University of Wisconsin demographer Yi Fuxian has been arguing for decades (mostly on Project Syndicate) that China’s present 1.4 billion population has been overcounted by some 100-130 million people. Most of these phantom citizens were ‘born’ after 1990. Despite these claims, China’s official statistics office has not felt the need to adjust the tally downward. But are there valid reasons to start doubting the total human population size of 8.3 billion (2026)?

Besides Yi Fuxian, there are other, heavily online demographers claiming China’s population is really under 1 billion or even under 500 million. I classify these claims as Chinese propaganda, namely meant to discredit the very idea of an overcounted Chinese population. Videos claiming China’s countryside is “empty” ignore that, indeed, the majority of China’s population has always lived in the nations’ Eastern basin, since the Western parts of the nation are extremely mountainous or arid.

China’s National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) registered the official 2026 tally at 1.405 billion people, down just 3.39 million from last year, due to deaths exceeding births. However, according to Yu Fuxian, local Chinese authorities have had reasons to overstate births in their regions, namely to attract government subsidies, or to avoid penalties. Local administrators are believed to have falsified school enrollment statistics, for example.

Apart from internal and regional reasons to inflate the population size, there may be international or geopolitical reasons why China wouldn’t want to adjust its population down to 1.3 or 1.27 billion people (as per Fuxian’s calculations). What comes to mind is China’s competition with India as the world’s most populous nation. China’s position as the world’s largest population wins it a certain authority—the weightiness of the world’s Middle Kingdom—along with a badge of economic and political competence.

Managing a nation with a population four to five times the size of the US is no small feat. Geopolitically speaking, China may also have many reasons to “throw its weight around” on the international stage. Having the world’s largest population can help intimidate one’s enemies militarily. The message is: “You Americans may have big rockets, but we’ve got half a billion expendable soldiers ready for a ground war.”

Lastly, boasting the world’s largest consumer market may also attract billions of USD$ in Wall Street investments to China, thus propping up its economy and its positions as rivaling economic superpower.

Reasons to Misrepresent the Global Population

Nations such as China, as we can see, may have various reasons to misrepresent their true population sizes. Whether overcounting to attract investments and subsidies, or undercounting, the crux is that physical population headcounts are extremely costly and difficult to organize. Most populations’ headcounts rely on proper birth and death registrations by local offices. That’s where things might easily go wrong.

For starters, I wouldn’t want to suggest that this sort of thing—miscounting the population—doesn’t happen in Western nations. I would suggest it also happens in modern nations. Below is an overview of reasons why either developed or developing nations might want to overstate, or sometimes deliberately undercount, their true populations sizes:

• Exaggerations of the regional or local population due to central government division of funds (e.g., subsidies, investments), for example by enrolling non-existent school pupils or undercounting natural deaths to hide a shrinking population. (Think of the Somali daycare scam in the US State of Minnesota.)

• International aid and loans: Larger reported populations can attract more financial assistance, even from the World Bank, other humanitarian aid, or concessional loans from UN agencies, bilateral donors, as aid is often scaled to population needs.

• Reparations for climate change, slavery, or colonialism: Larger populations can claim a larger stake from the reparations pie. Besides inflating the number of alleged victims, such reparations will also incentivize “crying wolf harder”, i.e., inflating crimes or even inventing mass genocides that never happened.

• Political/electoral power: Inflated figures can justify more seats in parliament, more representatives, or greater influence in regional blocs. Think of the US electoral college if it were changed for states be proportional to their relative share of the national population.

• National prestige: Governments may inflate numbers to project strength or hide demographic decline.

• Lower per-capita burdens: Underreporting can make per-capita GDP/income appear higher (improving global rankings), reduce reported poverty rates, or lower obligations under international agreements (e.g., climate targets scaled to population).

• Hide demographic issues: Countries facing rapid aging or low fertility (e.g., some claims about China inflating figures to mask faster-than-admitted decline) might underreport to avoid signaling weakness.

• Security/military: Smaller reported populations can downplay vulnerability or resource strains.

There may be many other reason, but when we add them all up, what is more likely, a global overcount or a global undercount? I suggest the overall incentive to misrepresent population headcounts skews the total upward, not downward, namely to project power and lay claim to divisions of funds and resources.

Greek philosopher Plato wrote that the soul had three parts, the rational, the spirited, and the appetitive. In his Republic, he also wrote that men should share their wives, that all sex should be had in public, and that children should be raised in communes without knowing who their real parents were.

Hippies of the 1960s implemented Plato’s ideas while rejecting Plato’s hard authoritarianism. But before we dismiss Plato as an idiot, we should note that Plato never meant anything he said or wrote to be serious or true. He was only doing hypothetical experiments in his head to see if there was something else that could be learned, for example, about the nature of human beings. It is the people who took Plato’s writings at face value who are the idiots.

Plato never observed a soul and could, therefore, never have determined its parts. This is why Western philosophy shouldn’t be a subject taught to random people, as though philosophy were a development of truths and facts. Philosophy’s study and teaching should be reserved to the cognitive and verbal elite who, moreover, possess the faculty of critical self-reflection. You need to be able to dismiss a lot as nonsense or see it as hypothetical conjecture, not as a “real”.

Have you noticed how people, especially on the progressive side of the political spectrum, are prisoners of words? That’s why leftist governments want to censor you thought. Scary words make these people feel scared. Angry words make them shrink. They confused words in their head for deeds in reality. It’s why liberal judges will convict man who “said” he was going to rape a woman (but didn’t), while the same judges will free another man who did rape a woman but “said” he didn’t know it was wrong to rape.

When we start confusing words for realities, we become idiots. Indeed, our judiciary, political bureaucracy, and even newspaper offices are staffed with idiots. But through a process of learning, imagining, and reflecting, we can arrive at truer insights. Anything learned by rote without question belongs to the realm of idiocy. Taking words for literal truths is a flaw of character. You’re supposed to reflect on words to find out what they actually achieved in terms of action in the real world.

Modern scientists, for example, say they want to study the “real” world that they say exists independently from human observers, by removing the observer. And so, they build machines, apparatuses, and measurement devices to “objectively” measure that a certain value is such and such. Then, they trust the “data” because it “says so”. But have they truly removed the human observer from said observation? No! The machine—after all—was created by these men. The machine, therefore, is an extension still of a human observer and, therefore, the observation is still subject to human interference.

I can poke a fish with my finger or I can poke it with a stick. I’m still involved either way. I could also design a machine that pokes sticks at fish. This doesn’t mean I have removed myself as an interfering observer at all. I have merely visually separated myself from the act through the use of a machine (that I made), but my intentions, my thoughts, my reasoning all still affect the outcome in the exact same manner as before. I have not really removed myself as an observer. Yet, scientists are convinced that by saying the magic words, “we’ve removed the human observer from the experiment”, they have achieved it really.

At present, there is no science whatsoever that has ever measured or known a thing without this subjective human factor mingling with the results. A thing, no thing, can be known without human observation. Even if we built a robot to help build us a scientific measuring device, the robot will still have been built by humans, or by other robots built by humans, or by machines built my humans that build robots.

Though we can always further increase the distance between ourselves and an observation—toward infinity—we can never sever this link between us and the outside world. Rather than fight this insight, the intelligent person embraces it: “All observation known to man is subjectively human observation.” This is the sort of truth Plato might have been looking for, for it supersedes mere words and zones in on the crux of the problem.

Accepting this forces us to explore related insights, such as the meaning of this distantly ‘tethered’ reality, a reality, unlike an umbilical cord, that can never be severed from humanity. Now, we are starting to think intelligently.

Not being an idiot has something to do with exploring, discovering, recognizing, embracing, and understanding either limitations or their absence. We can, for example, do a re-read of ancient Greek philosophy from the early Milesians through the Socratics and conclude that most of what these men had ever said or done was largely made up from behind their writing desks. Did Socrates even exist? We have a Roman copy of a Greek statue pertaining to be Socrates, but we don’t have the Greek original. (It could be that the figure Socrates was a fantasy, a figment of Plato’s. Which, however, doesn’t affect the quality of the thoughts presented as those of Socrates.)

Ordinary people cannot think very well. For example, when I suggested that perhaps several phantom centuries had been inserted into the Western timeline to put Otto III’s coronation in the year 1000 AD (see Heribert Illig) for the sake of unifying Europe under Christianity against Islam that rose during the 7th, this fact alone suggests, indeed, that Europeans didn’t wait for 300 years to counter Islam as a unified continent but that they must have done so much sooner.

However, the insertion of three fake centuries does not, in any way, affect real events that occurred during those “years”, even when we now remove the phantom centuries again and place ourselves in the year 1729. The Norse Vikings still went to Iceland, for example, and the Sutton Hoo helmet was still found. All that’s changed are the years these events are attributed to on a calendar that was always fictionally human to begin with. My point is that words (and calendars and human bookkeeping) are descriptive of reality, but not prescriptive. Words don’t rule the world, actions and events do.

Mind you, the confusion between actions and words arises only in feminine societies such as our modern world today. In more masculine ages, such as the Bronze Age, people were handily illiterate and didn’t keep records, and so there was no confusion about reality. Indeed, there are stories of peoples fleeing into the mountains who then, over time, lose their ability to read and write again. This act frees the newly illiterate people from the valley bureaucracies below. (Note that all great civilizations and empires were valley cultures, since mountainous regions are always too expensive to police.)

The illiterate but free men forget their texts but they don’t forget their history. The history becomes oral, restoring, in a way, the power of words to the speaker instead of to the bookkeeping bureaucrat and his legal texts. Now you know what killed magic: government bureaucracy killed the power of the magician’s words by documenting magic spells and thereby muting their potency.

Certain steps in the development of logical thought apparently took centuries if not millennia to be written down, either because people had no practical use for said advances, or because humanity by and large produces mostly very dim individuals who can’t do it.

For this is points to another great revelation: why do seemingly low-verbal humans coexist with high-verbal humans? And why do lawmakers reading from dusty old legalese texts wield the greatest apparent power? It’s because words rule people, but only people already subjected to the power of words—reasonably feminine people. For unlike men, women don’t test whether words they hear are physically possible. Intelligent manly men, it seems, are able to emulate the words they hear, as a video replay, to see if they make sense. But feminine women take the literal for the real, or at least pretend to do so.

Regardless, the logicians have fallen into the same trap that material scientists have fallen into. There is no limit to the number of logical insights one can have, as there is no limit to the number of observations a scientist can have. This brings us hidden limitations: If there is no limit to the number of insights or observations one can have, then there isn’t going to be a unifying Theory of Everything either. Every thought unthought beholds the power to undo the latest theories. And such a thing has already happened many times over.

This happened, for example, when we moved from a Euclidean understanding of space to a Newtonian one and then an Einsteinian one. The underlying ‘real’ space never changed, insofar there is a real space, and humanity’s limited grasping of the physical world only slightly improved in the process. I must remind the reader that our ancestors living before Giordano Bruno and Copernicus all though that “space” outside of Earth was the realm where our souls gathered after death. Only under the influence of Western materialist philosophy did European men begin to imagine space as a physical place. It was not until fairly recent that the concept of “outer space” became popularized in science fiction stories.

Are we, perhaps, living under the spell of such stories? Are we imagining trips to the moon that never really happened?

What is even the purpose of a supposed Theory of Everything? Why would anyone care to find it at all? Why do scientists claim that they keep getting closer to discovering this theory of everything? Or more precisely: Why should anyone care to know a definite system that can explain everything?

The desire to know everything and for there to be a definite thing to know informs us of something about human nature, namely of our innate limitedness. We show an innate desire for closure or resolution, a desire for putting an end to wants and needs, so that we may liberate ourselves from our chronic economic struggles. We just want to live the easy life. Though life already offers us such a thing, namely in death.

The desire for a theory of everything is no different from a desire for heaven, which is no different from a desire for eternal rest after death. We believe in these things because, after some time, after having lived life for several decades, we grow weary, tired, of having to do so many things over and over again. The things we once enjoyed doing first become routine, then a bore, and then a nuisance.

Much of the faith we once held in the future has proven futile, juvenile, impossible, or impractical. We were promised old age and security (by our capitalist employers), but the older we got, the more the such promises began to show clearly that it was all a scam.

Humanity thrives on idiots doing the work for others who exploit them. The true power structures of the world are indeed linguistic, for such a large portion of humans either believe what was said or, lacking counter-arguments, will unthinkingly pretend to go along with it.

To stop being an idiot, one must learn to think, and learning to think means to practice one’s imaginative faculties.

This is the story of how I was targeted by Dutch secret services, arrested, and wrongfully thrown in pre-trial detention for 13 days, only to be acquitted of sedition (carrying 5 years in prison). Having seen the police dossiers and court documents, I can now explain why it happened.

In late September 2024, I was resting in my parked car in the Netherlands near a sports field when 2 police officers started banging on my windows. They had traced me by triangulating my cell phone signals. They found my car because they already knew what license plate number, make, and model they were looking for: a silver 2011 BMW 1-series.

Moreover, one of these police officers had come down from The Hague. He wasn’t a local policeman. He was on a special mission to find me in the south of the Netherlands, to where I had returned after spending time in Budapest, Hungary.

Arrest without Cause

Earlier that evening, these officers had posed as buyers for my online marketplace sale, but they had failed to show up, so I cancelled on them. I drove away from the meeting point. Their plan had been to keep me waiting. The police were on their way for a surprise arrest!

I had evaded them, unbeknownst, but now they had found me again. I had to show the officers my ID, but they already knew who I was. They carried a printed-out photo of me with them for comparison, after which they claimed I was indeed the man on their wanted list, and they had spotted me. What?

They couldn’t tell me why, except that I had been a wanted man since early 2024. They ordered me to enter their police car. Since I didn’t resist arrest, I wasn’t cuffed. After being processed at the police station, handing over my cell phone, car keys, and wallet, I was put in a solitary holding cell.

Still, no one could tell me why I was being jailed. I vowed, then and there, that this was going to have severe consequences. I told the highest ranking officer present that you can’t just arrest a man for no reason. Oh, they also forgot to hand me the piece of paper explaining my rights to me—I got it three days later, just before meeting with the examining magistrate in The Hague.

Interrogations

But first, I was to be interrogated by two junior public prosecutors. A state-appointed lawyer supported me, since I couldn’t afford one.

One of the prosecutors, the male, sat there wearing his Rammstein t-shirt. This was shortly after Rammstein’s frontman had been accused of rape. Was he trying to relate to me? I hate heavy metal. The other prosecutor, an older female, came across as mentally unstable.

The purpose of their interrogations was solely to try to establish that I was indeed the person who had written a certain online post. The next day, more interrogations ensued. This time, they wanted to establish whether I was the author of a certain TikTok video.

On the third day, I was transported to The Hague by these same interrogators, who continued their interrogation in the car with me. I was handcuffed for an hour-long trip to our political capital. As we entered that city, we crossed under a bridge on a busy street that felt like passing through the gates of hell.

It was in the car that the male prosecutor, riding next to me, wanted to know about what I thought of Russia? “Russia?” I thought. I felt the conversation was getting random. I told him I thought Russia was a nation marked by poverty, and that I wouldn’t know, since I’d never been there, and had no interest in the country. After all, I thought Putin ideologue Dugin was an anti-White idiot. He is.

Aware that I was being recorded in the car (although they hadn’t told me), I rambled about all and nothing, basic chit chat, and told the prosecutor that I had heard of many people speaking Russian in Budapest ... because the older people learned it in high school before the fall of the Soviet Union.

I grew tired of the prosecutor’s weird talk, and at one point, I dismissively smiled without saying anything more. That led to the prosecutor’s violent verbal outburst, “What are you laughing at??” I was laughing at his low-IQ stupidity and his weird choice of topics.

After that, they dropped talking to me about Russia. I hadn’t yet figured out why they would bring up Russia in a conversation with me. A faint suspicion lingered on in my mind. Did they think I was with the Russians?

Meanwhile, my laptop had been retrieved from my still parked car, and my cell phone was to be examined. If I didn’t give up my passwords, they said my devices would be returned to me “in pieces”. This turned out to be an empty threat. I never gave up my passwords, but they eventually returned me my devices (after the court case) with just the SIM card removed and the cameras taped shut. They were fine.

‘Convicted’ by the Examining Magistrate

I arrived at another holding cell, part of The Hague’s courthouse. I met with my lawyer who had now seen the police dossier for the first time. It included wild statements by my brother (who still hates me because I was the first-born and I got a skateboard before he did).

The examining magistrate, to my surprise, effectively convicted me on the spot. She ordered me back to prison for pre-trial detention, with my court date set 10 days later. I was lucky, because such pre-trial detention could easily be extended indefinitely for ongoing investigations.

To motivate her semiofficial conviction of me, the examining magistrate said she had read personal emails that I had sent to my mom 5 years earlier, in which I had written that I had “become very powerful”. I was taken aback by this breach of privacy, but before I could protest, the magistrate ordered me to keep my mouth shut.

What the magistrate didn’t care to learn was this: I had meant that I had become psychologically powerful. I had overcome the consequences of severe emotional neglect as a child. I had overcome selective mutism, my inability to speak in public. I had defeated my life-long depression and decades of recurring suicidal ideation. I had sent my mom a few angry emails about her lack of emotional support for me when I was young. She had been quite a ruthless mother with little to no affection to give.

The examining magistrate, however, took my words as evidence that I was power-hungry. And now I understand why: because there was no case against me. They still had to make one up.

Read more about my cell mate, the prison Chad >

Why I Was Targeted

I was arrested without clear cause because they were still looking for a cause. Today, with 20/20 hindsight vision, and having seen the dossiers and documents, I was able to piece this puzzle together. Officially, I was arrested for two counts:

1) for posting a single reply-tweet on X in November 2022, which was a rhetorical question with a “?” question mark. I had asked about a Green Party politician’s plan to destroy half of Dutch livestock. The reply had not been directed at this politician, but at the podcast account I was replying to, though the politician’s @ handle had been included automatically by X (then Twitter) as part of the conversation thread. My rhetorical question(!) implied that I wanted this politician to stop killing our farm animals. I was, however, accused of threatening and/or planning to murder this politician, carrying a minimum 1 year jail sentence.

And 2), for posting a TikTok video in February 2024, in response to a national survey that said 20% of Dutch people favored overthrowing the state. In that video, I discussed a list of 10 hypothetical demands that the people might rally for, such as offering native White women free housing, or arresting the politicians who pushed for the COVID-era restrictions. This video was branded “a call for violence”, i.e., I was accused of sedition, a crime carrying up to 5 years in prison.

In hindsight, I now know that these counts were pretexts for a conviction, not causes for the arrest. I was being held for other reasons.

The Secret Service’s Hidden Hand

Around the time of Convid, I had started posting videos to TikTok. Since 2019, I had started recording speeches for YouTube. I was trying to become influential like Vertigo Politix, but YouTube geofenced my account and restricted views to barely 80-100 per video. Unable to break out of this shadow ban, I began posting clips to TikTok.

On TikTok, my videos finally found their audience. I started going viral regularly, racking up views up to half a million per video. My activities expanded when I started discussing geopolitical events unfolding around the world. The war with Russia in Ukraine started and I began commenting on it.

Very early on, for example, I warned that White men were going to be sacrificed in the meat grinder, and that Zelenskiy was going to flood Ukraine with African immigrants to replace the men lost. (Fast-forward to 2026: We know that this is exactly what happened.) As so often, my geopolitical analyses turned out to be right. I was often correctly predicting actual policy and how it was going to unfold.

I started talking more broadly about what was going on in the world, such as in Africa. I spoke about how France still controls many a West-African nation under its French financial shadow empire. I spoke about how Europe was planning to fuse with Africa, and how the EU intended to absorb even Central-Asian nations.

And that’s how Dutch and international secret services started taking an interest in me. Not because most of what I said was wrong, but because too much of what I said was right.

You see, I sometimes spoke against the Western anti-Russian narratives. I pointed out that Bucha’s massacre had been committed by Ukraine, not Russia. Or that the “kidnappings” of Ukrainian children by Putin were really relocations of Russian-speaking children, i.e., ordinary refugees. Or that many a Ukrainian refugee that initially arrived at Germany’s borders turned out to be a black African exchange student, not a Ukrainian woman and child.

A Former Intelligence Officer

It was a foundation called Justice for Prosperity, founded in 2020 by a former Dutch secret service employee, Jelle Postma, that had flagged me. This foundation focuses on finding and tracing the sources of online threats. I had been declared a threat because of the popularity of my videos, and because they thought I was getting paid by the Russians.

Indeed, with hindsight clarity, I recognize the “feds” repeatedly commenting during my many TikTok livestreams, asking me whether I had ever been approached by Russians, or whether I had ever taken money from Russians. Or they would accuse me of having done so. All the while, these feds were posting swastikas and pushing me to talk about Hitler, which I didn’t, since I favored Von Bismarck.

These feds were employees of the Dutch secret service, the AIVD, namely of their ‘social media monitoring’ branches such as the Justice for Prosperity foundation, which acts as an intelligence front. It carries the same style and tone of Bellingcat, a NATO front. JfP was founded right at the start of the COVID era to crack down on anti-Western or pro-Russian sentiment.

When I say, “anti-Western or pro-Russian sentiment”, this includes everyone who doesn’t think children can change their birth sex, or anyone who opposes gay marriage, COVID jabs, polyamory, trans drag, or mass immigration. For, apparently, these are “Western values” now. They’re not, but if you disagree, you become an intelligence target.

I became a target for further investigation. By June 2023, it was decided, as per police dossiers, that I needed to be taken out. That’s when the police sent a request to Twitter/X to find out my IP addresses and location data. (X complied without hesitation.)

The secret services then forwarded my case to the regular authorities with the “request to prosecute”. I was ordered to be arrested, so that my phones and computers could be investigated, hoping to find links with Russian propagandists.

Problem is, my phone and laptop uncovered ... absolutely nothing.

Here I was, calling myself The Great Johannes, speaking about complex geopolitical matters in viral TikTok videos, because I had started studying geopolitics in my spare time by reading hundreds of books on the topic.

When it became clear to the magistrates that I hadn’t actually needed a Russian prompter to help write my words, they instantly dropped the Russia angle. Because there was none.

Outcome

The court case was an exercise in defamation. Since there was no case, they had to make me appear guilty in other ways.

The public prosecutor exaggerated and misrepresented my words, often by omission. He claimed, for example, that I wanted to throw brown people out of their houses. He didn’t say that I had said I wanted to give those houses to native women who can’t afford them, and that the “brown people” (not my words!) were criminal asylum seekers.

At one point, my lawyer surprised everyone in the courtroom. He had spoken to my mom (who was present), and she had testified that when I was a teenager, I had taken an IQ test at the school psychologist’s request. He ascertained before the judge that, according to my mom, I had scored an IQ of over 150.

I was acquitted of sedition, but since I had already spent 13 days in pre-trial detention, I was convicted of those 13 days for “insulting and/or threatening a politician”. Of course!

But I was innocent. I am an innocent man who had become the victim of a low-IQ intelligence operation that mistakenly assumed I wasn’t capable of formulating my own words. They suspected “the Russians” had been feeding me my lines, even paying me to perform them, like a puppet on a string.

In reality, I had become a threat to the intelligence community simply because of my ... intelligence.

In my country the Netherlands, children as young as 12 years old are allowed to apply for euthanasia with their parents’ consent. And 16 and 17-year-olds can have themselves euthanized without their parents being legally able to stop the process.

But a recent review by 19 Dutch psychiatrists in their February 2026 essay1 shows that autistic women were the most likely demographic to be euthanized in the Netherlands in the cohort under age 30.

Indeed, 74% of this group of euthanized patients under 30 was female, and 75% was autistic. So, on average, we can say that euthanasia for young people in the Netherlands targets autistic women. The 19 psychiatrists argue, however, that this practice needs to be banned for people under age 25.

Now, some of you will say that this is a private matter and the people seeking to end their lives should not be stopped. To those I say the following:

After one famous case of euthanasia of a 17-year-old girl who was depressed because she had been raped, 14 psychiatrists wrote a letter of complaint to the Dutch public protector in April 2024 saying that the girl was not competent to make the decision and that the euthanasia should not have happened.2

The public prosecutor however failed to prosecute the euthanasia doctor, saying no rules had been broken. Except, of course, the common sense rule to offer troubled young people alternative help instead of killing them.

In an American newspaper article by The Atlantic from March 2026, the mother of the girl stated that she trusted the euthanasia doctor’s assessment that death was the only option available to end the girl’s suffering.

This was an obvious lie. Wouldn’t a change of environment also have cured the girl?

Are we, as a society, manipulating young people who already feel like a burden, telling them that the only solution is for them to die? What kind of a society does that to its own children?

The good news is that the majority of Dutch psychiatrists refuse to euthanize such young people. Sadly, there are also some doctors who will put teenagers to death for a depression.

On top of this, the state of the Netherlands may have an ulterior motive, namely: the country also allows organ donation after euthanasia. The doctor who killed the 17 year old girl mentioned happens to be the most vocal supporter of organ donation after euthanasia.

I believe the state of the Netherlands is guilty of committing crimes against humanity, and I will keep speaking about this matter until the state has been convicted.

Update

Within 24 hours after my video about euthanasia for young autistic women, two women informed me that they were indeed told to "get euthanized", at ages 17 and 18.

I am preparing to send a case to the United Nations Human Rights Council, for I can prove with facts that the state of the Netherlands is committing crimes against humanity by *actively targeting autistic young people for euthanasia*, and by refusing them alternative care.

I believe the motive may be *accessing and selling young people's organs*, since organ donation after euthanasia has been allowed in the Netherlands since 2012, including for underage people.

You see, though tons of old people die each day, their old organs aren’t useful. To make organ transplants useful, they need to be from young people. But young people generally don’t die very often. And so, there is a high-priced market demand for youthful healthy organs.

This is why you are reading stories about “mentally ill teenagers” being euthanized. Euthanasia of young people is the way to harvest healthy organs for transplants. There is now a perverse incentive to tell depressed young people “they should try euthanasia”.

Read more

This is Noelia from Spain. She was murdered by the Spanish state on March 26th, 2026. Though her personal friends weren’t allowed to attend the final moments of her life, medical staff leaked the photo to global media outlets. The message is: The state can and will kill you if you are deemed inconvenient.

Noelia was gang raped while in custody of the state after bouts of depression due to earlier childhood trauma.

The problem with these pictures is that she wasn't dead yet. Moments after this obscene picture was taken, the 25-year-old Noelia was whisked away into an operating room where her still beating heart was removed for an organ donor, along with her liver kidneys, lungs, and every other useful part.

She totaled a resale value of over 2 million euros. Noelia didn't die of 'euthanasia'. She died after being harvested alive.

Noelia’s case resembles that of Milou (17) from the Netherlands, the girl who was euthanized in 2023. Like Noelia, Milou was the victim of rape while in the custody of the state. Rape at ages 13 and 16, her parents ultimately went looking for a doctor to put the daughter to death. Having initially been denied, they found one doctor willing to home in for the kill: Menno Oosterhoff.

If you have any doubts whether euthanizing young people like Noelia or Milou is about harvesting their organs, there’s Dutch doctor Menno Oosterhoff who killed Milou (17) (and many other young women). He has admitted publicly to doing organ donations after euthanasia. The practice is legal in Belgium and the Netherlands.

This is the trauma > euthanasia > organ donor pipeline, and it targets young women. It’s real.

“Oosterhoff has stated he has been involved multiple times in euthanasia followed by organ donation.”

Organ donation after euthanasia is satanically called “ODE”. The death doctors anesthetize the “patient” at home, then transfer them to a hospital (while still alive) to rip their heart and lungs, liver and kidneys out. They pause your heart to create “circulatory death” but keep the body alive & oxygenized long enough to harvest your organs. Otherwise your organs go to waste.

I.e., none of the patients who have had their organs harvested were braindead. What is called circulator death is not brain death. The patients still lingering in a deep sleep while their chests are sawed open to rip out their internals. The so-called euthanasia “medicine” administered is really the preservative, i.e., the drug that will help preserve your organs during the harvest.

Menno Oosterhoff and anyone involved deserve the death penalty for what they’ve done. This is real. This is Satan at work on your children.

I can't believe we're killing women for depression. It's giving me conscientious objections. I cannot go on living as an ordinary citizen. I feel compelled to live in opposition to the state that allows this. We are at war with Satanists who have come to harvest children’s organs.

“The Satanists must die. They deserve the death penalty via an extremely painful and unsedated public execution.”

A user commented that “China has been doing organ harvesting, without the euthanasia pretence, for a while. Western countries have been increasing the practice, with the pretence.” Indeed, the book Killed to Order by Jan Jekielek goes into detail about the Chinese method, but neglects to inform Western audiences that we use the pretext of “teen euthanasia” to harvest hard-to-acquire youthful organs.

We, in Europe, of course, have heard plenty of stories of young male hikers mysteriously disappearing, only for their body to be found again later without their organs. The trauma-to-euthanasia pipeline, however, is the newer, more orchestrated method of harvesting young people’s organs. By denying them the love and care they would have needed in order to heal, and instead green-lighting the death job.

The key to euthanasia for things like depression is that the people being euthanatised are physically healthy. This has value, at least to those depraved murderers seeking to acquire organs. The organs inside a 25-year-old body have a price, namely anywhere between 2 to 8 million USD$.

This is the sign to definitively defeat and completely eradicate leftism. Leftism is a global crime syndicate pushing degeneracy for the masses, so that rich old feminist women can receive young women’s heart transplants.

We are at war with the darkest evil to have ever shown its face in human history. We are at war with the Devil herself.

Israel may be driving Turkey to war with Europe. Turkey’s leader Erdogan has publicly condemned Israeli attacks on Gaza, and more recent attacks on Yemen and Lebanon that happened leading up to the war on Iran.

Thus, Turkey, officially a NATO member, is deviating from the US-Israeli line of interests. This is understandable since Israeli officials have recently expressed threats that Turkey is ‘next’ if Iran falls.

But with Turkey in NATO, the USA cannot support Israeli threats against Turkey, unless the USA exits NATO in order to turn against a NATO country.

Erdogan was heard implicitly calling out a certain regional supremacism, calling it a ‘network’ that has seized power (such as over the USA and EU nations, and regional Arab states).

But Turkey is no European ally either. Turkey has, at a times, disrespected European sovereignty by using mass migration as a weapon and a threat against neighboring EU nations, such as during the Syrian crisis.

Keeping Turkey in NATO was always meant to keep Turkey away from Russia. Now, if Israel is thinking of attacking Turkey next, Turkey will be forced to side with Russia. The US and Israel may be eying Turkey’s access to the Black Sea as part of their Greater Alexandrian Empire.

A Turkey allied with Russia will cause upheaval in Europe, since the EU has absorbed at least 8 million Turkish people since the 1960s, the majority of whom are living in Germany. Their number is likely much higher due to Europe’s frequently (or deliberately) lacking statistics on ethnicity.

German critic Thilo Sarrazin once wrote the book about Germany abolishing itself, a book which was never translated into English, in which he warned that Turkey wouldn’t need to put boots on the ground to conquer Germany. The Turkish immigrant men already occupying Berlin today would only have put on their military fatigues and declare victory.

I have always called the large Turkish-Muslim presence in Europe the new “Trojan Horse” or the “Turkish Camel”. A Turkey allied with Russia will allow both countries to support each other’s conquests of Eastern Europe, for historical and geopolitical reasons, thus to restore some of the old Ottoman and Russian Empires, for example by seizing Greece and Bulgaria for Turkey, or by seizing Ukraine and Poland for Russia.

Only a powerful German army would be able to stop these invasions, however, no one in Germany presently cares to wage such a war.

And that is why I know for sure that the USA and Israel are willing to throw Europe under the bus in order to achieve their own Middle Eastern goals, which include the capturing and controlling the new Silk Road area running from Greece to China, also called the New Alexandrian Empire including Iran.

In this scenario, European men will have to acquire guerrilla warfare skills and retreat into the woods to defend our Christian enclaves. I will start making a series of videos exploring guerrilla warfare.

At the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest—also called the Varian Disaster after General Varus’s suicide during the battle—Germanic warriors carrying wooden spears and leather helmets slaughtered three far better-equipped legions of the Roman army, including the Romans’ prostitutes. The Germans succeeded because they lured Rome into an ambush. And that’s what the Strait of Hormuz is: an ambush.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone if Iran (and China) have rigged the strait with secret sea-floor weapons, ready to blast American carriers to pieces in a humiliating defeat. If there were any place on Earth where a third-world enemy could defeat the U.S. military, it would be the mountainous terrain of Iran. Indeed, unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, Iran is a giant ambush site, with weapons stashed in caves.

Read more

The classy Cem Özdemir of the Green Party has become Germany’s first state premier (Minister-President) with Turkish roots, a success story for the state of Baden-Württemberg, home of Martin Heidegger and Albert Einstein. From a historical perspective, however, the rise of Turkish-descended individuals to powerful positions in German society carries a very different meaning.

The relevant history of the German state of Württemberg begins with Conrad III of Hohenstaufen, who led the Second Crusade. His campaign to the Holy Land failed when the German army was crushed by the Turkish Seljuks at the Disaster of Dorylaeum in 1147.

Württemberg’s men tried again centuries later through the Tempelgesellschaft, a Protestant group founded in the late 19th century. Though named after the Catholic templar, this group had little to do with the Crusades.

These Christians of the Tempelgesellschaft migrated to Ottoman-ruled Palestine to build rural communities there. The first group of German emigrants arrived in Haifa (now Israel’s main industrial port) in 1868. They established additional colonies near Jaffa, Sarona, Jerusalem, and elsewhere.

The German settlements in Palestine became the most economically successful communities. Local populations were underdeveloped and showed little interest in planned growth.

In 1898, Emperor Wilhelm II visited and met Zionist leader Theodor Herzl to discuss Palestine’s future. From 1903 onward, Germany collaborated with the Ottoman Turks on the famous Berlin-Baghdad railroad, as envisioned by Otto von Bismarck.

Without the world wars, Germany might have dominated the Middle East today, securing cheap energy and trade with the East (India and China). Allied with a friendly Western Russia, this German Reich could have become history’s most powerful empire.

The British Empire could not permit this. Around 1940, Serbian nationalists acting on British orders sabotaged their section of the Berlin-Baghdad railroad, cutting Germany off. It forced Hitler to try to capture Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, for its oil reserves. Failing to do so, Hitler foresaw the German defeat in 1945.

After World War II, the Württemberg Templers soon departed Palestine. By 1948, Britain helped establish modern Israel, based on biblical claims to Jewish ownership of the land. Yet without the infrastructure the Germans first built and left behind, a modern Israel might not exist today.

This is why Cem Özdemir’s rise carries deeper significance than it appears: the roles have reversed. Israel, backed by the USA, might now work with Turkey to influence or dominate Germany rather than the reverse.

In my personal opinion, German Chancellors such as Merkel or Merz are, in fact, Israeli-American puppets, installed to keep the German people subdued long enough for the Turkish-Israeli takeover to succeed. And likewise, Ursula von der Leyen is playing her role to keep Europe buried under needless regulation that are designed to kill European competitiveness.

Without cheap Russian energy (Nordstream 2), Dutch gas fields (filled with cement!), or nuclear power plants, Germany lacks the means to resist a Turkish takeover.

Unless Iran destroys Israel, at which point everything changes again.

It’s been the most frustrating thing dealing with censorship. Not just online.

I grew up in an already feminized 1980s of The Netherlands. We were a pioneering socialist country about to invent gay marriage and trans surgery. Men were the problem, and White people were guilt of everything wrong with history.

I remember newcomers to my nation, Turkish and Moroccan people, were hailed as noble savages, morally better than us because their lack of development, as per Alexander Dugin, meant they were innocent primitives.

At the age of 4, my school took me to drink tea at a Turkish family’s house, as part of our introduction to them. Not them to us. Us to them. I found it odd, since their kid from school was brutally violent toward everyone else. A cup of tea couldn’t change my opinion of them.

As children, we were being conditioned to focus on the external, on people-pleasing, on helping “poor refugee foreigners” who, as has turned out, were nothing but a bunch of robbers hiding under the cloak of feigned innocence.

And then the censorship murdered my world. I was verbally extraverted as a child, but my all-female primary school teachers would call my mom if I’d been singing happy songs in the hallways after school, on my way home, so that by the time I got home, I was reprimanded for it. The teacher had complained.

This female all-watching-eye style of control is Jeremy Bentham’s panopticon in the flesh, or Sauron’s burning eye watching from afar. It’s the society that keeps your pulse from all possible angles and at all possible times.

As a teenager, I soon discovered all the forbidden things you weren’t allowed to talk about. TV began playing a big role in heavily diminishing the range of acceptable speech and thought. Our leaders in the Netherlands had gone on special trips to London to learn about the new “political correctness” craze. It was policy the British were perfecting in the 1990s, and the Dutch wanted to copy and spread it.

The early bulletin-board internet offered an escape. I can’t tell you how many online accounts I already lost before the year 2000 came along, but it must have been dozens, and then hundreds more followed. I got banned from every possible commenting platform, even from the infamous Polinco (which was supposed to be far-right).

Was I wrong for not even questioning the dogmas of the time, but merely trying to formulate them in my own words? I wasn’t even trying to oppose or debunk anything. I was just trying to figure out what the thought police would like us to think, but in doing so, I exposed its illogical flaws, because nothing made sense. I was called a far-right extremist before I was politically aware.

My short comments turned into long posts, my posts into articles, my articles into chapters, and the chapters became several of the books I later published. I focused on writing because speaking, I had learned, was totally forbidden. I was silenced before I even had begun to think.

I soon learned that the spoken word is a million times more powerful than the written. People will never have you arrested for speaking nonsense or lies, but they will throw you in jail immediately for speaking the sort of truths that cannot be officially denied. How dare you expose the state’s flawed logic!

As a kid, I had been misdiagnosed as being a math whiz, and told to pursue physics or that sort of thing. But I was really a wordsmith, an early writer. I had been writing a lot as a kid, including science fiction novels I wrote in a foreign language. My misdiagnosis wasn’t an accident. You see, I was technically born of the working class. My mom was a nurse, and my school was there to educate happy obedient workers. I was the high-IQ exception in a room full of sub-100 kids.

Of course the teachers had noticed my talents, so they decided to steer me away from literature and logic! Elites, ultimately, are threatened by only one thing: a man who can formulate better ideas in a way that makes the elites’ ideas look stupid. But don’t worry! The whole education system put in place in the West service to suppress the wisest kids. Their heads will be messed with beyond repair.

Sent down the wrong path, I ended up doing IT stuff in adulthood to make a living. But while I was writing code in “the zone” (usually cut off from the world, no phone, no distractions), my mind was producing public speeches I believed I would one day hold.

Indeed, having to do mechanical work produced the effect that my verbally wired brain began to obsess over all the more meaningful matters occupying the world, such as politics, geopolitics, history, philosophy, and so on.

I remember writing my first few blog posts about, for example, the Israel-Palestine conflict, and although my opinions on the matter were mellow and hardly three people visited the page to read my words, I felt I had committed an unforgivable crime, namely the crime of formulating my own beliefs on matters “better left to the politicians”. I feared the police would be on my door.

But I kept going at it--my wordsy mind kept producing insights about the world around me, and I could never dismiss the urge to put thoughts into words, and words into my mouth.

In my thirties, I started writing and self-publishing a dozen books, including several (short) novels, in which my long-repressed worldview began unfolding itself. A lifetime of reading helped me put things together coherently. I understood early on that the big problems of our time all hinged on what is called scientific materialism, which is this belief that everything in existence is just matter in motion, and that free will, a soul, and consciousness were just superstition, or the urine of the brain, mechanical byproducts of the Big Bang that had set everything in motion.

Had I once believed to be a biological machine, it is only because I had been conditioned like a dog to become one. My body revolted against this madness. I was not a slave! I was a real man. The voice in my head had found it rather odd that our Minister of Finance had said that the purpose of life is to educate children for the economy, first for the national economy, and then the global economy, as though we were still serfs trapped in a modernized and technologized feudal system. I wanted out. I wanted nothing to do with this “elite plot” ot treat people as fodder to feed a machine.

Now I understand how elites win and maintain power, and why those born at the bottoms of society could never, in most cases. The people in power regard the masses as their cattle, their technology. They do not regard us as human, and so they can inflict impossible pains--by incentivizing people to oversupply the world with babies, and then to cast the surpluses off to war, or into the virtual worlds of computer games and other ambition sinks. You see, a people living in balance with nature is an unprofitable one. It is from imbalance that elites receive their surplus wealth--tapped from the mines and the wells.

Humanity has become a giant inhibited organism ruled by an elite of people who are the only ones allowed to live a disinhibited life. The rich have learned to hide their antics from public scrutiny, and celebrities are surrogate-elites meant to distract the people away from the real elite. However, when they sell you the gay LGBT as a “lifestyle” or call transgenderism “a right to self-expression”, they are really inhibiting healthy reproductivity, whereas the elites themselves get traditionally married.

I finally started speaking out loud the speeches I had fantasized about in my head around 2018-2019. It was time for me to develop my speaking abilities, and in several languages, so as to reach a wider audience in Europe. The English language would help me reach a growing majority of under-30-yos in continental Europe. A financially windfall allowed me to focus all my time on studying more, and I used the subsequent years to developed a broad understanding of all that is going on in the world.

And that’s where I am now. It’s time to start doing my public speeches and be hated for them. But I am sure that, one day, I will break through the walls of the feminist panopticon and reach the common sense still hidden away in people’s minds, albeit behind the bars of their mental prisons.

Ever since John Money forced David Reimer and his brother to simulate sexual acts with each other as children in an attempt to teach David how to be a girl, the Western professoriate has convinced itself that gender transitions are not only possible but successful. David, forced to live as “Brenda” for much of his life after a botched circumcision, disagreed and became the original detransitioner. After learning that his case had become the basis for transitioning thousands of other boys, he took a shotgun to his head and killed himself.

Yet today’s bureaucrats, EU officials, and British lords all hasten to bring about the next genocidal catastrophe. To lure the next generations into abuse, Britain’s health services are reportedly preparing to send out 200 vouchers worth £500 (redeemable at Uber Eats) for hormone-blocking treatment—the kind that permanently stunts a boy’s body. Most of the invitees will indeed be boys, since you don’t need to block girls’ hormones to prevent them from becoming men. The trans industry is clearly targeting boys. If boys cannot be willingly cut up in adolescence—because their instincts refuse full amputations (as in David’s case, when he refused vaginal “reconstructive surgery”)—then perhaps we can simply prevent boys from entering puberty.

Read more

Women and girls are socialized to be more vulnerable. Boys are told to be tough. And this, feminists say, is because of “the patriarchy,” or whatever. But feminist explanations of men’s behavior often hide behind a blind spot, namely, that mothers don’t love their boys as much and that boys are often forced to grow up largely without a meaningful emotional support system. This forces boys to “toughen up” and prepare for a life that doesn’t have much love to offer. Girl grow up with love, whereas boys are starved of it.

Much of masculinity is explained as a coping mechanism designed to deal with extreme emotional loneliness. Only 20% of women in a long-term relationship say their partner is their primary confidant, compared to about 50% for men. Women, then, aren’t as emotionally attached to a relationship as men are, and this explains why 70% of breakups and divorces are initiated by women. Women are the ones who hold the emotional reins. Most men, having no other options, have no choice but to submit. Women can more easily break up because they have meaningful emotional support networks elsewhere that they can always rely on.

Women have easier access to emotional support and, therefore, have no interest in giving more love than they already do. By denying their spouse or long-term partner love, they end up holding the emotional reins in the relationship. It is women’s way of domesticating and controlling men: By offering some love to renew loyalty, and by denying love when she needs him to work harder. A man can quickly be reduced to a beast of burden if he does not learn how to make a stand for himself.

Feminists speaking from behind the blind spot will say that men should just build more vulnerable friendships with other men. This blindsided nonsense ignores that most of those men have never experienced emotional support at home to begin with. They cannot form “vulnerable relationships” because they don’t know what that is. In many cases, a man’s long-term lover is the only person he knows how to open up to. Losing her means to be condemned to emotional loneliness again. Emotional support and vulnerability were things denied boys by their family of origin, often paired with the threat of abandonment and physical violence.

When we pretend not to understand this, men’s behavior all of a sudden becomes inexplicable, stupid, weird, or hypermasculine. As lion cubs in a pride, boys are emotionally cast out from the youngest ages and expected to “fend for themselves.” This, in many otherwise reasonably adjusted men, translates into feverish hard work—to make money, to succeed, to achieve—namely, in hopes of someday winning the mythical love they never had. And then, women casually break up with them, leaving men feeling “not good enough”.

If I had to personally describe the average woman, I would use the following words: cold, harsh, cruel, unloving, unlovable, hateful, absent, dismissive, manipulative, vague, immature, money-hungry, materialistic, overly passive, unhelpful, unreliable, gone with the wind. The only reason I don’t outright hate women is that I’ve had the privilege—a luxury—of having had some brief experiences with women that made me feel somewhat loved or cared for (emotionally). But the moment I thought I could rely on this emotional support as a foundation to continue my life, it was ripped right out from under my feet again, returning me to a state of permanent falling with no end to the depths below me.

And yet, I am expected to be some kind of superman who should just “learn to fly.” The godlessness of our atheist-materialist society compounds men’s problems, for where can a man find any sort of stable emotional footing if he most certainly cannot get it from women, nor from his family of origin? The one traditional alternative has always been God, but God has become a dirty thing, for feminists have declared God patriarchal and evil.

There have been many famous prayer experiments that proved that prayers have no effect whatsoever on the person being prayed for. However, the person who performs the prayer may experience incredible mental health benefits. When the pious person imagines his connection to God as a personal relationship, whereby God becomes this man’s confidant, then he gains the sort of benefits he would have gotten from a real relationship (such as with a loving woman). God can be the stand-in for what is missing in a man’s emotional regulation: the eternal, unrelenting solid footing in the world that women and society neglect to provide.

God can cure depressed men if they succeed in developing a secure attachment to God, for “persons who pray often to a God who is perceived as a secure attachment figure derive clear mental health benefits” (Ellis et al., 2014).1 In a more foundational paper, An Attachment-Theory Approach to the Psychology of Religion,2 Lee Kirkpatrick established that God can psychologically function like an attachment figure for believers.

Can people who grew up in dysfunctional households benefit from turning to God? Yes, says Kirkpatrick:

• Early secure attachments to caregivers lead to secure, loving relationships with God;

• Insecure attachments lead people to turn to God as a substitute attachment figure to fulfill unmet needs for security, especially during distress;

An unloved man can never succeed on his own. He must find love, but if women don’t (want to) give him the emotional love he so desperately needs, then turning to God is his best and only alternative. What emotional support does for a human being is to be cupped in the hands of pure Love and protected at all times wherever you go. The idea is that a strong attachment to God offers a man a shield that protects him from emotional damage.

Men who feel emotionally understood and supported by others, such as by a loving woman, move about the outside world with visibly greater confidence. They act more maturely. They have lower stress and higher testosterone than the unbelieving, unloved man. But the man robbed of this secure love, who grew up without emotional support, may find the best substitute by cultivating a personal relationship with God.

“It is the myriads of trustful souls, that this sense of God’s unfailing presence with them in their going out and in their coming in, and by night and day, is a source of absolute repose and confident calmness. It drives away all fear of what may befall them. That nearness of God is a constant security against terror and anxiety.” (Voysey, 1882)

Why didn’t China fight to get the “deal” India now got from the European Union? It involves mass migration of up to 20 million Indian workers—mostly unmarried males. Chinese society apparently has no need for these millions of gifted, talented workers. If this doesn’t make any sense, it’s because the deal isn’t meant to benefit Europe. We were forced to enter a deal with India in order to get Indians on our side in the coming NATO war against China.

The USA, too, is suffering from the Indian Intifada. I’ve long suspected that U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance is Indian. Perhaps I’m wrong, or perhaps he just looks very white and loves changing his legal name frequently for no reason. Perhaps his whiteness is courtesy of the Aryan invader genes that once became India’s upper caste. Vance’s move to support Vivek Ramaswamy’s bid to become the governor of Ohio, however, stinks of the well-known Indian nepotism that guides that people’s actions.

Europe’s suicidal “India Deal” now comes after years of Americans pushing for their own Indian invasion. When Elon Musk in late December 2024 argued that the USA couldn’t continue existing without millions of skilled Indian laborers pouring into the country, the tech billionaire supported calling white opponents “retards.” (The word “retard,” meanwhile, is now one of the forbidden words on X that gets your post automatically censored, along with the words “tranny,” “faggot,” and “nigger.”)

American corporations abused the expanded H-1B visa scheme to stop hiring white men in favor of cheaper Indians. Despite the diploma mills running overtime, a majority of the so-called ingenious Indian migrants to the USA never lived up to their résumés. Many, if not most, ended up working as Deliveroo drivers, cooks, and cleaners when the economy was screaming for high-IQ AI developers.

It’s no different in European countries such as Germany or the Netherlands. European tech industries are crying out for hundreds of thousands more skilled workers, but the leftist politicians in charge keep hallucinating that Third World laborers will somehow match the required skills. They don’t. Barely 75% of migrants who’ve arrived in the Netherlands in the past five years have found work, after having been awarded free housing and monthly benefits for at least three years.

Instead of concluding that migrants coming in don’t possess the required skills, the race card is pulled. Media, journalists, and politicians join in unison to condemn the “racist” commercial entities that, despite suffering debilitating shortages, somehow refuse to hire foreign talent. The other conclusion—that perhaps foreigners don’t have the required talents—is scoffed at, if it is even mentioned at all.

My impression of the immigration system is as follows: Western companies are indeed in need of specific, high-IQ, and well-trained talent. However, companies also overstate these needs in order to appear economically healthy compared to competitors—namely to win government contracts, subsidies, and internally to win departmental budget approvals.

When politicians hear the phrase “labor shortages,” however, they seem to think that any quality of human body will suffice. So, politics brings in random mutts and retards from the Third World. A majority of these appear to have no qualifications whatsoever, which completely defeats the purpose of immigration. We were supposed to do immigration in order to avoid having to educate our own, since education is expensive. We were supposed to get fully trained and educated workers out of a box, so they could be employed and start paying taxes, preferably from day one.

Instead, what we’ve got are welfare dependents bringing in their extended families through family reunification deals. We’ve created a new underclass of totally untalented and uneducated people who don’t even possess the capacity for learning another language, which forces our society to “wait it out” for at least one more generation in order to have employables who can speak the local tongue. Then why—why?!—didn’t we invest in families of our own? Why didn’t we spend all this money spent on integration on funding native-grown families instead?

There is no logic to it. In Europe’s case, we’ve seen mass migration coming in from Morocco, Turkey, the Middle East, other North African nations, Central Africa, people from former colonies such as Indonesia, and so on. All of these different groups of people have brought with them insurmountable problems: low cognitive ability, low IQs, general retardation, weird diseases once thought cured (such as scurvy and whooping cough), and many cultural enrichments previously unknown to Western man, such as gang rape, genital mutilation, child marriage, and honor killings.

And now we’re getting millions of Indians on top of all that. Indian culture, it turns out, is the least trustworthy, per a recent global survey. Indians are more likely to scam other people, especially people outside of their immediate blood relatives. The Indian worldview, as we have had the misfortune of finding out, is one of ripping and robbing left and right, and putting cousins and brothers—if not their mothers—in charge of businesses, banks, and other operations.

They work hard, yes, but they don’t work for you.

As the USA is now phasing out the Indian enigma, Europe proffered itself to do the India Deal. I suspect that Europe’s unelected dictator, Ursula von der Leyen, may very well be an American spy, and that her dealings with India will most likely favor the U.S. economy before any European one. The USA will be able to sell energy, materials, goods, and services to Europe, while Europe will import tens of millions of new customers and dependents. This way, the USA can make money without having to carry the burden of integrating unintegrables.

Do we really need India on our side against China? I say India will pull the rug from under the West and side with China anyway. This is all a geopolitical joke. A big mistake. Our leaders are idiots, and our people will suffer.

In my novella Confusion, I criticized my autobiographical upbringing in both a militaristic household and an obedience-centric school system. Freedom existed only in that twilight zone that was the bicycle trip back and forth between school and home.

Later, I discovered that teacher John T. Gatto excellently described everything that’s wrong with our school system in his 1992 book Dumbing Us Down. He described the seven lessons we subject children to:

1. Confusion(!): Schools teach that nothing makes coherent sense.

2. Class Position: Children are taught to know and stay in their place in the hierarchy.

3. Indifference: Ringing a bell every 40-50 minutes and forcing students to drop whatever they’re engaged in. (Nothing is worth finishing.)

4. Emotional Dependency: Through stars, stickers, smiles, frowns, prizes, honors, and disgraces.

5. Intellectual Dependency: Only the teacher decides what will be learned.

6. Provisional Self-Esteem: Self-worth is made dependent on external validation.

7. Constant Surveillance: Children are taught that they are always being watched and judged.

This isn’t merely some program for the mental torture of children; it is in fact the exact way that humans may tame other human beings into becoming their willful servants. It is the training program for making children into adult serfs.

Read more

Shock and awe, and then the silence of the dead. After Dutch documentary show Zembla dropped the bombshell news that naive Dutch students had been forced to cohabit with hundreds of violent African immigrants at Stek Oost, in Amsterdam—leading to bloodstained walls after gangrapes at knifepoint—media turned the blind eye. It never happened. It’s not important. You deserved it. It’s for the greater good.

And then it was found out there are 50 such locations in the country. The same concept was already tried in mostly every other North-West European country with the same outcome: terror, rape, murder, and pure, pure hatred for White women.

The media silence echoes what happened after the infamous Cologne New Year’s Eve mass gang rapes in from the Kölner Dom Cathedral, almost a decade ago. Hundreds if not thousands of young German women had been begrapscht or raped by the filthy clawing hands mostly coming out of North Africa and the Middle East. Hands governed by low-IQ brains filled with dogmatic theocracy. Girls had been cornered and undressed in public. Media denied it had happened. Journalists called reports of the rapes Facebook mom fiction. For days, European media ignored what had happened, calling everyone racist who dared to bring it up. Until German police confirmed hundreds of reports had been filed by raped women.

Chancellor Angela Merkel’s response was to advise women to keep an arm’s length distance from the rapists. And it didn’t just happen in Cologne. Similar reports emerged from Stockholm Oslo, Brussels, Helsinki, Vienna, and many other European capitals. It had happened everywhere. The aftermath of the New Year’s Eve rapes led to a change in young White European women’s behavior. At first, they moved around the nightlife in never-before-seen packs of twenty, even thirty girls, cushioning each other for protection. Years later, when it became clear the problem was never going to go away anymore, European women learned to avoid certain hotspots. No longer will you see more than a handful of White people attending the New Year’s Eve’s fireworks shows at their capital’s large squares. Those places are now dominated by Naffers, North African Muslims hailing from Morocco, ALgeria, Libya, added with Syrians, generic Arabs, and other Middle Easterners.

It’s the religion of rape and evil—and they’re the progressive liberal left’s private weapon meant for the destruction of White women’s ovaries.

But what happened in Amsterdam at Stek Oost—a collection of builders’ containers fit together to create a hippie kibbutz for hundreds of students and an equal number of low-IQ, violent immigrants—was insidious. It was a government-funded nightmare crafted by the sickest, meanest, most twisted demonic liberals found anywhere on Earth. In 2018, the site was opened to the first inhabitants, but before year’s end, the number of rapes, unwanted pregnancies, and attempted murders spurred the building’s operators to desire to close the project. For good. Amsterdam’s municipal government, however, vetoed the closure and demanded the project continue. And it did continue, and will still continue through 2028, minimum, for our nation’s leaders are sadists who hate the native population so much, they desire to see it destroyed via the womb.

We are at war, and war crimes are being committed against the Dutch people. It’s just not some foreign power that is the reason why we’re under attack. We’re under attack from our own government.

An article in The Guardian by London mayor Sadiq Khan caught my attention for its deceitfulness. The mayor claims that London is now “safer than ever” in terms of violent crime, without listing any meaningful statistics for readers to compare then and now.

Mayor Khan appears to base his claims on the reduced murder rates. He writes, “London’s homicide rate is lower than rates in New York, Berlin, Brussels, Milan, Toronto and Paris, five times lower than the rate in LA, and almost 12 times lower than the rate in Chicago.”

But the murder rate being low is often because of medical advances (as explained here by Arctotherium). When fewer people die on the operating tables after getting shot or stabbed, there are fewer homicides. For London, this just means that the British NHS hospitals are doing a great job at saving lives after stabbings and shootings, etc. However, this does NOT simply imply reductions in violent crime.

Khan adds that “hospital admissions of young people for knife assault have fallen by 43%” since 2019, but he doesn’t mention that knife crime incidents recorded by the police have remained the same! The graph below shows that by 2025, there has been no meaningful reduction of “police recorded knife or sharp instrument offences” in London compared with 2019.

So how can one claim that London is now “safer than ever” when the risk of getting attacked by a sharp or pointy weapon is the same today as it was during the peak hell of 2019?

How do we explain the 43% drop in hospitalizations after knife attacks? Well, I guess people were lucky to wear their recommended stab vests! Since the number of knife attacks has remained the same, the reduction in hospitalizations must partially stem from better care by physicians, thus avoiding hospital admissions. Using the hospitalization statistics as evidence, then, that London is now “safer than ever” appears to be extremely deceitful.

London is not safer. It is just as unsafe.

The mayor further writes that causes of violent crime are poverty, inequality, and lack of opportunity. In other words, he’s strangely suggesting, albeit in a covert way, that violent crime is somehow mostly committed by people with recent migration backgrounds, i.e., those demographics allegedly without wealth, equality or opportunity.

This is false. There are several immigrant demographics in the UK with lower arrest rates than White British people. However, according to the UK’s own 2024 nationwide statistics on arrests, black people appear to have the highest arrest rates overall.

In fact, the aforementioned UK government website literally states, and I quote:

black people had the highest arrest rate in 38 out of 42 [UK] police forces

This fact cannot be explained by immigration, since other immigrant groups are, by far, not as criminal or violent as black citizens in the UK (up to 10 times less, by comparison). It cannot be explained by poverty, inequality, or lack of opportunity, since other demographics with even greater poverty and even less opportunity rarely commit violent crimes. And, rest assured, most people without money or opportunity don’t commit violent crimes.

Yet, Khan is making a dangerous and illogical argument, surreptitiously blaming White people or native Britons overall for the crimes being committed against them. Who else’s fault would Khan think it is that people lack opportunity and wealth? He doesn’t say it out loud, for that would be racist, but the silence is deafening.

Is Khan saying violence is justified as long as it’s poor migrants targeting people they perceive as having unjust amounts of wealth and opportunity? Perhaps due to colonialism, imperialism, or their own diligence and hard work? Is he saying it’s all White people’s fault? Isn’t that extremely racist to suggest?

Khan, for example, makes no mention of imported male aggression or culturally justified violence, such as among Arab, (North) African, Middle Eastern, or various Islamic cultures that treat violence very differently, for example in clan-based and ethnocentric settings. He also doesn’t mention the migration of criminals to the more lucrative West to find, exactly, the “lacking opportunity”, etc.

He doesn’t mention that it’s black people who have the highest arrest rates in London. The same black people who receive a disproportionate share of housing benefits, welfare payouts, and general societal coddling. If anything, based on how blacks in the UK are being treated, they should have the lowest crime rates. In reality, they still have the highest.

This isn’t a problem of slavery, either, since the largest share of blacks living in London are immigrants of the modern age. They are largely free blacks, descendants of African blacks who were never enslaved by Whites. These are not your usual ‘African-Americans’ who can claim that slavery victimized them for 400 years.

Khan then finishes his uninformative article by lamenting the death of a black child, 10-year-old Damilola Taylor, who was killed in the year 2000. Although his killers, two 16-year-old brothers, bear British first and last names, their father was a black immigrant from Jamaica. Indeed, as per the UK government’s own statistics, even mixed half black people perform worse.

The mayor then expresses his emotional feelings about investing in “deprived neighborhoods”, the sorts of neighborhoods where native White Britons have long been replaced by mass immigration.

Sadiq Khan’s concern is not for British people, but for anything that may help diminish the value of White British people and of White people in general. The title of Khan’s article was, “Sorry, Trump and Farage – London is no lawless ‘warzone’. Violent crime is lower than ever”. Except, it’s not. Violent crime is as high as ever.

What stands out is that different ethnicities appear to be responsible for different crimes. Black Londoners are responsible for most violent crime, including stabbing and shooting, whereas Pakistani Muslim people in the UK are responsible for most group-organized rapes.

Instead of pretending all is well, why don’t we just go after the known criminals? Alas, if I had been a British citizen living in Britain, I would have most likely been arrested for writing this article. I would have gotten up to three years in prison for “hateful words”.

ICE officer Jonathan Ross shot professional protester Renee Good dead through the windshield of her car as she hit the pedal to speed off, brushing the officer sideways, but not before he took the time to pull his gun on her. He could have easily jumped to the side, for that matter, and many on the left now see in Renee, the 37-year-old-mom-turned-lesbian-activist, a martyr. Many an American town has already seen crowds gather with calls to “save a life, kill an ICE” and “Kristi Noem will hang”, referring to the US Secretary of Homeland Security in charge of migrant deportations.

Liberal White Women are a psy-op, a psychological operation, meant to create division among White men and women, namely by making the “leftist White woman” the scapegoat for the right, a permissible target to hate and to kill. Vice versa, White men have become the national scapegoat for the left, a target to mock and dismiss. With rabid right-wing faux-racist conservatives barking and howling at the White Woman, the ordinary left-leaning woman will only end up feeling so diminished that she will not only embrace opting out of reproduction, such as 28-year-old Jill (@jillvlogs_ on TikTok), but, feeling wished dead by her society, will accept the most radical political course of action: the Kamikaze activist life.

Read more

Imagine it’s the year 2055, and a Russian-led but Islamic Europe goes to war with a black communist USA. Thanks to the US acquisition of Greenland in 2026, the black communists hold the strategic upper hand and ultimately obliterate the Old World. Europe (Russia) responds with nuclear annihilation of the Americas.

Would it really be a too far-fetched scenario if, already today, over 90% of under-20-year-old inhabitants of Brussels, the EU’s political capital, is of a non-native origin, and majority Muslim? On the other side of the Atlantic divide, Muslim mayor Mamdani recently declared that his New York City is going to follow the example of South Africa, a nation ruled by the black communist ANC party that has done nothing to help poor blacks.

Read more

Of course birth rates in modern nations around the world, such as the UK, Germany, or Japan, are plummeting. All those modern nations suffered a baby boom after the Second World War. That generation sucked up all the global wealth and hoarded it, to the point that home buyers in the West have an average age of over 70.

The last time the UK saw more deaths than births was in 1976, and that’s precisely around the time that West-European governments began their mass guest worker immigration schemes that brought Turkish, Indian, and North African workers in to support our economies.

Initially, the guest workers were supposed to be temporary residents. They were supposed to help us out until their help was no longer needed. But guest workers became asylum seekers, asylum seekers became refugees, and refugees became our “necessary replacements”. And then, mass migration, all of a sudden, became a government-mandated, permanent foreign cancer on once picturesque European towns, a blight on the landscape.

Our leadership clearly doesn’t care about the wellbeing of their people. People have become expendable cogs in a giant economic machine. The politicians worry only that dwindling birth rates might lead to a collapse of the economy.

The departure of the aforementioned baby boomer generation from the big cities, as they moved out into bigger, newly built homes in the suburbs to raise children, already left most cities in a state of disarray, along with its emptied shops, restaurants and bars that no one cared to frequent.

For the sake of “keeping the economy growing”, for that 2% annual GDP growth, the solution was to start cramming our inner cities with as many people we could fool into buying into the Western housing scheme.

Strangely, North Africans, Turks, and Middle Easterners were invited first. White Eastern Europeans, who at least share our countenance and religion, came second. And so, we found these suckers by the millions, to the point where native White Britons now make up less than 37% of London. It is no different in Berlin, Amsterdam, Brussels, or Paris, if not arguably a lot worse.

Read more

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is not Jewish. Grok AI says “he has Irish roots,” just like Joe Biden. That, in itself, is a strange thing to say. Jews can be from anywhere. But Waltz is known for his “supportive relationship with Minnesota's Jewish community, often praised by Jewish organizations for his pro-Israel stance and efforts against antisemitism, calling him a mensch.”

The German word Mensch just means human being. Apparently, whether Republic or Democrat, one has to strongly support the Jewish community in order to be called a human being. Then what do they call everyone else?

When two things happen at the same time, and the same people are involved, I take notice, and I start looking for a connection. Recently, citizen journalists doing the work mainstream journalists didn’t want to do found out about the massive scale of the Somali fraud in Minnesota, USA. To the tune of 9-10 billion $USD per year, which is about the size of the economy of Somalia in terms of its GDP, Somali fraudsters were ripping U.S. taxpayers. They did so mainly by setting up fake daycare centers or ‘learing’ centers (misspelling ‘learning’), and charging the government massive subsidies.

Read more