Yes, this is actually happening in Britain, but it’s not new or innovative
The Bolsheviks did the same thing
A short 🧵👇
First, as a reminder for those who don’t know what is going on, riots in Britain started after an Islamist butchered three young English girls and the government, currently headed by socialist Labour PM Starmer, did pretty much nothing
Years of frustration about immigration, legal and illegal, turned to riots
Starmer responded by cracking down on the English for protesting and now is locking up people for even retweeting posts siding with the rioters
So, now, Starmer is letting actual criminals out of jail so that Englishmen who simply don’t want their daughters murdered can be stuffed into prison
This is horrifying, but it’s not new
When the Bolsheviks acceded to power, they opened up the jails and freed all the violent criminals.
General Wrangel describes this happening in Crimea, and Gustav Krist, the Austrian prisoner of war who wrote Prisoner in the Forbidden Land describes the same thing happening in Central Asia
After the prisoners were free, the Bolsheviks established the Red Guards
The Bolsheviks weren’t freeing prisoners because they had kind hearts or disagreed with the idea of prison. They went on to kill tens of millions in prison camps, as we all know
Rather, it was about establishing control over the population. It’s a whole lot harder to think about the political system when you’re starving and having to deal with a huge crime wave, after all, the the freed prisoners create the anarchic conditions in which Bolshevism thrives
There’s not really much else to say about it other than that the Bolsheviks thrived on the anarchic conditions their prison policies created, then went on to fill the prisons right back up, only this time with political prisoners rather than real criminals
Solzhenitsyn described the communist attitude toward crime quite well:
So, that’s what Starmer is now doing.
Like the Bolsheviks, he’s letting real criminals go free do that the prisons can be crowded with political prisoners whose only crime is having a different opinion of immigration than he does
The state sees that as necessary because crime isn’t a threat to its rule, whereas an angry populace of competent people could be
Ok apparently the butcher was Rwandan rather than an Islamist
Whatever. He’s not an Anglo or Norman and so ought not be there
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"We" have financialized every aspect of life in an effort to squeeze financial return from everything
Private equity is particularly notorious for this, buying everything from Little League sports teams to medical practices
The medical aspect is particularly worrisome🧵👇
Take the above example, a report conducted by CBS. Dentistry IQ, summarizing the Private Equity problem and what the report found, noted:
"Private equity firms are also buying large dental chains, many of which are owned by individual dentists and specialists who offer implant procedures. According to PitchBook, Aspen Dental bought ClearChoice for an estimated $1.1 billion in 2020, Affordable Care (whose largest clinic brand is Affordable Dentures & Implants) was purchased for an estimated $2.7 billion in 2021, and the private equity wing of the Abu Dhabi government bought Dental Care Alliance for an estimated $1.1 billion in 2022.
"The American Dental Association (ADA) reported that private equity deals with dental practices increased ninefold from 2011 to 2021. There is also an additional interest in oral surgery, possibly due to how expensive implants can be.
...
"Lawsuits have been filed nationwide alleging that dentists at implant clinics have extracted patients' teeth unnecessarily, leaving patients with misaligned implants, or even unable to chew. Dentists who are heavily pushing for implants may be striving for lucrative income instead of the health of their patients.2
"Edwin Zinman, a San Francisco dental malpractice attorney and former periodontist, said: "They've sold a lot of [implants], and some of it unnecessarily, and too often done negligently, without having the dentists who are doing it have the necessary training and experience," Zinman said. "It's for five simple letters: M-O-N-E-Y."
It gets worse. The same general issue has come to medicine generally, with PE firms buying up hospitals just to raise costs and perform unnecessary procedures.
Such is what the American Journal of Medicine noted in a report titled “Private Equity and Medicine: A Marriage Made in Hell.” It provided:
Nearly every study reported in a recent meta-analysis found that PE acquisition led to higher prices. This has been documented in detail in anesthesia practices and in a combination of dermatology, gastroenterology, and ophthalmology practices. These latter studies documented “upcoding” such as seeing a higher percentage of visits claiming more than 30 minutes spent with the patient after PE takeovers. In addition, more new patients are seen and more fee-generating procedures are performed immediately after such takeovers. PE-backed management companies generated a major share of the out-of-network “surprise bills” that received considerable notoriety, as they have acquired major shares in such fields as emergency medicine, pathology, and anesthesiology, where patients do not have the ability to choose “in-network” physicians. Another way PE firms increase their ability to raise fees is by acquiring a dominant share of select specialties in a geographic area. PE firms are particularly attracted to procedure-oriented specialties such as dermatology, gastroenterology, and cardiology, where a few more procedures a week can make a big difference to “the bottom line.”
...
Why would PE firms invest in medical and dental practices, hospitals, nursing homes, hospices, and other health care entities? These firms typically seek to sell their acquired businesses in 3-5 years, aiming for at least a 50% profit. To do this, they must show sufficient revenue and profit growth to justify a higher sales price or increase the profitability of an entity they own to justify maintaining ownership. To do this, they must increase revenues and decrease operating costs. To achieve higher revenues, they will raise prices, increase the “productivity” of practitioners (ie, ask the physicians and others to see more patients), or seek a more lucrative mix of procedures. To lower costs they will seek lower-cost supplies; in a best case through forcing lower prices on currently used products, in a worst case by substituting inferior products. More often, because the major “cost” in a medical setting is the salaries of personnel, they will seek to substitute lower-paid staff: LPNs for RNs, minimally trained “medical assistants” for nurses.
When was the last time that England and her glorious Empire could have been saved from becoming a decaying, socialist hell?
Many say, incorrectly, either WWI, when the empire was exhausted, or WWII when it was bankrupted
The real answer is 1911, with the Parliament Bill🧵👇
The fight that led to the Parliament Bill began in 1909, with Winston Churchill's so-called People's Budget
By that point, Churchill had shifted to the Liberals from the Conservatives and was allied with Lloyd George to tax the landed elite into oblivion, despite his family being part of that elite.
The bill sparked a huge fight that culminated in England declaring war on its traditions and history in the name of socialism
The problem with the People's Budget was that it was the first overtly socialist law to come to England
In fact, it was entirely unprecedented and is known today as a "revolutionary concept" because it was expressly crafted to redistribute wealth, taxing landed wealth and income to fund welfare programs of the sort that have now bankrupted Britain
Because of its very nature, the bill was a shot across the bow of the landed elite, and fomented a great deal of social unrest and internal anger
It's the 59th anniversary of Rhodesia's Independence from the British who were demanding their self-destruction in the name of mass democracy
But why did Rhodesia declare independence on the 11th of November, 1965?
Few actually seem to know, so it's time to explain in the 🧵👇
By 1965, Rhodesia had been independent from the British South Africa Company and self-governing for about 42 years
Over those four decades, it went from being unsettled, landlocked veldt into a hugely successful country, the country with the highest standard of living for blacks in the continent
Of course, Rhodesia didn't do that by singing kumbaya and embracing race communism
Rather, it avoided the apartheid of South Africa while also avoiding the communism of the East and mass liberal democracy of the West by embracing Western government circa 1830: propertied voting
For white and black alike, to vote on the A roll in the national elections, one had to have the modern equivalent of about $60,000 USD in Rhodesian property, such as a house, business, farm, etc.
In limiting the national franchise to such people, it screened out the incompetent, the wastrels, and so on, limiting stewardship of the nation to those who had shown their ability to earn or steward wealth
This made me laugh because it's so true, but it also made me think, what would a modern equivalent be?
There's the Somali pirate ship stock market, but I have a different idea:
A militarized REIT that resettles abandoned, anarchic cities like Detroit
A 🧵on how it'd work👇
First, just think of the wasted capital in cities like Detroit, Baltimore, St. Louis, etc.
The reason for the abandonment makes sense: de-industrialization, the crack crisis, and lax policing make them about as dangerous and poor as Johannesburg
But it also means that whole swathes of essentially valueless neighborhoods exist in which the houses are still livable - there aren't trees growing through the living rooms or deer bedding in the bedrooms yet - but no one lives in them because crime, primarily, and the lack of jobs, to a lesser extent, made whole neighborhoods uninhabitable
Adding to the problem is that the cops are either corrupt, as in Chicago, or simply don't exist because they quit the force
So far, that has just meant these cities are dying for want of residents who add value rather than subsit on crime or the dole
They can't afford the police they need, can't attract business, and can't raise debt to rebuild
But it doesn't have to be that way...as Detroit's Greek Town area shows, there's a space for heavily defended areas that attract valuable guests, businesses and residents, and can be successful so long as the crackheads and gangsters are chased away by men with rifles
But the problem for America is that its full of people who praise the Soviets, a regime that murdered 10 million Christians 9the reason for the praise)
You can't have a country with that cancer in it, but America has solved this problem before🧵👇
This is, I think, one of America's big problems
About a quarter of the country (half of Dems) supported not just locking you in a concentration camp for refusing to be part of a science experiment, but also wanted to take your children from you for not making them part of it, and imprison you for criticizing it
What is that but a modern variation of Stalin starving millions of Ukrainian and Russian Christians to death and sending millions more to the gulags?
I suspect the responses would be similar if you asked about "racism"
Surrounding all that are outright overtones of violence
They send Antifa and BLM to riot, have the FBI arrest their political enemies (which it does willingly enough), and post online about "punching Nazis" (assaulting Trump supporters) and assaulting men for voting Trump
You can bet there's a great deal of overlap between the "imprison you and take your kids for refusing the jab" and the "assault normal guys for not voting for the gay race communist" crowds. They're probably the exact same groups
If Trump's to do anything, he'll have to actually take on the Deep State and Drain the Swamp
Could he do so?
It will certainly be a fight, but if Andrew Jackson could defeat Biddle and the Second Bank of the US, Trump can defeat the Deep State
Here's 5 ways how he could🧵👇
First, the Jackson and the Second Bank of the US comparison is, I think, important and worth remembering as a guide to action
Nicholas Biddle, who directed the bank, retracted loans and crashed the economy in an attempt to get Americans to look at Jackson as the reason for their economic woes and demand protection of the bank
It didn't work. Jackson, known for his populist bent, kept the American people on his side. His successor, Van Buren, did the same, using infrastructure projects and deregulation to gradually overcome Biddle's economic crash. This policy of Van Buren's eventually turned into massive railroad expansion, economic expansion, and the beginnings of the Industrial Revolution via increased production of things like pig iron and general American prosperity.
In short, the spat and Biddle-caused crash was long-lasting, spanning multiple administrations, and it was overcome with policies that built on Jacksonian strengths; empowering the people through deregulation and creating, through infrastructure, and environment in which success was more possible despite banking shenanigans
By the end, the bank was defeated and American prosperity intact
That's relevant to Trump. Much as Biddle caused a crash in a desperate attempt to protect the Swamp of that day, the Bank of the US, the Deep State of our day will pull any trick possible, not excluding an economic crash, to protect itself
So, how to overcome it? Do what Jackson and Van Buren did - continually call out the real cause of the crash and social woes, Deep State malfeasance, all while hacking away at the Deep State responsible for that malfeasance and empowering normal people to succeed where it has retreated, or where new opportunities have opened up because it has been hacked away