Aggregatore di feed

The post Trump Administration Planning Panama-Style Attack On Venezuela? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Mike Benz’s use of “the blob” specifically targets the U.S. foreign policy establishment, while “the deep state” is a broader, more conspiratorial term used by some to describe a hidden government structure manipulating policy across many domains.

The Blob (Mike Benz’s usage)

As framed by Benz, the term “the blob” refers to the network of foreign policy elites in Washington, D.C., that is committed to an interventionist, internationalist agenda.

Focus: Narrowly focused on the U.S. foreign policy and national security establishment. The term was popularized by former Obama aide Ben Rhodes, who used it to criticize the bipartisan consensus for interventionism that he felt was resistant to change.

Composition: Composed of diplomats, government officials, military leaders, think tank analysts, and journalists who share a similar worldview. These individuals often rotate between government and private sector jobs, creating a self-perpetuating network.

Motivation: Driven by a set of shared beliefs, including a commitment to American global leadership and the use of military force to manage world affairs. Critics of the blob argue this mindset persists regardless of political affiliation.

The Deep State

“The deep state” is a more expansive and often conspiratorial term that suggests a hidden or unaccountable government exists, which manipulates the public and obstructs the policies of elected officials.

Focus: Broad in scope, encompassing various government agencies, intelligence services, and career civil servants. Those who use the term often claim this network operates outside of democratic oversight.

Composition: Implies a clandestine network of actors manipulating power for their own purposes, often portrayed as being hostile to populist or anti-establishment figures.

Motivation: Said to be motivated by self-preservation, a specific political ideology, or a desire for power. Unlike the blob’s focus on foreign policy, deep state allegations can apply to domestic issues as well, including technology and censorship.

Key differences summarized

Feature: The Blob (Mike Benz) The Deep State

Scope: U.S. foreign policy and national security establishment. Broader, encompassing various parts of the government bureaucracy.

Origin of Term: Popularized by Ben Rhodes in 2016 to criticize the bipartisan foreign policy consensus. Has historical roots but gained significant traction in contemporary U.S. politics.

Nature: A shared mindset or worldview among a specific professional class. Often framed as a secret, malicious, or conspiratorial network.

Primary Arena: International relations and military intervention. Can include both foreign policy and domestic affairs, such as censorship and intelligence.

Learn about the origins and operations of the National Security State (the deep state) established in 1947 during the Truman regime.

The deep state is beyond the Constitution. It is separate from the American government which we all learned about in school, composed of the legislative, executive, and judicial branches. The deep state has no restrictions on its extra-constitutional actions, no separation of powers, no checks and balances, no transparency or open accounting for its egregious and invasive behavior.

The deep state is made up of the military-industrial complex comprised of pentagon profiteers, the intelligence community and corporate surveillance contractors of the imperial National Security State it sustains, with seemingly endless no win wars which have murdered millions of hapless victims across the planet, generating terrorism as blowback from its decades of unconstitutional covert actions and preemptive wars of aggression.

The American Deep State
Along with the multinational petroleum and weapons/intelligence industries of the military-industrial complex, the global narcotics trade is one the biggest businesses in the world. It is fueled and enabled by the intersection of drug money, intelligence and money laundering on a vast scale by banks and financial institutions. Researchers have connected the dots linking the underworld of organized crime (narcotics) to the upperworld of the Establishment (Wall Street banks and CFR-connected corporations/foundations/media). Interwoven within the nexus are the covert intelligence agencies.

For well over one hundred years U. S. government authorities have imported draconian police state techniques and technology developed overseas back to the American homeland, whether involving torture, surveillance, and suspension of human rights and liberties, using the overseas country as a laboratory for counterinsurgency and rearming local security forces for repression.

I witnessed Professor Alfred W. McCoy deliver these same illuminating remarks below at the University of Tulsa and afterwards had an opportunity to briefly discuss aspects of his internationally recognized research on CIA covert operations, the global narcotics trade, and the origins of the National Security State with him.

From suppressing the Filipino Insurrection following the Spanish-American War to the destructive counterinsurgency campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq, these martial exercises in unlawful, extra-constitutional behavior have continued unabated. And like the prodigal son of New Testament scriptures, they have come home.

The post The Leaked Playbook for Silencing America | Mike Benz Impact Theory w/ Tom Bilyeu appeared first on LewRockwell.

Writes Bill Madden :

Please read: https://www.lewrockwell.com/2025/10/andrew-wallace/president-trump-you-have-a-very-limited-time-to-put-down-insurrections-with-deadly-force-before-it-is-a-civil-war/ for a discussion of what needs to be done in order to keep our country safe from both internal and external threats.  This article and others available at: www.lewrockwell.com should be required reading for those interested in what is going on in the world and the best advice to keep our country safe.  Andrew also writes for: www.newswithviews.com.

I just read an article about the Trump/Massie feud at: www.thenewamerican.com.  It seems as though President Trump wants Congressman Massie removed from office for following the Constitution.  This is the problem with electing someone like Trump to lead any group.  His ego won’t permit him to lose at anything.  Rules are for everyone else and he’s fluent in speech without thought.  He’s not a great negotiator.  He’s almost always negotiated from a position of strength his whole life and, if he can’t get what he wants, he’ll sabotage an optimum deal with destruction of the entire negotiating process.

The only thing good that I can say about our current political leadership is that Joe and Kamala would have been worse.  We can only hope that someone reads Andrew’s great article and conveys its major points to the president before the USA sinks even lower.

The post Andrew’s Latest appeared first on LewRockwell.

In this explosive episode of America’s Untold Stories, Mark Groubert and Eric Hunley are joined by attorneys Andrew Iler and Mark Adamczyk—co-authors of “The JFK Assassination Chokeholds”—to uncover how legal manipulation and government obstruction have buried the truth behind the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Discover the shocking breakdown of the JFK Records Act, the misuse of power by congressional task forces, and why over 30,000 assassination records remain unreleased.

With newly uncovered documents and firsthand legal insights, this interview sheds light on the deep bureaucratic failure behind the JFK file cover-up.

️‍️ Learn how the National Archives (NARA) failed to follow its legal mandate

Find out what Trump’s executive order actually did

Hear why Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna is under fire

Why JFK researchers believe this is the final chokehold

Don’t miss this one.

Get the book “The JFK Assassination Chokeholds: That Prove There Was a Conspiracy” (affiliate link) https://amzn.to/4ob5MOc

*****************************************

Join us November 21st–23rd, 2025 in Dallas at JFK Lancer Conference (or Virtually) Tickets now available at https://assassinationconference.com/

Virtual tickets start at $75.99 In-person tickets start at $149.99 Discount Code: Use UNTOLD10 at checkout for 10% off *****************************************

The post America’s Untold Stories: JFK Files: Why They’re STILL Hiding the Truth ? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato fuori controllo negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa una storia di cartelli, a livello sovrastatale e sovranazionale, la cui pianificazione centrale ha raggiunto un punto in cui deve essere riformata radicalmente e questa riforma radicale non può avvenire senza una dose di dolore economico che potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la loro autorità. Da qui la risposta al Grande Default attraverso il Grande Reset. Questa la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/per-ragioni-di-sicurezza-nazionale)

Forse è ancora troppo presto per celebrare la rinascita dell'energia nucleare negli Stati Uniti, ma si sta verificando un'impennata di attività che dovrebbe portare alla diffusione di una nuova generazione di centrali nucleari avanzate e piccoli reattori modulari.

Ciò è particolarmente vero per i principali consumatori di energia industriale, tra cui ora rientrano anche i data center, dove esiste un forte incentivo economico a utilizzare maggiormente l'energia nucleare al posto del gas naturale e delle energie rinnovabili intermittenti.

In Illinois Meta ha di recente firmato un accordo a lungo termine per l'acquisto di energia nucleare dalla centrale nucleare di Constellation a Clinton, l'ultimo di una serie di accordi tra le grandi aziende tecnologiche e l'industria nucleare. Constellation ha anche dichiarato che avrebbe riavviato l'Unità Uno di Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania e venduto l'energia a Microsoft nell'ambito di un accordo ventennale. Anche Google ha accettato di finanziare lo sviluppo di piccoli reattori modulari, o SMR, in tre nuovi siti nucleari in Oregon. TVA prevede di costruire SMR nel suo sito di Clinch River e Kairos Power ha un progetto per un reattore avanzato a sali fusi. Inoltre Amazon, Google e Meta hanno firmato a marzo un impegno che prevede di triplicare l'energia nucleare a livello mondiale entro il 2050.

Aggiungere l'energia nucleare alla nostra lista di opzioni energetiche ha senso perché è l'unico modo per generare grandi quantità di elettricità a zero emissioni in modo affidabile per data center, veicoli elettrici e industrie alimentati dall'intelligenza artificiale. Ma la crescente domanda di elettricità e di energia nucleare evidenzia una questione seria: chi fornirà le enormi quantità di uranio necessarie per alimentare le centrali nucleari?

Attualmente il 95% dell'uranio utilizzato negli impianti nucleari statunitensi viene importato da altri Paesi, con la Russia e gli ex-stati sovietici che inondano il mercato mondiale e spingono gli altri fuori dal mercato. Anche la Cina sta rapidamente espandendo la sua influenza nella catena di approvvigionamento globale dell'uranio, ma la dipendenza americana dalle importazioni di uranio non è dovuta alla mancanza di risorse interne.

Infatti a metà degli anni '70 gli Stati Uniti erano l'unico fornitore di uranio arricchito in Occidente e gli affari prosperavano. Da allora i prezzi artificialmente bassi – e l'antagonismo politico nei confronti della produzione nazionale – hanno costretto i clienti statunitensi a cedere il passo alla concorrenza estera. Attualmente negli Stati Uniti sono operative solo cinque miniere di uranio, contro le diverse decine degli anni '70 e le 20 nel 2009.

Una crisi dell'uranio potrebbe non essere imminente, ma le implicazioni a lungo termine dell'acquisto di uranio estero a basso costo anziché dalle compagnie minerarie statunitensi sono preoccupanti, in particolare per la difesa nazionale, inclusa la flotta di portaerei e sottomarini nucleari della Marina. Anche la flotta nazionale di 94 centrali nucleari richiede una fornitura affidabile di uranio.

Le industrie americane, compresa la nostra base industriale della difesa, sono attualmente sottoposte a un'enorme pressione a causa delle restrizioni cinesi sulle esportazioni di commodity, comprese le terre rare. Sappiamo fin troppo bene che l'era dell'eccessiva dipendenza dalle importazioni di commodity deve finire. Questa è una vulnerabilità economica, energetica e di sicurezza nazionale che è diventata insostenibile.

Dato il rischio di un'interruzione delle importazioni di uranio, o di un'impennata del prezzo dello stesso,  c'è bisogno di una politica governativa per contrastare la minaccia alla sicurezza nazionale e all'economia americana. Il presidente Trump ha di recente affermato che l'amministrazione elaborerà raccomandazioni per rilanciare ed espandere la produzione di uranio statunitense. Questo è un buon primo passo, ma dobbiamo far coincidere le intenzioni con i fatti.

La dipendenza americana dalle commodity importate, in particolare da Paesi avversari, rappresenta una grave minaccia per la sicurezza nazionale. E causerà seri problemi a settori chiave della economia americana se non si interviene al più presto per incrementare la produzione interna. Per queste ragioni gli Stati Uniti si trovano ora ad affrontare una sfida monumentale: aumentare la produzione di uranio, diversificare le catene di approvvigionamento per proteggere la sicurezza nazionale e farlo in modo sostenibile.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una mancia in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.

NATO is at war with itself and against peace in Europe. The long and dirty history of Operation Gladio and NATO terrorism in Europe is at hand once again.

The U.S.-led proxy war against Russia is expanding to the territories of European Union and NATO member states. Remarkably, it appears that the NATO military bloc is at war with itself.

Hungary is condemning Poland for “war psychosis” and supporting state terrorism.

This week, two major oil refinery installations in Hungary and Romania were hit by powerful explosions on the same day, Monday. The first occurred at the Petrotel-Lukoil refinery north of the Romanian capital, Bucharest. Hours later, Hungary’s premier refinery at Százhalombatta, south of the capital, Budapest, was blown up. It has not yet been determined what caused the blasts. But the near-simultaneous timing would make technical accidents extremely unlikely. In other words, the incidents were terrorist sabotage.

The context is highly indicative, too. On the same day, a Rosneft oil refinery in Russia’s Volga Oblast at Novokuibyshevsk was shut down, reportedly after a drone attack.

Thus, the attacks have to be seen as part of the NATO-directed campaign to cripple Russia’s oil industry.

Also, this week, the Trump administration unveiled provocative sanctions against Russian oil and gas companies, Lukoil and Rosneft. The Kiev regime and its European NATO allies have been calling for Trump to slap more sanctions on Russia. Trump has framed the escalatory economic measures as a way to pressure Russia to end the war in Ukraine. However, the reality is that economic warfare is just another weapon to bring about the strategic defeat of Russia under the cynical guise of “peacemaking”.

The European Commission this week tightened its plans to terminate all Russian oil and gas imports into the EU, reversing decades of productive energy trade.

Hungary and Slovakia, and to a lesser extent Romania, have remained at odds with the NATO and EU policy of proxy war against Russia. These countries have come under intense pressure to cut off their imports of Russian oil.

Over recent months, the NATO-directed Kiev regime has stepped up long-range air strikes on Russian energy infrastructure. The Druzhba (Friendship) pipeline was hit during August, which temporarily cut off supplies to Hungary and Slovakia.

The Hungarian and Slovakian governments have openly defied the pressure campaign, insisting that their countries will not stop importing Russian oil, which, they say, is a vital national interest for their economies and societies. The landlocked countries would find it difficult and costly to replace Russian supplies.

What is remarkable about this week’s explosions is that the sabotage campaign is now targeting the territories of European states, not just the Russian infrastructure supplying these states.

What is even more shocking is that the NATO-aligned European powers are backing the attacks on Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia.

Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski this week told Hungary that he hoped that the Druzhba pipeline would be taken out entirely “to stop Putin’s war machine.”

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán denounced Poland for its “war psychosis”. At a peace rally in Budapest this week, Orban declared: “Hungary says NO to war! We will not die for Ukraine. We will not send our children to the slaughterhouse at Brussels’ command.”

The blowing up of civilian energy infrastructure in Europe is not unprecedented. What is happening in Hungary and Romania is a repeat of the explosion of the Nord Stream gas pipelines in September 2022, which the U.S. and other NATO agents carried out to cut off Germany from Russian fuel.

This week, Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk celebrated the Nord Stream terrorism as a legitimate strike against Russia “for invading Ukraine.”

To which Hungary’s Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó responded by slamming it as “scandalous”. He added, “According to Poland, if you don’t like an infrastructure in Europe, you can blow it up. With this, they gave advance permission for terrorist attacks in Europe… this is what European rule of law has come to.”

After the August attacks on the Druzhba pipeline, Hungary’s foreign minister accused the European leadership in Brussels of giving the Kiev regime a green light to conduct terror attacks. The absence of condemnation from Brussels of Kiev was extraordinary.

Now the war psychosis has culminated in terror attacks on the actual territory of European states.

There can be no doubt who the culprits are behind the terror campaign. The drones may take off from Ukrainian territory, but the logistics, planning, and targeting require NATO involvement at the highest level, just as the Nord Stream attacks did, and the ongoing deep strikes into Russian territory. The betting odds implicate the CIA, MI6, and their Polish and Baltic surrogates.

Another factor is the offer by Hungary to host a summit between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin to discuss ending the proxy war. The summit was called off this week, on Wednesday, apparently by Trump, just as he was announcing tough new sanctions on Russia’s oil industry. But last week, when the meeting was proposed, the NATO powers were miffed at the diplomatic initiative.

Hungary’s Szijjarto wrote: “From the moment the Peace Summit in Budapest was announced, it was obvious that many would do everything possible to stop it from happening. The pro-war political elite and their media always behave this way before events that could prove decisive between war and peace… It will be no different this time. Until the Summit actually takes place, expect a wave of leaks, fake news, and statements claiming that it won’t happen.”

The foreign minister could add to the wave of opposition tactics – “terror attacks” on Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and anywhere else where people call for peace and an end to war psychosis.

The proxy war that the U.S.-led NATO bloc instigated against Russia, which Trump also pushed during his first term, was always about trying to strategically defeat Russia, including using a military proxy in Ukraine and economic warfare. The logic of this criminal strategy includes blowing up and sacrificing so-called allies, if needs be. German and European economies are in ruins to satisfy the U.S.-led axis and its geopolitical objectives, which European elites are minions of. Nord Stream is taken out, and now oil refineries in Hungary and Romania. What next?

In another sinister development this week, a man was jailed for trying to assassinate Slovakia’s Robert Fico last year. His attacker was pro-Ukraine and targeted Fico for being “pro-Russian.”

The nefarious logic of the U.S. war machine known as NATO, absurdly the self-declared “defender” of the transatlantic Western alliance, is to eat its own when strategic priorities require.

NATO is at war with itself and against peace in Europe. The long and dirty history of Operation Gladio and NATO terrorism in Europe is at hand once again.

The views of individual contributors do not necessarily represent those of the Strategic Culture Foundation.

The post NATO Eats Its Own… Terrorist Attacks Against Hungary and Romania for Importing Russian Oil? appeared first on LewRockwell.

Since starting the Forgotten Side of Medicine, I’ve received quite a few correspondences from readers asking me to write about constipation. This I believe, is reflective of how widespread but rarely discussed constipation is, especially as one becomes older (where it often becomes a primary concern of everyday life). Likewise, the primary diagnosis for constipation is “chronic idiopathic constipation” (CIC). Idiopathic, for reference, means “no one knows why” which is remarkable given that existing studies find between 9-20% of adults (averaging at 14%) have CIC. This figure in turn, varies greatly by country:

In tandem, there is no clear consensus on how to treat CIC (e.g., if you review the treatment guidelines, you will see they vary greatly depending on which country they were made in).

Likewise, the majority of patients do not even discuss their condition with their doctors:

Overall, 4,702 participants had experienced constipation (24.0% met the Rome IV CIC criteria). Among all respondents with previous constipation, 37.6% discussed their symptoms with a clinician (primary care provider 87.6%, gastroenterologist 26.0%, and urgent care/emergency room physician 7.7%).

We found that the locus of control—the extent to which individuals believe they can control events that affect them—is associated with healthcare seeking for constipation. Namely, those with a lower locus of control (i.e., who believe symptoms are driven by others, chance, or fate) are more likely to consult with providers regarding their symptoms. However, individuals experiencing this maladaptive cognition may be resistant to both undergoing indicated diagnostic testing and accepting and adhering to treatments, thereby undercutting treatment success and reducing patient satisfaction.

Additionally, many who seek out medical help end up getting colonoscopy, a procedure which carries real risks and has no benefit here:

Among those who sought care, 54% reported previous diagnostic testing. Colonoscopy was the most commonly performed test; 46% of health seekers specifically underwent the procedure to evaluate their constipation. Although we did not ask the respondents about alarm features or have access to their medical records to confirm the “true” indication for the procedure, this suggests potential overuse of endoscopy in the evaluation of constipation. This is an issue because the diagnostic yield of colonoscopy for constipation is limited.

Pepin and Ladabaum noted that in 234 individuals undergoing lower endoscopy solely for constipation, no cancers were found, and only 3% had advanced lesions. The American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy states that colonoscopy should not be performed in the initial evaluation of constipated patients without alarm features or suspicion of organic disease. The high usage of endoscopy and other tests seen in our study, in combination with the high prevalence of constipation, further reinforces the significant impact of constipation on population health and healthcare costs and emphasizes that efforts to reduce unnecessary testing are needed.

In short, there is a surprising gap of knowledge in this area, which I believe is best demonstrated by how many times I’ve been asked to admit a patient to a hospital who was essentially just severely constipated.

For additional context: the current research shows constipation hospitalizes 92,000 Americans each year and results in 1.3 million visits to American emergency rooms, which again illustrates our society’s lack of knowledge in this area, especially as the rate of this is increasing (e.g., from 2006 to 2011, there was a 42 percent rise in ER visits for constipation).

Note: as I showed here, many gastrointestinal conditions (including inflammatory bowel conditions that cause chronic diarrhea) respond to DMSO and I have received numerous remarkable testimonials about this from readers. I am currently finishing up a Saturday article about how DMSO heals the eyes and restores vision (which incorporates hundreds of reports I have received from readers). If any of you have DMSO eye stories (you have not already shared in comments here), please send them my way (e.g., as a comment or reply to this article) so they can be incorporated into it.

The Effects of Constipation

While it is relatively unlikely one will be hospitalized for constipation, the condition nonetheless has a significant effect on quality of life, as it is stressful to be unable to defecate when you attempt to and often quite uncomfortable once too much has built up inside you. Conversely, after a large bowel movement (especially if they’ve been constipated), individuals often feel much better and clear-headed.

Constipation frequently results in significant issues. Most commonly, we recognize its connection to the fact that the pressure created by strained bowel movements can lead to hemorrhoids, rectal prolapse, and anal fissures.

However, it can also lead to less appreciated issues including:

• Dysbiosis within the gut microbiome. In many cases, the gut dysbiosis that leads to constipation results from foods not being fully digested. One of the most interesting things I learned is that SIBO often results from slowed bowel transit time, and practitioners who are most successful in treating SIBO focus on increasing peristalsis to facilitate the body eliminating the problematic bacteria.

• Fatigue, headaches, abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting.

• Chronic constipation is linked to progressively more severe illnesses, including diverticulitis, kidney disease, gastric and colorectal cancer, ischemic colitis, and Parkinson’s disease.

The Dangers of Laxatives

Since most constipation is labeled as “idiopathic” treatments are typically symptom based. Unfortunately, while laxatives are relatively benign if used occasionally, over time, they can impair the normal function of the GI tract and create a situation where one requires chronic laxative use.

Note: clinicians have also reported instances where laxatives destroyed the normal functioning of the colon which then required part of the colon to be surgically removed.

One of the most commonly used laxatives (MiraLAX) can create issues because a surprising number of people have sensitivities or allergies to polyethylene glycol. When individuals have delayed bowel transit time (anyone who is constipated), they are more likely to systemically absorb MiraLAX and experience toxicity from it.

As such, it is critical to identify the actual cause of constipation rather than just trying to perpetually treat the symptoms.

Conventional Causes of Constipation

When evaluating the root cause of constipation, it is critical never to forget that constipation can also be a symptom of a more serious illness.

For example, when a tumor grows in the colon, it progressively blocks transit through the colon, which in turn leads to the feces becoming narrower and narrower (along with abnormal weight loss, anemia, and rectal bleeding). Because of this, if you notice that it is gradually happening, it is worth getting a preliminary test to see if you may have cancer (there are simple and complex ways to test the stools for colon cancer).

Note: red meat (especially for those who do not eat it frequently) and beet juice can also make the stools turn red.

Other diseases that can frequently cause constipation include:

• Hypothyroidism—One of the common symptoms of hypothyroidism (beyond hair loss, coldness, fatigue, and weight gain) is delayed bowel transit time. As such, if you are constipated, you need to consider if you are hypothyroid.

• Hyperparathyroidism—This is a surprisingly common but unrecognized condition which can make individuals feel quite ill (e.g., it can cause pain throughout the body, cognitive issues, arrhythmias, kidney stones, unexpected fractures and gastrointestinal issues).

• Anxiety or Depression—Many report stress and anxiety causes constipation, and extensive data supports this. For example, a large study found anxiety was significantly more common in constipated patients, another found 65% of constipated patients had psychiatric conditions—most frequently anxiety or depression.

Proposed mechanisms include brain-gut axis dysfunction, increased pelvic floor muscle tension due to anxiety, altered gut microbiota in anxiety, and hormonal pathways affected by stress—and my leading hypothesis—sympathetic activation directly reducing bowel transit. Because of this, mind-body practices that relax the body can sometimes be quite helpful, as is psychological support.

Note: the natural treatments for anxiety are discussed here and those for depression here.

Additionally, many medications, particularly opioids, can cause constipation, with potential offenders also including antacids, anticholinergics, antidepressants, antihistamines, antipsychotics, calcium channel blockers, certain blood pressure medications, and NSAIDs. Because of this, if you develop constipation after starting a new prescription, it is always important to see if that drug is linked to impaired bowel movements.

Note: iron and calcium supplements can sometimes cause constipation (e.g., iron supplements cause constipation for approximately 10% of users).

Other Causes of Constipation

Unfortunately, in most cases, the cause of constipation remains unknown, and typically the advice given is to “eat more fiber,” which while sometimes helpful often is not. Additionally, in some cases, the benefits of fiber are not due to their stool bulking activity but rather that they directly stimulate peristalsis.

Presently, I believe there are a few major contributors to the epidemic of constipation we face that are largely overlooked.

Dietary Causes

• Dairy consumption (particularly in children)—which has been shown in many studies (e.g., a randomized trial found that 71.4% of children with chronic constipation not responding to laxatives significantly improved within 4 weeks of stopping dairy, whereas only 11.4% of the control group, with similar results seen in this blinded crossover trial).

Note: while this is often attributed to food allergies, it may also be due to the opioid-like substances in dairy (e.g., beta-casomorphin), as individuals often improve on milk lacking these substances, and severe constipation has been found to be reversed by naloxone (an opioid blocker). Likewise, gluten contains opioid like peptides (gluten exorphins) which have been shown to slow bowel transit time and cause constipation. Lastly, the variable sensitivity to these compounds (and being predisposed to constipation) may be a result of genetic susceptibility (e.g., OPRM1 A118G polymorphisms have been repeatedly shown to influence sensitivity to opioids).

• Poor diet and food triggers of constipation. Beyond dairy, we find the constipation causing agents often vary person to person, with the most commonly reported (ordered by frequency) being cow dairy, gluten, goat’s milk, beef (red meat), legumes, eggs, fried foods, rice (white), bananas (unripe), chocolate, caffeine (excess), alcohol (excess), tea (excess). Additionally, refined grains frequently lack the fiber needed to facilitate healthy bowel movements, and many readers have found using freshly milled whole grain flour (e.g., wheat, within 24 hours of milling) cured their constipation.

Note: within Chinese medicine, there is an entire diagnostic model based on looking at the characteristics of one’s stools. I have often found it to be extremely useful, and I often monitor my own stools to assess how my body is handling my current diet.

Nutrition and Hydration

In addition to certain foods causing constipation, a lack of critical substances can as well.

For example, chronic dehydration is widely recognized to be a cause of constipation (due to it drying out the stools and making them harder to push through). Additionally, I strongly suspect dehydration causes peristalsis (bowel motion) to shut down, as I’ve seen numerous cases where “frozen bowels” rapidly softened and resumed their normal function once the individuals received either a saline infusion or a zeta potential restoring treatment. Likewise, ultraviolet blood irradiation has been repeatedly observed to rapidly restore bowel function.

Likewise, mineral deficiencies (primarily magnesium) and in some cases potassium can sometimes cause constipation.

Read the Whole Article

The post Why You’re Constipated—and How To Fix It Naturally appeared first on LewRockwell.

Thomas Paine began his classic revolutionary pamphlet Common Sense with “These are the times that try men’s souls.” Imagine what old Tom would think of these times. Our souls are literally on trial; the satanic forces that thoroughly run this world vying against a faith in all that’s good and right, which some of us cling to fiercely.

The Charlie Kirk assassination, or whatever it was, is not going quietly into Dylan Thomas’s good night. Candace Owens alone is seeing to that. Candace has released what certainly look to be authentic texts from Charlie Kirk, written on September 8, two days before he was shot. In one, Charlie declares, “Jewish donors play into all the stereotypes. I cannot and will not be bullied like this. Leaving me no choice but to leave the pro Israel cause.” Now that kind of sentiment simply won’t do. Not in a land like ours, completely subservient to Zionism. So they simply rewrote the history. They do this all the time. Even someone from Turning Point USA, who had been in the private chat and personally saw the damning texts, said publicly that Charlie had “stood with Israel to his last breath.” Then Charlie’s unredacted seven page letter to Netanyahu was released. In it, he expresses the kind of adoration that today’s Right invariably feels for the “chosen.” Except that it was written on May 2.

The trumpeting of Charlie’s predictable genuflecting to Netanyahu was rendered irrelevant by the release of those final texts. This reminded me of how a desperate state controlled media produced a supposed deathbed audio confession from Jack Ruby, in which he swore that he had acted alone. The better evidence, which was captured on clear video, revealed Ruby confessing that “The world will never know the true facts of what occurred, my motives. The people who had so much to gain, and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I’m in will never let the true facts come aboveboard to the world.” When a reporter then asked him, “Are these people in very high positions Jack?” Ruby replied, “Yes.” Ruby’s brother Earl was on hand to verify that the mob connected nightclub owner had acted alone. Oswald’s brother Robert toed the official line, too. They can’t find a disloyal brother in this case, because Charlie Kirk was an only child. Maybe an ambitious cousin?

Now they have found video of Charlie’s Chief of Staff pretty much scurrying away from the area as soon as the shot was fired. Seems like strange behavior to me, but then again I am an incorrigible Thought Criminal. It’s important to look at Charlie Kirk himself. As I’ve said before, it’s pretty hard for an eighteen year old to convince billionaires to back his pet project. Most of us don’t know a single billionaire. How did young Charlie draw the attention of more than one? Then there are the usual contradictory bits of information found via internet searches. For instance, it is claimed that there aren’t clear results for a Charles or Charlie James Kirk, aged 31, born in either Illinois or Arizona. Then there was the book on the Kirk assassination, which was posted with a publication date of September 9, one day before the shooting. Amazon blamed it on “technical issues.” We have seen these same kinds of “technical issues” in the Sandy Hook case, Boston Bombing, and other widely reported events.

Our intrepid FBI director, Kash Patel, lashed out at those who are questioning the ridiculous official narrative of Charlie Kirk’s shooting. Naturally, he dismissed them as “conspiracy theorists,” as those running our intelligence agencies have done since that infamous April 1, 1967 CIA memo on “Countering Criticism of the Warren Report.” But then he called them “anarchists.” That’s an interesting adjective to use. Sure, maybe some who see through the absurd official explanation are anarchists, but I think many more aren’t. It’s no wonder that Kash always has that terrified, deer-in-the-headlights look. He’s being asked to defend lots of indefensible things. To declare, with a straight face, that there was no Epstein List. And now, to go even further and claim that actually Epstein didn’t traffic any females, underage or otherwise. But on X, he does a good job of bragging about alleged arrests being made. Alleged criminals being brought to justice. Just none of the Deep State villains we know and love.

Virginia Giuffre’s book has finally been released. In it, she describes being violently raped by a head of state, but doesn’t name him. This is decidedly odd, as in previous testimony she identified the rapist as former Israeli leader Ehud Barak. You know, the guy who spent the night at Jeffrey Epstein’s mansion almost as many times as Epstein spent the night at the Clinton White House. Too bad the guy who signed Epstein in on all those occasions, Mark Middleton, can’t be questioned about this, since he was found hanged with a shotgun blast to the chest. Naturally, the authorities concluded his death was a suicide. What else could they conclude? If Gary Webb can shoot himself twice in the head, Mark Middleton can hang himself and shoot himself at the same time. It’s a Total Corruption thing, you wouldn’t understand. But the message was clear; yes, we are completely in charge. Nothing to see here. Any questions?

Those Epstein victims have kind of disappeared again, after their outside press conference on Capitol Hill in early September. They didn’t really name any names either. But they vowed to provide their own “list.” At some point. Not yet. Maybe in 2028. This is what happens all the time now in America 2.0; a Big Story, which has a very brief shelf life. Nothing ever comes of the disclosures, or the obvious criminal behavior on the part of powerful persons. The stories come fast and furious. Strange rabbis are tunneling up under synagogues. A frightening Antisemitism Awareness Act is passed by Congress but somehow isn’t law yet. Barack Obama is about to be indicted for treason. Donald Trump wants to annex Greenland. And/or Canada. And take back the Panama Canal. Well, let’s just settle for indiscriminately bombing Venezuelan boats. We must stop “narco-terrorism,” after all. It’s almost as dangerous as “islamo- fascism” or “domestic terrorists.” And it’s all part of Making America Great Again.

I’m confused by this whole Venezuela thing. I know we hated the terrible, dreadful Hugo Chavez, although the people in his country seemed to like him. But he’s long and conveniently gone. And what does Venezuela have to do with Israel’s security, anyhow? Since the 1980s, when the neocon movement was born, our foreign policy has revolved exclusively around the interests of Israel. Maybe there is a dangerous sleeper cell of Holocaust Deniers in Venezuela. I remember when that super prison in El Salvador was all the rage south of the border. Who can forget the lovely Kristi Noem teasing the hardened criminals there, in her enticing outfit? Maybe Kristi will be sent on a mission to tease some unsuspecting “narco-terrorists” now. True, all they’ve caught so far is a Trinidadian fisherman or two. But Trinidadian fishermen can lead to Venezuelan “narco-terrorists.” Or so I’ve heard. All I know is that it must be part of our beloved Trumpenstein’s America First policies.

We are in the midst of yet another government shutdown. This happens all the time now. Both awful, carbon copy political parties argue over the Continuing Resolution to continue funding our unproductive but very, very expensive federal government. Socialism Without Services costs a lot. Will EBT benefits be cut off? Will USAID be able to waste our money as lavishly as usual? Will purple haired gender fluid teachers make new TikTok videos about it? I don’t make predictions, but they always get things settled at the last minute. As dramatically as possible, like those regular 2 and 1/2 counts in pro wrestling. Keep the Sheeple on the edge of their seats. I wouldn’t worry about it. Well, not any more than you should worry about having evil eugenicists control your lives. And that doesn’t appear to bother too many people. Just forget about it, and look forward to the upcoming Super Bowl halftime show. Anyone named Bad Bunny is bound to put on a memorable, wholesome show.

Raed the Whole Article

The post Charlie Kirk, Epstein, and the Zionist Cabal appeared first on LewRockwell.

Since the first of September, the U.S. Navy has been blowing up small vessels off the coast of Venezuela. The current count is nine boats and approximately 37 dead. The U.S. government declares that these boats are an imminent threat to our country because they are operated by narco-terrorists. It appears no evidence was necessary.

The Trump administration has completely eschewed the legal requirements for due process or normal interdiction procedures. Sadly, due to the Global War on Terror, we Americans have tragically grown accustomed to our government assassinating people because they are merely suspected terrorists. Leaving aside moral issues, it is worth recalling that these actions are illegal under both domestic and international law.

First and foremost, these actions are in contradiction to the United States Constitution. Article I, section 8 clearly states that Congress shall have the power to “declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water.” Article II, section 2 states: “The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States.” The president does command the forces, but only Congress can declare war—and Congress has not declared war against alleged “drug boats” in Latin America. These small boats 1,300 miles from the Florida Keys pose no emergency threat, and blowing them up is clearly an act of war.

Our cowardly Congress has appropriated many trillions of dollars for a plethora of wars since World War II. However, since 1942, they haven’t had the courage to take responsibility and actually declare war as the Constitution requires. Over the years, they usually haven’t even had the fortitude to refuse to finance wars with which they disagree. As a result of congressional unwillingness to exercise their mandated duties, the forever and failed wars have continued unabated. Congress does not want to be caught voting for wars which the public doesn’t want. Especially if the war becomes a failure, as is normally the case, they enjoy being free to say whatever the public wants to hear without the record of a pesky vote to contradict their dishonest rhetoric. To aid this ruse, the leadership tends to wrap the military budgets into big continuing resolutions or omnibus bills so there is no vote showing undeniable support for particular wars. The result: a win-win for duplicitous politicians and the military industry, but a big lose-lose for the American people and the poor American and foreign souls murdered and maimed.

The latest attacks and killings are also forbidden by article 2, section 4 of the UN Charter: “All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.”

Article 51 allows unilateral use of force only in self-defense against an “armed attack.” America is not threatened by small outboard motor boats more than 1,000 miles from our shores, and their mere existence in international waters, even if they are carrying drugs, certainly doesn’t constitute an “armed attack.” Off the coast of Venezuela there is a significant U.S. flotilla, which is fully capable of intercepting these small boats without having to obliterate them.

International Maritime Law (UNCLOS) article 88 states, “The high seas shall be reserved for peaceful purposes.” While drug interdiction may be permitted, the standard procedure is visit, search, and seize, not summary destruction.

Or consider the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, adopted in 1998 and signed by the U.S. in 2000. This statute sets out the court’s jurisdiction over war crimes among other issues. In May 2002 Undersecretary of State John Bolton formally notified the UN secretary general that the United States “does not intend to become a party to the treaty.” (Anyone surprised it was John Bolton who made this submission?) The George W. Bush administration was prepping for the invasion of Iraq—and the other countries on the neocon hit list—so were looking to limit the liability for those illegal wars. Remember, Iran is the last on the list that hasn’t been wrecked to date.

In 1950 the United States voted to approve the United Nations Nuremberg Principles, several of which are relevant to the Trump administration’s military campaign in Latin America:

Principle III: “The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible Government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law.”

Principle IV: “The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.”

Principle VI: “The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). (b) War crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder…” “…or devastation not justified by military necessity. (c) Crimes against humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhuman acts done against any civilian population…”

Back to domestic law: The 1981 Executive Order 12333 section 2.11 signed by President Ronald Reagan states, “No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.” This order has never been revoked.

When you consider the above, it is no surprise the admiral in charge of SOUTHCOM—the regional command responsible for Central and South America, their territorial waters, and the Caribbean—recently opted for early retirement.

Read the Whole Article

The post The Small Boat Attacks Are Illegal appeared first on LewRockwell.

Americans are so tired of being called “racists.”  This has been the Democrat party’s go-to rhetorical weapon for half a century.  Rather than debating policies on their merits, Democrat politicians just accuse their opponents of being Klan members and call it a day.  This is particularly galling since it is the Democrat party in the United States that fought a civil war to defend slavery and then established a Jim Crow system of enforced racial segregation that endured for another century.

Democrat party activists are always toppling statues of historic Americans accused of being insufficiently opposed to slavery centuries ago.  They try to “cancel” organizations whose long dead founders might have once said something politically incorrect by today’s standards.  Yet the Democrat party never has the courage to take a look at its own sordid history.  If it did, it would “cancel” itself.

Incapable of explaining why criminal illegal aliens should be permitted to invade American communities and devour limited welfare funds, Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett argues without evidence, “This administration is racist. … We know that we have a racist at the top.  Everybody has decided it’s okay to take off their hoods and mask up as ICE agents.  It reminds me of the Klan.”  Given that most Klan members supported the Democrat party, you’d think Crockett would have some expertise on this issue.  She does not.  As with every other Democrat politician who plays the race card every single day, she mindlessly insists that anyone who disagrees with her hates black people.

Democrats — especially black Democrats — have done tremendous harm to the ongoing fight against racial hatred in this world.  To be sure, race hate is real, and it is the source of awful bloodshed around the planet.  Compared to parts of the Middle East, Asia, South America, and Sub-Saharan Africa, though, racism in the United States is nonexistent.  In much of the world, people really do scrutinize the shade of a person’s skin to determine whether that person is “entitled” to any rights, including the right to live.  People are sold like cattle, worked to death, and dumped into mass graves.  Democrat politicians largely ignore these realities because recognizing such horrors around the planet would expose their own charges of “racism” as petty, baseless, cynical, and exploitative.

In America, overt acts of racism are so rare that the Democrat party has been forced to lecture Americans about their “unconscious biases” for twenty years.  American society is so welcoming to members of every race and ethnicity that the Democrat party must argue that invisible “systemic racism” exists even when Americans can’t see it.  No matter how hard Americans try to prove that they are not racist, Democrats insist that they are.

By maliciously defaming good people as racists, Democrats give aid and comfort to genuine racists around the world.  The Chinese Communist Party enslaves minorities and engages in ethnic genocide.  Then its government-controlled news media publicly broadcast recordings of Democrat politicians, such as Congresswoman Crockett, explaining that the United States — not China — is the most racist nation in the world.  China’s government murders people because of their family heritage, expressed opinions, and religious beliefs.  Yet Chinese communists have a never-ending supply of real video clips from Democrat politicians asserting that President Trump is Hitler and that his Republican voters are Nazis.  Famous Hollywood Democrats, such as Robert De Niro, shamelessly call White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller a “Jewish Nazi.”  While actual genocide continues in communist China, its state-run media have no problem portraying the United States as racist, fascist, and savage.  The Democrat party’s vile, reckless attacks against Americans give the world’s most murderous racists plenty of cover.

Twelve years ago, the Academy Award for Best Picture went to 12 Years a Slave.  That movie tells the biographical story of Solomon Northup, a free black man who was kidnapped in Washington, D.C. in 1841 and sold into slavery.  After living in bondage on several Louisiana plantations, Northup managed to escape with the help of friends and family from his native New York.  The movie deviates slightly from Solomon Northup’s own 1853 memoir in an effort to convey the violent brutality of slavery.  It is an emotional film that forces the audience to watch human beings enduring beatings, whippings, and other tortures.

When I first saw the movie, I expected a block of text to appear before the end credits that would address human slavery as it exists today.  After all, Northup’s story is particularly fascinating because he was born a free man and lived a happy life before being abducted and sold as a slave.  Both his original memoir and the 2013 movie relate his traumatic journey through the eyes of someone who is just as shocked by the experience as any American alive today would be.  His story, in other words, has a great deal in common with people around the world in 2025 who are kidnapped from their families, sexually abused, and trafficked as slaves.  It still seems strange to me that the Best Picture winner doesn’t conclude with an urgent plea for viewers to liberate the roughly fifty million human beings who live as slaves today.

Just last week, The Gateway Pundit published details of a “massive human trafficking and torture network” involving a Chinese crime syndicate that has “scammed, brutally tortured, drugged, and enslaved” thousands of South Korean citizens.  “Lured by fake employment ads and trafficked into Chinese-controlled criminal compounds in Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar,” those who have been abducted are “beaten, electrocuted, drugged, and forced to work” under the threat of execution.  Survivors who have managed to escape have described “being forced to scam their own citizens online” while their “captors used narcotics and psychotropic drugs to suppress resistance.”  Enduring similar horrors as Solomon Northup did two hundred years ago, the South Korean captives are just one example of human slavery flourishing today.

Why do so few Washington politicians or Hollywood actors ever shine a bright light on modern-day slavery?  Presumably because they don’t want Americans to know that there are fifty million slaves around the world today.  They don’t want to expose the inhumane abuses that their Chinese Communist Party friends and financiers commit.  They don’t want to highlight Islam’s historic fondness for kidnapping and slavery.  They don’t want Americans to realize that Mexican and South American cartels abduct women and children, hook them on drugs, and traffic them as sex slaves across the United States.  They don’t want to draw attention to the inconvenient fact that tribes in Sub-Saharan Africa still openly buy and sell slaves today.

If Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett gave a damn about slavery, she would use her giant microphone to expose big business slavers around the planet who profit from human misery.  She would go on an hours-long floor speech demanding that the U.S. government target the scourge of human-trafficking.  She would call out the Chinese communists, African nations, and Muslim communities that enslave human beings.  Crockett does none of these things.  Instead, she calls Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents Ku Klux Klan members and claims that President Trump is the most dangerous “racist” on the planet.

There is evil in this world.  It is ugly, brutal, and ruthless.  It steals boys and girls from their parents.  It rapes and tortures and murders.  It rips the innocence from those it abducts, and it laughs as it profits from unspeakable cruelties.  Slavery survives in 2025 because powerful voices refuse to speak about it.  Politicians such as Jasmine Crockett would rather pretend all white people are racist and that President Trump is America’s plantation master.  By telling those lies and ignoring those in bondage, she ensures that slavery’s horrors continue.

This article was originally published on American Thinker.

The post Democrat Party Lies Protect Modern Slavery appeared first on LewRockwell.

President Trump, if you don’t quickly put down the Insurrections with deadly force, as required to protect your people, you will be fighting an army of Communists and illegal invaders in a Civil War! They will be led and protected by the traitorous officials in the blue cities and states. If you allow them more time to organize they will have at least a ten-to-one advantage over our military. You must put them down quickly and decisively. Under a wartime situation, you can deport illegals without consent of judges. Study President Lincoln’s lawful actions during the Civil War.

Federal law enforcement must determine who is funding the conflict and arrest them for treason. State and local officials who don’t support federal forces must be arrested for treason or dismissed. Most people don’t realize that the Federal Government is funding the Communists in the states, which is unconstitutional and insane. Communism only exists until it runs out of other people’s money.

The lives of patriots and federal forces can’t be put at undue risk to protect rioters. If insurrectionists, rioters or others threaten citizens with deadly force (rocks, fires, vehicles, firearms, etc) they should be put down with deadly force. If civilian authorities refuse to prosecute criminals, replace or arrest them or use military courts.

It is well-known that most members of Congress do not support the concept of “America First” and they hate Trump for it. This is because it would interfere with their illegal business partnerships with the Zionist Jewish Lobby and others. It is reported that most members of Congress hate President Trump; Democrats admit it and Republicans lie. Citizens must vote those who don’t support “America First” out of Office!

As an Economist, I can say that we must terminate all Foreign Aid and deployment of troops overseas. We just can’t afford these expenditures. In a time of insurrection, we must have the troops and equipment in America for our survival. It must be understood that every conflict in last 80 years was for the sole benefit of the Military Industrial Complex and bribes to members of Congress. We lost every war; there were no Constitutional Declarations of War, and we lost 105,000 military dead. Not a single war was for national security. The American people buried their dead and endured a much lower standard of living because of these wars. If you can’t tolerate sacrificing your children and life blood to the Deep State and their minions in Congress, Vote the “America First”-hating Congress out of office!

Due to our oceans, the United States can’t be invaded. It can only be defeated by Weapons of Mass Destruction or from within. Therefore we have absolutely no reason to be involved in conflicts in any other country for any reason. There is nothing in our Constitution to authorize meddling in other countries and using the resources of our people for the benefit of other countries.

There is no question that Israel’s Muslim neighbors did despicable things to the Jews, but there is ample evidence that the Jews earned this hatred every year since its founding in 1948. But the point is that it is none of our business…except that the Zionist Jewish Lobby controls Congress.  Everybody knows this. This must end.

The assassination of Charlie Kirk has started a religious revival in the United States and questioned how Christian Evangelical Churches could support Zionist Genocide and Jews as the “Chosen Ones” when Jesus Christ condemned them.

In many previous articles, I have stated that if we would mind our own business without Foreign Aid or troops deployed overseas, we would have the American Dream and unlimited prosperity. This would still be true if not for the Treason of the Democrats aka Communists and the two-faced Republicans for allowing more than 20 million illegal invaders into America. These invaders must be deported quickly at great cost, regardless of the cost or opposition by a corrupt Congress. The Deep State aka Parasitic Super-Rich Ruling Class aka wealthy families and their minions in government say we need illegals to do work that Americans will not do. Of course this is true IF you pay Americans more not to work than they could earn working. In short, we must deport the illegals and terminate government benefits to those who can work but don’t.

Businesses that hire Illegals do so because they can pay them less because government benefits make up the difference. This mindset is faulty and causes major problems in society.

President Trump, please remember how the Democrat aka Communist army of Antifa and Black Lives Matter burned down our inner cities in 2020 when you trusted local officials to do the right thing but theydidn’t. Please don’t make the same mistake again.

I detest most members of Congress because they don’t support “America First” or President Trump. My friends feel the same way. Everybody should, or all is lost.

The post President Trump, You Have a Very Limited Time To Put Down Insurrections With Deadly Force Before It Is a Civil War! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Do you remember when we were told that the “Reagan deficit” was going to destroy the economy?  In the past two and one-third months ending October 15 the US national debt increased by $1 trillion.  That is five times greater in a mere 71 days than David Stockman’s exaggerated “$200 billion annual deficits as far as the eye can see” that he falsely attributed to President Reagan’s tax rate reduction. 

In light of the $38 trillion US national debt, why is Washington financing Israel’s wars and the war against Russia in Ukraine?  The weaponization of the US dollar with sanctions and asset freezes and confiscations has resulted in a decline in the percentage of international transactions accounted for by US dollars.  Similarly, the dollar’s use as foreign central bank reserves is declining.  If the dollar loses its role as reserve currency, the interest rate needed to finance the massive US national debt would rise precipitously and absorb the entire revenues of the government.  

American power depends far more importantly on the dollar’s role as reserve currency than it does on the War Department budget or winning wars for Israel and Ukraine. Trump’s war on Putin is driving up oil and other prices that are main drivers of inflation.  Trump’s war on China might deprive the US economy of rare earths, thus halting production of essentials.  It seems to me that the cost of American hegemony is going to be America’s destruction. 

The gold and silver markets have already seriously depreciated the value of paper fiat currencies and their debt instruments.  China is in the process of substituting gold for US Treasuries as central bank reserves.  As China is a huge holder of US debt, the adverse consequence for the dollar is obvious. 

The US economy faces massive unemployment from AI and robotics.  State and local governments have large bills from the subsidies they have institutionalized for immigrant-invaders.  Inflation, officially understated, is eating away at the living standards of Americans.  A very dark storm is gathering, and our President is pretending that he owns the world.

The post President Trump Needs To Turn Attention to Our Problems appeared first on LewRockwell.

According to several recent news reports, the two major Trump foreign policy shifts last week are the handiwork of Marco Rubio, the President’s Secretary of State and (acting) National Security Advisor. As with all neocon plans, they will be big on promises and small on delivery.

First up, according to Bloomberg it was Rubio who finally convinced President Trump to take “ownership” of the US proxy war on Russia, and for the first time place sanctions on Russia. Up to this point President Trump chose to portray himself as a mediator between Ukraine and Russia. But with this move against Russia’s oil sector he can no longer credibly claim that this is “Joe Biden’s war.”

The Trump move followed a confusing few weeks since the Trump/Putin Alaska summit in August. After that meeting Trump dropped the neocon position that a ceasefire in the Russia/Ukraine war must occur before any peace negotiations. It was a sign that Trump was looking more realistically at the war. He also said he did not think Ukraine would win, which is pretty obvious.

A surprise call to Putin the day before Ukrainian president Zelensky was to arrive in town just over a week ago reinforced that position and Zelensky left Washington empty-handed. He was seeking Tomahawk missiles that could strike deep into Russian territory.

Then out of the blue President Trump last week announced through his Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent that the US would be sanctioning Russia’s two largest oil companies until Russia declares a ceasefire in the war before negotiations. That won’t happen, but what it does mean is that Rubio and the neocons have successfully gotten Trump to step on the escalation escalator. That is what they always do. It will be much harder to back down now.

At the same time the US Administration was jumping deeper into the Russia/Ukraine war, a long-time neocon dream was suddenly back in play. Although in Trump’s first term a “regime change” operation was attempted against Venezuela, it failed spectacularly. But the neocons have long dreamed of overthrowing the Venezuelan government – they almost got their way back in 2002 – and suddenly after several weeks of extrajudicial murder on the high seas in the name of fighting the drug war, President Trump announced that land strikes on Venezuela would begin soon.

He did mention that he might brief Congress on his plans for war on Venezuela, not that Congress can be bothered to care much one way or the other.

The neocon old guard that still dominates Washington foreign policy is taking a victory lap. South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham was on the Sunday shows beaming over the conversion of “no regime-change wars” President Trump to “regime change wars” President Trump.

The Saddam Hussein WMD factories of 2002 have become the Nicolas Maduro cocaine and fentanyl factories of 2025 and once again the neocon war lies are amplified by the US mainstream media and transmitted to the American people. A new disaster is in the making. The “global war on terror” has been rebranded the “hemispheric war on narco-terror” and the US military industrial complex is rubbing its hands in anticipation of a windfall.

After John Bolton’s disastrous stint in the first Trump Administration, promises were made that the second Trump Administration would be neocon-free. Instead, the neocons are back. Unless President Trump wakes up soon, the neocons will destroy his second term…and maybe the country.

The post The Rubio Doctrine: Neocons Are Back! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Those charged with terrorism for supporting Palestine Action will have no jury in trials limited to 36 minutes each, with prison sentences up to six months. These are the plans for Starmer Courts for mass trials of anti-Genocide protestors.

The plans are devised by Justice Michael Snow. He is the epitome of judicial prejudice. When Julian Assange appeared before Snow in the first hearing after being dragged from the Embassy, Snow called Assange a “narcissist” even though Assange had said nothing but to confirm his name, and no evidence had been led.

Snow has now decreed that those 2,000 people charged under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act with supporting Palestine Action, will be tried in batches of five at the rate of ten people a day – giving 36 court minutes for each defendant. This is a farce, a spectacle of mass show trial. The 36 minutes includes both prosecution and defence cases and cross-examination.

At a scheduling hearing on Wednesday, one of the accused, 72 year old Deborah Wilde, objected that these trials would be far too short to present a proper defence.

Snow snapped back “I’m satisfied that the time is sufficient. I am not going to give more time. Your only remedy is the High Court”.

As I am sure Snow realises, ordinary people cannot afford to go to the High Court. The worrying thing is that the trials will be held before judges including the appalling Snow, with no jury.

Here is the relevant part of Section 13 of the Terrorism Act.

Perhaps the most astonishing thing about this draconian legislation is that arousing suspicion is actually the offence. It does not matter if the suspicion turns out to be well-grounded or not. The suspicion could be totally wrong, but if you aroused the suspicion on “reasonable grounds” in a policeman’s head, you are guilty.

It is an offence of strict liability. Your intent is not considered; you may have been most concerned to stop a Genocide, or to oppose the destruction of free speech. Judge Snow and his ilk will not care. They only want to know if some half educated cop suspected you of supporting a terrorist organisation. There is no jury to whom you can explain your actions – and which would be highly likely to sympathise.

I have seen it, as an offence of strict liability, likened to possession of Class A drugs. But actually it isn’t. The correct analogy would be a crime where the offence was arousing a suspicion you possessed Class A drugs, whether you actually had any or not.

The experience of watching 2,000 upstanding citizens, most of them elderly and many of them infirm, hustled through this slaughterhouse queue of mass justice and into prison, with little opportunity to defend themselves, will be a defining moment in the UK’s headlong slide into fascism.

The best available way to fight this ridiculously unjust process which has been directly opposed by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, by Amnesty International and by Liberty, is through the legal challenge to an absurd and oppressive law. This is being done in both England and Scotland, which are separate jurisdictions. I am the “petitioner” in the Scottish case.

There are precedents for different decisions in the different jurisdictions. The Scottish courts found Boris Johnson’s prorogation of parliament illegal; the English courts, legal. Ultimately the Supreme Court decided in favour of the Scottish courts. It is also possible that Palestine Action should simply operate legally in one jurisdiction and not the other – the law is frequently different in the two countries. The rationale of the legal case is explained here.

We desperately need funds. We now have a crowdfunder which pays money direct to the legal team. I understand that most people of goodwill have donated and donated to numerous causes in these terrible times. If you cannot donate, please help by spreading the crowdfunder.

This article was originally published on CraigMurray.org.uk.

The post 36 Minute Trials and No Jury – Starmer’s Fascist Mass Courts appeared first on LewRockwell.

Following the announcement of the impending summit with President Putin in Hungary, President Trump declared that the summit with the Russian President on Ukraine would be a “waste of time” on the grounds that “Russia is pursuing territorial ambitions that make a peace agreement with Ukraine impossible”.

He then proceeded to summon NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte to the White House, wherein he conveyed his decision to withhold the provision of US Tomahawk missiles to Kiev at that particular juncture.

This decision was precipitated by the perceived impracticality of allocating a substantial amount of time to train the Ukrainian army in the utilisation of such missiles. Concurrently, the US lifted the key restriction on the use of long-range missiles supplied by other NATO members to Ukraine, while NATO conducted the Steadfast Noon nuclear warfare exercise directed against Russia in Europe under US command. In response to the aforementioned events, a Strategic Nuclear Forces exercise was conducted in the Russian Federation. President Putin observed this exercise via video conference.

One example among many: that of the fast-growing German Rheinmetall, which is integrated into the US military-industrial complex through American Rheinmetall Munitions.

Rheinmetall has announced its intention to supply Ukraine with an electronic system designed to enhance the combat capabilities of the German Leopard tanks that have already been supplied to Kiev. The production and integration of this system is carried out by the Italian subsidiary of Rheinmetall, Rheinmetall Italia SpA, at its headquarters in Rome. In Italy, Rheinmetall has established a facility dedicated to the assembly, testing and production of warheads for kamikaze drones. The series is being produced at full speed. The plant is operated by the Italian subsidiary RWM Italia at its sites in Musei and Domusnovas in Sardinia. Rheinmetall is collaborating with the Israeli manufacturer UVision Air Ltd. on this project. It is evident that these Italian-manufactured kamikaze drones will be utilised by the Israeli army in attacks against Palestinians in Gaza, as well as in other operations primarily conducted in Libya, Yemen, and other regions.

Trump has imposed sanctions on Russian oil companies, representing the most stringent measures yet taken by the US against the Russian energy sector. It is evident that these sanctions are favourable to large US oil and gas companies. The European Union is participating in this operation, which has decided to completely block the import of Russian natural gas in three stages: from 1 January 2026, it will be forbidden to sign new contracts; short-term agreements already in place must end by 17 June 2026; and long-term agreements by 31 December 2027.

It should be noted that the aforementioned proposals have met with opposition from the countries of Hungary and Slovakia. Concurrently, Italy’s Edison entered into an agreement with Shell, securing the procurement of US liquefied natural gas (LNG) for a duration of 15 years. In consideration of the marked disparity between the price of gas in the US and that of gas in Russia, it is evident that consumer gas prices for households in Italy are rising.

The United States and the State of Israel are contemplating a plan to divide the Gaza Strip into two separate zones: one to be controlled by Israel, the other formally by Hamas pending its “disarmament”. This was announced at a press conference in Israel by US Vice President Vance and Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The plan is to immediately start “reconstruction” in the Israeli-controlled area, according to Trump’s plan to transform Gaza into a luxurious “Riviera of the Middle East”.

The Palestinian area, de facto controlled by Israel, would remain in its current situation: the Palestinian population would be locked there in a scenario of destruction and deprivation that would continue the genocide.

President Trump confirmed that Australia will obtain nuclear-powered submarines from the United States and the United Kingdom, indicating a strategic focus on deterring China and Russia.

Concurrently, he signed an agreement on rare earth minerals with the Australian Prime Minister at the White House. The AUKUS submarine agreement between Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States could cost Australia up to $235 billion over the next 30 years. The governments of the United States and Australia have announced their intention to invest in excess of $3 billion in critical minerals projects over the forthcoming six-month period. The recoverable resources in these projects are estimated to be worth $53 billion.

The US Department of War expressed its intention to invest in the construction of an advanced gallium refinery with a capacity of 100 metric tonnes per year in Western Australia. Gallium has several military applications, primarily in high-tech electronics such as radar and satellite communications. The material is also used as an alloy to stabilise nuclear weapons components and in aluminium-gallium alloys for the production of hydrogen bombs for thermonuclear warfare.

The original source of this article is Pangea.

The post War and Business. Peace Negotiations Are ‘A Waste of Time’ appeared first on LewRockwell.

It might succeed in terms of optics, but this won’t make any substantive difference in reality.

The US’ latest sanctions against Russia, the first under the second Trump Administration, are intended less as a weapon against the Russian economy and more as a means of weaponizing energy geopolitics in a bid to break apart BRICS, especially its Russia, India, China (RIC) core. This assessment is based on India and China’s close trade ties with the US in spite of its respective 50% and 55% tariffs on them, their continued rivalry despite their incipient rapprochement, and their triangulation with Russia.

In the order that they were shared, India’s and China’s trade with the US is much larger than their trade with Russia, but Russia importantly supplies a significant share of their energy. While neither wants to pay more for oil, however, the overall costs of the US raising its tariffs on them as punishment for defying its latest sanctions as well as the secondary ones that could be leveled against those of their financial institutions that facilitate this trade might be even more. This could arguably compel them to reconsider.

As for the second point, being in better graces with the US than the other is with it serves their interests vis-à-vis one another since neither wants to risk the scenario of their rival teaming up with the US against them, which could have strategic implications. They might therefore calculate that they have more to lose by defying the US in pursuit of lower oil prices and retaining closer ties with Russia if the other doesn’t too so it’s better to comply. This amounts to a weaponization of the prisoner’s dilemma.

Building upon the above, the last point is that each might have accordingly calculated that their rival won’t obtain better ties with Russia at their feared expense so long as both of them informally comply in part (key qualifier) with the US’ latest sanctions, which each might do in spite of publicly criticizing them. As it turns out, they were already decreasing purchases of Russian oil even before the sanctions, with India’s dropping 14% from August to September and China’s 8.1% in the first nine months of the year.

No matter how compelling these points might seem, nobody should assume that India and/or China will totally stop importing Russian energy, let alone right away. There simply isn’t enough supply on the market right now for them to do so. Even if others ramp up production, those two might still only gradually wean themselves off of Russian energy, which would then likely be sold at an even steeper discount to incentivize them to retain some purchases. Everything will therefore likely balance itself out.

Nevertheless, the US could still highlight India’s and China’s reduced imports under duress (the first’s confirmed by its top buyer and the second’s only reported) to debunk the BRICS myth of them all (especially RIC) working in harmony against the US, which Trump has complained about before. It doesn’t matter that such information warfare would have no tangible effect on global processes since all that’s important to Trump is the perception of the US having broken BRICS’ (and especially RIC’s) unity.

On that note, Russia’s special operation wouldn’t be curtailed even in the political fantasy that India and China soon dump its energy for good since the Kremlin has a big enough war chest to keep financing its side of the conflict for at least the next few years, though this might come with some opportunity costs. The takeaway is that the US is indeed weaponizing energy geopolitics in a bid to break apart BRICS, which it might succeed with in terms of optics, but this won’t make any substantive difference in reality.

This article was originally published on Andrew Korybko’s Newsletter.

The post The US Is Weaponizing Energy Geopolitics in a Bid To Break Apart BRICS appeared first on LewRockwell.

In Wednesday’s episode of The Peter Schiff Show, Peter concentrates on the fallout from gold breaking $4,000 and what that means for the dollar, monetary policy, and crypto. He ties the metal’s surge to the structural consequences of the dollar’s reserve status, calls out surprising admissions from big-name financiers and former Fed officials, and argues that Bitcoin’s “digital gold” story is unraveling.

He opens by noting how the media finally pays attention once a price gets headline-grabbing, even if they miss the deeper story about why gold is rising:

Well, it’s been one week since I did my last podcast and when I did my last podcast, it was also on a Wednesday and what prompted me to do it that day was the fact that it was the first day that gold broke 4000 and there was a lot of media attention. And of course, they missed the bigger picture as to why gold was at 4000 and what it pretended. But they did cover it. The media had pretty much ignored gold all the way up to 4000. But when it got there, all of a sudden it was a bit of a story.

He then explains why $4,000 gold is more than a price milestone — it’s a symptom of deeper reliance on the dollar’s special role and on fiat money creation:

And this probably has even bigger implications for us than going off the gold standard did either for them or us, because our entire economy, our entire way of life over that time period has evolved to become dependent on the dollar’s reserve status, dollars that we can create out of thin air. Not that we have to back by gold or anything. We just conjure them into existence. And we use those dollars to buy consumer goods that we don’t produce. So we get to live beyond our means.

He highlights how even mainstream bankers are conceding that gold’s run is not a trivial matter, pointing to Jamie Dimon’s blunt acknowledgment:

Probably one of the most significant admissions that I’ve heard was from Jamie Dimon, who is a highly respected guy. And Jamie Dimon was quoted as saying gold can easily go to 10,000. And I agree it can easily go to 10,000, and it very well will go to 10,000 and a lot higher than that. But here is the more significant aspect of the Jamie Dimon quote. Jamie Dimon said, quote, “This is one of the few times in my life, it’s semi rational to have some gold in your portfolio.”

Peter also recounts an extraordinary candor from a former Fed chair, using it to question the credibility of official narratives during crisis periods:

But no, that’s not what Ben Bernanke said. He said, and I, I’m not making this up. He said, well, you know, to be honest, I really couldn’t speak my mind back then because I was part of the, the, the Bush administration. And so I had to maintain the narrative that the administration, you know, was advancing, which I, you know, I couldn’t believe that he said this. So basically Ben Bernanke’s excuse for why he was so wrong wasn’t that he got it wrong and that he wasn’t smart.

He reminds listeners that any praise for Alan Greenspan must be honest about Greenspan’s own warnings on gold and loose policy, and he calls out commentators who dismiss the metal today:

So if you’re going to praise Alan Greenspan, you can’t just selectively praise him. You can’t ignore what he said about gold. So what would Alan Greenspan say today in the face of $4,000 gold? He wouldn’t dismiss it the way Scott Bessent is dismissing it. He would say $4,000 gold means monetary policy is much too loose because Alan Greenspan said $400 gold meant he was too loose.

Finally, Peter pivots to crypto and argues that gold’s rise is actively puncturing the narrative that Bitcoin is a superior store of value — a point listeners in the crypto world should take seriously:

The people in crypto, I think, have already lost a ton of money. They just don’t know it yet. Gold is not just pricking the dollar bubble. It’s pricking the Bitcoin bubble. The whole false narrative that Bitcoin is digital gold is being destroyed right now. Bitcoin is in a major bear market; it is down by more than 25%. 

This article was originally published on SchiffGold.com.

The post Gold Pricks the Bitcoin Bubble appeared first on LewRockwell.

Click Here:

Adam Dick 

The post Challenging Religion-centered War Propaganda Concerning Iran appeared first on LewRockwell.

The post No Vacation For You! appeared first on LewRockwell.

Il manoscritto fornisce un grimaldello al lettore, una chiave di lettura semplificata, del mondo finanziario e non che sembra essere andato fuori controllo negli ultimi quattro anni in particolare. Questa una storia di cartelli, a livello sovrastatale e sovranazionale, la cui pianificazione centrale ha raggiunto un punto in cui deve essere riformata radicalmente e questa riforma radicale non può avvenire senza una dose di dolore economico che potrebbe mettere a repentaglio la loro autorità. Da qui la risposta al Grande Default attraverso il Grande Reset. Questa la storia di un coyote, che quando non riesce a sfamarsi all'esterno ricorre all'autofagocitazione. Lo stesso accaduto ai membri del G7, dove i sei membri restanti hanno iniziato a fagocitare il settimo: gli Stati Uniti.

____________________________________________________________________________________

(Versione audio della traduzione disponibile qui: https://open.substack.com/pub/fsimoncelli/p/il-costo-nascosto-dellistruzione)

Il modello universitario europeo è spesso visto come un trionfo della società moderna. Senza tasse universitarie esorbitanti, con un debito studentesco minimo e la promessa di pari accesso, sembra la soluzione ideale. In Paesi come Germania e Francia gli studenti pagano solo una piccola quota amministrativa, in genere tra i $200 e i $500 all'anno, rispetto ai costi di iscrizione esorbitanti degli Stati Uniti o del Regno Unito. Molti ricevono anche aiuti finanziari sotto forma di borse di studio che non devono essere rimborsate, o prestiti a basso interesse in base alle necessità.

Ma dietro le promesse di equità e opportunità si nasconde un sistema che troppo spesso è rigido, sovraffollato e poco stimolante.

Nonostante l'accessibilità, la realtà di doversi orientare in queste istituzioni può far sentire gli studenti come se fossero solo un numero in una gigantesca macchina burocratica.

Quando l'istruzione è accessibile a tutti, le università si riempiono. Le aule sono sovraffollate e il contatto personale con i professori diventa raro. In molti Paesi europei è normale frequentare le lezioni con centinaia di altri studenti. C'è poco spazio per discussioni, feedback, o persino domande.

Ti siedi, prendi appunti, vieni promosso o bocciato. Sembra più una catena di montaggio che un luogo di apprendimento. E i numeri spiegano il perché. Nel 2022 l'Unione Europea contava 18,8 milioni di studenti, circa il 7% della sua popolazione totale, iscritti all'istruzione terziaria. Negli Stati Uniti circa  19,1 milioni di persone si sono iscritte all'università durante l'anno accademico 2024-25. Oltre a cifre di iscrizione simili, sia l'UE che gli Stati Uniti hanno reso l'istruzione superiore ampiamente accessibile. Nell'UE, dove le tasse universitarie sono spesso infime o fortemente sovvenzionate, l'istruzione superiore viene ampliata per accogliere la maggioranza. Nel 2022 il 44% dei cittadini dell'UE di età compresa tra 25 e 34 anni aveva completato un corso di laurea, rispetto al 50% negli Stati Uniti.

I due sistemi differiscono nella struttura. Ciò che li distingue non è il numero di studenti, ma il modo in cui viene erogata l'istruzione. Le università europee tendono a basarsi su lezioni di grandi dimensioni, percorsi di studio rigidi e una limitata competizione istituzionale. Il risultato è un modello costruito sulla fredda efficienza piuttosto che sull'individualismo. Le istituzioni statunitensi, al contrario, operano in un ambiente competitivo e decentralizzato, con una gamma più ampia di strutture accademiche, inclusi college più piccoli e una progettazione dei programmi più flessibile.

Quando l'istruzione superiore è dimensionata per servire quasi tutti, come in gran parte d'Europa, si rischia di barattare la profondità con la capacità di elaborazione e la personalizzazione con la comodità amministrativa. Alla fin fine funziona lo stesso, ma a costo di trattare l'istruzione meno come un percorso e più come un processo burocratico.

A causa di questa scala il sistema si basa fortemente sulla standardizzazione. I programmi sono progettati per soddisfare le esigenze della maggioranza, il che significa che spesso non lasciano spazio a chi pensa o impara in modo diverso. Questa rigidità non inizia all'ingresso dell'università. In Paesi come Germania e Francia gli studenti vengono indirizzati verso percorsi accademici, o professionali, già a partire dagli 11 o 12 anni. Se non si viene inseriti nel percorso giusto in quel momento, le possibilità di accedere all'università in seguito possono ridursi drasticamente. Di conseguenza quando gli studenti accedono all'istruzione superiore sono già stati incanalati in un sistema che limita la crescita personale, la sperimentazione e le seconde possibilità.

Questa rigidità produce qualcosa di più profondo della semplice frustrazione. Crea una cultura del conformismo. Ci si aspetta che gli studenti seguano il percorso ufficiale, finiscano in tempo e non facciano troppo rumore. Fallire o impiegare più tempo per laurearsi è visto come una debolezza, anche se il processo di tentativi ed errori è essenziale per un apprendimento autentico. L'idea di esplorare diverse discipline o di fermarsi a riflettere è raro che sia incoraggiata. Il successo si misura in base all'efficienza con cui si completa il programma, non in base a quanto si scopre su sé stessi o sul mondo.

Di conseguenza la creatività si perde. Gli studenti che vogliono correre rischi, provare cose nuove, o porre domande scomode finiscono per trovare scarso supporto. I professori spesso non hanno tempo per fare da mentore ai singoli studenti. Gli studenti hanno una scelta limitata su cosa studiare, o come affrontarlo. In questo sistema l'obiettivo non è ispirare, ma produrre.

Ora confrontate tutto questo con sistemi in cui la competizione e la scelta sono più centrali. Negli Stati Uniti gli studenti possono scegliere liberamente il proprio percorso di studi, cambiare indirizzo, o persino prendersi del tempo libero senza penalità. Nel Regno Unito le università competono per accaparrarsi gli studenti, spingendole a offrire programmi più innovativi e un insegnamento migliore. Questi modelli sono tutt'altro che perfetti, soprattutto in termini di costi, ma spesso offrono più spazio alla crescita personale, al pensiero indipendente e alla libertà accademica.

Non si tratta di un invito a ripristinare tasse universitarie elevate. L'istruzione dovrebbe essere accessibile, ma l'accessibilità da sola non garantisce la qualità. Il modello europeo spesso rinuncia alla flessibilità in favore dell'accesso; è costruito per servire tutti allo stesso modo, il che significa che fatica a servire bene chiunque.

Non è sempre stato così. Con l'apertura delle università europee al grande pubblico nel XX secolo, l'esigenza di efficienza portò a strutture rigide e programmi di studio standardizzati. Quello che un tempo era un sistema per pochi privilegiati divenne una catena di montaggio per milioni di persone. Per contestualizzare il concetto per i lettori americani: la maggior parte degli studenti europei paga meno di $500 all'anno in tasse universitarie. A titolo di confronto, mentre le università statunitensi hanno una media di oltre $38.000 all'anno, la maggior parte degli studenti americani frequenta istituti più accessibili, con tasse universitarie statali che si aggirano in media sui $10.000 in quelle pubbliche e sui $3.000 nei community college.

Prendiamo ad esempio la Svezia. Molti studenti non iniziano l'università prima dei vent'anni, in parte perché il sistema offre pochi incentivi a iniziare prima. Una volta iscritti, i percorsi accademici sono stretti e cambiare direzione è difficile.

In Italia gli studenti spesso rimangono all'università per molti anni. Non perché siano eccessivamente curiosi o appassionati, ma perché il sistema è obsoleto e lento. I tassi di abbandono sono alti e le lauree hanno scarso peso nel mercato del lavoro.

E in Francia alcune delle scuole più prestigiose non fanno affatto parte del sistema universitario pubblico. Le Grandes Écoles sono a pagamento, più selettive e offrono un'istruzione più personalizzata. Ironia della sorte sono considerate migliori proprio perché non seguono il modello “libero per tutti”.

La verità è che la vera libertà educativa significa molto più che eliminare le tasse universitarie. Significa permettere agli studenti di esplorare, fallire, cambiare e trovare la propria strada. Significa incoraggiare l'innovazione e premiare la curiosità. E sì, significa permettere ai sistemi di competere ed evolversi.

Il sistema educativo europeo è motivo di orgoglio, ma quest'ultimo non dovrebbe impedire le riforme. Dobbiamo porci domande più difficili: stiamo costruendo istituzioni che siano davvero al servizio degli studenti, o stiamo semplicemente creando macchine che trattano tutti allo stesso modo?

Se l'istruzione deve preparare le persone al futuro, allora dobbiamo assicurarci che i nostri sistemi siano sufficientemente flessibili da crescere con essi. Quando si forzano tutti a conformarsi allo stesso schema, si rischia di distruggere proprio ciò che rende l'istruzione potente: la capacità di pensare in modo diverso.

[*] traduzione di Francesco Simoncelli: https://www.francescosimoncelli.com/

Supporta Francesco Simoncelli's Freedonia lasciando una mancia in satoshi di bitcoin scannerizzando il QR seguente.