Behind the Façades in France: What expats and the mainstream media (French and American alike) fail to notice (or fail to tell you) about French attitudes, principles, values, and official positions…
Because of his new book, Sébastien Laye was a natural subject for a 50 minute interview on TVLibertés (Chaîne officielle TVL, 0:00-48:38) regarding Emmanuel Macron and what the author calls France's "incestuous capitalism."
His next interview is slated for Wednesday, not regarding Des moutons menés par des ânes ?, but the election in New York City.
990K subscribers
New York seems ready to elect Zohran Mamdani, writes Nicolas Conquer in the Valeurs Actuelles weekly, declaring him to be "a mayor without experience, but with plenty of slogans." The "City That Never Sleeps" May Never Wake Up Again, adds the ROF spokesman. "Dear friends in New York,"what can one say, other than "you asked for it!" (Shoookhran for the Instalink, Sarah).
Entitled Zohran Mamdani, the Socialist Nightmare, Nicolas Conquer's VA article gives some pointed pointers about the Ugandan-Indian Muslim, son of a Marxist professor:
The outgoing mayor, Eric Adams, threw in the towel late in the game, leaving a city on the brink of collapse: subways have become danger zones, unsanitary conditions are rampant, migrants are housed in luxury hotels, and the police are demoralized. The “city that never sleeps” has transformed into a city suffocating under the strain. In this chaos, Mamdani promises free public transportation, a rent freeze, city-run grocery stores, a drastic reduction in police interventions, and another tax increase for the wealthiest citizens. …/…From the Mayor of America to the Mayor of the “Great Replacement”
The contrast is striking. In 2001, Rudy Giuliani, “America's Mayor,” embodied firmness and dignity in the face of the chaos of September 11. Twenty-four years later, the world’s largest Jewish community after Israel—12% of New York City’s population—may be about to elect a mayor incapable of condemning the slogans of the “Global Intifada” chanted in the streets.
… Mamdani is a product of his time and its system. Naturalized as an American citizen in 2018, he benefits from an electoral dynamic shaped by mass naturalization. In New York, 60% of foreign-born voters support him, while only 30% of native-born voters do. Without this new demographic, he would have no political presence. Here again, the parallel with France is striking: mass immigration always has electoral consequences. …/…When Freedom is Veiled
A French politician recently suggested “bringing back” the Statue of Liberty. The idea seemed fanciful, not to say clownish. But at this rate, the statue itself will end up veiled. Green ideology—that of a conquering Islam and a repentant left—has crept into the Big Apple, as in other major American cities.
🗽 New York s’apprête à élire Zohran Mamdani, un maire sans expérience, mais plein de slogans.
— Nicolas Conquer (@ConquerNicolas) October 30, 2025
La “ville qui ne dort jamais” risque de ne plus jamais se réveiller... Amis new-yorkais, vous l’aurez voulu !
📰Ma tribune pour @Valeurs https://t.co/4yTtdgNwmU
Lars Hedegaard of the University of Southern Denmark and the Copenhagen Business School reports that
Daniel Karpantschof has written a thought-provoking essay on the origins of modern anti-Semitism. The text is long, but worth reading. I particularly notice that the term Nakba – the catastrophe, when it was launched in 1948, originally had a completely different meaning than the one used by today's Palestinians. I also find it interesting that the land of Israel cannot be described as a colonial power — as the so-called "anti-Zionists" are accustomed to. On the contrary, Israel is the result of decolonization.
When I see pictures of the Democratic mayoral candidate in New York, the constantly grinning Mohammedan Zohran Mamdani, I think of one of the nicknames that Muslims give to Allah: the smiling killer. Mamdani is almost certain to win the election on November 4, as he is expected to receive about half of the votes cast. New York will thus be the next Western metropolis after London to come under Muslim control. It took the Muslims only a few decades to carry out this fundamental and irreversible social upheaval. What will be the next Western metropolis to fall under Allah's turban? …
The Perversion of Morality
By Daniel KarpantschofAn old friend called the other day. We have known each other for twenty years. He said: “Now the war is over — so it's okay for us to talk again.” I had heard nothing from him while hatred of Jews was growing. Not while Carolineskolen, the only Jewish school in Denmark, had increased security guards and children were once again advised to hide their Stars of David, not while red triangles and red lines were being pasted up in marches favoring the Palestinians, and not while the posters on Copenhagen's Store Kongensgade said that it was better to kill a Zionist than an animal. But now that he thought it was all “over,” he thought it was safe to have a Jewish friend again. I hung up the phone and thought that this — this crooked moral compass — had become the disease of our time: The state in which good no longer seeks the truth, but justifies itself through lies. What I later realized was the beginning of what I call the inversion of morality. When reality becomes absurd Days after October 7th, I wrote to Roskilde Music Festival's director, Signe Lopdrup. I suggested that the festival — as a symbol of freedom and community and less about the victims of brutal, bestial terror — should condemn the terrorist attack in which young Israelis were murdered, raped, and taken hostage at the Nova Festival. I added that had it been any other festival, anywhere in the world, the reaction would have been immediate. But there was no response. Not a word. The silence said it all. For at that moment the absurdity became real: It was no longer the violence that determined whether we reacted — but whom the violence affected. [See also Charlie Kirk, etc…] The inversion of morality is when goodness is turned upside down, so that the moral value of an action is no longer measured by its content — but by its sender. It is the state in which guilt becomes virtue, and justice becomes a question of who, not what. The inversion of morality is the moment when we stop judging actions by their nature and instead judge by who does them. That is where the axis of civilization shifts — from ethics to identity, from truth to sympathy. Once the axis of morality has turned, the distortion quickly becomes culture. What begins as an exception becomes the norm. That is where the next phase enters: the perversity of morality. The perversity of morality is when the opposite becomes normal — when man uses morality to justify his own immorality, calling it virtue. It is the state in which empathy becomes selective, where truth is bent for the sake of emotion, and where evil is done in the name of good. Perversity is not the rupture of inversion — it is its afterlife. It is the moment when we stop simply distorting the good and begin to cultivate the distortion as goodness. Where the language of morality itself becomes a tool for justifying the lie. When freedom changed sidesEmma Lazarus wrote: “Until we are all free, we are none of us free.”The American-Jewish poet wrote it not as a slogan, but as an experience. Freedom was not a privilege for her — but a duty. Today her words are on posters and shouted by those who want to abolish the state that was created to give her own people a home. Lazarus wrote about freedom — they quote her to attack it. The language of freedom is now used to deny freedom, and the ideal of justice to justify injustice. This is the perversity of morality in its purest form: When what was once good becomes the servant of evil — and man calls his own complicity a virtue. The inverted colonial history One of the clearest examples of this distortion is the story of the state of Israel. Today Israel is often referred to as a colonial project — as a foreign power imposed on the Middle East by the West. But it is an inversion of both history and truth. Israel was not born of colonization, but of its demise. It was one of the world's first anti-colonial states — created in the wake of the collapse of the old empires. A people, displaced and persecuted for two thousand years, returned to their historic homeland after the colonial powers had withdrawn. Israel is the product of decolonization. Calling the Jews the colonial masters of Israel is not just ahistorical; it is an inversion of history, of morality, and of truth. It is to take the only example of an indigenous people reclaiming their land after millennia of exile and transform it into the narrative of an occupation. When the victims of history's colonialism are made its symbol, what is revealed is not Israel's mistake, but the inversion of morality. The catastrophe that changed meaning When the Syrian historian Constantin Zureiq called the Arab defeat the Nakba in 1948 — the catastrophe — he meant it literally. He wrote that the catastrophe lay not in the defeat but in self-deception: Seven Arab armies went to war to annihilate a newborn Jewish state — and lost. Today, the Nakba means something entirely different. It is no longer a showdown with mistakes and responsibilities, but a narrative of eternally innocent victims. Here we see the inversion in practice: guilt has become virtue. And its result — perversity — is a culture where responsibility is sin, and victimhood the highest morality. The symbol of modern perversity Greta Thunberg has — in her own way — become a mirror of our times. Not as a person, but as a phenomenon: a symbol of a generation that has learned to feel strongly but think weakly. She became famous for skipping school for a cause — there is hardly a better symbol of anti-knowledge. When she posted a picture of a "starving Palestinian," it turned out that it was actually a Jewish hostage held captive by Hamas. When the truth came out, she deleted the post. Not to correct, but to forget. It was not evil, but the perversity of morality — the reflex in which one would rather maintain one's self-perception as good than face reality. Thunberg is not the culprit — she is merely the mirror. A picture of how Western empathy has been blinded by its own reflection. Denmark's mirror Here too, perversity finds its place. According to Denmark's Security and Intelligence Agency (PET) and the Ministry of Justice's 2024 Security Survey, the number of anti-Semitic incidents has increased significantly since October 2023 — from harassment and vandalism to threats and assaults. The Jewish Community warns again that Danish Jews are hiding symbols, changing routes, and avoiding talking about Israel in public. Jews have long been excluded from the joint work on the memorial event for Kristallnacht — an event that was supposed to unite the victims, but instead became a picture of how they are being written out of the history of anti-Semitism, and the Jewish community has had to create its own alternative event. The ultimate manifestation of the inversion of morality — and its final destination, the perversity of morality: Jews excluded from Denmark's memorial event for Kristallnacht. In Copenhagen, some people are running for office on the slogan “Zionists out of town.” Those who post the pictures see themselves as anti-racists — but they repeat Europe's darkest language. The words are almost the same as in 1930s Germany: “Juden Raus!” When a European capital once again sees hatred of Jews as “expression of opinion,” it shows how far we have sunk into the moral dissonance left by the perversity of morality. Movements by guardians of morality, who raise their voices when the world does not agree with their feelings and call it conscience, are seen today, with precisely this erosion. They write declarations, hang banners, shout outside the prime minister's apartment, brace themselves for cycling, cultural events, and singing competitions, and believe that indignation is the same as responsibility. But morality does not need guardians. It needs witnesses. The guardian judges. The witness sees. The guardian wants to own the truth. The witness seeks it. The old guardians, who once stood guard over morality and humanity, have today become guardians of the perversity of morality itself — protectors of the self-righteousness that arises when inversion becomes a system. They defend the illusion of the good, but no longer the good itself. The inversion of morality occurs when the guardian forgets that morality is not a mirror to others, but to itself. The perversity of morality occurs when this forgetfulness becomes culture — when good is distorted so that it justifies its own intolerance in the name of virtue. And here arises what one might call the evil of banality: Not the banality of evil, as Hannah Arendt described it — but its modern inversion. Because today it is not blind obedience that nourishes evil, but conscious, selective distance. A form of moral laziness, in which man adopts a moral inversion because it is more comfortable not to know. Because perversity has taken root. It is no longer the system that makes us complicit, but the moral inversion of convenience. Not totalitarianism, but complacency. Not hatred, but ignorance, selection, inversion. It is the evil of banality: The quiet, cultivated apathy where the inversion of morality is allowed to grow — because no one cares anymore to know the difference between what is right and what just feels right. Because the feeling of right weighs more heavily than the knowledge of right, and many people feel quite strongly and think quite weakly.
Answering The Economist's question whether wealth should be taxed, a reader points out something about popular pop songs:
Ten Years After had a hit song in 1971 with “I’d Love to Change the World”. The lyrics included the line, “Tax the rich, feed the poor, 'til there are no rich no more.” Interestingly, the song did not say 'til there are no poor no more. One problem with wealth-tax proposals is that they are more focused on eliminating the rich than actually feeding the poor. And on that point, the chorus of that song is also telling: “I’d love to change the world, but I don’t know what to do, so I’ll leave it up to you.” Enough said.
paul greenberg
Brookline, Massachusetts
The head is spinning! The propensity of the Left to rewrite history — ancient or recent, its own as well as everybody else's — is rarely anything less than mind-boggling. The Leftists' latest rewriting of history concerns their mobs tearing down of America's statues in and around 2020:
replied that the far left has supported the destruction of statues of U.S. historical figures in recent years.
… "I hear all of a sudden from my liberal friends that they’re very concerned about our history. Really? These are the same people who tore down every statue they could get their hands on in the last four years," the lawmaker said. … "Christopher Columbus, Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt. They didn’t have any concern for history then. Now, all of a sudden, they’re like, ‘Oh, the facade of the East Wing is iconic,'" Hawley said. "Oh, give me a break. I mean, give me a break."
That post of mine got two reactions. From Ann:
Statues are different than the White House and you know that.
So now, it's "just" statues (it wasn't "only" statues when y'all were tearing them down, they were symbols of America's intrinsic evil — including even… Northern statues!). And "you know that," you damn conservative, meaning that therefore you should just shut up! (Thanks for the hyperlink, Sarah.)
we supported said statues be put into museums to commemorate the lost and fallen during the Civil War. They weren't desecrated or destroyed in the process of taking them down.
You have just entered the twilight zone! Leftist mobs (dripping with patriotism?) removed the statues (respectfully? in a professional manner?) for the sole reason to… (respectfully?) place them inside (respected?) museums?! And only to honor America, her history, as well as both sides in the Civil War?!?!
To the first woman ("Statues are different than the White House") I replied
You're right Ann … : it's far worse!
before proceeding to quote the Bob Woodson interview at the very bottom of this post. To the second woman I answered with a news item about Hans Heg, an (anti-slavery) officer in the Union army whose statue was thrown into a lake, although not before being… decapitated [see also the Stonewall Jackson statue]. To Dori's contention that "They weren't desecrated or destroyed in the process of taking them down" I linked a news report about the Hans Heg statue, adding that
Of course they were Dori …
Statues were painted over, (unceremoniously) torn down, decapitated, and dumped in lakes, as hysterical mobs squealed in glee. I see that the left's rewriting of history and that their fairy tales are never far from the surface.
One observer who has made profound observations about the left and their tactics is NATE HOCHMAN. Last year, he noted that the anniversary of Robert E. Lee’s surrender to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox
was occasion for gleeful crowing from the left-wing corners of the internet. “Happy Traitors Surrendering Day,” one young Virginia Democrat wrote. “F*** Robert E. Lee, f*** the Confederacy, and f*** their cause of treason.” A widely shared video featured a woman chugging “rebel tears” to celebrate the Confederacy “taking a fat f***ing L.” (Gratuitous vulgarity seems to be a feature of this discourse.) The famous left-wing hacker group Anonymous added, “On this day (April 9th, 1865) the Confederacy surrendered after getting it’s [sic] ass kicked.”
Notice, incidentally, that the vulgar cheers recall the recent ones in the wake of the brutal killing of Charlie Kirk ("It Should Not Be Considered Free Speech" Says Karsenty of the Left's Anti-Kirk Rants; "It Is the Glorification of Terrorism"). In Undoing the Appomattox, HOCHMAN points out that what the Left is doing "is rewriting history. What are they giving themselves permission to do?"
… Today’s vulgar cheers have very little to do with the Civil War at all. Today’s gleeful celebration of Lee’s surrender is part and parcel of the same fervor that has sought to remove any positive commemoration of the Southern general and his counterparts from public life. It has nothing to do with the Confederacy, except insofar as the soiled memory of the Antebellum South can be mobilized to undermine, attack, and delegitimize Red America. The contemporary Left seeks to recast the white, conservative, Christian lumpenproletariat as the inheritors of slavery, segregation, and the numerous other crimes that have replaced men like Grant and Lee at the center of our new national mythology.
… This is the true meaning behind the gratuitous, jeering celebrations of Appomattox. It is not, as the anonymous X user Lunkhead noted, about “hating traitors” so much as it is about a fervent desire to punish contemporary enemies. Given the violent nature of the Confederacy’s demise, it’s reasonable to ask: Just what, exactly, are they giving themselves permission to do?
I foresaw this in 2015, when the Rebel flag was starting to get demonized (Another Brick in the Leftwing Activists' (Self-Serving) Demonization of America and Rewriting of History). Of course, as I have written in the past, the Confederacy really represented the Democratic Party, and when an ignominious Republican had the gall to win the election of 1860 (the Election of a Ghastly Republican to the White House, shades of 2016, 2020, and 2024), the Democrats went berserk, and for the next four years, these drama queens (called by Abraham Lincoln Fire-eaters and Locofocos) tore the country apart.
As I quoted Bob Woodson, the founder of 1776 Unites, as saying, concerning the entire 1619 Project — check out The 1619 Project Summarized in One Single Sentence:
This is a fight against … the credentials of this country … slavery was a stain [beyond] which we moved … This is really a struggle for the soul of this nation. Lincoln [and the Emancipation Memorial] are a symbol of redemption, and the Left does not believe in redemption.
… One of the steps of defeating truth is to destroy evidence of the truth. Because these statues, like the Emancipation Memorial, are evidence of America's redemption from slavery, it's important for [the Left] to remove evidence of the truth.Related: From U.S. Grant and Union Soldiers Fighting the Slavocracy to John Brown and Abraham Lincoln, All Statues Must Come Down
As Dick Morris announces that, Powered By AI, The U.S. Is Experiencing A Massive Boom In Investment, Sebastien Laye explains in the Washington Examiner the reason for the massive boom while launching a challenge: Build the infrastructure, build the AI boom.
America’s economic rebound despite tariffs during the second quarter is not a mystery — it was all dependent on artificial intelligence and data center construction.
… My thesis is simple: if the United States wants to sustain this growth over the next 12 months and avoid a natural slowdown, it must go all-in now on building AI infrastructure — slash permitting timelines, green-light energy projects, and mass-train the HVAC techs, electricians, and plumbers who turn capital into capacity.
… On power, the lesson from Europe’s moratoria is cautionary: where capacity is scarce and approvals slow, investment doesn’t pause — it just re-routes to other countries. The U.S. should take the opposite track. …
RESTORING AMERICA: HARNESSING AI TO MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN
We have been here before. America’s 19th-century railroad boom and 20th-century highway system were growth engines that reorganized production and settlement. 30 years ago, we built the massive infrastructure underpinning the new internet. Today’s rails are fiber and power lines; today’s junctions are substation yards.
In the meantime, Sébastien Laye's new book seems to be selling well.
The title of the book is Des moutons menés par des ânes ?, or Sheep Led by Donkeys? or Sheep Led by Asses? The title is based on the age-old idiom Lions led by donkeys, and readers will recognize that its title could apply to just about any country in the Western hemisphere.
In the United States, what is superfluous gets mercilessly cut; In France, what is superfluous gets readily financed.
In an op-ed for Le Diplomate, speaks about courage in the political sense, contrasting two ways of reforming government, in France and in Trump's America. Shutdown à Washington, panne de courage à Paris. There are so many good quotes here that it's hard to pick only one.
Shutdown in Washington, lack of courage in Paris: "In the United States, we cut the superfluous. In France, we finance it."
The United States is living in slow motion, but debating. France is spending lavishly, but remaining silent. The American shutdown acts like a cruel mirror: over there, we embrace confrontation; here, we subsidize resignation.
When the Americans cut the superfluous, France maintains the useless
For two weeks, part of the American administration has been at a standstill.
America is tearing itself apart, but debating. It embraces disagreement. And this is what distinguishes Washington from Paris: when the United States blocks to defend principles, France unblocks to buy social peace.
… But behind the partisan tumult, Uncle Sam is asking a simple question: what should the state do, and at what cost?
In France, this question is never asked. When the state runs out of money, it borrows. When it goes into debt, it taxes. And at the end of the day, it's still John Doe who pays. Reform means only spending differently, never spending less. Our leaders dream of public efficiency, but reject state restraint. The result: a country on permanent budgetary life support, spending 57% of its national wealth without ever asking why.
The State, a business without a customer
The American crisis reminds us that a state, like any organization, must be able to question itself. In the private sector, a useless business closes. In the public sector, it becomes an acquired right.
… In the United States, the superfluous is revoked to save the essential; In France, on the other hand, the superfluous is subsidized to conceal the essential.
Shutdown à Washington, panne de courage à Paris : « Aux États-Unis, on coupe le superflu. En France, on le finance. »
Les États-Unis vivent au ralenti, mais débattent. La France dépense sans compter, mais se tait. Le shutdown américain agit comme un miroir cruel : là-bas, on assume la confrontation ; ici, on subventionne la résignation.
Quand les Américains coupent dans le superflu, la France entretient l’inutile
Depuis deux semaines, une partie de l’administration américaine est à l’arrêt.
… Les Républicains veulent réduire les dépenses, les Démocrates du Sénat refusent de voter la loi de finances temporaire — la Continuing Resolution — tant que leurs priorités ne sont pas financées. Parmi elles : plus de 1500 milliards de dollars supplémentaires pour prolonger des programmes d’aide hérités de l’ère Obama, y compris pour des immigrés en situation irrégulière. Oui, vous avez bien lu ! Donald Trump, lui, théâtralise le bras de fer : il sait que ses adversaires se piégeront par leurs propres calculs politiciens. Règle élémentaire de l’Art de la guerre : ne jamais interrompre un ennemi en train de commettre une erreur.
L’Amérique se déchire, mais débat. Elle assume le désaccord. Et c’est bien ce qui distingue Washington de Paris : quand les États-Unis bloquent pour défendre des principes, la France débloque pour acheter la paix sociale.
… Mais derrière le tumulte partisan, l’Amérique pose une question simple : que doit faire l’État, et à quel prix ?
En France, cette question n’est jamais posée. Quand l’État manque d’argent, il emprunte. Quand il s’endette, il taxe. Et à la fin de la journée c’est encore Nicolas qui paie. Réformer consisterait à dépenser autrement, jamais à dépenser moins. Nos gouvernants rêvent d’efficacité publique, mais refusent la sobriété étatique. Résultat : un pays sous perfusion budgétaire permanente, qui dépense 57 % de sa richesse nationale sans jamais se demander pourquoi.
… L’État, cette entreprise sans clientLa crise américaine rappelle qu’un État, comme toute organisation, doit pouvoir se remettre en cause. Dans le privé, une entreprise inutile ferme. Dans le public, elle devient un droit acquis.
… Les États-Unis suspendent le superflu pour sauver l’essentiel. La France, elle, subventionne le superflu pour masquer l’essentiel.
💥 "Nos élites, nos ânes, ont vendu aux Français l’idée que l’avenir et la grandeur de la France se jouaient dans la dilution européenne. Force est de constater que c’est une catastrophe !"
— Ligne Droite • La matinale de RC (@Ligne__Droite) October 20, 2025
🗣️ @SebastienLaye, auteur de "Des moutons menés par des ânes ?" aux éditions @EditionsVa… pic.twitter.com/M4wfHdIdxX
Invité sur La Matinale de RC par la Ligne Droite, Sebastien Laye est venu parler de son nouveau livre, qu'il évoque aussi dans une vidéo sur Youtube. Comme il le dit sur X Twitter, il y a des bonnes nouvelles et des mauvaises nouvelles. Les bonnes nouvelles, c'est que Des moutons menés par des ânes ? est déjà "sold out" sur Amazon.fr. Or, il semblerait que le livre soit la victime d'une espèce de shadow-banning :
Mon essai "Des Moutons menés par des ânes?" est deja un best seller mais impossible de l'avoir sous moins d'un mois chez @AmazonNewsFR @amazon . Marre de cette censure des livres de droite. Je vais faire remonter l'information aux USA, où Amazon s'est engagé à ne pas censurer les ouvrages. Surtout qu'il s'agit d'un simple essai économique sans prise de positions idéologiques, c'est juste un livre libéral de droite. @tegnererik @louise_morice_ @DorineRouyer
… woke or centrists LOVE books censorship. they censor even without reading the books ! in my case they are pissed off because of a foreword by a catholic businessman..@AmazonNewsFR @DavidSacks @JP_O @Ligne__Droite
Mon essai "Des Moutons menés par des ânes?" est deja un best seller mais impossible de l'avoir sous moins d'un mois chez @AmazonNewsFR @amazon . Marre de cette censure des livres de droite. Je vais faire remonter l'information aux USA, où Amazon s'est engagé à ne pas censurer les…
— sebastien laye (@SebastienLaye) October 20, 2025
Over at the New York Post, Glenn Reynolds points out that ‘No Kings’ crowds don’t want more democracy — they want LESS
Watching the “No Kings” protests, a friend commented: “Democracy dies when the other side wins. Another rule they wouldn’t want to have turned back on them.”
That does seem to be the animating spirit not only of the various marches around the country, but of the entire anti-Trump resistance.
President Donald Trump’s crime isn’t anything he’s said, or done, or even believed (which, all too often, anti-Trump protesters can’t cogently describe anyway).
It’s that he won, and he represents the other team.
As Batya Ungar-Sargon put it: “The ‘No Kings’ rally isn’t protesting Trump but rather the agenda the majority of America voted for. The Left isn’t protesting a king but their fellow Americans. They aren’t standing up for democracy — they are protesting against it.”
… In fact, Trump is a “king” — or “dictator,” as we’re often told — whose actual program seems to involve shrinking the government he heads. That’s not the usual thing for autocrats.
… As Meghan McCain tweeted, “I don’t understand how Trump is a King when he won every single swing state, the electoral college and popular vote in a democratic election.”
[With sarcasm dripping from his lips,] Legal scholar Ilya Shapiro responded, “No no he’s a king by dismantling an administrative state that <checks notes> nobody voted for.”
That’s Trump’s real sin — carrying out the will of the voters.
Democrats know their policies are unpopular. That’s why they have to lie about everything from immigration to affirmative action to gun control.
During the COVID years, the same people who are out marching for “no kings” supported an endless array of dictatorial measures: lockdowns, firing people for not vaccinating, arresting people for being outside, arresting people for paddle-boarding in the ocean without a mask, arresting people for holding unlicensed religious services, etc.
Read the whole thing™. In the same vein, Batya Ungar-Sargon had some hard truths to deliver on CNN last weekend while Lars Hedegaard penned the following:
The Left Hates DemocracyLast Saturday, millions of Americans took part in numerous demonstrations under the slogan “No Kings”. The anger is directed at Donald Trump, who is not a king, but was elected by an absolute majority of voters in November last year. So it can be reasonably stated that the marches are opposing the citizens who installed a president they hate. It is democracy that they want to get rid of — expressed in the demand that Trump immediately resign.For several years, Democratic leaders and their foot soldiers have been moaning about the “fascism” that they accuse Trump of being an exponent of. Apart from that, they do not present any real policy apart from the demand for unhindered immigration of anyone who can drag themselves across the US borders — regardless of whether they are drug dealers, human smugglers, gang members or just ordinary violent psychopaths. They will therefore do everything in the world to hinder the federal authorities' efforts to enforce the current legislation. Added to this are the vague notions that Trump wants to become a dictator and steal from the poor to give to the rich.Fortunately for the protesters, they themselves have rich backers who are pouring billions into the protests and financing the approximately 250 organizations behind the “No Kings” marches. One of them is George Soros, who has made no secret of the fact that he hates the United States and will do whatever he can to bring down the West.If Trump were really a fascist, the demonstrations would not have been possible, because in that case his “Gestapo” would have picked up the organizers and their financial backers at 4 a.m. and put them in concentration camps. The fact that people can freely demonstrate and hurl slogans and insults at the government shows that it is not fascist.The Democrats' historical understanding is flawed. Trump is the exact opposite of a fascist. Since he came to power, he has worked tirelessly to resolve threatening military conflicts around the world — most recently in Gaza. Was it such an effort that distinguished Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini?Trump is also trying to slim down the federal bureaucracy — that is, to limit the power of the state — while Hitler and Mussolini worked on the opposite. As Mussolini used to say: The state is everything! Hitler prided himself on not wanting to nationalize business, but to socialize the German people and make them obedient tools of the state. Trump and his Republicans, on the other hand, believe that the foundation of the United States is civil society, where citizens can freely pursue their happiness as long as they obey the law. That is how the American Constitution was conceived.But the left hates the constitution and therefore acts in exactly the same way as Mussolini's Fasci italiani di combattimento and Adolf Hitler's stormtroopers. For the time being, the left-wing rabidists are content with a few executions of their opponents or assassinations.But just as Mussolini's blackshirts and Hitler's brownshirts were paid for by someone, so too are the 250 organizations behind "No Kings."The protesters pose as advocates for the poor. In reality, they are useful idiots taking to the streets to defend the economic hegemony of the ruling class. They just don't know it because they've never heard about it in the media.
"White boomers have the right to have a mass therapy session about the fact that Donald Trump won, but to call it a No Kings protest, to act like he is a king is so utterly preposterous. This is a man who won the popular vote. He won every swing state. He is a person who is enacting the exact agenda he promised he was going to enact while he was campaigning. And so what they are actually protesting is the absolute perfection of American democracy.""White boomers have the right to have a mass therapy session about the fact that Donald Trump won, but to call it a No Kings protest, to act like he is a king is so utterly preposterous. This is a man who won the popular vote. He won every swing state. He is a person who is… pic.twitter.com/EI5QE8Q6qg
— Thomas Hern (@ThomasMHern) October 21, 2025
