Ford Takes Record $19.5 Billion Charge As EV Bet Implodes, Pivots To Grid Batteries

Shares of Ford in New York have yet to hit a new high since the debut of the all-electric F-150 Lightning in April 2022. What was pitched as a flagship EV push has since devolved into an epic miscalculation, with the automaker now preparing to take $19.5 billion in charges, mostly in the fourth quarter, as it unwinds and overhauls its electric vehicle strategy.

Ford is overhauling its entire electrification roadmap. The reset includes the cancellation of three future EV programs, the termination of the current F-150 Lightning, and a shift toward new offerings across multiple powertrains, including a future extended-range hybrid vehicle variant of the F-Series.

The pivot also entails a complete restructuring of battery operations, highlighted by the breakup of its partnership with South Korean battery maker SK On. The next chapter of Ford's strategy is a pivot toward grid-scale energy storage systems.

We've explained to readers that lithium prices are on the rise as EV battery makers pivot to energy storage systems:

• Grid-Scale Battery Boom Sparks Lithium’s Comeback

• Wall Street Eyes Lithium as Battery Storage Demand Poised to Spark New Upcycle

Last year, Ford lost a staggering $5.1 billion in its EV division and expects this year to be even worse. The pivot puts the struggling automaker's EV division on track for profitability by the end of the decade.

Here are the key highlights of the pivot:

• Offers broad choice with gas, hybrids, and EVs: Ford will offer a range of hybrids to complement efficient gas engines. The Universal EV Platform will underpin multiple models. By 2030, about 50% of Ford's global volume will be hybrids, extended-range EVs, and electric vehicles, versus 17% today.

• Fills U.S. plants with affordable new models: New Built Ford Tough pickups will be assembled at BlueOval City in Tennessee, and a new gas and hybrid van will be produced at the Ohio Assembly Plant. Ford plans to hire thousands of new employees in the U.S. in the next few years.

• Launches battery energy storage business: Ford will leverage wholly owned plants in Kentucky and Michigan and leading LFP technology to provide solutions for energy infrastructure and growing data center demand. Ford plans to begin shipping BESS systems in 2027 with 20 GWh of annual capacity.

• Improves profitability: Actions are expected to drive accretive returns and accelerate margin improvements across Ford Model e, Ford Pro, and Ford Blue. Ford Model e is now expected to reach profitability by 2029, with improvements beginning in 2026.

• Rationalizes U.S. EV-related assets and product roadmap: Ford expects to record about $19.5 billion in special items, with the majority in the fourth quarter. The company expects about $5.5 billion in cash effects, with most paid in 2026 and the remainder in 2027.

• Raises guidance: The company raised 2025 adjusted EBIT guidance to about $7 billion, citing continued underlying business strength and cost improvements. It reaffirmed adjusted free cash flow guidance, trending toward the high end of the $2 billion to $3 billion range.

Goldman analysts led by Mark Delaney offered clients their first take on the restructuring of Ford's EV unit:

We believe the realignment and restructuring actions will help improve the P&L as Ford reduces Model e losses and increases production of more profitable Blue and Pro vehicles. Over the longer term, we expect a key debate will center on how these actions impact Ford's ability to reach Model e profitability, particularly as it increasingly competes with Chinese OEMs outside of China. We think successful execution on the UEV platform and EREV technology, as well as software and digital services, will be key factors. On the ESS business, industry participants have historically seen varied margins, and we believe costs and the company's ability to deliver a full solution will be important determinants of long-term profitability.

On capital allocation:

We do not expect these charges to affect Ford's dividend. Recall that Ford's dividend target is based on 40% to 50% of adjusted free cash flow, and we believe these charges will be excluded from the adjusted FCF calculation. In addition, the company has a strong cash position on the balance sheet, in our view.

Goldman maintained a Neutral rating on the stock, raised EPS estimates to $1.16, $1.65, and $1.80 for 2025, 2026, and 2027, respectively, and lifted its 12-month price target to $14 from $13, based on an unchanged 8x multiple on normalized EPS.

Ford shares have yet to recover since the F-150 EV debuted in April 2022.

In November, we reported that Ford mulled scrapping the EV truck:

• Ford Mulls Scrapping F-150 Lightning After Dismal Demand, Mounting Losses

The F-150 EV is shaping up to be America's first major EV casualty. Henry Ford would likely be turning over in his grave after such a massive miscalculation in chasing the "green" narrative. The question now is whether the board will hold management accountable for drinking the green Kool-Aid.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 06:59

Porsche To Ferrari: The EVs Drawing The Most Attention Ahead Of 2026

A December 2025 study of the electric vehicle market names the 2026 Porsche Cayenne Electric as the most anticipated EV set to launch next year. Conducted by B2B automotive platform eCarsTrade, the research analyzed more than 20 upcoming electric models and ranked them based on global search interest related to pricing, specifications, range, and release timing.

The Cayenne Electric stands out clearly, attracting around 911,000 monthly searches worldwide. Buyers across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia are closely following the model, which is expected to deliver up to 1,139 horsepower in its Turbo version—making it the most powerful production Porsche ever—and feature an 800-volt system capable of charging at up to 400 kilowatts.

Close behind, the MG Cyberster has generated more than 800,000 searches, drawing attention as one of the first mass-market electric roadsters, with a starting price near $73,000 in Europe, China, and the UK.

(View the full study here)

Audi also features prominently in the rankings. The Q6 e-tron, which shares its platform and charging technology with the Porsche Macan Electric, has attracted roughly 793,000 potential buyers at a starting price of $63,800, while the Audi A6 e-tron Sportback adds to the brand’s strong presence.

Volkswagen’s ID.7, positioned as the electric successor to the Passat, has also drawn significant interest from fleet and company-car buyers, with more than 700,000 people researching the $50,000 sedan for its long-range highway capability.

Family-focused electric SUVs are another area of strong demand. Hyundai’s three-row Ioniq 9, offering seating for seven and a 300-mile range at a $60,600 starting price, has recorded 665,000 searches as buyers look for practical electric alternatives to traditional large SUVs.

The study also notes growing curiosity around high-end models, including Ferrari’s first electric vehicle, the Ferrari Elettrica, which has generated more than 300,000 searches despite an estimated starting price above $535,000.

According to eCarsTrade, interest in these models reflects broader market momentum, with electric vehicles expected to account for about 27% of all new car sales in 2026. The findings suggest that established automakers such as Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen, and Hyundai are gaining ground in the EV space, driven by demand from both fleet buyers and individual consumers who place greater trust in familiar brands when making major purchases.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:45

Porsche To Ferrari: The EVs Drawing The Most Attention Ahead Of 2026

A December 2025 study of the electric vehicle market names the 2026 Porsche Cayenne Electric as the most anticipated EV set to launch next year. Conducted by B2B automotive platform eCarsTrade, the research analyzed more than 20 upcoming electric models and ranked them based on global search interest related to pricing, specifications, range, and release timing.

The Cayenne Electric stands out clearly, attracting around 911,000 monthly searches worldwide. Buyers across North America, Europe, the Middle East, and Asia are closely following the model, which is expected to deliver up to 1,139 horsepower in its Turbo version—making it the most powerful production Porsche ever—and feature an 800-volt system capable of charging at up to 400 kilowatts.

Close behind, the MG Cyberster has generated more than 800,000 searches, drawing attention as one of the first mass-market electric roadsters, with a starting price near $73,000 in Europe, China, and the UK.

(View the full study here)

Audi also features prominently in the rankings. The Q6 e-tron, which shares its platform and charging technology with the Porsche Macan Electric, has attracted roughly 793,000 potential buyers at a starting price of $63,800, while the Audi A6 e-tron Sportback adds to the brand’s strong presence.

Volkswagen’s ID.7, positioned as the electric successor to the Passat, has also drawn significant interest from fleet and company-car buyers, with more than 700,000 people researching the $50,000 sedan for its long-range highway capability.

Family-focused electric SUVs are another area of strong demand. Hyundai’s three-row Ioniq 9, offering seating for seven and a 300-mile range at a $60,600 starting price, has recorded 665,000 searches as buyers look for practical electric alternatives to traditional large SUVs.

The study also notes growing curiosity around high-end models, including Ferrari’s first electric vehicle, the Ferrari Elettrica, which has generated more than 300,000 searches despite an estimated starting price above $535,000.

According to eCarsTrade, interest in these models reflects broader market momentum, with electric vehicles expected to account for about 27% of all new car sales in 2026. The findings suggest that established automakers such as Porsche, Audi, Volkswagen, and Hyundai are gaining ground in the EV space, driven by demand from both fleet buyers and individual consumers who place greater trust in familiar brands when making major purchases.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:45

Britain's New Spy Chief Warns Of 'Aggressive, Expansionist, And Revisionist' Russia

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Britain’s new intelligence chief warned on Dec. 15 that the UK is operating in an era when “the front line is everywhere,” as she set out an assessment of global threats and described Russia as an “aggressive, expansionist, and revisionist” power determined to export instability across Europe and beyond.

Blaise Metreweli, who recently became head of the Secret Intelligence Service—commonly known as MI6—said that Russia’s campaign against Ukraine and its wider hybrid operations pose an acute and enduring danger to Britain and its allies, according to a preview of her first public speech released by the British government.

“The export of chaos is a feature, not a bug in the Russian approach to international engagement, and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus,” Metreweli said.

‘The Front Line Is Everywhere’

Speaking from MI6 headquarters in London, Metreweli said that as Russia and other hostile actors rewrite the rules of conflict through cyber operations, information warfare, and covert sabotage, the global threat environment is becoming increasingly complex and interconnected.

“The front line is everywhere,” she said, warning that the UK faces a new “age of uncertainty.”

Metreweli said Britain’s support for Ukraine will remain firm and that pressure on Moscow will be sustained despite the length and cost of the war.

“Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring,” she said. “The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained.”

NATO Warns Russia Could Target Allies Next

Her remarks come as European leaders have issued increasingly blunt warnings about Russia’s intentions beyond Ukraine.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said last week that allied countries could become “Russia’s next target,” saying that Moscow’s willingness to absorb massive losses in Ukraine demonstrated a readiness to confront the wider alliance.

“We need to be crystal clear about the threat,” Rutte said. “We are Russia’s next target, and we are already in harm’s way.”

Rutte called for a rapid rise in defense spending to deter aggression and prevent the kind of wide-scale conflict that past generations experienced.

“Russia has brought war back to Europe, and we must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured,” he said.

“Imagine it, a conflict reaching every home, every workplace, destruction, mass mobilization, millions displaced, widespread suffering, and extreme losses. It is a terrible thought, but if we deliver on our commitments, this is a tragedy we can prevent.”

In June, NATO allies agreed to raise defense spending targets to 5 percent of gross domestic product by 2035—more than double the current 2 percent benchmark and in line with demands long made by U.S. President Donald Trump.

Sanctions and Diplomacy

Metreweli’s speech also follows a series of British and European actions aimed at countering Russian and Chinese influence operations.

The UK recently sanctioned multiple Russian entities accused of conducting information warfare, as well as two China-based companies linked to what the British government described as “indiscriminate cyber activities” targeting Britain and its allies.

Separately, the European Union on Dec. 15 announced fresh sanctions against individuals and companies supporting Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, which transports oil and generates revenue for the war effort, as part of a broader effort to restrict Moscow’s ability to finance its military operations.

Metreweli’s remarks in London coincided with fresh talks in Berlin on Dec. 15 involving U.S. envoys, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and European officials aimed at securing peace and stability in Europe amid pressure from Russia.

U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, held talks with Zelenskyy and other delegates on Dec. 14 in Berlin, as part of efforts to bring the Ukraine war to an end.

“Representatives held in-depth discussions regarding the 20-point plan for peace, economic agendas, and more,” Witkoff said in an update on social media. “A lot of progress was made.”

Trump has pressed for a quick end to the nearly four-year war, but a compromise that both Russia and Ukraine would accept has been elusive.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:00

Britain's New Spy Chief Warns Of 'Aggressive, Expansionist, And Revisionist' Russia

Authored by Tom Ozimek via The Epoch Times,

Britain’s new intelligence chief warned on Dec. 15 that the UK is operating in an era when “the front line is everywhere,” as she set out an assessment of global threats and described Russia as an “aggressive, expansionist, and revisionist” power determined to export instability across Europe and beyond.

Blaise Metreweli, who recently became head of the Secret Intelligence Service—commonly known as MI6—said that Russia’s campaign against Ukraine and its wider hybrid operations pose an acute and enduring danger to Britain and its allies, according to a preview of her first public speech released by the British government.

“The export of chaos is a feature, not a bug in the Russian approach to international engagement, and we should be ready for this to continue until Putin is forced to change his calculus,” Metreweli said.

‘The Front Line Is Everywhere’

Speaking from MI6 headquarters in London, Metreweli said that as Russia and other hostile actors rewrite the rules of conflict through cyber operations, information warfare, and covert sabotage, the global threat environment is becoming increasingly complex and interconnected.

“The front line is everywhere,” she said, warning that the UK faces a new “age of uncertainty.”

Metreweli said Britain’s support for Ukraine will remain firm and that pressure on Moscow will be sustained despite the length and cost of the war.

“Putin should be in no doubt, our support is enduring,” she said. “The pressure we apply on Ukraine’s behalf will be sustained.”

NATO Warns Russia Could Target Allies Next

Her remarks come as European leaders have issued increasingly blunt warnings about Russia’s intentions beyond Ukraine.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said last week that allied countries could become “Russia’s next target,” saying that Moscow’s willingness to absorb massive losses in Ukraine demonstrated a readiness to confront the wider alliance.

“We need to be crystal clear about the threat,” Rutte said. “We are Russia’s next target, and we are already in harm’s way.”

Rutte called for a rapid rise in defense spending to deter aggression and prevent the kind of wide-scale conflict that past generations experienced.

“Russia has brought war back to Europe, and we must be prepared for the scale of war our grandparents or great-grandparents endured,” he said.

“Imagine it, a conflict reaching every home, every workplace, destruction, mass mobilization, millions displaced, widespread suffering, and extreme losses. It is a terrible thought, but if we deliver on our commitments, this is a tragedy we can prevent.”

In June, NATO allies agreed to raise defense spending targets to 5 percent of gross domestic product by 2035—more than double the current 2 percent benchmark and in line with demands long made by U.S. President Donald Trump.

Sanctions and Diplomacy

Metreweli’s speech also follows a series of British and European actions aimed at countering Russian and Chinese influence operations.

The UK recently sanctioned multiple Russian entities accused of conducting information warfare, as well as two China-based companies linked to what the British government described as “indiscriminate cyber activities” targeting Britain and its allies.

Separately, the European Union on Dec. 15 announced fresh sanctions against individuals and companies supporting Russia’s so-called shadow fleet, which transports oil and generates revenue for the war effort, as part of a broader effort to restrict Moscow’s ability to finance its military operations.

Metreweli’s remarks in London coincided with fresh talks in Berlin on Dec. 15 involving U.S. envoys, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, and European officials aimed at securing peace and stability in Europe amid pressure from Russia.

U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, held talks with Zelenskyy and other delegates on Dec. 14 in Berlin, as part of efforts to bring the Ukraine war to an end.

“Representatives held in-depth discussions regarding the 20-point plan for peace, economic agendas, and more,” Witkoff said in an update on social media. “A lot of progress was made.”

Trump has pressed for a quick end to the nearly four-year war, but a compromise that both Russia and Ukraine would accept has been elusive.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 05:00

Is China In A Better Position To Win The Rare Earth Mineral War

During an October swing through Southeast Asia, US President Donald Trump struck same-day agreements with Malaysia and Thailand to deepen cooperation on critical minerals and rare earths, underscoring Washington’s push to diversify supply chains away from China, according to SCMP. 

According to the White House, Trump and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim agreed to expand collaboration on building and securing critical mineral and rare earth supply chains. Using similar language, Washington said it would also “strengthen cooperation [with Thailand] on critical minerals supply chains development and expansion,” including exploration, extraction and processing.

The back-to-back deals reflect how resource-rich economies have become central battlegrounds in the US-China rivalry over rare earths. Analysts say Beijing currently holds the advantage, having spent decades engaging countries across Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America. These nations often view China as a “partner that actually builds,” with investment that comes with fewer political conditions than US funding.

China’s dominance is structural. It mines about 70 per cent of the world’s rare earths and controls roughly 90 per cent of global processing capacity, meaning even minerals extracted elsewhere are often sent to China for refinement. As Marina Zhang of the University of Technology Sydney noted, this long-term engagement has given Beijing a “commanding lead,” particularly in downstream processing.

Enrique Dans of IE Business School said China already controls the “chokepoints that matter,” from separation to magnet manufacturing, allowing it to “lock in long-term offtakes and joint ventures in resource-rich countries.” He contrasted that with a US approach that “tends to arrive with conditions, compliance, and slower money,” adding that many governments see Beijing as the partner that delivers visible projects and jobs quickly.

Sun Chenghao of Tsinghua University said China’s model — combining infrastructure, trade and mineral cooperation — has given it a more positive image in the Global South, while the US is increasingly seen as “aggressive.” Although Washington retains influence, he said “China still holds a relative advantage in the rare earth sector,” especially in emerging resource-rich economies.

SCMP writes that the rivalry is intensifying. Rare earths now sit at the centre of a strategic contest that both powers see as vital to economic security, defence manufacturing and technological leadership — with Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America likely to remain key theatres in the years ahead.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 04:15

Is China In A Better Position To Win The Rare Earth Mineral War

During an October swing through Southeast Asia, US President Donald Trump struck same-day agreements with Malaysia and Thailand to deepen cooperation on critical minerals and rare earths, underscoring Washington’s push to diversify supply chains away from China, according to SCMP. 

According to the White House, Trump and Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim agreed to expand collaboration on building and securing critical mineral and rare earth supply chains. Using similar language, Washington said it would also “strengthen cooperation [with Thailand] on critical minerals supply chains development and expansion,” including exploration, extraction and processing.

The back-to-back deals reflect how resource-rich economies have become central battlegrounds in the US-China rivalry over rare earths. Analysts say Beijing currently holds the advantage, having spent decades engaging countries across Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America. These nations often view China as a “partner that actually builds,” with investment that comes with fewer political conditions than US funding.

China’s dominance is structural. It mines about 70 per cent of the world’s rare earths and controls roughly 90 per cent of global processing capacity, meaning even minerals extracted elsewhere are often sent to China for refinement. As Marina Zhang of the University of Technology Sydney noted, this long-term engagement has given Beijing a “commanding lead,” particularly in downstream processing.

Enrique Dans of IE Business School said China already controls the “chokepoints that matter,” from separation to magnet manufacturing, allowing it to “lock in long-term offtakes and joint ventures in resource-rich countries.” He contrasted that with a US approach that “tends to arrive with conditions, compliance, and slower money,” adding that many governments see Beijing as the partner that delivers visible projects and jobs quickly.

Sun Chenghao of Tsinghua University said China’s model — combining infrastructure, trade and mineral cooperation — has given it a more positive image in the Global South, while the US is increasingly seen as “aggressive.” Although Washington retains influence, he said “China still holds a relative advantage in the rare earth sector,” especially in emerging resource-rich economies.

SCMP writes that the rivalry is intensifying. Rare earths now sit at the centre of a strategic contest that both powers see as vital to economic security, defence manufacturing and technological leadership — with Southeast Asia, Africa and Latin America likely to remain key theatres in the years ahead.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 04:15

Privacy For The Powerful, Surveillance For The Rest: EU's Proposed Tech Regulation Goes Too Far

Authored by Elen Irazabal Arana and Nikolai G. Wenzel via TheDailyEconomy.org,

Last month, we lamented California’s Frontier AI Act of 2025. The Act favors compliance over risk management, while shielding bureaucrats and lawmakers from responsibility. Mostly, it imposes top-down regulatory norms, instead of letting civil society and industry experts experiment and develop ethical standards from the bottom up.

Perhaps we could dismiss the Act as just another example of California’s interventionist penchant. But some American politicians and regulators are already calling for the Act to be a “template for harmonizing federal and state oversight.” The other source for that template would be the European Union (EU), so it’s worth keeping an eye on the regulations spewed out of Brussels.

The EU is already way ahead of California in imposing troubling, top-down regulation. Indeed, the EU Artificial Intelligence Act of 2024 follows the EU’s overall precautionary principle. As the EU Parliament’s internal think tank explains, “the precautionary principle enables decision-makers to adopt precautionary measures when scientific evidence about an environmental or human health hazard is uncertain and the stakes are high.” The precautionary principle gives immense power to the EU when it comes to regulating in the face of uncertainty — rather than allowing for experimentation with the guardrails of fines and tort law (as in the US). It stifles ethical learning and innovation. Because of the precautionary principle and associated regulation, the EU economy suffers from greater market concentration, higher regulatory compliance costs, and diminished innovation — compared to an environment that allows for experimentation and sensible risk management. It is small wonder that only four of the world’s top 50 tech companies are European.

From Stifled Innovation to Stifled Privacy

Along with the precautionary principle, the second driving force behind EU regulation is the advancement of rights — but cherry-picking from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights of rights that often conflict with others. For example, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of 2016 was imposed with the idea of protecting a fundamental right to personal data protection (this is technically separate from the right to privacy, and gives the EU much more power to intervene — but that is the stuff of academic journals). The GDPR ended up curtailing the right to economic freedom.

This time, fundamental rights are being deployed to justify the EU’s fight against child sexual abuse. We all love fundamental rights, and we all hate child abuse. But, over the years, fundamental rights have been deployed as a blunt and powerful weapon to expand the EU’s regulatory powers. The proposed Child Sex Abuse regulation (CSA) is no exception. What is exceptional, is the extent of the intrusion: the EU is proposing to monitor communications among European citizens, lumping them all together as potential threats rather than as protected speech that enjoys a prima facie right to privacy.

As of 26 November 2025, the EU bureaucratic machine has been negotiating the details of the CSA. In the latest draft, mandatory scanning of private communications has thankfully been removed, at least formally. But there is a catch. Providers of hosting and interpersonal communication services must identify, analyze, and assess how their services might be used for online child sexual abuse, and then take “all reasonable mitigation measures.” Faced with such an open-ended mandate and the threat of liability, many providers may conclude that the safest — and most legally prudent — way to show they have complied with the EU directive is to deploy large-scale scanning of private communications.

The draft CSA insists that mitigation measures should, where possible, be limited to specific parts of the service or specific groups of users. But the incentive structure points in one direction. Widespread monitoring may end up as the only viable option for regulatory compliance. What is presented as voluntary today risks becoming a de facto obligation tomorrow.

In the words of Peter Hummelgaard, the Danish Minister of Justice: “Every year, millions of files are shared that depict the sexual abuse of children. And behind every single image and video, there is a child who has been subjected to the most horrific and terrible abuse. This is completely unacceptable.” No one disputes the gravity or turpitude of the problem. And yet, under this narrative, the telecommunications industry and European citizens are expected to absorb dangerous risk-mitigation measures that are likely to involve lost privacy for citizens and widespread monitoring powers for the state.

The cost, we are told, is nothing compared to the benefit.

After all, who wouldn’t want to fight child sexual abuse? It’s high time to take a deep breath. Child abusers should be punished severely. This does not dispense a free society from respecting other core values.

But, wait. There’s more…

Widespread Monitoring? Well, Not Completely Widespread

Despite the moral imperative of protecting children — a moral imperative so compelling that the EU is willing to violate other core values to advance it — the proposed CSA act introduces a convenient exception. Anything falling under national security, and any electronic communication service that is not publicly available (i.e. available only to elected officials and bureaucrats) would remain entirely untouched. Private chats among citizens require scrutiny — but the conversations of those who claim to protect us are off limits.

As the good minister said, “behind every single image and video there is a child who has been subjected to the most horrific and terrible abuse.” If that is indeed true of every “single image and video,” why would it not also be true of the messages shielded by the CSA’s national security and non-public exceptions? Does the horror somehow dissipate when the users are politicians or bureaucrats? Is the unacceptable suddenly made acceptable when it concerns those who write the rules?

In the EU’s hierarchy of rights, protecting children trumps privacy. But protecting Eurocrats trumps protecting children. In the end, modern technology gives politicians unprecedented opportunities to monitor citizens, while exempting themselves from scrutiny.

There is no chatter yet — that we know of — about imposing similar measures in the US. But, from the wealth tax to AI regulation — and the very origins of the American administrative state — bad ideas from Europe have a nasty way of making their way across the Pond. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 03:30

Privacy For The Powerful, Surveillance For The Rest: EU's Proposed Tech Regulation Goes Too Far

Authored by Elen Irazabal Arana and Nikolai G. Wenzel via TheDailyEconomy.org,

Last month, we lamented California’s Frontier AI Act of 2025. The Act favors compliance over risk management, while shielding bureaucrats and lawmakers from responsibility. Mostly, it imposes top-down regulatory norms, instead of letting civil society and industry experts experiment and develop ethical standards from the bottom up.

Perhaps we could dismiss the Act as just another example of California’s interventionist penchant. But some American politicians and regulators are already calling for the Act to be a “template for harmonizing federal and state oversight.” The other source for that template would be the European Union (EU), so it’s worth keeping an eye on the regulations spewed out of Brussels.

The EU is already way ahead of California in imposing troubling, top-down regulation. Indeed, the EU Artificial Intelligence Act of 2024 follows the EU’s overall precautionary principle. As the EU Parliament’s internal think tank explains, “the precautionary principle enables decision-makers to adopt precautionary measures when scientific evidence about an environmental or human health hazard is uncertain and the stakes are high.” The precautionary principle gives immense power to the EU when it comes to regulating in the face of uncertainty — rather than allowing for experimentation with the guardrails of fines and tort law (as in the US). It stifles ethical learning and innovation. Because of the precautionary principle and associated regulation, the EU economy suffers from greater market concentration, higher regulatory compliance costs, and diminished innovation — compared to an environment that allows for experimentation and sensible risk management. It is small wonder that only four of the world’s top 50 tech companies are European.

From Stifled Innovation to Stifled Privacy

Along with the precautionary principle, the second driving force behind EU regulation is the advancement of rights — but cherry-picking from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights of rights that often conflict with others. For example, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of 2016 was imposed with the idea of protecting a fundamental right to personal data protection (this is technically separate from the right to privacy, and gives the EU much more power to intervene — but that is the stuff of academic journals). The GDPR ended up curtailing the right to economic freedom.

This time, fundamental rights are being deployed to justify the EU’s fight against child sexual abuse. We all love fundamental rights, and we all hate child abuse. But, over the years, fundamental rights have been deployed as a blunt and powerful weapon to expand the EU’s regulatory powers. The proposed Child Sex Abuse regulation (CSA) is no exception. What is exceptional, is the extent of the intrusion: the EU is proposing to monitor communications among European citizens, lumping them all together as potential threats rather than as protected speech that enjoys a prima facie right to privacy.

As of 26 November 2025, the EU bureaucratic machine has been negotiating the details of the CSA. In the latest draft, mandatory scanning of private communications has thankfully been removed, at least formally. But there is a catch. Providers of hosting and interpersonal communication services must identify, analyze, and assess how their services might be used for online child sexual abuse, and then take “all reasonable mitigation measures.” Faced with such an open-ended mandate and the threat of liability, many providers may conclude that the safest — and most legally prudent — way to show they have complied with the EU directive is to deploy large-scale scanning of private communications.

The draft CSA insists that mitigation measures should, where possible, be limited to specific parts of the service or specific groups of users. But the incentive structure points in one direction. Widespread monitoring may end up as the only viable option for regulatory compliance. What is presented as voluntary today risks becoming a de facto obligation tomorrow.

In the words of Peter Hummelgaard, the Danish Minister of Justice: “Every year, millions of files are shared that depict the sexual abuse of children. And behind every single image and video, there is a child who has been subjected to the most horrific and terrible abuse. This is completely unacceptable.” No one disputes the gravity or turpitude of the problem. And yet, under this narrative, the telecommunications industry and European citizens are expected to absorb dangerous risk-mitigation measures that are likely to involve lost privacy for citizens and widespread monitoring powers for the state.

The cost, we are told, is nothing compared to the benefit.

After all, who wouldn’t want to fight child sexual abuse? It’s high time to take a deep breath. Child abusers should be punished severely. This does not dispense a free society from respecting other core values.

But, wait. There’s more…

Widespread Monitoring? Well, Not Completely Widespread

Despite the moral imperative of protecting children — a moral imperative so compelling that the EU is willing to violate other core values to advance it — the proposed CSA act introduces a convenient exception. Anything falling under national security, and any electronic communication service that is not publicly available (i.e. available only to elected officials and bureaucrats) would remain entirely untouched. Private chats among citizens require scrutiny — but the conversations of those who claim to protect us are off limits.

As the good minister said, “behind every single image and video there is a child who has been subjected to the most horrific and terrible abuse.” If that is indeed true of every “single image and video,” why would it not also be true of the messages shielded by the CSA’s national security and non-public exceptions? Does the horror somehow dissipate when the users are politicians or bureaucrats? Is the unacceptable suddenly made acceptable when it concerns those who write the rules?

In the EU’s hierarchy of rights, protecting children trumps privacy. But protecting Eurocrats trumps protecting children. In the end, modern technology gives politicians unprecedented opportunities to monitor citizens, while exempting themselves from scrutiny.

There is no chatter yet — that we know of — about imposing similar measures in the US. But, from the wealth tax to AI regulation — and the very origins of the American administrative state — bad ideas from Europe have a nasty way of making their way across the Pond. 

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 03:30

Brussels Slams Brakes On 2035 Combustion Engine Ban

The European Commission is preparing to retreat from its planned 2035 ban on new combustion-engine car sales, yielding to pressure from Germany, Italy and automakers struggling to compete with U.S. and Chinese rivals, according to Reuters. The announcement is expected Tuesday.

EU and industry sources say the ban could be delayed by five years or softened indefinitely, turning a once-firm rule into something more aspirational. The reversal would mark the bloc’s biggest climb-down from its green agenda in the past five years.

"The European Commission will be putting forward a clear proposal to abolish the ban on combustion engines," said Manfred Weber, head of the European Parliament’s largest political group. "It was a serious industrial policy mistake."

Traditional automakers such as Volkswagen and Stellantis have lobbied hard for relief, arguing EV demand has fallen short, costs remain high and charging infrastructure is uneven. EU tariffs on Chinese EVs have barely dented the pressure.

"It's not a sustainable reality today in Europe," Ford CEO Jim Farley said last week, adding industry needs were "not well balanced" with EU CO2 targets.

EV-focused companies warn the rethink hands China an even bigger advantage in electrification.

"The technology is ready, charging infrastructure is ready, and consumers are ready," said Polestar CEO Michael Lohscheller. "So what are we waiting for?"

Reuters writes that the 2023 law was meant to force a rapid shift to batteries or fuel cells, with fines for non-compliance. But European carmakers still trail Tesla and Chinese groups like BYD and Geely on scale and cost. Earlier this year, the EU already granted automakers “breathing space” by spreading 2025 compliance over three years.

Manufacturers now want to keep selling combustion engines alongside plug-in hybrids, range-extender EVs and vehicles running on so-called CO2-neutral fuels. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen signaled openness to e-fuels and “advanced biofuels” in October.

"We recommend a multi-technology approach," said Todd Anderson of Phinia, adding the internal combustion engine will "be around for the rest of the century."

EV industry players say regulatory backtracking will undermine investment.

"It's definitely going to have an effect," said ChargePoint CEO Rick Wilmer.

Automakers also want the 2030 target of a 55% cut in car emissions phased in over several years and the 50% reduction target for vans dropped. Germany wants climate credits for low-carbon steel and other upstream measures.

Environmental groups say the EU should stick to the 2035 deadline, arguing biofuels are scarce, expensive and not truly carbon-neutral.

"Europe needs to stay the course on electric," said William Todts of T&E. "It's clear electric is the future."

Whether Brussels actually stays the course, or keeps rewriting the rules when reality intervenes, remains to be seen.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 02:45

Brussels Slams Brakes On 2035 Combustion Engine Ban

The European Commission is preparing to retreat from its planned 2035 ban on new combustion-engine car sales, yielding to pressure from Germany, Italy and automakers struggling to compete with U.S. and Chinese rivals, according to Reuters. The announcement is expected Tuesday.

EU and industry sources say the ban could be delayed by five years or softened indefinitely, turning a once-firm rule into something more aspirational. The reversal would mark the bloc’s biggest climb-down from its green agenda in the past five years.

"The European Commission will be putting forward a clear proposal to abolish the ban on combustion engines," said Manfred Weber, head of the European Parliament’s largest political group. "It was a serious industrial policy mistake."

Traditional automakers such as Volkswagen and Stellantis have lobbied hard for relief, arguing EV demand has fallen short, costs remain high and charging infrastructure is uneven. EU tariffs on Chinese EVs have barely dented the pressure.

"It's not a sustainable reality today in Europe," Ford CEO Jim Farley said last week, adding industry needs were "not well balanced" with EU CO2 targets.

EV-focused companies warn the rethink hands China an even bigger advantage in electrification.

"The technology is ready, charging infrastructure is ready, and consumers are ready," said Polestar CEO Michael Lohscheller. "So what are we waiting for?"

Reuters writes that the 2023 law was meant to force a rapid shift to batteries or fuel cells, with fines for non-compliance. But European carmakers still trail Tesla and Chinese groups like BYD and Geely on scale and cost. Earlier this year, the EU already granted automakers “breathing space” by spreading 2025 compliance over three years.

Manufacturers now want to keep selling combustion engines alongside plug-in hybrids, range-extender EVs and vehicles running on so-called CO2-neutral fuels. Commission President Ursula von der Leyen signaled openness to e-fuels and “advanced biofuels” in October.

"We recommend a multi-technology approach," said Todd Anderson of Phinia, adding the internal combustion engine will "be around for the rest of the century."

EV industry players say regulatory backtracking will undermine investment.

"It's definitely going to have an effect," said ChargePoint CEO Rick Wilmer.

Automakers also want the 2030 target of a 55% cut in car emissions phased in over several years and the 50% reduction target for vans dropped. Germany wants climate credits for low-carbon steel and other upstream measures.

Environmental groups say the EU should stick to the 2035 deadline, arguing biofuels are scarce, expensive and not truly carbon-neutral.

"Europe needs to stay the course on electric," said William Todts of T&E. "It's clear electric is the future."

Whether Brussels actually stays the course, or keeps rewriting the rules when reality intervenes, remains to be seen.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 02:45

Germany's Municipal Financial Crisis: The Green Transformation Backfires

Submitted By Thomas Kolbe

For years, politicians managed to hide the damage caused by the green transformation. Now, deep cracks are appearing in municipal finances amid the severe economic crisis gripping the country. Cities like Stuttgart serve as showcases for the future of the republic.

For a long time, Stuttgart’s city treasurer was more than just a steward of solid numbers. He was regarded as the uncrowned king of fiscal policy in the region—and held a position envied by many colleagues. The robust foundation of the automotive industry and its extensive supplier network funneled generous tax revenues into the city’s coffers for years, particularly from trade taxes.

As recently as 2023, Stuttgart recorded a record 1.6 billion euros in trade tax revenue—a sum that gave the city extraordinary financial leeway. Social projects, infrastructure initiatives, municipal ambitions—the local government could spend freely.

Cracks in the Model Municipality

Then came 2024. Early cracks in Germany’s economic foundation, building up over years, began to appear in Stuttgart as well. By the end of the fiscal year, the city faced a deficit of 6.8 million euros—a first warning that things might be spiraling out of control.

In green-led Baden-Württemberg, officials explained the shortfall with one-off effects and general problems in the German economy—problems they firmly believed could be managed under the state’s green transformation.

Then 2025 arrived—and with it, shock. Trade tax revenues collapsed, expected to bring only around 850 million euros into the city’s coffers for the year. The supplementary budget shows Stuttgart now faces a deficit of 890 million euros—a fiscal hammer blow, reflecting the massive collapse of Germany’s core industries, including automotive, machinery, and chemicals.

The Moment of Truth

The picture is the same across the country. For 2025, the German County Association forecasts a cumulative municipal deficit of around 35 billion euros—a historic figure unseen since World War II, and notably, for Germany, once considered a model of fiscal prudence.

The moment of truth has arrived. Ideologues have run their course. What follows are retreating maneuvers, frantic repair attempts, and the reflex to stabilize past policies artificially with ever-larger debt programs. The house of cards is stacked higher before it inevitably collapses.

Recent experiences with Berlin’s debt policies allow a fairly precise prediction of what comes next. Parts of the so-called “special fund”—new federal debt taken on outside the regular budget—will likely be repackaged into municipal aid packages to plug ever-growing budget holes.

If municipal finances worsen, the next escalation stage is already prepared: a consolidation of debt across the states, accompanied by the issuance of so-called special bonds. Initially through the federal states, guaranteed by the federal government, possibly involving the KfW Bank, labeled as infrastructure investments. Political imagination knows almost no bounds—at least until the bond market puts its foot down and abruptly ends the spree.

Germany has become, as a result of prolonged, fatal political mismanagement, a fiscal parasite. The attempt to pull tomorrow’s purchasing power into the present through debt is fundamentally flawed. It generates growing mountains of debt, forces higher levies, and gradually erodes citizens’ purchasing power through rising inflation.

Predictable Reaction

Many municipalities respond predictably. Across the board, trade tax rates are being drastically increased. The Rhineland-Palatinate capital of Mainz, for example, raised its rate from 310 to 440 percent—a significant burden for local businesses.

Other municipalities, like Wörth with a 65-point increase or Bad Dürkheim with 45 points, illustrate the strategy: higher levies amid declining economic performance—a death spiral for the local economy and, in the medium term, for tax revenue itself.

At the same time, massive austerity programs are being implemented. Germany faces a redefinition of public services. Municipally run, loss-making swimming pools, sports facilities, and recreational centers are now on the chopping block. Put simply: after years of delay, the manic cult of green transformation is now presenting its bill.

And it comes unexpectedly high for many, because people believed the promises of green central planners, who claimed that the complex, finely tuned network of domestic industry could be replaced by a centrally planned green fantasy. A historic error and a regression into the disastrous world of socialist feasibility illusions.

The Green Dream Is Being Lied Into Existence

A quick glance at state-funded media is enough to see how politics and state-aligned outlets attempt to deceive the public about the true state of the German economy. Single, typically heavily subsidized green projects are celebrated, while the real world suffers—with around 24,000 corporate insolvencies and hundreds of thousands of job losses this year alone.

During prime-time broadcasts, this dramatic decline is systematically overshadowed by other topics. The media effort by the green power complex to maintain the illusion of a climate-socialist Elysium reaches grotesque extremes.

Ironically, we see the same process on a geopolitical level, with attempts to turn the Russian central bank’s assets at Euroclear into a system of credit collateral. Essentially, everyone is bankrupt, and the EU staggers in panic mode toward a geopolitical catastrophe.

Every new deficit—whether at the federal level, in social funds, or in municipalities—fails to precisely measure a country’s loss of prosperity, which now reflexively flees into a debt crisis. In Berlin, officials seriously believe they can offset declining economic output with money printing. But as the saying goes: if wealth could be printed, one could also award degrees without merit.

Germany is now attempting to do both simultaneously. In the end, the country will experience its green miracle.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 02:00

Germany's Municipal Financial Crisis: The Green Transformation Backfires

Submitted By Thomas Kolbe

For years, politicians managed to hide the damage caused by the green transformation. Now, deep cracks are appearing in municipal finances amid the severe economic crisis gripping the country. Cities like Stuttgart serve as showcases for the future of the republic.

For a long time, Stuttgart’s city treasurer was more than just a steward of solid numbers. He was regarded as the uncrowned king of fiscal policy in the region—and held a position envied by many colleagues. The robust foundation of the automotive industry and its extensive supplier network funneled generous tax revenues into the city’s coffers for years, particularly from trade taxes.

As recently as 2023, Stuttgart recorded a record 1.6 billion euros in trade tax revenue—a sum that gave the city extraordinary financial leeway. Social projects, infrastructure initiatives, municipal ambitions—the local government could spend freely.

Cracks in the Model Municipality

Then came 2024. Early cracks in Germany’s economic foundation, building up over years, began to appear in Stuttgart as well. By the end of the fiscal year, the city faced a deficit of 6.8 million euros—a first warning that things might be spiraling out of control.

In green-led Baden-Württemberg, officials explained the shortfall with one-off effects and general problems in the German economy—problems they firmly believed could be managed under the state’s green transformation.

Then 2025 arrived—and with it, shock. Trade tax revenues collapsed, expected to bring only around 850 million euros into the city’s coffers for the year. The supplementary budget shows Stuttgart now faces a deficit of 890 million euros—a fiscal hammer blow, reflecting the massive collapse of Germany’s core industries, including automotive, machinery, and chemicals.

The Moment of Truth

The picture is the same across the country. For 2025, the German County Association forecasts a cumulative municipal deficit of around 35 billion euros—a historic figure unseen since World War II, and notably, for Germany, once considered a model of fiscal prudence.

The moment of truth has arrived. Ideologues have run their course. What follows are retreating maneuvers, frantic repair attempts, and the reflex to stabilize past policies artificially with ever-larger debt programs. The house of cards is stacked higher before it inevitably collapses.

Recent experiences with Berlin’s debt policies allow a fairly precise prediction of what comes next. Parts of the so-called “special fund”—new federal debt taken on outside the regular budget—will likely be repackaged into municipal aid packages to plug ever-growing budget holes.

If municipal finances worsen, the next escalation stage is already prepared: a consolidation of debt across the states, accompanied by the issuance of so-called special bonds. Initially through the federal states, guaranteed by the federal government, possibly involving the KfW Bank, labeled as infrastructure investments. Political imagination knows almost no bounds—at least until the bond market puts its foot down and abruptly ends the spree.

Germany has become, as a result of prolonged, fatal political mismanagement, a fiscal parasite. The attempt to pull tomorrow’s purchasing power into the present through debt is fundamentally flawed. It generates growing mountains of debt, forces higher levies, and gradually erodes citizens’ purchasing power through rising inflation.

Predictable Reaction

Many municipalities respond predictably. Across the board, trade tax rates are being drastically increased. The Rhineland-Palatinate capital of Mainz, for example, raised its rate from 310 to 440 percent—a significant burden for local businesses.

Other municipalities, like Wörth with a 65-point increase or Bad Dürkheim with 45 points, illustrate the strategy: higher levies amid declining economic performance—a death spiral for the local economy and, in the medium term, for tax revenue itself.

At the same time, massive austerity programs are being implemented. Germany faces a redefinition of public services. Municipally run, loss-making swimming pools, sports facilities, and recreational centers are now on the chopping block. Put simply: after years of delay, the manic cult of green transformation is now presenting its bill.

And it comes unexpectedly high for many, because people believed the promises of green central planners, who claimed that the complex, finely tuned network of domestic industry could be replaced by a centrally planned green fantasy. A historic error and a regression into the disastrous world of socialist feasibility illusions.

The Green Dream Is Being Lied Into Existence

A quick glance at state-funded media is enough to see how politics and state-aligned outlets attempt to deceive the public about the true state of the German economy. Single, typically heavily subsidized green projects are celebrated, while the real world suffers—with around 24,000 corporate insolvencies and hundreds of thousands of job losses this year alone.

During prime-time broadcasts, this dramatic decline is systematically overshadowed by other topics. The media effort by the green power complex to maintain the illusion of a climate-socialist Elysium reaches grotesque extremes.

Ironically, we see the same process on a geopolitical level, with attempts to turn the Russian central bank’s assets at Euroclear into a system of credit collateral. Essentially, everyone is bankrupt, and the EU staggers in panic mode toward a geopolitical catastrophe.

Every new deficit—whether at the federal level, in social funds, or in municipalities—fails to precisely measure a country’s loss of prosperity, which now reflexively flees into a debt crisis. In Berlin, officials seriously believe they can offset declining economic output with money printing. But as the saying goes: if wealth could be printed, one could also award degrees without merit.

Germany is now attempting to do both simultaneously. In the end, the country will experience its green miracle.

Tyler Durden Tue, 12/16/2025 - 02:00

Aristocracy, Meritocracy, Technocracy, And Revolution

Authored by J.B. Shurk via American Thinker,

All human societies have informal social classes or formal social castes that separate groups of people within the same community.  Generally speaking, notions of aristocracy and hereditary nobility started on the battlefield.  Warrior chiefs of clans became minor kings after killing more rivals without dying themselves.  Rather than remaining in a constant state of tribal conflict, the chiefs of other clans bent the knee and became lesser lords.  Because kings and lords prefer their heirs to be kings and lords, too, bloodlines afforded children the social status that their ancestors had earned on the battlefield.

A ruling king who provided security and stability earned deference from those under his protection.  Over time, tribes combined to become nations.  Chieftains cooperated to form royal courts.  And the heirs of warrior chiefs adopted customs and traditions that symbolically separated those who rule from those who are ruled.

During social upheavals, the ruling aristocracy is often overthrown.  This provides hereditary nobles an incentive not only to quell rebellions quickly but also to find ways to keep the interests of non-nobles aligned with the aristocratic class.  Gifts of land, titles, and property buy a certain amount of loyalty.  The creation of minor offices apportions power to those deemed “worthy” of holding it.  The historic growth of administrative bureaucracies creates a path for non-nobles to exercise their talents in the service of those who rule.

To the consternation of Europe’s aristocratic class, the Great War ushered in a popular revolution against the hereditary order.  Several centuries of a growing middle class, increased literacy, industrial innovation, entrepreneurialism, and more widespread property ownership helped to create the social conditions for broad swaths of Europe’s populations to question why bloodlines should matter more than intelligence, talent, and hard work.  Many European families who lost fathers and sons during the First World War blamed European nobles for the calamity.

By the time the Second World War had provided an extra helping of self-destructive ruin, many of Europe’s noble houses were no more.  Those that had survived were acutely wary of suffering the fates of so many cousins who had been hanged, burned, or shot.  For the surviving members of Europe’s aristocracy to endure, they had no choice but to hand considerable political powers to the common people.  The twentieth century shepherded government reforms, suffrage for men and women without property, public welfare statutes, and expanded opportunities for common people to become part of the State’s governing bureaucracy.

While these reforms were celebrated as triumphs for “democracy,” it is important to understand that they did not completely supplant the vestiges of European aristocracy.  In the United Kingdom, the House of Lords still recognized the inherent right to rule of certain families.  Men with noble titles still ran central banks, trading houses, and clandestine agencies.  The attachés of those administrative lords still came from the “best families” and attended the “finest schools.”  Increasingly, however, the children of middle class families competed for and secured positions within the larger bureaucratic staff.

This twentieth century transition — in which citizens from low social classes were more broadly included in the functions of government — marked the social pivot to what Westerners call “meritocracy.”  

No longer would a person’s bloodline serve as the limits of what that person might achieve in this life.  Instead, natural intelligence, hard work, and determination could provide a person of any means the opportunity to rise as high as he might wish.

“Meritocracy” was an alluring idea to sell to the common people who had already destroyed so much of the aristocrats’ cherished social order in the first half of the twentieth century.  

Out with the nobles!  In with the people who deserve to have power!  From the point of view of someone in the lower or middle classes, a system that rewards skill, smarts, and determination sounds much fairer.

However, “meritocracy” provides an ancillary benefit to a ruling class seeking to maintain control: It keeps the most ambitious members of the non-noble classes competing against each other for a small number of powerful positions and reinforces the legitimacy of the governing system as a whole.  People who study, sacrifice, and struggle to obtain a little power within a governing bureaucracy are not inclined to question, criticize, or delegitimize that system once vested with a modicum of authority inside of it.

With the rise of the “meritocracy,” residual ruling class families found endless opportunities to keep unsuspecting commoners chasing their tails.  

A hundred years ago, “gentlemen” in positions of power had, at most, a college education.  The transition toward “meritocracy” convinced members of the lower classes that they needed all kinds of postgraduate degrees to prove their “expertise.”  

Just keep studying, kids, and you might finally have the right credentials to do the same job as a bunch of lords once did before they had reached the age of twenty-two! 

 In the meantime, stay poor, follow the rules, question nothing, and the ruling class might find a position for you once you’ve begged long enough.

In pursuit of “meritocracy,” commoners have been conditioned to believe that you cannot be successful without at least a college education.  In turn, the remnants of the noble ruling class have turned colleges into indoctrination laboratories that reinforce the ideologies of the ruling system.  Members of the Old Guard, in other words, have found the perfect mechanism through which to subordinate the very people otherwise inclined to overthrow them.  

Say ‘Hello’ to the new nobility; it looks just like the old one!

Unfortunately for the powers that be, there are widening cracks now in the “meritocracy” illusion.  Those cracks began with “affirmative action” programs in the United States that perpetuated racial discrimination, and they have continued to expand this century with the broad initiatives across the West in support of so-called “diversity, inclusion, and equity.”  Preferential admissions and hiring decisions in favor of special classes of people identified by their skin color, ethnicity, sexual disposition, disability, or perceived “victimhood” have blown up the perception that “meritocracy” exists at all.

Instead, what is increasingly obvious is that the same aristocrats who have always made the rules are once again decreeing which classes of commoners will be allowed to mingle among their ranks.  

Out with the meritocratic!  In with the multi-racial trans-furries who have trouble doing math!  As institutions in the West expose themselves as part of an unjust and prejudicial political system, the legitimacy of the ruling class is increasingly under attack.

For the first time in many decades, Westerners have begun to notice that much of the old aristocracy supposedly supplanted by the “meritocracy” remains nonetheless in charge.  Surprise!  A century after the supposed end of hereditary rule, men and women with feudal titles still control the European Council, transnational governing bodies, international treaty organizations, and all the central banks.  In other words, the illusion of “meritocracy” gave the ruling class just enough camouflage to survive several more generations.

What happens now?  

The world’s richest man, Elon Musk, says that artificial intelligence will soon replace most human jobs.  

He insists that there will be a universal high income that every common peasant receives.  He says people will want for nothing…except purpose.

Perhaps Musk is right.  

Perhaps the lower classes will consent to a small number of elites ruling over them in perpetuity.  

Perhaps they will consent to mass surveillance, censorship, and State-sponsored “truths.”  

Perhaps they will agree to let the families of billionaires behave as entourages within royal courts in support of a coterie of technocratic kings.

Or perhaps we are destined for social upheaval.  

Perhaps what started on the battlefield will return to it. 

 Perhaps the ruling aristocracy will finally be overthrown.  

Regardless, the future will be interesting.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 23:25

Aristocracy, Meritocracy, Technocracy, And Revolution

Authored by J.B. Shurk via American Thinker,

All human societies have informal social classes or formal social castes that separate groups of people within the same community.  Generally speaking, notions of aristocracy and hereditary nobility started on the battlefield.  Warrior chiefs of clans became minor kings after killing more rivals without dying themselves.  Rather than remaining in a constant state of tribal conflict, the chiefs of other clans bent the knee and became lesser lords.  Because kings and lords prefer their heirs to be kings and lords, too, bloodlines afforded children the social status that their ancestors had earned on the battlefield.

A ruling king who provided security and stability earned deference from those under his protection.  Over time, tribes combined to become nations.  Chieftains cooperated to form royal courts.  And the heirs of warrior chiefs adopted customs and traditions that symbolically separated those who rule from those who are ruled.

During social upheavals, the ruling aristocracy is often overthrown.  This provides hereditary nobles an incentive not only to quell rebellions quickly but also to find ways to keep the interests of non-nobles aligned with the aristocratic class.  Gifts of land, titles, and property buy a certain amount of loyalty.  The creation of minor offices apportions power to those deemed “worthy” of holding it.  The historic growth of administrative bureaucracies creates a path for non-nobles to exercise their talents in the service of those who rule.

To the consternation of Europe’s aristocratic class, the Great War ushered in a popular revolution against the hereditary order.  Several centuries of a growing middle class, increased literacy, industrial innovation, entrepreneurialism, and more widespread property ownership helped to create the social conditions for broad swaths of Europe’s populations to question why bloodlines should matter more than intelligence, talent, and hard work.  Many European families who lost fathers and sons during the First World War blamed European nobles for the calamity.

By the time the Second World War had provided an extra helping of self-destructive ruin, many of Europe’s noble houses were no more.  Those that had survived were acutely wary of suffering the fates of so many cousins who had been hanged, burned, or shot.  For the surviving members of Europe’s aristocracy to endure, they had no choice but to hand considerable political powers to the common people.  The twentieth century shepherded government reforms, suffrage for men and women without property, public welfare statutes, and expanded opportunities for common people to become part of the State’s governing bureaucracy.

While these reforms were celebrated as triumphs for “democracy,” it is important to understand that they did not completely supplant the vestiges of European aristocracy.  In the United Kingdom, the House of Lords still recognized the inherent right to rule of certain families.  Men with noble titles still ran central banks, trading houses, and clandestine agencies.  The attachés of those administrative lords still came from the “best families” and attended the “finest schools.”  Increasingly, however, the children of middle class families competed for and secured positions within the larger bureaucratic staff.

This twentieth century transition — in which citizens from low social classes were more broadly included in the functions of government — marked the social pivot to what Westerners call “meritocracy.”  

No longer would a person’s bloodline serve as the limits of what that person might achieve in this life.  Instead, natural intelligence, hard work, and determination could provide a person of any means the opportunity to rise as high as he might wish.

“Meritocracy” was an alluring idea to sell to the common people who had already destroyed so much of the aristocrats’ cherished social order in the first half of the twentieth century.  

Out with the nobles!  In with the people who deserve to have power!  From the point of view of someone in the lower or middle classes, a system that rewards skill, smarts, and determination sounds much fairer.

However, “meritocracy” provides an ancillary benefit to a ruling class seeking to maintain control: It keeps the most ambitious members of the non-noble classes competing against each other for a small number of powerful positions and reinforces the legitimacy of the governing system as a whole.  People who study, sacrifice, and struggle to obtain a little power within a governing bureaucracy are not inclined to question, criticize, or delegitimize that system once vested with a modicum of authority inside of it.

With the rise of the “meritocracy,” residual ruling class families found endless opportunities to keep unsuspecting commoners chasing their tails.  

A hundred years ago, “gentlemen” in positions of power had, at most, a college education.  The transition toward “meritocracy” convinced members of the lower classes that they needed all kinds of postgraduate degrees to prove their “expertise.”  

Just keep studying, kids, and you might finally have the right credentials to do the same job as a bunch of lords once did before they had reached the age of twenty-two! 

 In the meantime, stay poor, follow the rules, question nothing, and the ruling class might find a position for you once you’ve begged long enough.

In pursuit of “meritocracy,” commoners have been conditioned to believe that you cannot be successful without at least a college education.  In turn, the remnants of the noble ruling class have turned colleges into indoctrination laboratories that reinforce the ideologies of the ruling system.  Members of the Old Guard, in other words, have found the perfect mechanism through which to subordinate the very people otherwise inclined to overthrow them.  

Say ‘Hello’ to the new nobility; it looks just like the old one!

Unfortunately for the powers that be, there are widening cracks now in the “meritocracy” illusion.  Those cracks began with “affirmative action” programs in the United States that perpetuated racial discrimination, and they have continued to expand this century with the broad initiatives across the West in support of so-called “diversity, inclusion, and equity.”  Preferential admissions and hiring decisions in favor of special classes of people identified by their skin color, ethnicity, sexual disposition, disability, or perceived “victimhood” have blown up the perception that “meritocracy” exists at all.

Instead, what is increasingly obvious is that the same aristocrats who have always made the rules are once again decreeing which classes of commoners will be allowed to mingle among their ranks.  

Out with the meritocratic!  In with the multi-racial trans-furries who have trouble doing math!  As institutions in the West expose themselves as part of an unjust and prejudicial political system, the legitimacy of the ruling class is increasingly under attack.

For the first time in many decades, Westerners have begun to notice that much of the old aristocracy supposedly supplanted by the “meritocracy” remains nonetheless in charge.  Surprise!  A century after the supposed end of hereditary rule, men and women with feudal titles still control the European Council, transnational governing bodies, international treaty organizations, and all the central banks.  In other words, the illusion of “meritocracy” gave the ruling class just enough camouflage to survive several more generations.

What happens now?  

The world’s richest man, Elon Musk, says that artificial intelligence will soon replace most human jobs.  

He insists that there will be a universal high income that every common peasant receives.  He says people will want for nothing…except purpose.

Perhaps Musk is right.  

Perhaps the lower classes will consent to a small number of elites ruling over them in perpetuity.  

Perhaps they will consent to mass surveillance, censorship, and State-sponsored “truths.”  

Perhaps they will agree to let the families of billionaires behave as entourages within royal courts in support of a coterie of technocratic kings.

Or perhaps we are destined for social upheaval.  

Perhaps what started on the battlefield will return to it. 

 Perhaps the ruling aristocracy will finally be overthrown.  

Regardless, the future will be interesting.

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 23:25

John Mearsheimer: Why Diplomacy Is Going Nowhere & Ukraine Is Doomed

With Zelensky having much-belatedly dropped aspirations for Ukraine's NATO membership, European officials are now openly admitting what pretty much everyone knew but was afraid to say.

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas has newly acknowledged in fresh remarks that Ukraine's membership in the military alliance is now obviously "out of the question" - but that the European Union now needs to provide concrete security guarantees.

"Now if this [Ukraine’s NATO membership] is not in question, or this is out of the question, then we need to see what are the security guarantees that are tangible. They can’t be papers, or promises, they have to be real troops, real capabilities," she told reporters ahead of an EU Foreign Ministers meeting.

Kallas asserted that "in the last 100 years, Russia has attacked at least 19 countries," and so this means "the security guarantees are needed for all other members" in the EU.

Image via European Union

Europe is likely still going to propose some scheme not acceptable to Moscow, such as "Article 5-style" security guarantees, falling just short of NATO membership. But Russian leaders are just going to see keep viewing this as but a recipe for future conflict. 

This is precisely what Zelensky is now demanding in place of dropping the NATO bid. "We are talking about bilateral security guarantees between Ukraine and the United States — namely, Article 5-like guarantees ... as well as security guarantees for us from our European partners and from other countries such as Canada, Japan and others," he recently told Financial Times.

While rejecting the US deal which hinges on significant territorial concessions, Zelensky is hailing his new stance as some kind of grand compromise.

"These security guarantees are an opportunity to prevent another wave of Russian aggression," he had said over the weekend. "And this is already a compromise on our part." But this should have been taken off the table all the way back in February of 2022, on the eve of the Russian invasion, or even well before. Of course, he's much too late 'offering' this 'concession'. 

As we pointed out earlier, the open secret has for years been that the Washington and EU establishments know full well that it was historic and recent constant NATO expansion which led to this horrific, grinding war. This reality is so well understood that in their private, non-official commentary even former top Biden officials fully admit the fact.

Yet these same Biden officials had while in government pursued policies fueling the Ukrainian proxy war as they wanted to 'weaken' Russia. They considered the issue of NATO expansion as a prime rationale of Russia's invasion to be an off-limits talking point.

All of the above developments suggest that diplomacy is still going nowhere, also as Kiev has still not been induced to offer anything 'real' (from Moscow's perspective) that would be enough to permanently end the war and achieve lasting peace.

According to a recent podcast appearance by geopolitical analyst and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer, "there is virtually no reason to think that a peace agreement can be struck to end the war, despite all the diplomatic maneuvering that has been taking place in recent months."

He continued... "For sure, diplomacy is a good thing in principle, but in practice it is going nowhere in this case. Russian demands are completely at odds with Ukrainian and European demands. And neither side is willing to budge an inch. Moreover, many seem to think that the proposal the Trump administration is pushing is a joint US-Russian plan — one that both Moscow and Washington support — when in fact there is no evidence that the Russians have accepted Trump’s 27-point plan."

"Indeed, that proposal is unacceptable to the Russians as they made clear on December 4th. Diplomacy will only become relevant when there is a major development on the battlefield that tells both sides that it is time to negotiate an armistice, turning the hot war into a frozen conflict." Watch the full interview below:

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 23:00

John Mearsheimer: Why Diplomacy Is Going Nowhere & Ukraine Is Doomed

With Zelensky having much-belatedly dropped aspirations for Ukraine's NATO membership, European officials are now openly admitting what pretty much everyone knew but was afraid to say.

EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Kaja Kallas has newly acknowledged in fresh remarks that Ukraine's membership in the military alliance is now obviously "out of the question" - but that the European Union now needs to provide concrete security guarantees.

"Now if this [Ukraine’s NATO membership] is not in question, or this is out of the question, then we need to see what are the security guarantees that are tangible. They can’t be papers, or promises, they have to be real troops, real capabilities," she told reporters ahead of an EU Foreign Ministers meeting.

Kallas asserted that "in the last 100 years, Russia has attacked at least 19 countries," and so this means "the security guarantees are needed for all other members" in the EU.

Image via European Union

Europe is likely still going to propose some scheme not acceptable to Moscow, such as "Article 5-style" security guarantees, falling just short of NATO membership. But Russian leaders are just going to see keep viewing this as but a recipe for future conflict. 

This is precisely what Zelensky is now demanding in place of dropping the NATO bid. "We are talking about bilateral security guarantees between Ukraine and the United States — namely, Article 5-like guarantees ... as well as security guarantees for us from our European partners and from other countries such as Canada, Japan and others," he recently told Financial Times.

While rejecting the US deal which hinges on significant territorial concessions, Zelensky is hailing his new stance as some kind of grand compromise.

"These security guarantees are an opportunity to prevent another wave of Russian aggression," he had said over the weekend. "And this is already a compromise on our part." But this should have been taken off the table all the way back in February of 2022, on the eve of the Russian invasion, or even well before. Of course, he's much too late 'offering' this 'concession'. 

As we pointed out earlier, the open secret has for years been that the Washington and EU establishments know full well that it was historic and recent constant NATO expansion which led to this horrific, grinding war. This reality is so well understood that in their private, non-official commentary even former top Biden officials fully admit the fact.

Yet these same Biden officials had while in government pursued policies fueling the Ukrainian proxy war as they wanted to 'weaken' Russia. They considered the issue of NATO expansion as a prime rationale of Russia's invasion to be an off-limits talking point.

All of the above developments suggest that diplomacy is still going nowhere, also as Kiev has still not been induced to offer anything 'real' (from Moscow's perspective) that would be enough to permanently end the war and achieve lasting peace.

According to a recent podcast appearance by geopolitical analyst and University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer, "there is virtually no reason to think that a peace agreement can be struck to end the war, despite all the diplomatic maneuvering that has been taking place in recent months."

He continued... "For sure, diplomacy is a good thing in principle, but in practice it is going nowhere in this case. Russian demands are completely at odds with Ukrainian and European demands. And neither side is willing to budge an inch. Moreover, many seem to think that the proposal the Trump administration is pushing is a joint US-Russian plan — one that both Moscow and Washington support — when in fact there is no evidence that the Russians have accepted Trump’s 27-point plan."

"Indeed, that proposal is unacceptable to the Russians as they made clear on December 4th. Diplomacy will only become relevant when there is a major development on the battlefield that tells both sides that it is time to negotiate an armistice, turning the hot war into a frozen conflict." Watch the full interview below:

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 23:00

FBI Hunting Down Members Of 764 Network: Dan Bongino

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

The FBI is in the process of pursuing members of the 764 criminal network, Deputy Director Dan Bongino said in a Dec. 12 post on X.

The 764 is a violent network, operating within the United States and around the globe, that methodically targets and exploits minors, according to the FBI.

“These networks use threats, blackmail, and manipulation to coerce or extort victims into producing, sharing, or live-streaming acts of self-harm, animal cruelty, sexually explicit acts, and/or suicide,“ the FBI stated. ”The footage is then circulated among members of the network to continue to extort victims and exert control over them.”

Bongino wrote on X: “We are hunting down the members of the 764 network with unprecedented arrest numbers, and a tireless focus on developing new investigative leads with our state, local, and global law enforcement partners.

“We will not allow them to target our children.

“You cannot hide behind a keyboard.”

The 764 network comprises “Nihilistic Violent Extremists” who support the production and sharing of child sex abuse material and extreme gore media, the Department of Justice stated on Nov. 20.

Members “often conduct coordinated extortions of teenagers, blackmailing the victims to comply with the group’s demands.”

On Nov. 20, a federal grand jury indicted a 20-year-old member of the 764 network over allegations that the person persuaded and coerced three minor females to engage in sexually explicit conduct.

“This is one of the most serious issues in America and the @FBI numbers reflect it—500 percent increase in Nihilistic Violent Extremism arrests over last year and 20 percent increase in confirmed 764 arrests,” FBI Director Kash Patel said in a post on X. “Every field office is fully engaged and we’re not slowing down.”

The FBI stated: “Victims are typically between the ages of 10 and 17 years old, but the FBI has seen some victims as young as 9 years old. These violent actors target vulnerable populations to include children as well as those who struggle with a variety of mental health issues, such as depression, eating disorders, or suicidal ideation.”

Malicious actors groom their targets by establishing trusting, romantic relationships with victims.

The agency asked family and friends to watch out for potential indicators and warning signs among minors, including sudden changes in behavior or appearance, dropping out of activities and becoming more isolated, scars, carvings on the skin such as words or symbols, scratches or bruises, burn marks, wearing long sleeves or pants in hot weather, harming of family pets or other animals, and receipt of anonymous gifts.

Protecting Children

In a Dec. 12 FBI podcast, Supervisory Special Agent Abbi Beccaccio, who oversees specialized child sexual exploitation investigations, said the members of violent online networks get their victims to engage in horrific activities because of “their underlying desire to sow chaos.”

“Essentially, they want to target the most vulnerable populations, and in doing so, they hope to bring down the fabric of society, whether or not they actually have the ability to do that,” Beccaccio said.

This week, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced three bipartisan bills to protect children online that focus on sentencing laws, child extortion, and violent online criminal networks, according to a Dec. 9 statement from the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

The Sentencing Accountability for Exploitation Act requires the U.S. Sentencing Commission to develop a new child sex abuse material (CSAM) sentencing guideline that takes into account modern indicators of dangerous conduct, such as a person taking part in a CSAM online group.

The Ending Coercion of Children and Harm Online Act seeks to tackle the issue of individuals coercing children into harming themselves, other people, or animals by proposing life in prison for such crimes.

The Stop Sextortion Act targets people who threaten to distribute CSAM with the goal of coercing, intimidating, and extorting children.

“Changes in technology have created new opportunities for criminals to harass, exploit, intimidate, and harm American children. These horrific crimes—often committed by violent online groups who take advantage of our nation’s outdated laws—have gone unchecked for far too long,” Grassley said.

“Congress must stand up for American families and finally address the online rot that is hurting children nationwide.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 22:35

End Of An Era: Pro-Democracy Icon Jimmy Lai Found Guilty Of Sedition In Hong Kong

The high profile trial of Hong Kong's foremost pro-democracy media tycoon has just wrapped up, and it puts a symbolic cap on the end of an era in terms of prior large scale anti-China activism in the city.

Jimmy Lai, who long spearheaded huge protests and local media criticism of Beijing, was found guilty on Monday in a landmark national security case, marking an end to the 156-dady trial. He could spend the rest of his life in prison based the series of sedition-related convictions.

Media tycoon and Beijing critic Jimmy Lai, via Associated Press

Prosecutors accused him of conspiring with senior executives of the fiercely pro-democracy and independent Chinese-language newspaper Apple Daily and others to request foreign forces to impose sanctions or blockades to thwart Beijing influence in Hong Kong. 

Further, he's alleged to have engaged in other hostile activities against Hong Kong or China, which hearkens back to prior years of long-running street protests which sometimes descended into violence and vandalism, or at times large student takeovers of entire university buildings.

China had long alleged a foreign intelligence 'hidden hand' behind the protests. This was in part due to student activists being in semi-regular communication with Western officials and NGOs, and sometimes even honored at events hosted in Europe or the US.

A panel of three government-approved judges convicted the 78-year-old, after Lai had consistently denied all charges. He was first detained in August 2020 under Hong Kong’s Beijing-imposed national security law.

The security law has been widely seen as the final nail in the coffin of Hong Kong's long-running autonomy, and was a response to the major 2019 protests which were widely covered in international press reports.

Lai upon the verdict being read appeared upbeat, as he waved to supporters in the public gallery, which included his wife, son, and Hong Kong’s Catholic Cardinal Joseph Zen.

Western leaders, including of the US and Britain, are expected to lobby for his freedom, especially given that this is being viewed as ultimately a crackdown on Western values in influence on one of the globe's main financial hubs.

Sebastien Lai, one of his children, issued a statement on behalf of the family, saying they are saddened by the verdict, describing it as a twisting of justice. "In the 800-page verdict they have there is essentially nothing, nothing that incriminates him," Lai told reporters in London. "This is a perfect example of how the national security law has been molded and weaponized against someone who essentially said stuff that they didn't like."

Western condemnation and outrage pours in...

The UK condemns the prosecution of Jimmy Lai and calls for his immediate release.

My statement on the verdict today; pic.twitter.com/rHttaOuktB

— Yvette Cooper (@YvetteCooperMP) December 15, 2025

"This verdict proves that the authorities still fear our father, even in his weakened state, for what he represents," his daughter Claire added in the statement. "We stand by his innocence and condemn this miscarriage of justice."

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 22:10

Homan Urges Politicians To Stop Attacking ICE, Border Patrol Officers

Authored by Naveen Athrappully via The Epoch Times,

Politicians should stop attacking immigration officers trying to enforce laws while putting their lives at risk, border czar Tom Homan said during a press briefing on Dec. 13 that involved officials from the Customs and Border Patrol (CBP).

“I’m begging the politicians, the governors, the mayors who constantly attack these men and women, please stop. I don’t want to bury anybody else. It’s not a joke. We’re all there enforcing the laws. Not only I care about the safety of the men and women in uniform, I care about the safety of those who we’re looking for and apprehending,” Homan told reporters.

“I want you to remember three o'clock this morning, I bet every one of you will be sleeping comfortably in your bed. These men and women will be standing on a dirt trail someplace because a sensor went off. Is it just someone coming for better life? Or was it a heavily armed drug smuggler? They don’t know, but they’re going to take it on. Every night across this nation.”

Homan praised the men and women of CBP, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and other federal law enforcement who are involved in building what he called the “most secure border.”

There have been multiple incidents of immigration enforcement officers being attacked while carrying out their duties.

In a Dec. 10 statement, ICE said more than 100 people attempted to impede an investigation, locking a gate to trap agents within a restaurant. The investigation was part of a multi-year probe targeting a transnational criminal organization.

“Agitators quickly turned violent, assaulting officers and slashing tires,” it said.

Two Homeland Security Investigations Special Response Team operators were injured, with one suffering a knee injury while the other ruptured a bicep. Two U.S. citizens were arrested for assaulting a federal officer, obstruction, and damaging a government vehicle.

An ICE officer was attacked by an illegal immigrant from Louisiana who “savagely bit the officer’s hand while resisting arrest,” DHS said in a Dec. 12 statement. The bite tore through the skin and drew blood, according to DHS. The agency called on politicians and the media to halt calls to resist ICE enforcement.

“DHS law enforcement is facing a 1,150 percent increase in assaults against them and an 8,000 percent increase in death threats. This is the reality of what our ICE officers are facing every day as they go to work to simply do their job and enforce the law,” DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said.

Protestors taunt federal agents in front of Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices in Portland, Oregon, on Oct. 3, 2025. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

Protecting ICE Officers

Certain lawmakers and local officials have maintained a negative view of immigration enforcement.

During a Sept. 30 news briefing, Katrina Thompson, the mayor of Broadview, Illinois, demanded that ICE and DHS stop what she called “hostile actions” against the local community.

She alleged officers were deploying chemical agents and physical force against protestors, and said there was a “pattern of escalating aggression” from ICE agents against demonstrators exercising their First Amendment rights.

In September, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law a bill that makes it a misdemeanor crime for officers to wear face coverings while doing their jobs.

Newsom said his state was “pushing back” against actions of the Trump administration.

“It’s like a dystopian sci-fi movie. Unmarked cars, people in masks, people quite literally disappearing. No due process, no rights in a democracy where we have rights,” he said.

Federal agents have been wearing masks to protect their identities and prevent them and their families from being doxxed by activists.

On Nov. 17, the Department of Justice filed a lawsuit against California and its officials, challenging the law and other legislation, arguing they pose considerable personal safety risks for agents, including doxxing and harassment.

“Law enforcement officers risk their lives every day to keep Americans safe, and they do not deserve to be doxed or harassed simply for carrying out their duties,” Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement.

DHS is taking action against people who threaten immigration officers.

Last week, DHS announced it had arrested two people from New Jersey who allegedly threatened to shoot ICE officers “on sight.” The individuals also threatened to hang McLaughlin, the agency said in a Dec. 9 statement.

U.S. citizens Ricardo Antonio Roman-Flores and Emilio Roman-Flores, who are twins, were charged with multiple crimes, including conspiracy to commit terroristic threats and unlawful possession of an assault weapon. The Epoch Times was unable to reach the pair’s attorneys for comment at the time.

“Let this be a warning to anyone who dares threaten or attack our brave law enforcement officers,” Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said. “If you threaten our law enforcement or DHS officials, we will hunt you down and you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Tyler Durden Mon, 12/15/2025 - 21:45