Cedar Creek, TX
Joined September 2008
- Tweets561
- Following361
- Followers251
- Likes128K
Mark Colosimo retweeted
I hate the word influencer it’s silly and meaningless. But if I could influence anyone of anything it would be this: practice gratitude as a spiritual discipline and it will change your life forever.
Those that believe in God should be thanking God every single day for all of their blessings or pick three at least.
Those that don’t believe in God, my hope for you is that you change your mind one day, but in the meantime, you can still practice gratitude.
We live in a very dark world where there is a lot of doom and gloom. Gratitude is a life-changing practice. Because it teaches you how to happy no matter how bad things are.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
The best American ship class of WW2 was the Essex-class aircraft carrier. Japan had no answer for it. Nobody did.
December 1941. The US Navy goes to war with seven fleet carriers. Within a year, four of them are at the bottom of the Pacific. Lexington at Coral Sea. Yorktown at Midway. Wasp and Hornet off Guadalcanal. By late 1942, at times the US had just one carrier operational in the Pacific.
But something was already coming down the slipways.
Back in 1940, after France fell, Congress had passed a massive naval expansion bill. Part of that order was a new class of fleet carrier. Bigger, faster, tougher than anything before it. Around 27,000 tons, about 90 to 100 aircraft, a crew of more than 2,500 men.
The lead ship, USS Essex, was commissioned on the last day of 1942. Then they just kept coming.
American shipyards turned them out at a pace that's still hard to believe. Some were built in well under two years. A few in barely more than a year. Twenty-four were eventually completed, more than any other class of fleet carrier in history.
Several took the names of the carriers that had been sunk. A new Yorktown. A new Lexington. A new Hornet. A new Wasp. The ships Japan had sunk came back to haunt them.
During the same war, Japan managed to finish only a handful of new fleet carriers. One of them was Shinano, which sank on its first voyage.
By 1944, the Essex class was the backbone of the Fast Carrier Task Force, the most powerful naval strike force ever assembled.
In June 1944, at the Battle of the Philippine Sea, Japan launched everything it had at the American carriers. Essex-class fighter squadrons shot down hundreds of Japanese planes in a single day. American pilots called it "the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot." Japanese carrier aviation never recovered.
Their air groups helped sink both of the largest battleships ever built. Musashi in October 1944. Yamato in April 1945.
And their toughness became legendary.
USS Franklin was hit by two bombs in March 1945 with planes fully fueled and armed on deck. The explosions tore her apart and killed around 800 men. She was dead in the water, burning, listing, close enough to Japan to see it. Her crew saved her. She made it all the way back to New York.
USS Bunker Hill took two kamikazes in under a minute in May 1945. Hundreds killed. She survived.
USS Intrepid was hit by a torpedo and multiple kamikazes over the course of the war. Sailors started calling her "the Evil I." She survived too.
Not a single Essex-class carrier was sunk in the war.
And their story kept going. They fought in Korea. They fought in Vietnam. They hunted Soviet submarines. USS Hornet recovered the Apollo 11 astronauts after the first Moon landing. The last one, USS Lexington, wasn't retired until 1991. Nearly 50 years of service.
Four of them are still afloat today as museums: Yorktown, Intrepid, Hornet, and Lexington.
Japan's admirals had planned for a short war because they knew what American industry could do if given time.
The Essex class was what that looked like.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
I have found the images of the rioting in Paris and other French cities heartbreaking. I spent three wonderful years as a doctoral student in Paris, and I easily recognize many of the neighborhoods and streets that are now in flames.
Though its roots go back to ancient Rome, Paris became a truly great city because of the University of Paris, which grew from the Cathedral school of Notre Dame. For centuries, scholars came from all over Europe to this center of learning where the Western intellectual tradition—born of the confluence of Jerusalem, Athens, and Rome—was defended and developed.
What seems clear is that the arsonists and rioters of the present day represent a farrago of forces inimical to the intellectual and moral values of the West.
I had taken such encouragement from the demonstration of pride in Catholicism and Catholic history that was on display when Pope Leo visited France just a few weeks ago.
May the French people rouse themselves to realize that they stand against a determined enemy and that they have the intellectual and spiritual resources to oppose that foe.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
We endure a time when so called Catholic bishops
Ban the Latin Mass
Ban the faithful assisting at the Latin Mass
Ban the faithful praying the prayer to St. Michael
Ban bishops and priests who uphold the perennial magisterium
Ban religious communities who uphold the perennial Mass and doctrine
Ban lay professors who uphold the perennial magisterium
And we're expected to obey and say nothing or else we'd be banned as well
When exposing heresy is treated as committing heresy you are ruled by heretics
The new synodal churzh is not the Catholic Church
Mark Colosimo retweeted
I honestly do not understand how any American who is not already a literal Communist or a literal Jihadist could vote Democrat after hearing what Slotkin said below.
This is LITERALLY totalitarianism. It's not the fake "fascism" the Left likes to accuse the Right of, it is the REAL THING.
Undeniably.
Irrefutably.
This is a sitting member of Congress who was in the CIA saying that dissent from what she believes will result in imprisonment.
This is straight out of Solzhenitsyn. Straight out of Orwell. This is something an early Nazi would have said in 1932 under the Weimar Republic.
Please please PLEASE share her words with everyone you know. The Democrat/Media Complex will try to bury this. It is up to us on social media, on blogs and via texts and emails to get the word out.
The only way to stop these monsters is to make sure that voters who don't really keep up on politics understand the actual threat, see it with their own eyes and hear it with their own ears.
Please. Spread the word to anyone who will listen. And even those who won't listen.
ON UCHICAGO CAMPUS: U.S. Senator from Michigan Elissa Slotkin hopes planned political prosecutions of republican leaders will scare young conservatives from getting involved in politics.
@ElissaSlotkin
Mark Colosimo retweeted
St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the Devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray, and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly hosts, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan, and all the evil spirits, who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen.
Our local bishop is banning the St Michael prayer from the end of Mass.
His article, in the local Catholic paper, explains that in order to celebrate the liturgy “in accordance with the mind of the Church” priests need to “catechize the people of God as we move away from additional prayers recited together immediately before, during, and immediately after Mass.”
Mark Colosimo retweeted
NEW AD: James Talarico wants to set our way of life ablaze.
Talarico has declared war on Texas oil and Texas beef, and now he wants to burn our economy to the ground.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
RE: The Midterms and National Survival
The Democrat Party has been hijacked by an alliance of literal Communists and Islamic jihadists who now wear the mantle of Tip O’Neill and Sam Nunn like a skinsuit while espousing the most radical, anti-American agenda the USA has ever experienced.
These are people who want the Constitution eviscerated, capitalism extinguished, Sharia law imposed and your very way of life destroyed. If they achieve power, the lawfare you saw in 2020 will be NOTHING by comparison. If you hold traditional conservative values and/or if you are a practicing Christian or a Jew, they want you destroyed—economically, politically, practically, reputationally and—if necessary—they want you in a Gulag or to pay with your life.
This is not hyperbole, nor is this something that will happen overnight if we lose the midterms. However, if they win the midterms this will be for them a major step towards their ultimate goal of domination, a domination where the Bill of Rights has no meaning and all elections are pre-determined.
I really don’t care how much you dislike RINOs or how upset you are that Trump did not fully fix your pet issue in less than two years or how irritated you get filling up your gas tank. If you sit out these upcoming midterms to “send a message,” all you are doing is participating in your own demise.
If this is you, please wise up. This is NOT POLITICS AS USUAL. National survival is at stake in a way it never has been before.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
Bernie Sanders says the top 1% owns more than the bottom 93%, that fewer than a thousand billionaires got $2.2 trillion richer last year, and that it's "obscene."
It's the most seductive and most wrong economic argument of our time. Let me explain why.
First, wealth distribution follows a power law. Always. Everywhere. Books, music, startups, followers on X, goals in soccer. A small minority captures most of the value. That's not a bug of capitalism. It's the mathematical signature of every system where value gets created.
So the only question that matters isn't "how big is the rich's slice?" It's "is the cake growing, and is the slice of the poorest growing with it?"
And the answer is yes. In 1990, more than one human in three lived in extreme poverty. Today it's about one in ten. During exactly the period when billionaires multiplied.
Bernie shows you the slice. He never shows you the cake.
Second thing he won't tell you: past a certain level, wealth stops being consumption. It becomes capital allocation.
Elon Musk isn't sleeping on a pile of cash. He owns stakes in Tesla, SpaceX, xAI. Jeff Bezos owns Amazon stock. That "$2.2 trillion" isn't sitting in a checking account. It's factories, rockets, data centers, millions of jobs. Nobody can eat $100 billion. You can only decide where to invest it.
Once you understand that, the whole debate changes. The real question becomes: who allocates capital better?
The people who built Amazon, SpaceX and Nvidia? Or politicians?
A 5% wealth tax isn't "taking money from the rich." It's taking investment decisions away from people who proved they can create value and handing them to people who proved the opposite.
Because the fundamental difference between an entrepreneur and a politician is consequences.
The entrepreneur invests his own money. If he allocates badly, he loses everything. The market corrects him brutally, no appeal. That's why most startups die: the system kills bad decisions.
The politician invests other people's money. If he allocates badly, nothing happens. Worse, he gets a bigger budget to "fix the problem."
Milton Friedman put it better than anyone. There are four ways to spend money. Your money on yourself: you care about price and quality. Your money on others: you care about price. Others' money on yourself: you care about quality. Others' money on others: you care about nothing.
Government is the fourth box. By design.
Perfect example: California high-speed rail. Approved in 2008 for about $33 billion. Current estimated cost: over $100 billion. Passengers carried: zero. No entrepreneur would have survived that. The politicians who pushed it built careers on it.
And when allocation has no consequences, it eventually finds a buyer. A politician who controls billions without accountability becomes the most profitable target in the world for anyone who wants to steer that money.
The irony is that the left that rails against billionaires is itself funded by billionaires. George Soros is one of the biggest Democratic donors in history. The Gates Foundation shapes public health policy across the planet.
Politicians don't fight billionaires. They pick their own. The ones who fund the state over the ones who compete with it.
So if we actually want fewer poor people, we have to stop judging ideas by their intentions and start judging them by their results. And the results are brutally clear.
China, 1978: Deng Xiaoping opens the economy to markets. More than 800 million people escape extreme poverty. The largest retreat of misery in human history. Not through redistribution. Through the freedom to build.
India, 1991: liberalization. Same movie.
South Korea and North Korea: same people, same language, same starting point in 1953. One became one of the most advanced economies on earth. The other has famines.
Poland and Ukraine: comparable living standards in 1990. Today the average Pole is more than three times richer than the average Ukrainian.
Argentina: a year and a half of liberalization, and the poverty rate falls from over 50% to around 30%.
No country in history escaped poverty by punishing the people who build. Every single one did it by letting them build.
And if you want to see what Bernie's program looks like in real life, you don't have to imagine it. It exists. It's called France. We've been running it for 45 years.
Mass nationalizations in 1981. Two years later, Socialist president Mitterrand has to reverse course into austerity.
Retirement at 60. The 35-hour workweek.
A wealth tax for 35 years. Hundreds of wealthy households left every year for Belgium, Switzerland, London, taking their capital, their companies and their future taxes with them. Macron finally scrapped it in 2018.
Hollande's 75% tax: raised a few hundred million, drove talent out, abandoned after two years.
One of the highest tax burdens in the OECD. Public spending around 57% of GDP, a record in the developed world.
Last balanced budget: 1974. Public debt: over €3.4 trillion. Mass unemployment for four decades.
If taxing the rich and growing the state made people prosperous, France would be the richest country on the planet.
It isn't. GDP per capita in France is barely more than half of America's. It's lower than Mississippi, the poorest state in the US. Not a single global tech giant. Our best engineers build Silicon Valley instead. I've been going back and forth between Paris and San Francisco for years. I see it every week.
And California is about to replay the movie. Prop 40, on the ballot November 3rd, would take 5% of billionaires' net worth. Even Gavin Newsom, a Democratic governor, opposes it. The state's own nonpartisan budget analyst warns that income tax revenue could drop every year if the wealthy leave. Larry Page, Sergey Brin and Peter Thiel have reportedly already started moving their assets out.
You don't fight poverty by shrinking the top. You fight it by growing the cake.
Bernie wants a society where nobody has too much. I want a society where nobody has too little.
The first has been tried everywhere and produces equality in stagnation. The second lifted a billion people out of misery.
Choose.
The top 1% owns more wealth than the bottom 93%.
1 man owns more wealth than the bottom 53% of households.
Less than a thousand billionaires got $2.2 trillion richer in the last year.
Obscene.
Yes. We need a 5% billionaire wealth tax in California and throughout America.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
If you're planning to vote Democrat, and you're doing it sincerely, because you genuinely want a fairer country, cheaper homes, better schools, and a future for your kids, this post is for you. I'm not here to insult you. I'm here to show you something nobody inside the system will ever tell you. Give me two minutes.
Why do people keep defending a system they know doesn't work?
You've seen it a hundred times. A program fails, its budget doubles, the problem gets worse, and the people in charge ask for more. Nobody inside seems surprised. That's because, for them, the system isn't failing. It's working exactly as designed. Just not for you.
To understand it, forget ideology. Follow the incentives.
A politician's horizon is the next election. Two years, four years, six at most. His reward comes from promising: free tuition, cancelled debt, guaranteed housing, a green transition paid for by someone else. The bill arrives in ten, twenty, thirty years. By then he's retired, writing his memoir, giving paid speeches. He collects the applause today. You pay the invoice tomorrow. Any system where the person who makes the promise never pays for breaking it will produce endless broken promises. That isn't a moral failure. It's a mathematical certainty.
A bureaucrat is rewarded for the size of his budget and his team, not for solving the problem. If he solves it, his department shrinks. If it gets worse, he asks for more money, and he usually gets it. Failure is literally funded.
Then add the mega-donors. Foundations like those of Bill Gates or George Soros spend billions shaping policy: global health priorities, criminal justice, education, elections. You don't need to imagine a secret meeting. That's the point. No conspiracy is required, only incentives. The foundations fund the causes, the politicians adopt them, the agencies execute them. And when it goes wrong, who pays? Not the foundation. Not the politician. The neighborhood where the policy was tested. The billionaire never lives inside his own experiment.
The Austrian economists understood this a century ago. Mises showed that a state can't allocate capital properly because it has no prices, no profit and loss, no signal telling it when it's wrong. Hayek showed that no planner can ever know what millions of people know. When an entrepreneur misallocates capital, he goes bankrupt. When a state does, it raises taxes, prints money, or borrows from your children. Error is never punished, so it never stops.
And that's where the cycle locks in. When capital is allocated by politics instead of markets, the most profitable skill is no longer building. It's lobbying. Getting close to the money. Writing the rule that crushes your competitor. Corruption stops being a bug and becomes the business model. Every round creates more people who depend on it and will defend it. That's why the system protects itself even when everyone knows it's broken. Too many livelihoods depend on the lie.
Meanwhile, Europe's fashionable economists offer the opposite diagnosis. Thomas Piketty and Gabriel Zucman tell us the problem is that the state doesn't take enough: more wealth taxes, more redistribution, more state. France has been running that experiment for fifty years. The result is one of the highest tax burdens in the developed world, record debt, and capital and talent leaving the country every year.
History shows how this movie ends. Debt piles up until it can no longer be repaid. Currencies get debased. Then comes the reset, and it is rarely peaceful. Rome debased its coins for generations before it collapsed. Weimar's hyperinflation came just before the darkest chapter of the 20th century. Empires that can't stop spending don't reform gently. They break.
We are approaching the end of that cycle. America now spends more on interest on its debt than on its military. Read that sentence twice.
The good news is that the ending isn't written yet. You can still choose builders over promisers. You can still demand that the people who make decisions live with their consequences. You can still ask for less state, not more.
Wake up. The people selling you the dream will never be the ones paying for it.
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you.
I come from your future.
In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream.
Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them.
The promise was protection. The result is stagnation.
The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe.
I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has.
Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France?
Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
To my American friends, part two. Last time I talked about France. This time I want to talk about something bigger than France, bigger than any midterm you've ever voted in: who will control artificial intelligence.
You carry a responsibility no other people on earth carries right now. The most powerful technology in human history is being built in your country, under your laws. Whatever rules you choose will become the rules for the world. If Democrats retake Congress, here is the playbook I see coming, because in Europe we've already watched the first chapters.
It starts with a beautiful promise. Superintelligence will bring abundance. Cures for every disease, free education, the end of scarcity. And it might. But then comes the sentence that always follows: "This is too important to be left to the market."
Then comes regulation. It won't be one law. It will be a thicket of them: licenses to train a model, mandatory audits, compliance offices, approved datasets, safety boards staffed by people who have never shipped anything. Each rule sounds reasonable on its own. Together they build a wall.
Who can climb that wall? Not the kid in a garage in Ohio. Not the two-person startup. Only the giants with armies of lawyers and lobbyists. Some of the biggest AI companies have already gone to Congress asking for a licensing regime. When incumbents beg to be regulated, it's not because they love rules. It's because rules are a moat.
So you end up with two or three approved AI companies sitting next to the government, dressed up as competition. They would share the same values, the same filters, and the same red lines, all decided in the same rooms. Europe just did this with the AI Act. The result is that we barely build anything. We regulate what Americans and Chinese create.
Now think about what that means once AI is everywhere. It will decide what information you see, what loans you get, which jobs you're screened for, and what speech gets flagged. A small class of officials and their partner corporations would hold the master switch on human knowledge. That is a new nomenklatura. The Soviet apparatchiks needed millions of informants to control what people thought. This one would need a few data centers and a compliance policy. Orwell imagined a telescreen in every room. We're building something far more intimate.
This is exactly what your Founding Fathers feared. They had just escaped a distant power that decided everything for them, so they designed a country where power could never concentrate in one place. They split it, checked it, and handed the most important guarantees directly to the people: the right to speak and the right to bear arms. Those rights were never gifts from the state. They were limits on the state. Free speech came back to life the day X stopped being a censorship machine. But a Constitution is only as strong as the citizens who defend it at the ballot box. If AI gets centralized in a handful of approved hands, those rights become words on old paper.
Have you watched Altered Carbon? In that world, the ultra-rich live for centuries by buying new bodies. Everyone else gets one life, rents their existence, and dies. Society hasn't collapsed. It works perfectly for the people at the top. That's the real horror: it's stable. No amount of work, talent or merit can lift someone from the bottom, because the ladder itself is owned. That's what a captured AI economy looks like. It won't be chaos. It will be a permanent ceiling.
America has always been the opposite: the one country on earth where a nobody with a laptop can become somebody. I build my company between Paris and San Francisco. I know which side of the Atlantic still lets you try.
So before you vote, ask every candidate one simple question: will your AI policy let a 19-year-old in a dorm room compete with the giants, or will it protect the giants from that 19-year-old?
Keep AI open. Keep power distributed. Keep the ladder.
Stay American.
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you.
I come from your future.
In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream.
Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them.
The promise was protection. The result is stagnation.
The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe.
I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has.
Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France?
Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
I’m Polish. If France is your future, I come from the end of that road.
France shows you the slow version. We lived the full one – the version where the state doesn’t just take care of everything. It owns everything.
In Poland it arrived with Soviet bayonets. In America it would arrive by vote – slower, softer, with better slogans. But the destination is the same, and so is the mechanism.
It starts with prices. When the state decides what things should cost, prices stop telling the truth. A price is a message: this is scarce, this is wanted, make more of this. Abolish the message, and the whole economy goes deaf. So the shelves emptied – first of meat, then of almost everything.
Every Pole knew the joke. A man walks into a shop: "No meat?" The clerk: "No, sir. Here is no fish. No meat is across the street."
We queued for everything. People wrote their place in line on their palms and kept lists through the night. You waited years for a small car, and often more than a decade for an apartment. Not because Poles were lazy. Because nobody in the system had any reason to produce what we needed.
At work, we had another joke: we pretended to work, and they pretended to pay us.
And the promise of equality? It produced the most unequal system of all. The party elite had their own shops – Poles called them the shops behind the yellow curtains. Those with dollars shopped in special stores. Everyone else got the queue.
Then the system needed informers, because nobody believed in it anymore. Our neighbors were recruited to report on us. You never knew who was listening – the colleague, the friend, sometimes family. So we learned to live a double life: one language in public, another at home.
Those who spoke up got the wolf ticket: no job, no promotion, sometimes no university place for their children. Nobody needed to send them to prison. They just couldn’t live.
The newspapers reported record harvests while the shelves stood empty. Everyone knew. Nobody said it. That is what a society looks like when the lie becomes the system.
In 1950 we were about as rich as Spain. By 1989, Spain was twice as rich. That is what forty years of "fairness" cost us.
Today in America, the method is softer. Your neighbor won’t inform on you to the secret police. Someone will report your post, and you’ll be cancelled – no job, no account, no platform. Different tools, same machine.
We got out. Ten million of us joined Solidarity, and in 1989 a system that looked eternal collapsed. Since then, Poland has become one of the great success stories of Europe – because people were finally free to build.
But we still carry it. More than thirty years later, you can see it in the careful answers, the closed faces - the system leaves faster than the fear does. It takes generations to get out of it fully once you fall into that trap.
Nobody votes for the queue. Nobody votes for the informer. They come with the promise.
Trust me, you don’t want to go down that road.
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you.
I come from your future.
In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream.
Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them.
The promise was protection. The result is stagnation.
The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe.
I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has.
Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France?
Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you.
I come from your future.
In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream.
Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them.
The promise was protection. The result is stagnation.
The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe.
I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has.
Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France?
Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
Je n'ai jamais été aussi optimiste. Pas malgré le chaos actuel, mais grâce à lui.
Je vais vous expliquer pourquoi l'empire du mensonge construit par la gauche depuis cinquante ans va s'effondrer, et pourquoi ce n'est pas une opinion mais une question de physique.
Tout commence avec un mouvement né sur X il y a quelques années : l'effective accelerationism, ou e/acc.
Au départ, c'est une idée presque thermodynamique. L'univers a une tendance de fond : la matière s'organise pour capter et dissiper l'énergie de plus en plus efficacement. Une cellule fait ça. Une forêt fait ça. Une civilisation fait ça. Le marché, la technologie et le capital sont les formes les plus avancées de ce processus. Ce sont des machines à transformer l'énergie en intelligence, en abondance, en complexité.
La thèse e/acc est simple : il ne faut pas freiner cette dynamique, il faut l'embrasser. Plus d'énergie, plus de calcul, plus d'innovation, plus de croissance. Monter sur l'échelle de Kardashev au lieu de s'excuser d'exister. En face, il y a les « décels » : ceux qui veulent ralentir, réguler, taxer, interdire, culpabiliser. Ceux qui voient le progrès comme une menace à contenir plutôt qu'une force à libérer.
Mais il y a une dimension de l'accélération dont presque personne ne parle. L'accélération n'est pas seulement un moteur. C'est un filtre.
Pensez à n'importe quel organisme. Un corps humain en bonne santé peut courir. Il accélère, son cœur pompe plus fort, ses muscles consomment plus d'oxygène, et tout fonctionne parce que le système est bien conçu. Maintenant, prenez un corps malade. Des artères bouchées, un cœur fragile, des organes qui ne communiquent plus entre eux. Faites-le courir. Il ne va pas plus vite vers la santé. Il va plus vite vers l'infarctus.
L'accélération ne corrige pas les défauts d'un système. Elle les amplifie. Un système sain qui accélère devient plus fort. Un système dysfonctionnel qui accélère meurt plus vite.
Et c'est exactement ce qui est en train d'arriver au projet que je vais appeler par son nom : le projet globalo-socialiste. Celui porté par les démocrates américains, par la technostructure de Bruxelles, par les entités supranationales qui n'ont de comptes à rendre à personne, par un réseau d'ONG financées par l'argent public pour dicter la morale aux peuples qui les financent.
Regardez ce que ce projet a produit.
Des États obèses qui prélèvent plus de la moitié de la richesse produite et qui délivrent des services publics de plus en plus dégradés. Des écoles qui n'apprennent plus à lire mais qui apprennent à culpabiliser. Des hôpitaux à bout de souffle malgré des budgets records. Une immigration massive sans aucune exigence d'assimilation, présentée comme une chance par ceux qui n'en subissent jamais les conséquences. Une désindustrialisation organisée au nom d'une écologie punitive qui délocalise la pollution en Chine et l'emploi avec. Des normes, des normes, et encore des normes, jusqu'à ce qu'il devienne plus simple de créer une entreprise à Austin qu'à Lyon. Une justice qui excuse le coupable et soupçonne la victime. Une censure qui avance masquée sous le nom de « lutte contre la désinformation ». Et une jeunesse à qui l'on a expliqué que son pays, son histoire et sa civilisation étaient des crimes à expier.
Ce n'est pas un ensemble de bugs. C'est la conception elle-même.
Maintenant, changeons d'image. Voyez ce système comme un moteur.
Un bon moteur, c'est de la précision. Des pièces qui s'emboîtent, un minimum de frottements, une énergie qui se transforme en mouvement. Le marché libre, la propriété, la responsabilité individuelle, la monnaie saine : c'est ça, un moteur bien conçu. L'information circule par les prix, chaque erreur est sanctionnée, chaque bonne idée est récompensée.
Le moteur socialiste, lui, est mal conçu dès le départ. Il ne tourne pas sur la création de valeur mais sur sa redistribution. Il ne récompense pas la performance, il la taxe. Il ne laisse pas les erreurs mourir, il les subventionne. Résultat : ça frotte partout. Ça chauffe. Ça grince. Chaque pièce use la pièce d'à côté.
Et que font ceux qui pilotent ce moteur ? Au lieu de le reconcevoir, ils changent les pièces. En permanence. Une pièce cède, on en remet une neuve. Encore une. Encore une.
Ces pièces de rechange, vous les connaissez. Elles s'appellent la dette publique et la planche à billets.
La France a dépassé les 3 300 milliards d'euros de dette et n'a pas voté un budget à l'équilibre depuis le milieu des années 70. Les États-Unis ont franchi les 37 000 milliards de dollars. Les banques centrales ont maintenu des taux à zéro pendant des années, imprimé des montants que plus personne ne sait se représenter, et quand l'inflation est arrivée, elles ont fait semblant d'être surprises. Milton Friedman l'avait pourtant dit il y a cinquante ans : l'inflation est toujours et partout un phénomène monétaire.
Chaque crise, on rachète du temps avec de l'argent qui n'existe pas. Chaque problème structurel, on l'arrose de liquidités pour masquer le bruit du moteur. Mais les frottements sont toujours là. Ils s'accumulent. Et la facture des pièces de rechange finit par coûter plus cher que le moteur lui-même : la charge de la dette devient l'un des premiers postes de dépense de l'État français.
Pendant des décennies, ce moteur mal conçu a pu tourner à 3 000 tours par minute. Lentement. Bruyamment. Mais il tournait. Le monde allait assez doucement pour que le bricolage permanent suffise à masquer l'absurdité de la conception.
Et puis l'IA est arrivée.
L'intelligence artificielle, c'est l'accélération la plus brutale de l'histoire humaine. Ce qui prenait des années prend des mois. Ce qui prenait des mois prend des jours. Des entreprises de dix personnes font ce que faisaient des entreprises de mille. Le capital, les talents et les idées se déplacent à la vitesse de la lumière vers les endroits où ils sont bien traités.
L'IA vient de faire passer le moteur de 3 000 à 20 000 tours par minute.
Posez-vous la question qu'un ingénieur se poserait. Que se passe-t-il quand on fait monter à 20 000 tours un moteur mal conçu, rafistolé de partout, qui frotte à chaque rotation ?
Il explose.
Pas parce que quelqu'un l'a saboté. Parce que la physique ne négocie pas.
Et c'est exactement ce que nous voyons en ce moment, sous nos yeux.
L'insécurité qui gagne des villes entières qui étaient paisibles il y a vingt ans. Le conflit de Gaza importé dans nos rues et instrumentalisé par une gauche qui a troqué l'ouvrier contre le clientélisme communautaire. La misère qui revient dans un pays qui a pourtant un des taux de dépense publique les plus élevés au monde. Des classes moyennes qui travaillent et n'arrivent plus à se loger. Une France fracturée, où l'on parle désormais à voix haute de risque de guerre civile.
Ce ne sont pas des accidents. Ce ne sont pas des « crises » successives sans lien entre elles. Ce sont les pièces du moteur qui commencent à voler.
C'est la conséquence logique de cinquante ans de socialisme international : un système qui a détruit la responsabilité, la frontière, la monnaie, l'école et la fierté, et qui découvre qu'à haute vitesse, tout ce qui a été détruit ne peut plus être compensé par une ligne de dette supplémentaire.
Et c'est là que je deviens profondément optimiste.
Parce qu'une fois qu'on a compris ça, on comprend aussi que leur projet a une date de fin. Pas une date politique. Une date physique. Un système qui consomme plus qu'il ne produit, qui punit ceux qui créent et récompense ceux qui détruisent, qui finance son présent en hypothéquant l'avenir de ses enfants, ne peut pas durer indéfiniment. Il n'est pas soutenable par construction. L'IA ne fait qu'avancer l'échéance.
Le mensonge a besoin de lenteur pour survivre. Il a besoin que les conséquences arrivent assez tard pour qu'on puisse accuser quelqu'un d'autre. Dans un monde à 20 000 tours, les conséquences arrivent immédiatement. Le mensonge n'a plus le temps de se cacher.
Alors, que faire quand le moteur explose ? On en construit un nouveau. Et cette fois, on le conçoit correctement.
Écoutez Elon Musk. Un homme qui a reconstruit l'industrie spatiale, la voiture électrique et l'infrastructure satellite en partant d'un principe simple : revenir aux premiers principes. Ne pas demander « comment on a toujours fait », mais « qu'est-ce qui est physiquement vrai ». C'est exactement ce dont nos États ont besoin : arrêter de rafistoler et repartir de la base.
Écoutez Javier Milei. Un homme dont tout le monde se moquait, arrivé à la tête d'un pays ravagé par un siècle de péronisme, et qui a pris la tronçonneuse au sens propre. Ministères supprimés, dépenses coupées, inflation écrasée, excédent budgétaire retrouvé. Il a prouvé une chose que la gauche jurait impossible : on peut démonter le moteur socialiste et le peuple peut le soutenir.
Écoutez Milton Friedman. Relisez-le. Tout était déjà là. La monnaie, la liberté de choisir, la responsabilité, les effets pervers de l'intervention publique. Il disait que si l'on confiait le Sahara au gouvernement fédéral, il y aurait pénurie de sable en cinq ans. On a ri. On a confié le sable. On a eu la pénurie.
Revenez à une hiérarchie et au respect du beau. Une civilisation ne tient pas que sur des chiffres. Elle tient sur l'idée qu'il existe des choses supérieures à d'autres. Que l'excellence vaut mieux que la médiocrité. Que le mérite compte. Qu'une cathédrale est plus belle qu'un parking. Que transmettre est un devoir et pas une oppression. Le relativisme a été l'arme culturelle de ce projet. Le retour du beau, du vrai et de l'exigence en sera l'antidote.
Et enfin, faites le Nuremberg du communisme. Le nazisme a été jugé, documenté, enseigné, et il est devenu moralement indéfendable. Le communisme, avec ses dizaines de millions de morts, ses goulags, ses famines organisées et ses peuples réduits en esclavage, n'a jamais eu ce procès. On peut encore porter un t-shirt du Che dans une université sans que personne ne cille. Tant que ce procès historique et moral n'aura pas eu lieu, l'idéologie continuera de muter et de revenir sous de nouveaux noms. Il faut nommer les crimes, les enseigner, honorer les victimes, et rendre cette idéologie aussi infréquentable que celle qu'elle prétendait combattre.
Le monde qui vient sera plus rapide, plus exigeant et plus impitoyable avec les systèmes mal conçus. C'est une terrible nouvelle pour ceux qui ont vécu du mensonge.
Et c'est la meilleure nouvelle de notre génération pour tous ceux qui veulent construire.
Le moteur va exploser. À nous de dessiner le suivant.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
When the editor of the world’s most prestigious medical journal concluded that much of the clinical research it published could no longer be trusted, the problem was no longer abstract.
Marcia Angell, a pathologist who joined the New England Journal of Medicine staff in 1979, rose to executive editor and then served as interim editor-in-chief from 1999 to June 2000. She stepped down after more than two decades at the journal, formally to write a book. The deeper context was her growing conviction, formed from years of editing manuscripts, that pharmaceutical industry influence had compromised the independence of clinical research. She and previous editors had enforced strict conflict-of-interest rules, yet industry-sponsored studies continued to arrive with designs, analyses, and selective reporting that favored the sponsor’s product. Negative results were often suppressed, side effects minimized, and “academic” authors frequently carried undisclosed financial ties.
In a widely cited 2009 New York Review of Books essay, Angell wrote the line that crystallized her position: “It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” She described an industry that had shifted from discovering useful drugs toward marketing, co-opting academic medical centers, researchers, and even the journals that were supposed to serve as independent arbiters. Her 2000 editorial “Is Academic Medicine for Sale?” and later book The Truth About the Drug Companies expanded the critique, arguing that commercial priorities systematically distorted what research was done, how it was conducted, and what reached publication.
Angell’s departure marked the end of an era of tighter editorial resistance to industry influence at the NEJM. Her public statements afterward made clear that she viewed the problem as systemic rather than isolated: once the bulk of clinical research depended on commercial funding, journals could no longer function as reliable filters of medical evidence.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
Of course he name drops an obscure Italian-American communist who was against America's participation in World War 2 and was investigated by the FBI for his ties to the international communist party.
Of all the great men and women of Italian descent who've contributed to New York City and the United States, this is the idiot he picks.
He is physically incapable of being anything other than a loathsome propagandist for communism.
As the most prominent Italian-American in city government, please allow me to formally disinvite you from ever mentioning Italian heritage ever again.
And yes, we Italians came here to work, create businesses, dig the subways, build the buildings -- and it was indeed a struggle. A struggle a rich kid like Zohran could never know. But we didn't ask for any handouts. There was no welfare, millions of us came here knowing there was only ourselves, our work, and our community -- and we thrived. We wanted to become Americans, and our people were proud to learn the language and wave the American flag.
And when the time came, millions of Italian-Americans returned to Europe to fight World War 2, my father included. Many of them had to fight their own former countrymen in Mussolini's Italy. And they did exactly that, because they were nothing less than Americans.
Quite the opposite of the current immigrant situation championed by people like Zohran, where we invite lazy and entitled foreigners to loot the treasury without asking anything in return, as they resentfully fly the flags of their own nations -- and could never be counted on to defend America.
My mother was a widow who raised five children on her own, working in a button factory. We didn't take a penny of government assistance. We relied on ourselves. It was hard work, but we did it, and we were grateful. And today I sit on the City Council, representing the very neighborhood I grew up in.
That's what being an Italian-American in New York means. Not the communist propaganda Zohran is pushing here.
It's about hard work, independence, heritage, and most importantly, pride in being an American above all else.
Mark Colosimo retweeted
This trend of publicly degrading and insulting Our Lord Jesus Christ is a hallmark of the synodal churzh
The Son of God was not flirting with an adulteress
The idea that God would flirt with a woman breaking His Sixth Commandment is obnoxious
It’s all part of the Amoris Laetitia heresy to downgrade the immorality and sinfulness of adultery
Synodalism is not Catholicism
Mark Colosimo retweeted
How you can tell that the new religion is man focused and not God focused
Not one of Pope Leo's questions includes
What does God say about marriage, divorce, adultery, fornication and sodomy?
The revelation of God contained in scripture and tradition is not his starting point
Modernists always start from human experience
Synodalism is not Catholicism
NOW: Pope Leo is opening the Amoris Laetitia 10th anniversary conference
Addressing the prelates, he outlines questions to guide discussion in next week:
“What are people truly seeking beneath these cultural changes?
What do their joys and hopes, griefs and anxieties reveal to us?
Where do our pastoral language and practices succeed in opening a path, and where do they fail to touch people’s hearts or assist their efforts to do what is good?
What is the lived experience of families teaching us — an experience from which we have not yet fully learned?
What can we offer as formation for healthy and holy family life?
In particular, what can we learn from parents as they seek to accompany their children and young people in such contexts?”
He further adds:
“What kind of Church, then, do people encounter precisely when they are most fragile?
Do our communities help them discover that they still have a place, a responsibility and gifts to offer?
Can the truth we proclaim be encountered through the patience, closeness and mercy of our pastoral presence?
How can we announce to them the fullness of the Gospel’s teaching about the family?”
Soon on @CatholicHerald