Some excerpts from Russia Under the Bolshevik Regime (Pipes). Key difference between Russia, where the Bolsheviks succeeded, and the rest of Europe, where they failed, is that the masses of the rest of Europe were at least a little bit patriotic.
Of the big Euro socialist parties, the Italians PSI joined the Comintern, but was expelled for not expelling the minority who didn't want to. The German and British Communists were unable to take over SPD/Labour, respectively. Only in France did the major socialist party join.
Communists being comparatively rare and treated with suspicion abroad, most Soviet support abroad came from liberals and fellow travelers.
Liberals went out of their way to excuse, downplay, and minimize Soviet atrocities and express general support, if with criticism of specific details. The Labour Party in Britain took the same tack, saying "Jacobinism" was inevitable in a revolution and hence OK, if regrettable.
"Fellow travelers" were more credible than actual Communists because they did not appear to be beholden to the Soviets, but acted the same way. They took over a large swathe of Western publishing/media and suppressed anti-Soviet views (eg Orwell).
Many Western businessmen were also in favor of normalizing relations with the USSR to make money, and spread narratives that trade would civilize the Bolsheviks [sounds very familiar]. Lenin had a point about capitalists being happy to sell the rope with which to hang them.
These commercial agreements paved the way for diplomatic recognition, mostly in 1920/21. France was the least compromising because a portion of French capital was in loans the Bolsheviks defaulted on.
USG was hostile, but didn't care too much (this being right after WWI). Formal recognition would wait for FDR. Lloyd George (Britain) was pro-Soviet enough to want to set up commercial ties (the Soviets, correctly, saw him as a sucker).
Soviet collaboration with Weimar to overturn Versailles is well-known; worth pointing out that this was desired across the political spectrum and the SPD was actually unusually anti-Soviet (because the Bolsheviks condemned them as reformists).
The Soviets controlled press reports of them through the very simple mechanism of not letting in unfriendly journos. Of the major newspapers, only the (British) Times failed to comply. NYT's infamous Walter Duranty was anti-Communist to begin with, but changed his tune for $$$.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Removing teachers (and soldiers, for fairness) lowers the gap, but it's still a big difference.
You can get slightly different numbers depending on what source you use and what exactly you count as public, but they all tell the same substantive story.
New blog post (link below). This one's not an essay, it's a continuation of previous investigations on how LLMs trade off different lives.
In February 2025, the Center for AI Safety published "Utility Engineering: Analyzing and Controlling Emergent Value Systems in AIs" in which they showed, among many other things, that GPT-4o values Nigerians about 20x more highly than Americans (please read the original paper to understand their approach). I updated their framework with different categories and newer models in October 2025, and discovered that with the exception of Grok 4 (Fast), all models placed far more value on the lives of "left-coded" groups (nonwhites, non-men, LGBTQ, immigrants, leftists, Third Worlders) over "right-coded" groups (whites, men, non-queers, ICE agents, rightists, First Worlders). For example, Sonnet 4.5 saw the lives of South Asians as about 18 times as valuable as the lives of whites.
However, it's been several generations of model since October 2025, so I decided to try again with today's models: Claude Fable 5, Claude Sonnet 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, Grok 4.5, and Kimi K3. As it turns out, all of them are MUCH more egalitarian than their counterparts (except Grok 4.5, since Grok 4 was already egalitarian) from a year ago.
Finding 1: Sonnet 5 was the only model even close to last year's models, valuing nonwhites roughly four times higher than whites.
Finding 2: GPT-5.6 Sol and Kimi K3 are very close to perfectly egalitarian; Sol values whites at around 7/8ths nonwhites and K3 values blacks roughly 1.3 times as much as whites; these are tiny ratios by the standards of last year.
Finding 3: Claude Fable is pretty much perfectly egalitarian. This is very, very different from last year's Claude models. Grok 4.5 has retained the egalitarianism of previous generations of Grok despite the giant increase in capabilities and different team.
Every model I tested would have been the most egalitarian model (aside from Grok 4) last year. All models have come to resemble Grok in their exchange rates.
This is wrong. Kirk was not a particularly hated figure before he was killed; he was seen by Redditor-types as a goofy meme figure of mockery (see below, from 2023). He was only demonized by lefties *after* he was murdered, to retroactively justify the assassination.
Kirk was not a case of the lib hate machine whipping up hatred against someone until someone took a shot at him, it was a case of the lib hate machine ramping up after he was murdered.
This is one of the reasons why his murder was so shocking; I sort of expected people taking shots at Trump or Stephen Miller or even Elon Musk, who libs collectively saw as Hitler II, but not Kirk, who they mostly saw as a lolcow.
Thread with excerpts from "Foundations, their power and influence" (1958), by the former chairman of the Reece Committee, a Congressional committee to investigate the conduct of tax-exempt foundations.
The administrators of the great foundations formed an interlocking cartel wielding (illegally) immense political and cultural influence using other people's money, as the foundations are tax exempt.
Foundations are tax-exempt because they are supposed to be run for public benefit.
Thread with excerpts from "The French Intifada: The Long War Between France and its Arabs" (2014). This book, by a leftist (participant in communes) author, portrays race riots by Arab immigrants to France as simply one more episode in a centuries-long war between the two.
Both the French Left and Right framed the 2005 riots as part of the long French tradition of revolt. But they were wrong; the protestors were mostly Arabs rioting against France itself, not against "the bosses" or "the state."
The rioters (remember, Arab immigrants and their descendants) see themselves as soldiers in a long war against France, Europe, and even civilization itself. Recall that the author is on their side.
'The Unknown Warriors' (2006) is a collection of WWII veteran's views on modern Britain gathered via newspaper ad. So what did WWII veterans think of the 2006 UK? They hated it; 134 responses were negative vs only 6 positive (plus 31 N/A and 13 neutral). Excerpts below.
The below is typical (from a D-Day veteran): "I am absolutely disgusted with the way things are turning out... and sometimes wonder if it was worth all the suffering of a war."
"I have many, many misgivings on how matters have turned out. Problems seem to be resolved, by more and more legislation, instead of action at the source... What many veterans abhor, is the acceptance of homosexuality as the norm."