Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French I've rubbed shoulders with tech billionaires, high-flying politicians, leaders in wildly different fields.
The greatest disappointment isn't the one you'd think.
It's not cynicism. It's not corruption. It's unconsciousness.
In the vast majority of cases, these people have no idea of the effects of their actions. No one wakes up in the morning thinking, "I'm working for a system that produces mass immigration, hence insecurity." No one makes the connection. No one traces the causal chain back.
Why? Because they lack historical culture. Economic culture. They optimize their career, their status, their next step, without ever seeing the system they're part of.
They're not evil. They're lost.
The true cynics do exist; I've crossed paths with them. But they're rare. The banality of evil isn't villains plotting. It's smart, ambitious people, deeply unconscious, who execute without understanding.
That's far more frightening than a conspiracy. A conspiracy, you can fight. Mass unconsciousness, though, reproduces itself on its own. 8:50 PM · Jul 10, 2026
Weil es hier von Thma + Befund/Analyse her gut hineinpaßt:
Zitat Jan A. Karon@jannibal_ Auf der Plattform X hat sich in jüngster Zeit ein eigentümliches Genre des schiefen historischen Vergleichs etabliert, das immer wieder bemüht wird, um extrem linke Phänomene auf die einfachste und untauglichste Folie zu pressen. Das geht wie folgt: Die Antifa gilt als die »neue SA«, linksextreme Gruppierungen sind »rot lackierte Faschisten«, die Gruppe »widersetzen« die neue Hitlerjugend, und wo immer sich ein vermummter Aufmarsch linken Ursprungs zeigt, hallt es als Gegenargument »Nazis raus!«.
Solche Gleichsetzungen sind sicher bequem, aber in der Regel ahistorisch. Nationalsozialistische Vergleiche verlieren ihre analytische Kraft, sobald sie zu einem Deutungsmuster für alles herhalten; und sie werden auch nicht klüger, wenn die Sprecherposition eine konservative ist. Sie bleiben, auch in diesem Fall, was sie sind: falsche Analogien, die mehr über die Sehnsucht nach moralischer Eindeutigkeit verraten als über die Sache selbst.
Linksextreme Gewalt und militante Organisationsformen entspringen nicht einer heimlichen Verwandtschaft mit dem Nationalsozialismus, auch wenn dieser Take sehr bequem ist. Sie folgen vielmehr einer eigenen, ideengeschichtlich gut dokumentierten Tradition radikaler Linker, die bereits im 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhundert die Frage der politischen Gewalt bejaht haben. Ihr Selbstverständnis ist die systematische Negation der Menschlichkeit des (rechten) Gegners. Wer dies ignoriert und stattdessen auf die NS-Schablone zurückgreift, verkennt nicht nur die historische Genese, sondern auch die ideologische Verwurzelung des Phänomens. Bessere Bezugspunkte fänden sich in der Geschichte des real existierenden Sozialismus, in den Praktiken linker Diktaturen Osteuropas oder in den militanten Traditionen der westdeutschen Nachkriegs-Linken selbst. Auch solche Analogien sind nicht frei von Verkürzungen, doch sie bleiben zumindest innerhalb eines weltanschaulichen Horizonts kohärent und stimmig.
Was sich derzeit beobachten lässt, ist letztlich die spiegelbildliche Entsprechung jener NS-Besessenheit, die Linke kultiviert haben. Wenn der Nationalsozialismus zum alleinigen Maßstab aller politischen Bewertung wird, dann gerät das eigene Geschichtsbild in eine eigentümliche Enge. Die einen (Linke) verbinden jede konservative Wortmeldung mit dem Dritten Reich, die anderen (Konservative) jede Form linker Militanz mit der SA. Beide Verfahren entlasten Menschen von der Mühe, die jeweilige Ideologie aus ihren eigenen Prämissen heraus zu bewerten. Sie sind unklug und Varianten derselben Bequemlichkeit. 3:33 PM · Jul 11, 2026
Ulrich Vosgerau@UlrichVosgerau Stimmt genau! Und das kommt daher – darauf habe ich ja schon öfters hingewiesen – daß der fulminante Erfolg der linken Kulturrevolution seit der 1968er-Zeit dazu geführt hat, daß wir uns alle nur noch in der Sprache der Kommunisten über Politik unterhalten (können); auch diejenigen, die sich selber als liberal, konservativ oder gar rechts einstufen. In der Sprache der Kommunisten ist "Faschismus" das (absolute) Böse. Um jemanden zu delegitimieren oder zu diskreditieren, muß irgendwie eine Verbindung zum "Faschismus" hergestellt werden. (Auch die Opfer der Großen Säuberung Stalins, vielfach kommunistische Revolutionäre der ersten Stunde, mußten vor ihrer endgültigen Ermordung noch kurz bekennen, heimlich "Faschist" gewesen zu sein – sonst hätte es nicht seine Richtigkeit gehabt mit der Ermordung).
Es gibt aber heute keinen einzigen Faschisten mehr, weder rechts noch links noch islamistisch, weil es keine Bolschewisten im Sinne von Lenin, Trotzki oder Luxemburg/Liebknecht mehr gibt. Der Faschismus war einfach die Reaktion klein- und großbürgerlicher Kreise auf den völlig kompromißlosen, unbedingten Durchsetzungswillen und die grenzenlose Gewaltbereitschaft der extremen Linken. Brave Bürger erkannten irgendwann, daß das Entzünden von Kerzen vor dem Standbild der Hl. Jungfrau die Rote Armee und in den Komintern weder aufhalten noch vernichten würde – weil man hierzu andere Mittel bräuchte. Das ist Faschismus. Der Faschismus war dann eine brutale, gewalttätige Angelegenheit. Aber angefangen hatten die anderen, der Faschismus war immer nur eine Reaktion auf das, was 1917 in Rußland gesiegt hatte und den Rest von Europa auch noch wollte.
Die heutige Linke ist nicht bolschewistisch, dazu fehlt ihr auch der Mumm, und mit lauter Kriegsdienstverweigerern könnte man die Rote Armee eben auch nicht bis zu den Seelower Höhen und darüber hinaus führen. Die heutige Linke besetzt keine Bahnhöfe, sondern Rechtsbegriffe ("Menschenwürde", "Gleichheit", "Asylrecht"). Sie enteignet keine Kapitalisten, sondern läßt sich staatlich alimentieren, wozu die Kapitalisten dringend benötigt werden, denn nur deren unermüdliches Steuernzahlen ermöglicht ja den linken Bums.
Nun steht das System – "die Arbeit tun die anderen, eine parasitäre linke Priesterkaste bestimmt über die öffentliche Moral und mithin über die politische Großrichtung" – vor dem Zusammenbruch, da diese öffentliche Moral nicht nur zur Überschwemmung des Landes mit Ausländern, sondern v.a. auch zu seiner Deindustrialisierung geführt hat. Immer mehr Bürger bemerken das. Selbstverständlich bezeichnen die Kommunisten diese Bürger nun als "Faschisten" und behaupten, nach deren Ausschaltung werde alles wieder gut, die Probleme seien nur auf "Sabotage" zurückzuführen!
Was im Ostblock noch "Sabotage" hieß, heißt bei uns übrigens "Rassismus". Sei der erstmal weg, funktioniere die Utopie bestens...
Zitat Jan A. Karon@jannibal_·3h Auf der Plattform X hat sich in jüngster...
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French I ran the best AI on the market on a simple question. The right wins in May 2027. What is the optimal plan for the first ninety days to clean out the Mitterrand-era socialist deep state and revive France.
Here's what it produced. It's cold, it's legal, it's executable. Read to the end—the conclusion is worth the detour.
The plan starts before day one. On election night, three things already exist or all is lost. A vetted list of six hundred names for government decision-making positions. Draft laws and ordinances already written, article by article. A nomination calendar designed like a military campaign. Trump 2016 showed up empty-handed and lost four years. Trump 2024 arrived with thousands of files and reclaimed his machine in a few weeks. That's the whole difference.
Day one. Dissolution is signed, because the Assembly elected in 2024 runs until 2029 and no plan survives without a majority. Legislative elections fall at the end of June. And at the first cabinet meeting, the General Secretariat of the Government changes hands. Not the second. The first. The SGG controls the text circuit, the interministerial agenda, the memory of the machine. As long as it stays in the same hands, every decree can die from a technical note.
Days two to fifteen. First wave. The general secretaries of the ministries. The strategic central administration directors: Treasury, Budget, DGESCO, and the DGAFP, the directorate that manages careers across the entire civil service. Forty prefects in the first move. The permanent representative in Brussels and the General Secretariat for European Affairs, because half the regulations come from there and everyone forgets that floor. Then the rhythm sets in. Every Wednesday, twenty to thirty nominations in cabinet. Published, owned, claimed. The Americans call it flood the zone. An administration that sees three hundred heads change in six weeks understands on its own that the era has shifted. Speed isn't a detail of the plan. Speed is the plan.
Days fifteen to forty-five. The country votes. Meanwhile, the new general secretaries audit their ministries. Mapping of functional positions, secondments, subsidies to associations. That's where the ecosystem sleeps. Thousands of structures funded by public money that produce doctrine, flood the courts, feed the airwaves. You don't ban them. You stop funding them. A freeze is decided by circular. An extinction is voted in the finance law.
And the rectors. All replaced by the end of June. The back-to-school is prepared in summer. Whoever holds the summer holds the school year.
Days forty-five to seventy-five. The majority is installed. Extraordinary session in July. Two texts go out ahead of everything else. An enabling law under Article 38, to reform the senior civil service by ordinances while Parliament debates the rest. And the great transformation law: extension of the list of positions at the government's discretion, executive posts turned into mission contracts, enforceable functional mobility. You don't revoke civil servants. You don't need to. You change who directs them, who evaluates them, who promotes them, and what the institution expects of them. The status protects people. It doesn't protect organigrams.
In the same package, reform of the INSP and the ENM. Exams, juries, pedagogical models, exit rankings. The essentials are regulatory. No one will protest to defend the makeup of a contest jury. And yet that's where the next thirty years are made.
Public audiovisual next. The summer law restores to the state shareholder the power to appoint the presidents of France Télévisions and Radio France, a power transferred to the regulator in 2013 precisely to shield it from alternation. Or it privatizes. The two texts are drafted. The choice is political, the execution identical.
The attorney generals are appointed in cabinet all summer, appeals court by appeals court. And criminal policy is set by circular from the Keeper of the Seals. It's not a power grab. It's the law in force. You just have to remember it.
Days seventy-five to ninety. The first ordinances come out. The Constitutional Council issues its decisions on the summer laws. The plan anticipates partial censures: each text has its fallback version already written, and the renewal of one-third of the Council is on the early 2028 calendar, with three appointments returning to the President of the Republic and the presidents of the two chambers. It's mathematical. And if the lock snaps shut anyway, there's still Article 11. A law adopted by referendum has escaped Constitutional Council control since 1962. The weapon doesn't need to fire to deter.
Meanwhile, Bercy prepares the 2028 budget. Every agency, every authority, every operator passes through the sieve of a single question: if this structure vanished tomorrow, who would notice? What is born by decree can die by decree. What is born by law will wait for the finance law. You can't revoke the Defender of Rights. You can vote its budget.
Day ninety, assessment. The SGG. The general secretaries and central administration directors. Forty prefects, thirty embassies, all the rectors, the attorney generals. Two laws passed, ordinances published, subsidies frozen, the 2028 budget armed. Zero illegality. Zero tank in front of a ministry. Just Wednesday mornings used to their full constitutional potential.
End of the machine's response.
What struck me was its conclusion. The Fifth Republic gives the French president powers Trump never had. No Senate confirmation post by post. No filibuster. No federated states. It's all in the Constitution since 1958, laid there by de Gaulle. No one on the right has ever used it to the hilt.
Two things are missing. The lists. And the will.
Alternation isn't played out at the ballot box. It's played out in the organigrams. And an organigram, from now on, gets optimized in a conversation with a machine.
The deep state held by opacity. That's over. 8:36 PM · Jul 11, 2026
Zitat Trump, when he got elected in 2016, made a beginner's mistake that weighed down his first term.
He hadn't grasped the American deep state.
He arrived alone. Without a team, without a nominations plan, without a personnel list. Result: his administration spent four years sabotaging its own decisions. Decrees blocked, leaks orchestrated, nominations delayed by several months, senior officials boasting of "resisting" in the columns of the New York Times.
In 2024, he learned his lesson. Thousands of profiles identified and vetted even before the election. The Schedule F to reclassify senior officials and be able to replace them. A personnel plan ready on day one. That's the real difference between the two terms. Not the ideas. The administrative execution.
The French right must understand this now.
It's all but certain that it will win in 2027. But winning the election isn't enough. If it comes to power without a meticulously detailed plan to take back the institutions, nothing will happen. Inertia will absorb everything. As it always has. The French deep state is socialist, it's the legacy of Mitterrand, and it will survive any electoral alternation if you don't attack its structure.
So here is the mapping of the posts that actually make this country run.
First floor: the jobs at the government's discretion. About 600 positions appointed in the Council of Ministers. The general secretaries of ministries, central administration directors, prefects, academy rectors, ambassadors. That's the transmission belt between the political and the administrative. A minister comes and goes, his central administration director stays. The one who writes the circulars has more power than the one who appears on TV.
Second floor: the General Secretariat of the Government. The most powerful position whose name no one knows. It coordinates all interministerial work, validates all texts, organizes the continuity of the state. Whoever holds the SGG holds the machine.
Third floor: the Council of State. Vice-president, section presidents, councilors. It gives its opinion on all bills before their presentation and then judges appeals against decrees. It is both judge and advisor to the same power that it oversees. No reform passes without it.
Fourth floor: the Constitutional Council. Nine members, renewed by a third every three years, appointed by the President of the Republic and the presidents of the two chambers. The renewal calendar must be integrated into the strategy from the first day of the term. It's mathematical.
Fifth floor: the judiciary. The Superior Council of the Judiciary, which manages careers. Attorney generals, appointed in the Council of Ministers. The National Financial Prosecutor's Office. And above all, the National School of the Judiciary, which ideologically trains each generation of judges. You don't reform justice by changing the laws. You reform it by changing who recruits and who trains.
Sixth floor: National Education. The DGESCO, which writes the curricula. The Higher Council for Programs. The general inspectorate. The rectors. As long as these posts remain in the same hands, each generation of students emerges formatted by the same culture, no matter the minister.
Seventh floor: public audiovisual and its regulation. Presidencies of France Télévisions and Radio France. The ARCOM board, which appoints and sanctions. Public money funds an editorial line. The one who appoints the presidents sets the line.
Eighth floor: independent administrative authorities and agencies. Defender of Rights, CNIL, CNCDH, ADEME, France Stratégie, regional health agencies. "Independent" means independent of universal suffrage, not of ideology. Each one produces reports, standards, sanctions that constrain politics from the outside.
Ninth floor: the money circuit. Bank of France, Caisse des Dépôts, Treasury Directorate, Budget Directorate. Bercy can bury any reform with three technical notes.
Tenth floor: the reproduction of the caste itself. The INSP, formerly ENA, the grand corps, the finance inspectorate. That's where the ideological homogeneity of the senior civil service is manufactured. Reforming the entrance exams, the juries, the exit criteria—that's reforming the next thirty years.
And finally the European floor: the permanent representation in Brussels and the choice of the French commissioner. Half of our standards come from there. Ignoring this floor is like taking back the house while leaving the gate keys.
The program of a serious candidate in 2027 must not just contain measures. It must contain an organigram. Names ready for every post, a public service transformation law ready to be voted on the summer following the election, a nominations calendar planned like a military campaign.
Because the truth is, alternation isn't decided at the ballot boxes.
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French The insecurity exploding in Europe, the gang rapes, the grooming gangs… it’s not random.
It’s the predictable result of 20 years of migration policies that were deliberately chosen, funded, and imposed by globalist networks.
The real cancer isn’t a man. It’s rotten ideas.
It’s not “villains” pulling the strings in the shadows. It’s lost souls with a shitty idea: the Open Society. The notion that nations no longer have the right to control their borders, that integration happens on its own, and that naming cultural problems is hate.
They’ve funded the production of this narrative and the framing that paralyzes any reaction.
For over 20 years, Open Society has pumped billions into NGOs that fight deportations, expand asylum to the extreme, and sell migration as a magic solution to all of Europe’s problems (Soros wrote it in black and white).
Meanwhile, USAID has handed out hundreds of billions in American aid with catastrophic oversight. Proven cases of funds being diverted to terrorist groups (Syria, Al-Qaeda affiliates, major vulnerabilities in Gaza, documented accusations in Congress). Not necessarily intentional, but the result is there: taxpayer money that ends up fueling chaos.
The consequences are abyssal.
In the UK, official inquiries (Rotherham, Rochdale, Telford) have revealed thousands of young girls, often white and vulnerable, sexually exploited in gangs mostly by Pakistani men. The authorities knew. They stayed silent. Out of fear of being labeled racists.
In Sweden, Germany, France: the stats show a massive overrepresentation of certain migrant profiles in sexual and violent crimes. Enough to change cities, make women afraid, and shatter the social contract.
And every time, the same reflex: minimize, contextualize, above all don’t name the cultural problem.
This system—poorly monitored aid agencies + foundations imposing a no-borders ideology + NGOs paralyzing democratic responses—is the real cancer. As long as it stays active, nations remain hostages.
The Trump administration has already started cleaning house at USAID.
The real opportunity: pair that with a full-on offensive against foreign influences and the networks that have funded the destruction of European sovereignty. Audit the flows, expose who’s funding what, cut off what harms citizens’ security, and make debate possible again.
That would be the first real domino.
When you show people that their insecurity and their children’s suffering come straight from these bad ideas and these uncontrolled influence flows… all of globalism loses its legitimacy.
The lost souls with their shitty ideas will lose the game.
Nations and builders will win.
This is the moment. Let’s go. 10:02 AM · Jul 13, 2026
Zitat Ronen Steinke@RonenSteinke Das hier läuft weitgehend unter dem Radar, auch weil der listige Herr Dobrindt das Thema schön in die Sommerpause geschoben hat. Das darf uns aber auf keinen Fall entgehen: (1/9) 6:56 PM · Jul 12, 2026
Der Verfassungsschutz soll erhebliche neue „Exekutiv-Befugnisse“ bekommen, zum Zerstören oder Manipulieren von Gegenständen einschließlich Datenträgern, und auch … (2/9) … zum Manipulieren oder VERFÄLSCHEN von Informationen. Das ist ein Affront gegen das Bundesverfassungsgericht, sogar ein echt dreister, und es ist rechtsstaatlich frivol. (3/9) ...
Nie im Leben würden wir akzeptieren, dass die Polizei solche Befugnisse bekommt, wie sie jetzt Verfassungsschutz bekommen soll: (6/9) heimlich die Gegenstände oder Datenträger von Leuten manipulieren, sich danach spurlos aus dem Staub machen und nie zugeben, dass man es gemacht hat. (7/9)
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam @brivael Translated from French What the State is doing is crystal clear.
They’ve realized they’ve lost the battle of ideas. So they’re rolling out the heavy artillery: an “observatory for domestic disinformation” capable of tweaking algorithms, disabling accounts, commandeering Arcom, and simply blocking things outright.
It’s nothing less than the Ministry of Truth from 1984.
Pipsqueak dictators who want to muzzle anything that doesn’t toe their line.
It’s high time these enemies of freedom cleared out. It’s becoming truly unbearable.
Zitat Pierre Sautarel@FrDesouche·2h Translated from French Creation of an observatory for domestic disinformation capable of triggering a “counterattack,” demanding the modification of an algorithm, rendering an account inactive, and referring the matter to Arcom, with the possibility of requesting an outright “block.”
3:18 PM · Jul 13, 2026
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French We are truly under occupation.
There is no democracy left.
Less than a year from the elections, the French state and Europe are accelerating the rollout of a total control system:
The digital euro to track, block, and program every transaction.
Social media control under the pretext of "protecting children" (no one is fooled).
A disinformation observatory that will be able to tweak algorithms, disable accounts, and censor at will.
It's the Ministry of Truth, 2026 edition. They literally want an endless dictatorship.
If something isn't done very quickly to restore a real democracy with individual freedom and the people's choice, we're heading into very dark times.
Zitat Dirk D.@DirkDig40017971·2h Replying to @brivael Translated from French The French have agreed to sign exit permits for themselves. The French have agreed to inject themselves. The French have agreed to control each other. The French have agreed to mask themselves.
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French Many were still naive during the Covid period.
We accepted the exit permits, the injections, the checks among ourselves, the masks… thinking it was an exceptional parenthesis, justified by a health emergency.
Today, a large majority has opened their eyes.
It wasn’t just a health crisis. It was the full-scale test of a much older and broader project: that of a world where a technocratic minority decides what is good and what is bad for the people.
You will only have the right to take the plane twice a year. Governments will steer every detail of your life. That, in essence, is the project that Jacques Attali has been describing in his books for thirty years.
Covid blew up this trajectory because it came too soon. The system wasn’t yet sufficiently locked down.
It’s the frog placed in a pot of cold water that you gradually heat.
Except this time, the majority jumped out before the water got too hot.
The frog has escaped the pot. And you don’t easily put it back in.
They’ve already lost.
They’ll double down on their efforts—it’s mechanical. Multiply the control mechanisms, the interference in public spaces, the transformation of social networks into tools for surveillance and indoctrination.
But three realities make their attempt futile:
• People know now. • Once you know, you can fight back. • Intelligence left their camp a long time ago. Too much time spent in globalist circles ends up disconnecting from reality and human complexity.
The awakening is here. It is profound. And it is probably irreversible.
It’s the best strategic news of recent years. 6:30 PM · Jul 13, 2026
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French What the State is doing is crystal clear.
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Don’t be mistaken.
What we’re observing right now is not just a simple hardening of authoritarianism. It’s the concrete advance of communism.
Socialism is merely the first step. It prepares the ground: it accustoms societies to progressive nationalization, to forced redistribution, to creating dependency on central power. Communism, however, goes further. It’s about destroying private property itself.
To achieve this, one indispensable condition is required: breaking the ability of peoples to think and express themselves freely. That’s why censorship and total control of the narrative are at the heart of the project. Without control over information and minds, no one will ever accept giving up what they own.
This is precisely what Klaus Schwab described in Davos in 2015 with that now-famous phrase: “You will own nothing and be happy.”
A world without private property. Everything centralized. Everything decided from above. Happiness as a state-imposed injunction.
Look at what’s happening in France.
The Macron government, behind its veneer of center-left and European modernity, is putting the tools of this project into place. Interference in public space, the transformation of social networks into instruments of surveillance and indoctrination, the desire to criminalize dissent… none of this is a deviation. It’s the method.
Don’t be mistaken.
You can simply tell yourself: Macron is a communist. 6:40 PM · Jul 13, 2026
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French To all those who, within these systems, know that they are committing serious acts:
History is patient, but it is relentless. Even if you win for a time, it will eventually judge you.
And the judgment will be harsh.
If you are still in a position to act, do everything you can to make it fail. You already know it: you are on the wrong side. You may still have a debt to repay.
Be very careful about what you do. It is not too late to choose the right side before history closes the book. Rate this translation:
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael·6h Translated from French What the State is doing is crystal clear.
They’ve realized they’ve lost the battle of ideas. So they’re rolling out the heavy artillery: an “observatory for domestic disinformation” capable of tweaking algorithms, disabling accounts, commandeering Arcom, and simply blocking x.com/FrDesouche/sta…
Ich fürchte, zur Wahl-der-richtigen-Seite ist es bereits zu spät. "Die Geschichte" hat ihren Stab schon über Merkel gebrochen (auch wenn es hier noch nicht "offiziell" ist); sie wird es auch mit den Faucis, Scholzens, Merzens und vd Leyens so halten. Noch kann diese Kamarilla auf uns herumtrampeln, aber das Pendel hat für den Ausschlag zur anderen Seite hin mittlerweile gut an Fahrt aufgenommen.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Alice Weidel@Alice_Weidel Der Staat „darf in die Privatsphäre eingreifen, in dem er Informationen beschafft, sie verändert, sie verfälscht. Er darf damit wohl auch jeder politischen Partei und jedem Bürger gefälschte Informationen unterschieben, die er dann zum Anlass nimmt, gegen sie oder ihn vorzugehen.“
Zitat Roland Tichy@RolandTichy·3h künftig soll der Verfassungsschutz nicht nur in Ihren PC einbrechen dürfen, sondern dort bewußt Inhalte manipulieren und neue einfügen - um Ihnen dann "V erbrechen" nachgewiesen zu haben. Trennung zwischen Polizei und Verfassungsschutz wird aufgehoben zu Gunsten einer echten...
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael What the State is doing is crystal clear.
Zitat Gerhard Lenz Der Kollwitz auf X: »Widerstand Deutschland 2.0 Das musst du gesehen haben. So wurde die EU-#Chatkontrolle trotz einer klaren NEIN-Mehrheit durchgeboxt: 314 Abgeordnete stimmten GEGEN das Gesetz. 276 Abgeordnete stimmten DAFÜR. Mathematisch ein klarer Sieg für die Bürgerrechte, oder? Falsch gedacht. Weil die Abstimmung strategisch in die Urlaubszeit gelegt wurde und viele Abgeordnete fehlten, griff ein bürokratischer Trick: In der zweiten Lesung braucht es eine absolute Mehrheit von 361 Stimmen, um das Gesetz zu blockieren. Es fehlten 47 Stimmen. Das bedeutet: Jeder leere Stuhl im Sommerurlaub wurde automatisch als „JA“ für die Massenüberwachung gewertet. Wenn leere Sitze den Willen der echten Mehrheit brechen, ist das kein demokratischer Prozess mehr, sondern ein Taschenspielertrick auf Kosten unserer Privatsphäre.
Zitat Marc friedrich@marcfriedrich·13h Orwells Dystopie 1984 wird in der EU Realität!
Erst die Chatkontrolle, DSA und jetzt:
Von der Leyen bestätigt, dass jeder in der EU eine App der EU für die...
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael She is not the ideologue. She is the puppet.
We can see it. She reads a text she no longer believes in. The vacant stare, the mechanical voice. A woman already cracking under the weight of the role thrust upon her.
History is merciless with puppets.
- Puyi, last emperor of China, installed by the Japanese as a puppet emperor. He ended up a captive, humiliated, then just a simple gardener.
- Quisling, hanged.
- Pétain, condemned, died in disgrace.
- The leaders of the Eastern European people's democracies: celebrated one day, swept away the next, forgotten or put on trial when the system collapsed.
- Always the same fate.
- Those who pull the strings stay in the shadows.
- Those put out front end up broken, ridiculed, or destroyed by the system they served.
Because bad ideas devour first those who embody them.
Ursula von der Leyen is just one more link in this long chain.
We can already see the cracks. History doesn't change its methods.
Anmerkung: Auf den ersten Blick sah (oder sieht es immer noch) so aus, als ob zwei der notorischen deutschen Fehlbesetzungen Zu- oder Unfälle waren, Verlegenheitslösungen, um sich eine Niderlage vor dem Gesetz oder dem Wähler zu ersparen. Pahl-Rugensteiner, abgeschoben auf das nutzlose Amt des Bundesgrüßaugusts im Bellevue, um nicht mit dieser Nulpe für die SPD im Wahlkampf 2017 antreten zu müssen; UvdL 2018 an die Tête der EUdSSR, um den Untersuchungsausschuß in Sachen Abwracken der Bundeswehr kaltzustellen. Mittlerweile fällt es schwer, in diesen Personalien nur eine weitere Bestätigung des Peter-Prinzips zu sehen.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Consciousness in AI is the equivalent of the blackbody problem and the ether at the beginning of the 20th century.
For years, the greatest physicists were convinced that the ether existed. It was an elegant, coherent hypothesis… but wrong.
Then came the blackbody problem. The equations of the time no longer worked. It was necessary to accept that an entire paradigm was incomplete before quantum mechanics could emerge.
I have the feeling that we're living through something similar today.
A part of AI research is persuaded that a few more orders of magnitude in computation, parameters, and data will make consciousness emerge. As if consciousness were simply an emergent property of complexity.
Maybe.
But today, we don't have the slightest shred of experimental proof showing that this hypothesis is true.
We have systems that remarkably well imitate reasoning, language, and certain human behaviors. Not systems that we can demonstrate possess subjective experience.
Confusing imitation with consciousness may be our modern version of the ether.
The history of science reminds us of one thing: what seems obvious just before a scientific revolution is often precisely what will be abandoned afterward.
Maybe more computation will suffice.
Maybe a fundamental piece is missing from physics, biology, or information theory.
No one knows.
Arrogance lies in claiming that the answer is already known. 7:22 PM · Jul 14, 2026
Zwei Anmerkungen: a) ist das Problem im Fall der KI von Alan Turing ja für substanzlos erklärt worden (nicht zuletzt, weil niemandem bislang ein Weg eingefallen ist, wie die Frage danach empirisch waserdicht zu beantworten wäre): wenn sich das Verhalten eines kybernetischen Systems nicht von dem eines mit Bewußtsein ausgestatteten unterscheiden läßt, ist die Frage nach ihm hinfällig; b) ist die Frage auch in der Biologie nicht ansatzweise geklärt (das sog. "Bindungsproblem"), was eng verwandt, aber nicht völlig deckungsgleich mit der Frage des "freien Willens" ist: inwiefern es sich um ein Epiphänomen völlig unbewußter Hirnaktivitäten handelt, wie genau es entsteht und welche Rolle es, sowohl bei Entscheidungen wie beim Erleben spielt (für das erste dürfte bei Beitrag dazu bei "Null" liegen).
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael To all the technocrats of the world:
Sorry.
AI is going to put you out of work.
Not because it's evil. Because the software you've been running on for fifty years is on its last legs.
For half a century, the West has run on a single invisible operating system. A simple postulate: the world is finite, resources are scarce, and the only serious question is how to slice up a shrinking pie.
From that software emerged all the layers of cotton wool we called "prudence": the precautionary principle, endless regulations, compliance, ESG, impact studies, ethics committees, sensitivity readers. Every decade, an extra layer. We thought it was wisdom. It was scarcity management elevated to a civilization.
In that world perceived as closed, everything backfires. Creating becomes suspect because it consumes. Boldness becomes risk because it disrupts allocation. Anyone who exceeds becomes a problem because it unbalances sharing. Renunciation becomes virtue. Degrowth becomes a business that sells despair to the young. And the word "progress" is hijacked by those managing decline.
It wasn't a conspiracy. It was a logic. Girard saw it: ideas spread by imitation, not truth. That software replicated from mind to mind until it became the air we breathed.
Its political arm was called globalism. After 1945, a traumatized civilization bet that to avoid wars, we had to dissolve nations, neutralize cultures, hand decisions to supranational entities. The reasoning had something noble about it. In practice, it produced a management machine: managing flows, managing risks, managing populations, managing scarcity.
Thiel calls it the "World State." Same obsession with equality, same distrust of excellence, same tentacular bureaucracy. Just better marketed. "Inclusion" instead of "collectivization." "Governance" instead of "plan."
And in a finite world, that project was rational. If the pie stops growing, then yes, the only sensible thing is to slice it, monitor it, administer it.
Except the postulate is collapsing.
The world isn't finite.
And intelligence has left the building.
That's the second reason, deeper, that we talk about less. A system can survive a dubious morality as long as it's carried by real intelligence. When intelligence exits, it collapses. And it has exited.
Tech has a name for it: the bozo explosion. A mediocre leader reflexively hires someone even more mediocre than himself, out of fear of being outshone. His hires do the same. At every level, competence drops. It's negative selection, irreversible. Western institutions are there. The last truly brilliant minds of the globalist project have left or are already dead to their own paradigm. What's left are managers of managers.
Meanwhile, intelligence—the kind that takes risks and builds—has migrated. It's in the labs, in garages, in startups. It has abandoned ship.
That's why the collapse isn't a hope. It's a deadline.
AI accelerates everything.
It's not just going to "replace jobs." It does two infinitely more radical things.
It multiplies. What required a team yesterday can be done by one person today. The capacity to create value, historically rare, becomes abundant. Every determined individual becomes a force.
It reveals. Corruption, waste, absurd allocations, rents protected by opacity—everything becomes visible. We won't be able to pretend much longer that a program "protects" when the data shows it destroys. AI is a merciless revealer and a weapon of mass destruction against institutional conformism. Every absurd norm, every parasitic commission, every administrative layer that kept the bold from building—it's all going to blow up.
And it's already happening.
What comes isn't an adjustment. It's a tipping point.
We're entering the world of abundance. When expansion becomes possible again—upward, into space, into intelligence—the whole logic of zero-sum games collapses. We no longer have to fight over slices of a finite pie. We make a bigger pie.
In fifteen or twenty years, when globalism and wokism are consigned to the dustbin, we'll see clearly what this moment represents: the shift from an era of moral and bureaucratic decline to an era of conquest, truth, and massive building.
Questions will become simple again:
Does it work? Does it create value? Does it make people freer and more capable?
Capitalism was never a morality. It's a machine for processing dispersed information. When information becomes abundant and transparent, the machine becomes formidable. Profit reverts to what it never should have stopped being: the signal that a scarce resource has found the use that people truly value.
The entrepreneur—the one who takes personal risk to bring into existence what didn't exist—becomes again the basic cell of progress. Not because he's more virtuous. Because it's the only known mechanism that aligns individual interest with large-scale collective value creation.
What comes isn't a return to normal. It's a Renaissance. A Big Bang.
When you remove the chains from a civilization that invented the printing press, the telescope, the engine, and the computer, you don't get an adjustment. You get an explosion of creation.
We can stay in the fog and inertia. Keep believing the problem is a lack of control, norms, redistribution. Many will do so to the end—systems have colossal inertial force.
Or we can look at what's coming, and align with it.
Hope isn't naivety. It's the most radical form of courage: looking at the world as it is—its brutality, its inertia, its confusion—and deciding anyway to build.
The future will be bright.
Not because everything's fine.
Because the tools to solve problems have never been more powerful, and free individuals have never had so many means to act.
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French Share this tweet.
Because if these recommendations are applied, the election will be stolen.
And these will undoubtedly be the last elections before the dictatorship.
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French This is the most dreadful text that the Fifth Republic has produced since the Liberation.
I went and read Senate Report No. 875 on "the regulation of information in the digital space," adopted on July 8 with the prerogatives of an investigative committee. 160 pages, 56 recommendations. It's absolutely mind-blowing.
While everyone's looking the other way, this text serves as a Trojan horse: we start with the fight against foreign interference Viginum, a legitimate service, bounded by four cumulative criteria including the involvement of a "foreign entity," and we coldly propose to build its "counterpart" turned inward. Toward you. Toward me. Toward any French person who publishes.
Read recommendation No. 1. It proposes creating, before the presidential election, an "observatory" funded by public money, tasked with encouraging platforms "to modify their algorithms or to invisibilize a guilty user" as elections approach. You read that right. "Invisibilize a guilty user." Guilty of what? Decided by whom? Without a judge, without a trial, without defense. A para-state body that designates citizens to be erased from recommendation feeds, precisely at the moment when political speech matters most. Shadowbanning as a tool of public policy.
Recommendation No. 4 goes further: impose on platforms "stricter obligations to remove content, or even to suspend algorithms during the electoral campaign." Suspend the distribution of speech during the campaign. In what free country has anyone ever written that?
Article 11 of the 1789 Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, constitutional block: "The free communication of thoughts and opinions is one of the most precious rights of Man: every Citizen may therefore speak, write, print freely, except to answer for the abuse of this freedom in the cases determined by the Law." Answer for the abuse BEFORE A JUDGE, AFTER publication. Not be invisibilized preemptively by a subsidized consortium.
The Constitutional Council has already ruled twice. In 2018 (decision 2018-773 DC), it only saved the "fake news" injunction by reducing it to almost nothing: only manifestly false allegations, artificially and massively disseminated, with a manifest risk of altering the vote. In 2020, it struck down the Avia law (decision 2020-801 DC) because removing content without a judge posed a disproportionate threat to freedom of expression. This report proposes exactly what the Council has already declared contrary to the Constitution — worse, since it adds the nominative designation of "guilty parties."
And that's just the beginning.
Recommendation No. 5: allow activist associations to trigger proceedings themselves for "fake news" under Article 27 of the 1881 law. Privatized procedural denunciation.
Recommendation No. 9: create NON-INTENTIONAL offenses of defamation, insult, or discrimination, punishable by simple "negligence" when AI is involved. Two centuries of press law rest on intent. We're proposing to criminally convict people for statements they didn't mean to make.
Recommendations No. 14 to 17: enshrine in European law an official definition of "disinformation," graduated into levels of risk up to "unacceptable risk," expressly targeting "climate, health" disinformation. The State defining true and false on contested scientific subjects, with a scale of penalties. A Ministry of Truth with a nomenclature.
Recommendations No. 20 to 26: condition press accreditation (CPPAP), and thus subsidies and tax status, on compliance with "deontological charters" and consultation with an "approved association acting on journalistic ethics." Translation: to be recognized as press, you have to think correctly. It's the return of prior authorization, abolished in... 1881.
Recommendations No. 29 and 53: condition state advertising purchases on the exclusion of "disinformation sites," then "provide an incentive mechanism or even an obligation" for PRIVATE advertisers to direct their budgets toward labeled media. The economic asphyxiation of non-conforming media, organized by law.
Recommendations No. 31, 32, 36, 37, 38: require YouTube, TikTok, Instagram to "configure their algorithms" to promote "services of general interest" designated by Arcom and place high-audience independent creators under Arcom's direct regulation, "on the same basis as in the audiovisual field." An influencer who does too well becomes a licensed TV channel. And while regulating with one hand, subsidizing with the other: recommendations No. 39 and 40, a "specific financial support" and remuneration grids for information creators. The stick for the rebels, the trough for the compliant.
Recommendations No. 12 and 13: expand criminal identification of authors of "press law offenses" and create a "named request" to lift online anonymity. The end of anonymity, for opinion crimes.
Take a step back for a second. Put it all together: an body that designates citizens to invisibilize, algorithms suspended during campaigns, a legal definition of truth, intentless offenses, press under ethical accreditation, state-directed advertising, creators under Arcom license, anonymity lifted on request. Each of these bricks would already be a scandal. The whole forms a complete architecture of information control, presented in the anesthetizing language of "regulation" and "information quality."
Article 34 of the Constitution entrusts the law with setting guarantees for public freedoms, not organizing their dismantling through proxy observatories. Article 4 of the Constitution guarantees "the pluralist expression of opinions." Article 10 of the ECHR protects freedom of expression, including for ideas that "offend, shock, or worry" (Handyside, 1976). This report clashes head-on with all three.
If there are lawyers, constitutionalists, public law professors reading this who want to take up the case—document, publish, prepare the QPC challenges and referrals the day these recommendations become amendments—make yourselves known.
Because I'm weighing my words: I think this is the most dreadful text the Fifth Republic has produced since the Liberation. Not the most brutal. The most insidious. The one that doesn't censor a book but redefines who has the right to inform, what is true, and who deserves to exist in the public space.
I went and read that report, and it's absolutely mind-blowing. Read it yourselves. Information Report No. 875, Senate, extraordinary session 2025-2026. It's all there. 10:32 AM · Jul 16, 2026
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French In 2027, France and Europe may have their last real chance before the 2030 Agenda is locked in for good.
Klaus Schwab said it bluntly: “You will own nothing and be happy.” This isn’t some futuristic whim.
It’s the underlying thread of everything being forced upon us today, under the guise of sustainable development, ecological transition, and social justice.
The United Nations’ 2030 Agenda, with its 17 goals and 169 targets, is being translated into concrete policies across Europe: mandatory digital identity, central bank digital currency, progressive restrictions on private property in the name of climate and circularity, centralization of power in Brussels, surveillance of behaviors through ESG standards and algorithms.
If the French don’t wake up, if sovereign peoples don’t take back control at the next deadlines, we’ll have a federal Europe steered by an illegitimate, unelected, and corrupt government at every level.
No more free elections. No more national sovereignty. Everything will be locked into an Orwellian system where individual freedom becomes a relic of the past.
The 2030 Agenda isn’t a program for progress. It’s the plan of a globalist elite to reshape our societies without our consent, selling us servitude as an ideal of happiness.
2027 is the front line. France and Germany are pivotal. If we let this window pass, the lock snaps shut. But nothing is set in stone. Peoples can still wrest their destiny from the hands of those who want to control everything.
Choose to wake up. Choose to take back power. Choose to build an Europe of free nations rather than a rootless empire.
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael This is the most dreadful text that the Fifth Republic has produced since the Liberation.
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French I gave the most authoritarian report of the Fifth Republic to an AI and asked it to dismantle it legally.
Result: in just a few minutes, it produced what law firms charge tens of thousands of euros for. Every angle of attack, every precedent, every avenue of recourse. AIs are now on the level of the best lawyers—and what they find in this text is damning.
Senate Report No. 875 proposes to "invisibilize" citizens before the presidential election, to suspend algorithms during campaigns, to create defamation offenses WITHOUT intent, and to condition press status on "deontological" charters. Here, in black and white, is how this pile of authoritarian recommendations gets demolished before the judges.
First, the Constitutional Council has ALREADY ruled. Twice.
In 2020, decision 2020-801 DC: the Avia law, which wanted to remove content without a judge, was struck down for disproportionately infringing on freedom of expression. In 2009, decision 2009-580 DC: Hadopi, only a JUDGE can restrict access to the Internet. Recommendation No. 1 of this report—a "para-public" observatory that designates "faulty users" to be invisibilized, without a judge, without a trial, without recourse—proposes exactly what the Council has already declared unconstitutional. Worse. And the trick of entrusting it to "civil society" funded by the ANR won't fool anyone: an entity funded, mandated, and steered by the State is exercising a public power prerogative. Its acts are challengeable. In summary proceedings for liberty, it's judged in 48 hours.
Next, Article 11 of the 1789 Declaration, constitutional block: "Every Citizen may therefore speak, write, print freely, except to answer for the abuse of this freedom in the cases determined by the Law." Answer AFTER, before a judge. Not be neutralized BEFORE, by a subsidized consortium. Two centuries of law swept away by a recommendation.
"Non-intentional" defamation offenses by AI (reco No. 9)? A legal oxymoron. Personal criminal liability is a constitutional principle (Articles 8 and 9 of the 1789 Declaration). Condemning someone for statements they neither conceived nor intended is criminal liability for the act of a machine. No chance of surviving a constitutional priority question.
Conditioning press status on "deontology" (recs 20 to 26)? The Constitutional Council established as early as 1984 (decision 84-181 DC) that the administration cannot subordinate the existence of a press organ to an assessment of its content. It's the return of prior authorization—abolished in 1881. In Italy, Article 21 of the Constitution prohibits it word for word. In Spain, Article 20. In Germany, Article 5 of the Basic Law says literally: "There is no censorship." France would be the only country in Europe to do what Karlsruhe, Madrid, and Rome would forbid at first glance.
And the best part: the European front. Forcing YouTube and TikTok to tweak their algorithms to promote media labeled by Arcom, regulating "high-audience" creators like TV channels, switching to the "country of destination" (recs 31, 32, 38, 52)—all of that flatly violates EU law. The CJEU just pulverized the Austrian law that tried the same thing (Google Ireland judgment, C-376/22, November 2023). And anyone—you, me—can file a complaint with the European Commission. It's free. It triggers an infringement procedure against France.
The ECHR has even already ruled that you don't convict for "fake news" in elections (Salov v. Ukraine, 2005) and that online anonymity is protected by freedom of expression (Standard v. Austria, 2021).
Let's recap the available weapons: referral to the Constitutional Council by 60 parliamentarians before promulgation. Priority constitutional question by any targeted litigant. Appeal to the Council of State against every implementing act, with summary proceedings for liberty in 48h. Preliminary reference to the CJEU. Free complaint to the European Commission. Electoral dispute before the Constitutional Council if invisibilization affects the presidential race. Six avenues. All open.
This report knows it's fragile: it cites its own blocking case law on page 97. Its authors won't be able to plead ignorance.
I've made the full legal mapping available—ten targets ranked by vulnerability, all precedents, all recourse vehicles. Lawyers, constitutionalists, public law professors: help yourselves. Referral briefs can be prepared right now, even before these recommendations become amendments.
They wrote 160 pages to organize information control. It took an AI just a few minutes to map their demolition. That's the world in which they legislate—and they haven't grasped it yet. 10:55 PM · Jul 16, 2026
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French All the totalitarian movements of the last century, at one point or another, had the people behind them.
Hitlerism seduced a part of Germany through democratic elections, mass rallies, and a propaganda that knew how to transform resentment into collective hope.
Stalinism, for its part, consolidated its grip by relying on national mobilization during the Great Patriotic War, on the cult of personality, and on the promise of a new world that touched millions of hearts, even under terror.
Totalitarianism is not just a machine of power. It is a system that needs popular soil to take root.
Even if that support is manipulated, partial, or extorted by fear, it is indispensable. Without it, it remains an elite construct, artificial and fragile.
Today, for the first time, we are facing a totalitarian project of a different nature: supranational, global, and Orwellian in its aims of control over behaviors, thoughts, and societies.
The globalist project.
But it lacks what has always been the foundation of all previous totalitarianism: the people.
The elites who carry it are all corrupted. Disconnected from nations, contemptuous of popular identities, they operate in a closed circuit from international institutions, elite forums, and bureaucracies without direct mandate from citizens.
And the rejection is massive. In my poll on this subject, 98% of people express clear and determined opposition to this project.
The hatred of globalist elites is total in the West.
By design, this system cannot succeed. A totalitarianism without popular support—even illusory—is like a tree planted in rock: it has no roots to draw its strength. It wavers at the slightest breath of truth.
This is the fundamental flaw. Yesterday's regimes were able to last for decades because they had, for a time, known how to speak to the crowds and mobilize collective energies.
This one has only elites against entire peoples.
So, there is hope. Great hope.
Because when a project of total control has no one behind it, it is doomed to failure even before it has truly begun. Bad ideas without popular bearers collapse under their own weight.
We are at a turning point where freedom can still prevail. Because the peoples have not yet abdicated their sovereignty.
Do not let appearances discourage you. What has no popular foundation does not hold.
Choose to build. To defend the truth. To create spaces of freedom and concrete alternatives.
The 21st century will not be that of global totalitarianism without consent.
It will be that in which free men take up the thread of their history again.
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael The further I advance in life, the more convinced I am that the ability to have truly creative ideas is deeply tied to the morality one carries within.
It’s not a question of IQ or network. It’s a question of deep intention.
Look at figures often cited as masters of business: Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Sam Altman, and others of the same mold. They excel in execution, conviction, value capture, and scalability. They become extremely rich.
But their creativity? Close to zero. They systematically fall into copying, incremental iteration, strategic acquisition, or cloning features.
Steve Jobs summed it up perfectly about Microsoft:
« The only problem with Microsoft is they just have no taste. They have absolutely no taste. I don’t mean that in a small way, I mean it in a big way. »
No taste. No cultural originality.
No spark that consists of wanting to offer something beautiful and true to humanity.
Because I believe there’s a strong correlation: the urge to copy, the somewhat shady schemes to achieve one’s ends, and creative sterility often go hand in hand. Being deeply creative means wanting to build products that elevate humanity. That requires a relatively clean moral foundation. An inner compass that prioritizes real value over capture.
And then there’s the one who stands out completely.
The one who often says he has “a torrent of ideas.” The one whose approach, whatever one thinks of his choices, is wildly creative in the way of tackling humanity’s fundamental problems: energy, consciousness, multi-planetary life, infrastructure.
Elon Musk.
I think the moral foundation and the ability to be truly creative are extremely linked.
Great builders don’t cheat with reality. They face it head-on, with curiosity and rigor. And that’s where true breakthroughs are born.
The rest is often good business… but rarely art that changes the course of things. 9:54 AM · Jul 16, 2026
Zitat 🇫🇷 Marie 🇫🇷@marie_giannoni·1h Replying to @brivael 🚨 France is sinking. The French are going to suffer.
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Yes, the French are likely to suffer. The fall could even be quite violent.
But unlike many, I am deeply optimistic.
What’s depressing the French today isn’t just the decline. It’s the feeling that it’s permanent, that nothing will ever change, and that we’ll remain eternally trapped on this trajectory.
Yet the Macron episode is probably the culmination of a technocratic and globalist project built over the past fifty years—including by part of your own camp.
Once this sequence is over, the diagnosis will finally be clear. We’ll know what failed, who carried that failure, and what needs to be rebuilt.
The turn might be brutal. But once the turn is past, all that’ll be left is to rebuild. And hope will return as soon as the French realize an exit exists.
Above all, technology is now playing in our favor.
What once took twenty or thirty years can sometimes be rebuilt in two or three thanks to artificial intelligence, robotics, and automation.
A leaner administration, a revitalized industry, revamped public services, more abundant production: we’ll be able to rebuild at a speed never seen in history.
The old world might take a few more years to collapse.
The new one, though, can emerge extremely quickly.
There’s every reason to be immensely optimistic. 11:13 AM · Jul 17, 2026
Für 🇩🇪 habe ich allerdings nicht den Ansatz eines Optimismus. Wir haben keine KI, keine Robotik, wir zerstören jegliche Grundlage für eine industrielle Renaissance, wir zerstören das soziale Gefüge, wir haben ein explosives Millionenheer von Fellachen importiert, das nur durch die ausgeschütteten Almosen in XL ruhiggestellt werden kann und wir vernichten die Grundlagen, sie uns leisten zu können. Die Politik hat mittlerweile jeglichen Anschein aufgegeben, sich um die Probleme "zu kümmern", stattdesssen füllen nur noch dekadente Selbsterfüllungstrips von lächerlichen Selbstdarstellern und Knilchen, deren sexuelle Entgleisung ihr einziges Kapital darstellt, die Nachrichten.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French I was pretty skeptical about Elon’s Everything App.
I had this naive belief that it wasn’t possible in the West. Too much inertia, too many judgments, too many cultural roadblocks.
The more I observe X, the more that conviction crumbles.
Because Grok is building exactly what was missing: a platform that fits the Western spirit. Individual freedom. The ability to create without being judged. The ability to express ideas without being immediately pigeonholed.
If Elon manages to cleanly integrate banking, cultural consumption (movies, series, music…), he then has a clear runway to roll out a Tesla-style Uber Eats. And more broadly, an ecosystem where SpaceX and Tesla are no longer just companies, but the two pillars of a coherent way of life.
I see it more and more clearly. And I believe in it more and more.
So if there’s one thing to do today, it’s simple:
Create your account. And start building your personal brand.
It’s probably the best asset you can build for yourself for the next ten years. 9:41 AM · Jul 20, 2026
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French Someone here told me that the AfD is the devil incarnate.
So I spent an hour with Grok reading their program (Grundsatzprogramm 2016 + Wahlprogramm 2025 « Zeit für Deutschland »).
Here's what I found, point by point:
- Swiss-style popular initiative referendums + term limits for professional politicians
- Europe of sovereign nations (or exit if impossible), end of the euro as a single currency
- Total border control, asylum procedures outside Germany, in-kind benefits only, massive remigration of people without right of residence and criminals
- Massive tax cuts, abolition of the solidarity surcharge, family splitting, tax simplification
- End of the Energiewende: return to nuclear, retention of coal, repair of Nord Stream, abolition of the CO₂ tax and bans on internal combustion engines
- Traditional family (father-mother-child) encouraged through strong pro-natalist aid
- German leading culture, protection of the German language, « Islam does not belong to Germany » if it rejects the legal order
- Strengthening of the police, zero tolerance for foreign criminality and clans
- Maximum freedom of expression and reform of public media
This is the official program, not rumors.
Now, a simple and sincere question:
Can someone concretely explain to me how this program makes the AfD the new Nazi party? 9:32 AM · Jul 22, 2026
In den Kommentaren zu diesem Post haben sich viele AfD-Hasser zu Wort gemeldet. Das "Argument" ist dabei IMMER das gleiche:
- Schriftlich mag man nichts verbotenes finden. Aber in den Köpfen der AfD-Politiker ist das 4. Reich fest verankert und so bald die AfD auch nur die aller kleinste politische Beteiligung hat, werden wie 33 die Demokratie abgeschafft, Lager errichtet und die Armee marschiert.
Das ist natürlich objektiv nichts anderes als Hass & Hetze und wenn man sich an die Buchstaben unserer Gesetze halten würde, müsste diese Hetze bestraft werden. Diese Verschwörungstheorien, Hetze und Unterstellungen sind exakt das, was in den Gesetzen der letzten Jahre adressiert wurde. Nur das gerichtlich (!) festgelegt wurde, dass Hass und Hetze trotz bestehender Gesetze nicht verurteilt wird, wenn es gegen die AfD geht. Die AfD habe keine Rechte. Nur Pflichten.
Nur so nebenbei ist diese Hetze auch schreiend dumm und geschichtsvergessen, denn die Nazis haben aus ihren Plänen nie einen Hehl gemacht; sowohl Hitler als auch die NSDAP haben bis ins kleinste Detail angekündigt, was sie tun wollen. Bei manchen Leuten galt damals halt die Devise "Die Nazis schreiben & sagen das zwar - aber die meinen das nicht so".
Wenn die AfD also explizit das Gegenteil von dem als Programm hat, was die Nazis hatten - und man dann behauptet, die AfD würde sich exakt wie die Nazis verhalten und exakt das schreiben & sagen, was die Nazis sagten...
Man muss ein Linker sein, um derart viel Unlogik ohne Nasenbluten zu verkraften. Generell vermute ich stark, dass radikallinke Ideologie eher Symptome einer Geisteskrankheit aufweist: absolute Realitätsabstinenz, Arroganz bis zum Mond, totalitäre Grundeinstellung und einen starken Hang zur Gewalt gegen Andersdenkende. Was soll das sonst sein außer einer latenten psychischen Störung?
Wenn überhaupt mal Inhaltlich argumentiert wird, dann betreiben die AfD-Hasser inverses cherry picking. Findet sich auch nur eine einzige Forderung, nur eine Formulierung, die man selbst nicht unterstützt, dann macht das automatisch die AfD anwählbar. Zum puren Bösen.
Bei allen (!!!!!) anderen Parteien gilt: da muss man halt abwägen und bewerten; eine 100%-Abdeckung der eigenen Ziele und Forderungen gibt es nicht. Bei jeder Partei muss man Kröten schlucken, sonst kommt überhaupt keine Regierung zustande; und im übrigen ergibt sich die reale Politik dann sowieso aus dem Koalitionsvertrag. Da werden zu radikale Forderungen von den Koalitionspartnern schon abgesägt.
Aber für die AfD gelten alle diese Überlegungen nicht. Wenn da zum Beispiel die Anti-Russland-Rhetorik nicht scharf genug ist, dann macht das automatisch die AfD zum puren Bösen. Und nicht etwa zu einem Teil der Meinungsvielfalt.
Oft werden die folgenden politischen Ziele als "unverhandelbar" dargestellt:
- Absolute (!) Unterwerfung Deutschlands unter die EU. Die Existenz Deutschlands wird nur noch als Übergangslösung geduldet. Wer die Existenz von nationale Interessen behauptet, ist ein Nazi. Dabei darf die EU niemals (!!!!!) öffentlich kritisiert werden. Hinter den Kulissen und in dunklen Hinterzimmern darf die "Elite" die Zukunft ausklüngeln. Aber der tumbe Bürger darf das weder kritisieren noch in Frage stellen.
- Absolute (!!!) Aufhebung der Grenzen. Jeder (!!!!) darf nach Deutschland kommen wie er lustig ist und die deutschen Steuerzahler haben die Pflicht, die dann durchzufüttern. Niemals darf auch nur die kleinste Kritik an Masseneinwanderung geäußert werden. Jeder Einwanderer ist ohne Ausnahme ein besserer Mensch - weil er kein Biodeutscher ist. Das gilt insbesondere auch für eingewanderte Mörder, Vergewaltiger, Terroristen, Frauenhasser und Schläger: jeder einzelne von denen ist mehr wert als der Jürgen von nebenan. Weil Jürgen ein Nazi-Enkel ist.
- Absolute Zerstörung der deutschen Wirtschaft als Opfergabe auf dem Altar "Menschengemachter Klimawandel". Auch dabei ist jede Kritik selbstverständlich voll Nazi.
___________________ Verbote sind Freiheit. Meinungen sind Terror. Quoten sind Leistung. Linke Regierung ist Familie. (c) Rot-Grüne Allianz Prophezeiung: 2022, das Jahr in dem in Deutschland der Schleier für alle eingeführt wird. Nennt sich dann "Maske". "Warum halten sie Begriffe wie 'Zigeunersoße' für rassistisch, aber 'Schei** Juden' für harmlos?", Hamed Abdel-Samad
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French I just discovered something pretty incredible.
Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime systematically weaponized the idea of "protecting / raising children" to justify:
– the censorship of books and culture – total control of education – mass indoctrination via the Hitler Youth (mandatory from 1936, ban on all other youth organizations)
In Mein Kampf, Hitler writes that the State must declare the child "the people's most precious asset" and act as guardian of a millennial future in the face of which individual desires count for nothing.
Official slogan: "He who owns the youth owns the future."
Now, ask yourself who, right now, is weaponizing children to push laws through 🫣? 10:34 PM · Jul 22, 2026
Zitat Heavy Pulp@heavypulp Dialogue scene from Homer's Odyssey built on Grok Imagine. Thread on how this was built below. 8:06 PM · Jul 21, 2026
I treat @grok @imagine like I would treat a real production from a real set. Two locked start frames: one over Calypso's shoulder, one over Odysseus' shoulder. I reuse these as the launch images for the whole conversation, so the scene's geometry never drifts on me.
How I make dialogue seamless in one scene: I run the dialogue from both OTS (Over The Shoulder) camera angles, and when a moment needs both voices in one take, the prompt declares both voices up top and gives them strict turns. Example: "OTS on Calypso, handheld continuous take. Both characters speak in this clip, one at a time, never overlapping: she speaks on camera; his single reply arrives as a voice off-frame. Two quiet seconds; presses on, each clause a stone in water. Speaks spaced, low warm alto, soft Greek accent: Keep this house. Beat. Be ageless. Beat. Softer: Forever. Stillness; she waits, eyes on him..."
The key to continuity between each angle when cutting is that I run movement prompts from both angles.
For example when Odysseus wipes her tear, I run "loose fist, only the index finger extended, one short slow downward stroke beside her nose" for both angles of the scene. Same hand, same finger, same stroke in both prompts. That way the action and emotion is mirrored correctly from both angles and the two shots cut together like one continuous piece of blocking.
Elon Musk@elonmusk Before this year ends, Grok Imagine will make a full-length movie of The Odyssey that is historically accurate and true to the art of Homer 4:41 AM · Jul 22, 2026
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael I agree with Elon.
Before the end of the year, Grok Imagine will deliver an Odyssey faithful to Homer. A few months later, what we're building with @argildotai will make the same thing accessible to any individual.
We've created a harness that makes all the annoying stuff simple: prompting, storyboarding, character creation, editing, etc.
We orchestrate with Grok LLM. We generate image and video with Grok. We stack dozens of small specialized models.
Result: an ecosystem deep enough for a single person to organize the entire chain of a film or series... and manage their IP properly.
Argil's mission is simple:
eradicate the woke mind virus at Hollywood by giving back the power to make the best films on the market to those who want to tell stories, not slogans.
Zitat Elon Musk Says Grok Will Make an AI ‘Odyssey’ Film That Is ‘Historically Accurate’ by the End of the Year
Elon Musk has — finally — broken his silence on “The Odyssey” (well, at least since Christopher Nolan’s epic was released and started breaking various box office records).
The tech mogul and recently-crowned trillionaire — who before the film’s launch rallied against various casting decisions — wrote on his social media platform X that his AI tool Grok Imagine would make a “historically accurate” full-length feature version of Homer’s ancient Greek poem. He noted that his AI “The Odyssey” would be ready by the end of 2026 (just in time for awards season).
Given the presence of cyclops, six-headed monsters and a witch who turns sailors into pigs in “The Odyssey,” a nearly 2,800 year old epic considered to be a work of fiction, how “historically accurate” any retelling — AI generated or otherwise — can be is likely to be called into question.
Presumably, Musk is referring to the racial element, with him having been the most prominent voice attacking the casting of Lupita Nyong’o as Helen of Troy. In March he wrote that “Chris Nolan is an anti-White racist,” claiming that he only cast Nyong’o because “He wants the awards.” While not confirmed, the all-white AI cast of the short film he posted on X would appear to be more in line with what Musk would prefer.
"Historically", dear Variety staff, means in this context "true to the source material," not any vaunted accurate representation of a Bronze Age conflict, since this was never the aim, purview or scope of any ancient epic, escpecially not one ancient Greek civilization saw as its cultural foundation myth (which was due to the fact that it was chosen to be recited at every Olympic Games). You might as well film The Lord of the Rings sans the One Ring, Sauron, Gollum and Gandalf.
"Les hommes seront toujours fous; et ceux qui croient les guérir sont les plus fous de la bande." - Voltaire
Zitat Brivael Le Pogam@brivael Translated from French We’re often told that the globalist system is an immense, invincible machine, everywhere.
The reality is simpler and funnier.
Count the true representatives of this caste. The 32,000 officials of the European Commission. The few thousand who orbit around Davos. The 1,400 Young Global Leaders. The Soros networks, the foundations, the international NGOs, the offices of central banks and multilateral institutions. In total, an extremely thin layer: a few tens of thousands of people who allocate, regulate, narrativize, and tax.
On the other side?
The entire Western peoples. The Americans, the Europeans, the Canadians, the Australians, the British. Elon. Thiel. The PayPal mafia (in part). Trump. Vance. Milei and Argentina, which has just proven in hard numbers that the model works when you let it breathe. Millions of entrepreneurs who still create net value every day, despite the brakes.
They’ve never been so alone. And the forces opposite have never been so numerous, so coordinated, so determined.
This isn’t a battle of “villains against heroes.” It’s a battle of allocation ideas. Theirs allocate badly. Ours create.
The renaissance is no longer a wish. It’s already being written.
Go build.
Zitat Diddbear@Diddbear·8h Replying to @brivael Translated from French Once again, alas, the X audience is unfortunately not the same as the one I encounter in my daily life.
Bitte beachten Sie diese Forumsregeln: Beiträge, die persönliche Angriffe gegen andere Poster, Unhöflichkeiten oder vulgäre Ausdrücke enthalten, sind nicht erlaubt; ebensowenig Beiträge mit rassistischem, fremdenfeindlichem oder obszönem Inhalt und Äußerungen gegen den demokratischen Rechtsstaat sowie Beiträge, die gegen gesetzliche Bestimmungen verstoßen. Hierzu gehört auch das Verbot von Vollzitaten, wie es durch die aktuelle Rechtsprechung festgelegt ist. Erlaubt ist lediglich das Zitieren weniger Sätze oder kurzer Absätze aus einem durch Copyright geschützten Dokument; und dies nur dann, wenn diese Zitate in einen argumentativen Kontext eingebunden sind. Bilder und Texte dürfen nur hochgeladen werden, wenn sie copyrightfrei sind oder das Copyright bei dem Mitglied liegt, das sie hochlädt. Bitte geben Sie das bei dem hochgeladenen Bild oder Text an. Links können zu einzelnen Artikeln, Abbildungen oder Beiträgen gesetzt werden, aber nicht zur Homepage von Foren, Zeitschriften usw. Bei einem Verstoß wird der betreffende Beitrag gelöscht oder redigiert. Bei einem massiven oder bei wiederholtem Verstoß endet die Mitgliedschaft. Eigene Beiträge dürfen nachträglich in Bezug auf Tippfehler oder stilistisch überarbeitet, aber nicht in ihrer Substanz verändert oder gelöscht werden. Nachträgliche Zusätze, die über derartige orthographische oder stilistische Korrekturen hinausgehen, müssen durch "Edit", "Nachtrag" o.ä. gekennzeichnet werden. Ferner gehört das Einverständnis mit der hier dargelegten Datenschutzerklärung zu den Forumsregeln.
Sie sind vermutlich noch nicht im Forum angemeldet - Klicken Sie hier um sich kostenlos anzumelden
Online
Offline