Unapologetic Pureblood American Male. Everything you want is on the other side of fear and hard work. Learn the left handed layup

Beach, Desert, and Mountains
Joined February 2026
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
⚠️ WARNING: UPSETTING FOOTAGE ⚠️ Her crime was that she wasn’t wearing a hijab. So a man violently beat her… and beat her… and beat her. All while other men formed a circle and just watched, as if it’s some kind of sick entertainment. Look at her face. The pain. The fear. This happens in every single country where Muslims live. And you almost never hear about it, because the left, Islam, and the media simply don’t care. Nobody wants to upset them by pointing out the basic reality that they are barbaric savages from the 7th century with no respect for human life.
1,183
4,716
745
7,208
256,614
Just a reminder…
42
592
15
1,003
6,684
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Ti fottono in pochi secondi e non hai tempo di renderti conto
145
2,592
111
7,009
1,114,048
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
A word of advice to the Pope. The walls around the Vatican were ordered by Pope Leo IV and finished around 852 after Muslim Arab raiders sacked St. Peter's Basilica. Do not lecture anyone on walls, immigration, war, or the virtues of Islam.
427
9,139
247
41,729
360,047
He came looking for trouble and got BLASTED with instant karma! 💨😭😂 #TrumpPrank #InstantKarma #FunnyMoments #PrankVideo
283
833
49
9,321
569,810
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Somewhere right now, a person who has never built anything is writing an article explaining why Elon Musk doesn’t know what he’s doing. They call him a fraud from behind a screen he built the future on. They call him dangerous from a platform he owns. They call him greedy while he pledges $10.5 billion in SpaceX stock to 72 million American children. The man they describe does not exist. The man they ignore just made a car fly. These are people who have never built anything that survived contact with reality. Their entire careers exist in the space between an opinion and a deadline, and they have confused the ability to describe the world with the ability to understand it. He operates in the physical layer of reality. The layer where the math either closes or the rocket doesn’t come home. Where the car either drives itself or it crashes. Where the satellite either reaches orbit or it becomes debris. No opinion survives in that layer. No spin. Just physics and results. He built the vehicle that carries NASA astronauts to the International Space Station. The satellite constellation delivering internet to active war zones. The EV that forced every automaker on Earth to abandon their combustion roadmap. The brain chip that let a paralyzed person control a computer with their thoughts. They say he hoards wealth. He just pledged one SpaceX share from his own holdings to every child in America. 72 million kids. Not a foundation. Not a tax shelter. A direct ownership stake in the company building the future. Those kids now have skin in the game. A reason to care about launches, about engineering, about what gets built next. Not because someone told them to. Because they own a piece of it. The people calling him greedy have given the public nothing but their opinions and the privilege of listening to them. The criticism didn’t escalate because he got worse at engineering. It escalated because he bought X. He cracked open the algorithm. Handed the public square back to the people using it. Broke the power of a small class of gatekeepers to curate reality for everyone else. They spent decades telling the public what to think. He gave them a platform and told them to think for themselves. The meltdown has been dressed up as concern for democracy ever since, but what they are actually mourning is the monopoly. These are the people who lecture about misinformation from newsrooms that retract stories quarterly. Who demand accountability from a man who tests his work in front of the entire planet while they publish behind editorial boards that answer to no one. An engineer puts a rocket on a drone ship and the whole world watches it land or explode. A journalist puts an opinion in a headline and if it’s wrong, nothing happens. No consequence. Just a correction buried where nobody reads it. One of these people is accountable to physics. The other is accountable to their editor. And the one accountable to their editor keeps telling the one accountable to physics that he doesn’t know what he’s doing. They had one advantage. The bottleneck. The ability to stand between the public and the information and decide what got through. Not truth. Access. He didn’t compete with them. He made the bottleneck irrelevant. A rocket doesn’t care about your headline. Gravity doesn’t read your editorial. And the laws of physics have never once adjusted to fit a narrative. They own the words. He owns the work. One of them is going to Mars. The other will write an article about why he shouldn’t.
143
549
49
1,957
31,064
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
American is at Planet Fitness in Wisconsin wearing a jacket in support of ICE 🚨 The Planet Fitness makes him REMOVE the jacket because they say defending your country is “sensitive” (They actually say this on camera) “Supporting ICE — protecting your country is sensitive?” “Yes” “I was wearing an ICE jacket inside of Planet Fitness, and he's telling me I can't do that.” America has completely lost the plot. So every other country on earth is allowed to have immigration enforcement but America… Remember Planet Fitness also defends trans men in women’s restrooms Cancel your Planet Fitness membership
2,630
12,371
696
34,163
890,123
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Replying to @RickyDoggin
Social degenerates
1
10
63
1,517
🚨This is a MUST READ: it’s a post from a French Citizen: Brivael Le Pogam, this is the best description of what has occurred in France I have seen, read his words: Le Pogam: “To every American, and to everyone watching France burn from abroad: Do not blame the French people for this. We never asked for it. We never voted for it. And the one time we were clearly asked, we said no. Here are the numbers your media won't show you. 70% of the French say there are too many immigrants in France today. 79% want a tougher immigration policy. 77% disapprove of the government's record on immigration. 83% want foreign criminals and long-term unemployed foreigners sent home. And no, it's not just the old. 69% of French 18 to 24 year olds support suspending legal immigration for three years. This is not a fringe. This is the French people. In 2005, we were asked if we wanted the European Constitution. 55% voted no. Three years later, our politicians passed the same text under another name, through parliament, without ever asking us again. That is modern France in one sentence. The people say no. The elites do it anyway. So who is responsible? The politicians who lied to us. A class of leaders formed in the same schools, the same forums, the same networks, loyal to each other before they are loyal to their nations. In 2017, at Harvard, Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, bragged about his Young Global Leaders program in four words: "We penetrate the cabinets." He added that it was true in France. Emmanuel Macron was one of his Young Global Leaders. It's the same project in Brussels with Ursula von der Leyen and in Paris with Macron. Borders treated as an obstacle. Nations treated as relics. The people treated as a problem to be managed. What you are watching in France is not the French people failing. It is the end of the globalist project, an abject, quasi-communist dream of a world run by unelected planners. It is collapsing everywhere in Europe at once, and the West has to cut this cancer out before it takes the rest of the body with it. The peoples of Europe don't want this. They never did. So when you see our town halls burning, don't say "the French chose this." The French never chose this. They were forced into it. If you're French and you agree, repost this so the world hears it from us. If you're American, look at us carefully. Then choose differently on November 3rd.” Hope that wakes you up… Vote RED 🇺🇸
1,147
9,157
591
22,164
534,994
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Let's talk about Bill Gates, because his life is the clearest illustration of the spectrum I described: builders versus players. Start with the builder. In 1980, IBM needed an operating system. Gates didn't have one, so he bought one from a small Seattle company, adapted it, and licensed it to IBM while keeping the right to sell it to everyone else. That move created the PC industry. "A computer on every desk and in every home" sounded absurd. He made it real. Was it clean? No. Microsoft bundled Internet Explorer into Windows to strangle Netscape, and a US federal court found it had illegally maintained its monopoly. Gates was ruthless. But it was still building. Ruthless in service of a product hundreds of millions of people chose to use. Reality was the judge. Then he left that game for philanthropy. And I think the philanthropy playbook slowly ate his soul. Because at that scale, philanthropy isn't building. Your product is no longer software. Your product is influence over how billions of people should live. And this is where the worldview matters. Elon and Gates disagree on the most fundamental question there is: are there too many humans, or too few? Elon thinks the planet is underpopulated, that collapsing birth rates are one of the greatest risks to civilization, and that humanity should expand, all the way to other planets. Gates has spent years worrying about population growth, emissions, resources. Humanity as a load on the system. Something to be managed, optimized, reduced in its footprint. Elon has a word for where that worldview leads when you push it to the end: extinctionist. The belief, spoken or not, that humanity itself is the problem. I want to be precise here. I don't think Gates wakes up wanting humanity to disappear. It's quite possible he sincerely believes he's saving the world. That's exactly what I said about Macron, and it's what makes it dangerous. Look at the pattern. Population, emissions, what people should eat, how farmland should be used, how children should be taught, how global health should be organized. Gates sees the world as a system to be optimized from above, by experts, with enough money and enough data. That's not Marxism in economics. Gates is the archetypal capitalist. But it rhymes with Marx on the deepest level: the planner's arrogance. The conviction that a small, enlightened group can understand society well enough to steer it. The same false axioms I described about Macron: humanity as variables in a model, not as billions of free people making their own choices. Now multiply that by money. When a regular person has wrong ideas, they mostly harm themselves. When a politician has wrong ideas, elections can eventually stop him. When a company has wrong ideas, customers walk away and competitors win. A billionaire philanthropist with wrong ideas has none of those brakes. No voters. No customers. No competitors. He defines the problem, funds the solution, and grades his own work. And he can pour hundreds of billions into it over decades. Good intentions, plus false axioms, plus near-unlimited money, plus zero feedback. That's the most dangerous combination I know. And look at the two visions side by side. The builder bets that humanity is precious and should grow. More people, more minds, more creativity, more of the universe made conscious. The planner bets that humanity is a problem to be managed. Fewer emissions, smaller footprints, tighter control, decided from above. One is a philosophy of abundance. The other is a philosophy of scarcity dressed up as compassion. The most dangerous man in the world isn't the cartoon villain. It's the sincere planner with infinite money and no feedback loop. Don't manage humanity. Build for it.
I love watching the world and connecting the dots. And if there's one thing that has always bothered me in how people talk about billionaires, it's the box. The group. On one side: "Eat the rich. Every billionaire is a policy failure." On the other: "Every billionaire is a genius who earned it all." Same mistake, opposite directions. Both throw a few thousand very different human beings into a single box and stop thinking. Billionaires aren't a category. They're a spectrum. I've been writing about the Dark Triad: narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy. And about my theory that these traits are essentially a toolkit for power games, which are zero-sum, a pure social construction. Building is the opposite. It's a game against reality, and it's positive-sum. So here's how I see the billionaire spectrum. Not good versus evil. Players versus builders. At one end, the purest player: George Soros. Look at the founding act. In 1992, he bet massively against the British pound, forced it out of the European exchange rate mechanism, and made around a billion dollars in a day. Nothing was built. No product, no factory, no new technology. A bet on the weakness of an institution, won against an entire country. Then look at what the money was used for. For decades, his fortune has been poured into reshaping politics and societies: networks of NGOs, campaigns, causes, candidates, in dozens of countries. His family is still one of the largest political donors in the United States. Every dollar points at the same target: not reality, but power over the rules of the game. And here's the twist that connects to what I wrote about Macron. I don't think Soros is a cartoon villain. I think he sincerely believes in his vision of an "open society." That's exactly what makes the model so powerful. A sincere ideologue with nearly unlimited resources, playing the long game with institutions, convinced he's on the right side of history. It's Macron with a checkbook. At the other end of the spectrum: Elon Musk. Almost every dollar he's made has been thrown back into reality. Rockets, electric cars, batteries, satellites, tunnels, brain interfaces, AI. Bets that most experts said were impossible, many of which nearly killed him financially. When Tesla and SpaceX were both close to bankruptcy, he put in his last money rather than pull it out. His fortune isn't a lever on other people's decisions. It's a lever on physics. He's not a saint either. He's stepped into the political arena, spent heavily, and taken the hits that come with it. Even the purest builder gets pulled toward the power game. But his center of gravity is clear: what he cares about is whether the rocket lands. And in between? Almost everyone. That's the part that matters most, and that the box hides completely. Most billionaires aren't bad guys. They built something real, often something extraordinary. Then wealth pulls them, slowly, toward the left side of the spectrum. Media, foundations, policy influence, global agendas. The game shifts from "build something people want" to "shape what people are allowed to want." And yet many of them redeem themselves on specific things. Bill Gates built one of the most important companies in history, and his foundation's work on malaria and polio has saved an enormous number of lives, even if it later drifted toward steering global policy. Jeff Bezos built a logistics machine nobody thought possible, and keeps pouring billions into space. Mark Zuckerberg made his share of mistakes, and then open-sourced some of the most powerful AI models in the world. Nobody is fully on one side. Every billionaire is a mix of builder and player. The question is never "is he good or evil?" The question is: where does the money go? Into reality, or into power? Here's why this matters for you, even if you'll never be a billionaire. That spectrum doesn't only exist at the top. It runs through every company, every team, every career. Every single day, you choose where your energy goes. Into the work itself, or into the politics around the work. Into the product, or into the meeting about who gets credit for the product. Into building, or into positioning. The player's game is seductive. It gives quick wins, status, influence. But it creates nothing. At the end of a lifetime of power games, the world has been rearranged, not enriched. The builder's game is harder. Reality says no all the time. Rockets explode. Products fail. Customers leave. But every time you win against reality, you leave the world with something that didn't exist before. The richest man in the world got there by building things. The most influential players got there by moving things around. Choose your side of the spectrum. Stop playing. Start building.
97
419
35
1,889
54,070
Do no harm
189
329
25
4,294
125,972
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Christopher Hitchens: ”In 1786, when the United States was barely a country, it was having its sailors taken as slaves by the Barbary states, the states of the Ottoman Empire and North Africa. Tripoli, shores of Tripoli. Ships stopped, its crews carried off into slavery. We estimate 1.5 million European and American slaves taken between 1750 and 1815. Jefferson and Adams went to their ambassador in London and said, why do you do this to us? The United States has never had a quarrel with the Muslim world of any kind. We weren't in the crusades. We weren't at war with Spain. Why do you do this to our people and our ships? Why do you plunder and enslave our people? The ambassador said very plainly, Mr. Abdul Rahman said, because the Quran gives us permission to do so, because you are infidels, and that's our answer. Jefferson said, well, in that case, I will send a navy which will crush your state, which he did. Islamic fundamentalism is not created by American democracy. It's a lie to say so. It's a masochistic lie, and it excuses those who are the real criminals, and blames us for the attacks made upon us.”
206
4,408
228
15,863
540,307
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Replying to @brivael
1
9
40
1,082
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
In 1957, a Russian immigrant published a novel of more than a thousand pages built around one question: what happens if the people who make the world run simply stop? Its title is Atlas Shrugged. In France it's called La Grève, The Strike. It wasn't even translated into French until 2011. That tells you something. This morning, I think Elon Musk wrote the sequel. A. Where the book comes from. Ayn Rand was born Alisa Rosenbaum in Saint Petersburg in 1905. As a teenager, she watched Bolshevik soldiers walk into her father's pharmacy and seize it in the name of the people. Her family lost everything. Not to a competitor. To a committee. She fled to America in 1926 and spent the rest of her life writing about one distinction: those who create, and those who seize. B. The story. In Atlas Shrugged, America is sliding into decline. Not because of war. Because of rules. Year after year, a growing class of bureaucrats, regulators and planners decides that production must be controlled, shared "fairly," frozen. They never build anything. They issue directives. The worst one freezes every worker in his job and forces every inventor to hand over his patents for the public good. And one by one, the people who make the country run start disappearing. The best engineers. The industrialists. The inventors. An oil man sets his own wells on fire before vanishing. The whole country keeps repeating a question it doesn't understand: "Who is John Galt?" John Galt is the man behind the disappearances. He has convinced the creators to go on strike. They withdraw to a hidden valley in the Colorado mountains, where everyone keeps what they make and trades freely. And they let the world find out what it looks like without them. The lights go out in New York. The grey men are left alone with their directives, and discover that a directive has never produced a single kilowatt. C. The core idea. The strike isn't about money. It's about consent. Rand's insight is that the system that captures the creators runs on their cooperation. It needs them to keep producing so it has something to redistribute. The bureaucrat is a parasite who needs a host. Remove the host, and he's exposed as what he always was: useless. D. What Musk just did. This morning, Musk announced that next year he will give one of his own SpaceX shares to every kid in America. "The first of many." Here's what's fascinating. It's the strike, run in reverse. Rand's creators withdrew. Musk stays. He keeps building rockets, satellites, AI. But instead of walking away from the system, he walks around it. The value goes straight from the builder to the citizen. No ministry, no agency, no committee in the middle. Rand had to make the creators disappear to prove the bureaucrats were useless. Musk doesn't need to disappear. He just needs to stop routing value through them. Same result. The grey men are left standing in the middle of a pipe nobody uses anymore. E. The difference that changes everything. Rand's strike has a flaw her critics never stopped pointing out: ordinary people are left behind. The creators retreat to their valley. The rest of the country sits in the dark. Musk's version fixes that. He isn't taking the creators out of the world. He's bringing the world into the valley. Every kid in America becomes a shareholder in the machine. Not a spectator of the strike. A participant. That's the alliance being formed right now: builders and citizens, directly, with nothing in between. And the only people who lose that deal are the ones who never built anything. F. Why now, and not in 1957. In Rand's time, the strike was a fantasy. You couldn't produce at scale without the state's permission, and you couldn't reach every citizen without its pipes. In 2026, one founder can build rockets, run a global network from orbit, and pledge equity to 73 million children in a single post. AI will soon do in seconds what a ministry does in years. The tools of the strike finally exist. And they don't require anyone to leave. G. The ending. For seventy years, "Who is John Galt?" was a shrug. A way of saying nothing can be done. In the book, the strike ends when the creators decide the road is clear and walk back into the world to rebuild it. That's the scene we're watching. Not a man leaving. A man coming back, with a gift for every child. The grey men are about to discover what Rand promised them seventy years ago: a world that no longer needs them.
I don't know if you realize what just happened. Elon Musk is completely bypassing the State. For 100 years, we've been told the problem is capital. That it must be captured, taxed, redistributed. With an army of intermediaries standing between those who create wealth and the people: ministries, agencies, commissions, bureaucrats. Musk is doing the opposite. He's taking his capital and giving it directly to the people. One SpaceX share to every kid in America. Not a handout. Not a subsidy. A piece of the machine that's taking humanity to Mars. And he says it himself: this is the first of many. Mises understood this back in 1944: the bureaucrat creates nothing. He administers what others created, following rules that have no connection to the value produced. The day value flows directly from the one who creates it to the one who receives it, the bureaucrat has no function left. That's what's being born right now. A new liberal world order, where the very concept of the State will make less and less sense. The world we're entering is a world of abundance. AI, robots, energy, space. And that abundance won't come through the State, for one simple reason: we have a century of proof that it doesn't work. Redistribution was version 1.0. Direct distribution of capital is 2.0. While France is still debating how to tax builders even more, America is handing stock to its kids. Pick your side.
297
2,116
191
8,852
296,834
I'm not ableist.
45
168
15
2,029
36,482
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
White people have no culture? Tell that to the pickup trucks, cowboy boots, country music stadiums, deer camps, NASCAR, fishing poles, and Friday night lights. Y’all just mad it’s not centered on you. 🇺🇸 #explore #fyp
498
1,473
55
7,820
81,779
I'm more successful than you!
741
877
49
16,478
829,767
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
This is California under Gavin Newscum Do not let democrats win again. Vote for Steve Hilton.
71
300
23
721
20,615
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
Todo esto me hizo acordar cuando los de BLM quisieron saquear una panadería italiana en Ohio. Qué maravilla la 2da enmienda
1,156
10,886
756
125,139
10,412,199
Freedom and Dogs retweeted
This guys always spot on.. he doesn’t give a damn what anyone thinks and just lets it rip.. love it…
190
1,446
159
16,362
2,202,449