tyler Durden
Tue, 07/21/2026 – 02:00

Narrative Control: The Collapsing Authority Of The State

Narrative Control: The Collapsing Authority Of The State

Authored by Jacob Reynolds via ‘Academy of Ideas’ substack,

Perhaps the central battleground of contemporary politics is the need of our political elites to control the narrative. Primarily, the role of establishment politicians is not to deliver changes and reforms, not to fix problems identified by people in their everyday lives, and not to change circumstances such that they can attract votes, but to maintain narrative hegemony.

Crucially, this differs from previous attempts to maintain ideological hegemony – that is, to win the societal ‘battle of ideas’ – because ideological warfare was always related to the real world. For example, Stalinism’s ideological success was demonstrated in defeating the Nazi industrial machine at its own game, capitalism defeated communism by offering unparalleled standards of living, social democracy was ideologically effective to the degree it demonstrated you could balance both the demands of organised labour with those of economic growth.

By contrast, the attempt at narrative hegemony treats the political realm purely in the domain of information management. This is a political class that has given up on shaping the world and instead looks to shape the narrative.

A variety of attempts to maintain control of the narrative

The news cycle is full of examples that demonstrate that contemporary elites are concerned, above all, with controlling the narrative. Three suffice.

First, there was the recent confirmation of a story which many people had assumed for a long time, although was widely dismissed as a conspiracy theory. The British government has a special division, run out of Whitehall, called the Research, Information and Communications Unit (RICU). The job of RICU is to intervene with victims of potentially ‘racially inflammatory’ crimes and make sure that they ‘calm community tensions’. You could call this the ‘don’t look back in anger’ unit – its job is to make sure that government, victims and the media all stick to a story which encourages people to avoid asking difficult questions.

This unit has been involved in creating media narratives in conjunction with the press, public campaigns like plastering London in posters following the 2017 London Bridge attack, and working with victims’ families (such as the families of Henry Nowak) to write their statements to the press. In all such cases, the RICU unit serves to further the interests of state multiculturalism, force-feeding the public with the message that ‘division’ and ‘demonisation’ are the primary issues, rather than government policies on migration and multiculturalism.

Second, the Department for Media Culture and Sport released a proposal with an almost innocent-sounding name: Watch this space: a new strategic direction for UK media.

It proposes a ‘prominence regime’ for ‘trustworthy’ news on social media and video-sharing platforms. It would make news from public service media plus other ‘trustworthy’ providers ‘prominent and easy to find’. It gives the example of national and local news publishers appearing near the top of people’s social media feeds when they search for news, especially during ‘social unrest or crisis’.

The DCMS worries that online news is now heavily shaped by algorithms, that misinformation and echo chambers can worsen ‘polarisation, conflict and division’. The government will explore legislative options for a news-specific prominence regime on social media. The proposals explicitly raise whether this should be ‘ongoing and always on’ or only active in periods of crisis, and whether users should be allowed to switch it off.

A third example, which although I take from America is extremely relevant here, is the reaction to the brutal murder last year of Iryna Zarutska by Decarlos Brown Jr, a 14-time offender who was repeatedly set free by authorities under the influence of defund-the-police style racial-justice policing policies. Despite the case being an enormous sensation on social media, it took 18 days for the New York Times to comment. When it finally did, the article was a monstrosity of moral evasiveness. ‘A Gruesome Murder in North Carolina Ignites a Firestorm on the Right’, ran the headline, with the piece engaging in a bizarre detour to talk about the ‘egregiously exaggerated stories about Black criminality’ in the Jim Crow era.

The NYT was not alone in preferring to talk about the reaction to the attack rather than the attack itself. Elite barometer Politico went with ‘Ukrainian refugee killed in North Carolina gets dragged into political messaging war’, while Axios complained of ‘MAGA influencers seeking to elevate the issue of violent urban crime’. CNN, not to be outdone, produced this horrific example of the shiftiness of the passive voice: ‘How the lives of a Ukrainian refugee and a Charlotte man with a criminal history converged in a fatal stabbing.’

Clearly, the regime media was concerned above all with ensuring that no one draw any political consequences from the stabbing, which had been going viral on social media for almost a whole week. The issue for these outlets, when it became impossible to simply ignore the issue, was to ensure that widespread concerns about urban criminality, ineffective justice policies and the withdrawal of law and order prompted by the Black Lives Matter movement did not get a hearing. Such concerns are merely ‘right-wing firestorms’ and part of a regrettable ‘political messaging war’.

A very similar logic was seen in the days following the murder of the French student Quentin Deranque earlier this year by Antifa thugs. He had been attending a demonstration organised by a group of young women, and had come along lest they face any trouble. This man was simply murdered in cold blood by a premediated attack of Antifa militants, who picked him out, followed him home, and ambushed him 12-to-1 before kicking him in the head until he was dead. The mainstream French media reported that a far-right activist had died after inciting a confrontation.

In these examples, I don’t even have to mention the explicit censorship systems which now rule the Western world, such as the Online Safety Act or the EU’s Digital Services Act.

What drives attempts at narrative control

What is driving this? Why such a desperate need to exercise total narrative control?

The key to this issue, is, in essence, the following schematic: the established political class are unable to reckon with the sources of their unpopularity, and must employ ever more comprehensive attempts to provide a foundation for their deeply unpopular rule, because they face total destruction. The stakes are existential for them.

One of the fundamental driving facts of contemporary politics is that the ideology of the ruling class is thoroughly discredited. The political pressure on the ruling class is, across the West, extreme. They face, if not electoral annihilation, then electoral defeats to populist forces who, until recently, would have been totally marginal.

But the response of the political mainstream does not include the possibility of introspection. While they might be capable of asking the question why they are unpopular, they are incapable of answering it with a hard look at themselves.

At the same time, this ruling class certainly feels itself under sustained pressure. To invoke the language of Marxism, they feel threatened not just as a government, but as a class. Their class position – their position as the dominant political and economic group in society – is under threat.

These two facts – the inability to look in the mirror and the dread they feel at the approach of a new order – give rise to a response which at the same time focuses their efforts on political messaging and licenses extreme measures. Put together, this sets the stage for some of the most profound and most desperate attempts to control speech that we know in mature democracies.

Because they cannot avail themselves of introspection, they must come up with a particular explanation to understand their unpopularity. They need, to borrow a term from philosophy, an ‘error theory’ – that is, a theory for why it is that their programme, policies and worldview face such opposition. If they are on all issues fundamentally correct, why do people not agree with them? What explains the errors that the populist masses make?

The explanation is, in the time-honoured fashion of anti-democrats since Plato, that the voting masses are not just wrong, but also misled. The masses do not really disagree with the experts, they just lack the skills and knowledge to perceive what the experts have already decided is the truth. The masses have been tricked – tricked by sophists, by propagandists, by the internet, by Elon Musk, by Russians, by populist charlatans. They have been fed a diet of propaganda, hoodwinked by adversarial algorithms, fallen prey to foreign misinformation.

Therefore, the most important task for the ruling class, anxious to solve the problem of the erroneous masses, is to ‘fix’ the narrative imbalance. The problem of political disagreement becomes a problem of political messaging. If the truth has already been decided, but people still don’t see the light, then we need special techniques for bringing the masses to see the truth. Controlling the narrative – arranging what can be seen, heard and said – becomes not an alternative to democracy but the better substantiation of its essence.

At the same time, the class interest of the establishment is keenly felt by them all. This is not merely a possible change of government afoot but a change of regime. We are not talking about different shades of the postwar consensus, but a desire to overturn it entirely. Given how much the stakes have been raised, the available tools have become proportionally more powerful. Things that would have never been conceivable before in democratic peacetime – dawn raids over private messages, the use of the world’s most powerful technologies to change the debate in real time, gagging orders on the press so powerful their existence cannot even be mentioned – have become fair game in the contemporary political contest.

These two features come together to mean that the establishment classes are thus both psychologically and personally motivated to establish ever more elaborate and intrusive schemes for controlling the narrative.

Three strategies of control

We can group these tactics together under three banners

A. Strategies of control

B. Strategies of deception

C. Strategies of delegitimisation

The strategies of control are perhaps the most obvious – the various forms of soft and hard censorship, regulation of the internet and other communications.

The strategies of deception are also quite straightforward to spot. We have already mentioned the ‘don’t look back in anger’ unit, but we should also note the government supply of industrial-grade misinformation. One examples is the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) modelling the impact of migration by using info on migration from 20 years ago, ignoring, for example, care workers who bring 15 dependents. Another is the refusal to publish crime statistics broken down by nationality and migration status. NGOs are also part of these strategies of deception.

But so far we have said less about the strategies of delegitimisation. The most obvious example here is the hysterical moral panic around ‘foreign disinformation’ and the attempt to turn all critics of the establishment into various versions of stooges of Vladimir Putin (or, more recently, of Donald Trump).

It literally does not compute for the establishment to see mass discontent as the logical response to their despotic and failed policies, and so the possibility that this as all manipulated by Russia or funded by shady Trump-aligned forces is the only logical step.

Beyond controlling the narrative

This story – a story of a political class engaged in what is effectively an all-out war for survival – seems bleak enough. But it looks increasingly likely that as the narrative control efforts fail, they will intensify their work in more radical directions.

Indeed, the past few days gives us an indication into how Andy Burhnam – who is said to have a more ‘mature’ understanding of the problems of establishment politics – plans to deal with mass discontent. Burnham’s solution is to re-orient the Civil Service away from London. But the small print reveals this is less about devolution than a desire to make the Civil Service less responsive to any future Reform government: Politico reveals he aims to ‘rewire’ the Civil Service to head off Farage.

This is just one part of a playbook now well-established in continental Europe. Macron has led the continent in ‘future-proofing’ the state against populist adversaries: key political allies of President Macron are being appointed to the top of major French institutions like the courts, the national bank and the armed forces.

But in addition, British bureaucrats will be considering adopting the whole continental package: mobilisation of paid Antifa to attack political opponents, the use of lawfare against opponents such as banning and financial investigations, and the solidifying of the deep state.

Reasons for optimism

Despite this dark picture, we actually have reasons to be far more optimistic about what the future holds. Ultimately, the reason for all of the efforts at narrative control is that the establishment have already lost the ideological battle, and their desperate attempts stem from the anticipation that they are about to lose the political battle as well.

The reason they lost is twofold. On the one hand, the impact of their policies have become unavoidable. On the other hand, a tremendous rebellion has taken place among ordinary people, fuelled by the tenacious work of an insurgent ideological counterweight.

Their fear is the justified fear of the losing party. They are terrified because of the enormous cumulative work of the great populist revolt. Just as the night is darkest before dawn or the cornered animal is capable of great violence, the established order is, I think, on its last legs. This means we should be both watchful but also cautiously optimistic.

Ultimately, the reason for elite panic is the mass of popular discontent. It is this desire for something profoundly different that is the condition for all our efforts to overturn the narrative hegemony that we would otherwise be subject to.

*  *  *

Jacob Reynolds is convenor of the Academy, an intellectual retreat which is an initiative of the charity Ideas Matter, taking place on August 22nd & 23rd. Tickets and more here.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/20/2026 – 23:25

Oregon Sees Disturbing Spike In Gender Transition Therapy For Children

Oregon Sees Disturbing Spike In Gender Transition Therapy For Children

If you’re curious to see what the US would look like under an entrenched progressive regime, deep blue states like Oregon offer special insight.  Four years of woke Democrats running the show under the Biden Administration was bad enough – Pride flags draped across the White House and naked transgenders dancing across the lawn was an embarrassing moment for the nation. 

However, for people living on the West Coast, the agenda continues unabated.

The children of blue states are still on the menu, and Oregon is surpassing them all with an acceleration of gender-based indoctrination.  According to a recent study published in Oxford Academic’s Research Connections, children in Oregon are up to three times more likely to be diagnosed with gender dysphoria compared to the national average.

The study maintains that the rate of gender treatments in Oregon remains “rare”, but when the numbers are compared to most states across the country a disturbing trend becomes visible.  Using insurance data as a baseline, the authors note that between 2016 and 2023, roughly 1 in 240 girls and 1 in 630 boys in Oregon received cross-sex hormones by age 17.  These rates are about 3x the national average for girls and 2x for boys (even higher – 4x to 5x – at ages 14 -15). 

Oregon is the only U.S. state to formally adopt WPATH standards of care. This expands Medicaid coverage for hormones and surgeries, in many cases with no age minimums.  The state also passed shield laws, which allow 15-year-olds to consent without parental notification.

The study’s authors argue this creates demand for gender based treatments rather than merely responding to a legitimate need for them.  In other words, the trans trend in Oregon is artificially created through false diagnosis. 

Add to this Oregon’s gender fluid indoctrination programs which have invaded all levels of the state’s public school system, and you get an ideological factory churning out brainwashed children who are then automatically diagnosed with gender dysphoria and “transitioned” before they have a chance to recognize what is happening to them.  

The trans trend in Oregon is an extension of the woke takeover of American popular culture and politics starting in 2011-2012.  From 2011 to 2022 in the US, there was a 100% increase in minors identifying as “trans” and a 285% increase in adults identifying as trans.  In Europe the increase was even more expansive.  In the UK, for example, the rate of trans identification jumped 50-fold. 

This explosion in gender dysphoria coincided with an avalanche of gender fluid and LGBT propaganda which was not effectively exposed until recently.  Today the wider public is aware of the trans agenda, but the fight to expose the targeting of children has been arduous. 

Until a few years ago, Democrats outright denied that children were being given hormone blockers and gender-bending surgeries despite all the evidence to the contrary.  The gas lighting was unprecedented.  Blue states remain strongholds of woke cultism, and any children living in places like Oregon will still be preyed upon.     

The latest studies confirm what many conservatives have suspected all along; that the sudden surge in trans identifying people is being driven by ideological pressure – An invasion of woke politics into the medical industry within blue states.     

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/20/2026 – 23:00

Is China Sabotaging America’s Data Centers?

Is China Sabotaging America’s Data Centers?

Authored by Lipton Matthews via American Greatness,

China is the one foreign power with both the resources and the strategic incentive to shape American technology.

Washington’s preoccupation with foreign influence has become almost reflexive, though curiously selective in its targets. Some lawmakers have built entire political identities around scrutinizing the influence of the Israel lobby on American foreign policy. Similarly, journalists trace Qatari money through American think tanks, and analysts fervently scrutinize Gulf investment in universities and sports franchises. Yet China, the one foreign power with both the resources and the strategic incentive to shape American technology and energy policy, occupies a curiously small share of this scrutiny. Given the evidence now available, that imbalance deserves correction.

Neville Roy Singham makes for an instructive starting point. Having sold his software consulting firm for hundreds of millions of dollars, Singham relocated to Shanghai, where he now works from an office shared with a Chinese media company whose stated mission is promoting Beijing’s narratives to foreign audiences. From that base, he has directed substantial funding toward a cluster of American nonprofits, including The People’s Forum, the ANSWER Coalition, and BreakThrough News, whose output consistently aligns with the positions of the Chinese government on major geopolitical questions. A visitor to his office once documented a banner reading “Always Follow the Party,” a detail that leaves little room for ambiguity about the network’s orientation.

What transforms this from an unusual biography into a matter of genuine political consequence is the organization that carries this network’s influence into American civic life. The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) openly calls for the replacement of the American government through revolutionary means rather than electoral politics, and its senior leadership is drawn almost entirely from the executives who run Singham’s nonprofits

The party’s 2024 presidential nominee, Claudia de la Cruz, co-founded The People’s Forum. Her running mate directs one of Singham’s grantmaking bodies. Separately, the editor of BreakThrough News sits on the party’s central committee. This is not a loose ideological affinity between separate organizations. It is the same leadership operating under different institutional names.

That leadership has directed considerable energy toward one particular front, the American buildout of AI infrastructure. Across 21 documented campaigns in 14 states, the party has served as either the lead organizer or a significant participant in efforts that produced 10 local moratoriums, one permanent ban, and billions of dollars in delayed or canceled data-center investment. In Charlotte, party organizers ran a sustained door-to-door campaign ahead of a unanimous council vote to pause new data-center construction. In Prince George’s County, they trained residents to pressure local officials and helped build a petition that gathered 20,000 signatures before the county moved to halt permitting.

It would be a mistake to characterize the underlying opposition as manufactured. Concerns about water consumption and rising electricity costs are genuine and widely shared. But real grievances offer convenient cover, and an organization with documented financial ties to a Chinese Communist Party (CCP)-aligned network has positioned itself at the center of that anger while disclosing almost nothing about its own funding, since it maintains no registered nonprofit status and files no public financial statements for its general operations.

This pattern of quiet institutional penetration is not confined to street-level activism. It reaches into the universities that train the next generation of American policymakers. Tax filings obtained by the Washington Free Beacon show that Energy Foundation China, a nonprofit led by former Chinese government officials, sent $1.2 million to Harvard University and four campuses within the University of California system in 2024, nearly double what it had given the year before. The group’s chief executive previously served as a senior Chinese government climate negotiator, and the chairman of its board once worked as a director for China’s national legislature.

Its own staff roster reads like a directory of former Chinese state officials, including a one-time senior figure at the Beijing Municipal Environmental Protection Bureau and a former manager of overseas infrastructure projects for a subsidiary of a state-run industrial conglomerate. One watchdog group described the organization bluntly as nothing more than an influence operation of the CCP.

The funding pattern is telling in its own right. Since 2020, the group has funneled more than $15 million into American universities and nonprofits while spending over $200 million domestically in China, a ratio that undercuts its public claim to be a nonpartisan charity focused solely on emissions reduction. Its money has also flowed to advocacy organizations that shape federal energy regulation directly, including a Washington research group that champions electric vehicle mandates and a Colorado think tank behind efforts to restrict gas stoves. Taken together, the strategy looks less like philanthropy and more like an attempt to steer American energy policy toward technologies that China already dominates, a shift that would deepen rather than reduce American dependence on Chinese manufacturing.

None of this activity occurs in isolation from the digital sphere. OpenAI’s own security researchers recently disclosed that they banned a cluster of ChatGPT accounts operating from China, likely tied to a private firm serving provincial government clients, whose purpose was to generate social media content blaming data centers and artificial intelligence for rising household electricity bills. This material was not crudely fabricated. It was crafted to blend seamlessly with legitimate reporting on regional power pricing, complete with matching hashtags intended to blend inauthentic commentary into an authentic public conversation.

A related cluster pursued a parallel objective, producing cartoons critical of American tariff policy while explicitly instructing the model to depict only President Trump and to exclude any images of Xi Jinping, ensuring that blame for economic tension landed on a single, familiar target. This same network has been linked to accounts spreading false claims that ChatGPT user data had been compromised, an apparent attempt to erode public confidence in a leading American AI company, a tactic that closely resembles earlier Chinese campaigns against Western firms working to reduce dependence on Chinese rare earth supply chains. It is worth pausing on one particular irony here. These operators chose to use an American AI system to generate propaganda undermining trust in American AI, rather than relying on any of China’s own domestic models.

Three separate strands of evidence now point toward the same conclusion from three different directions.

  • One traces institutional funding, nonprofit leadership, and political organizing through American civic institutions.

  • Another traces academic grants flowing quietly into Harvard and the University of California from an organization run by former Chinese officials.

  • A third traces synthetic content, banned accounts, and coordinated amplification through American social media platforms.

All three converge on a single strategic objective: eroding public confidence in the infrastructure, institutions, and companies that underpin America’s position in energy and artificial intelligence.

None of this justifies treating every data-center protester, university researcher, or critic of AI policy as an unwitting instrument of foreign interference.

The vast majority of them are not.

But when a Shanghai-based financier’s nonprofit network, a revolutionary political party sharing its leadership, a Beijing-linked climate group funding elite American universities, and a state-linked propaganda operation all converge on adjacent fronts within the same narrow window of time, that convergence constitutes a pattern rather than a coincidence.

It is a pattern that has, so far, received far less attention than it warrants and one that deserves a far more prominent place in America’s ongoing conversation about who is trying to shape its politics from abroad.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/20/2026 – 22:35