Zero Hedge

Hegseth Removes Another Top Pentagon Official

Hegseth Removes Another Top Pentagon Official

Friday saw more of the expected house-cleaning and reshuffling at the Pentagon under Pete Hegseth, as Navy chief of staff Jon Harrison has been fired.

"Jon Harrison will no longer serve as Chief of Staff to the Secretary of the Navy. We are grateful for his service to the Department," a Department of Defense (DOD) official said.

Via The Daily Mail

Harrison had been appointed to the United States Arctic Research Commission by Trump in 2020, and interestingly he from the start of the current administration became a key architect implementing Hegseth's and Trump's new vision for the Pentagon.

"The sudden ouster, according to two defense officials and a former defense official, follows the confirmation this week of Navy Undersecretary Hung Cao," Politico writes.

The publication further notes that Harrison made changes which also sought to limit the power and influence of the undersecretary job:

POLITICO previously reported that Phelan and Harrison had reassigned several aides who were supposed to help Cao navigate the role once he’s confirmed. They had also planned to interview all future military assistants for Cao to ensure decisions came from the secretary’s office.

Cao is a high-profile Navy veteran and former Republican Senate candidate in Virginia who President Donald Trump nominated for the post.

The ouster follows months of musical chairs inside the Pentagon. Hegseth fired several top aides earlier this year and removed the chair of the Joint Chiefs, as well as the uniformed leaders of the Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard.

As another example, in August Lt. Gen. Jeffrey Kruse had been ousted from his role as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

The official reason disclosed is "loss of confidence". While the DIA is lesser known among the nation's major intel agencies like the CIA or NSA, it coordinates all military intelligence among US armed forces, and is mostly staffed by civilians - but under DoD leadership.

Hegseth also removed Vice Adm. Nancy Lacore, head of the Navy Reserve, and Rear Adm. Milton Sands, a Navy SEAL in charge of Naval Special Warfare Command, from their posts, according to officials.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 22:45

Deterring The Next Quasi-World War: China–Russia–North Korea Versus US

Deterring The Next Quasi-World War: China–Russia–North Korea Versus US

Authored by Joseph Yizheng Lian via The Epoch Times,

Russian planes recently flew into Polish and Romanian airspace to test NATO’s resolve while the world veers toward a conflict in Asia—one that could be far worse than the situation in Ukraine—where true deterrence and resolve remain largely absent.

Let’s backtrack a little.

On Sept. 3, Beijing staged a military extravaganza to parade a full suite of fearsome weapons. Many journalists were awed, and some defeatist experts advocated Chamberlainian appeasement. Others, mostly China observers, tried decoding the seating plan of senior Chinese Communist Party (CCP) officials atop Tiananmen Square for clues about the power struggles in Zhongnanhai.

However, what is often overlooked in the discussion about the event is that it represents the financing and support mechanisms behind a new type of quasi-world war. The ongoing Russia–Ukraine war is one example, and the potential invasion of Taiwan by the Chinese regime is another. Let’s explore this further.

The Xinhua images of the Sept. 3 event, featuring Chinese leader Xi Jinping, Russian President Vladimir Putin, and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un consorting in solidarity, should be interpreted as a calculated response to the new tripartite model the West has devised for militarily supporting Ukraine. That model conveys that Kyiv identifies its military hardware needs, European allies provide the financing, and the United States produces and delivers the hardware.

The Beijing event showcased a parallel model: Moscow requests war materiel, including troops, China and North Korea supply them in exchange for cheap Russian energy, with India and a few other countries dipping in. Thus, even though the war’s actual fighting is confined within Ukraine and Russia, its financing involves a much wider array of adversarial states. The coalitional symmetry in this financing mechanism can prolong the bloody conflict indefinitely, which Russia and Ukraine, if left to their own devices, cannot achieve.

A way to stop the war is to break that symmetry, which seems to be the goal of U.S. President Donald Trump’s “secondary tariffs.” On Aug. 6, he doubled the headline tariff on India to 50 percent for buying cheap Russian oil. It is showing results. India reportedly bought much less Russian oil in August. Notably, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who attended the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting in Tianjin from Aug. 31 to Sept. 1, quietly skipped the Sept. 3 military parade.

Now, Trump is pressuring Europe to immediately end its remaining reliance on Russian energy and join him in a similar effort against Beijing, and has called for imposing up to 100 percent additional tariffs on China for buying Russian crude oil. The EU leadership is not yet entirely on board, but has proposed to advance its target of ending all energy imports from Russia from 2027 to 2026 or even sooner.

But whatever happens to the war in Ukraine, the world would not be okay even when Putin agrees to call it quits, because Xi has all the intentions to do a sequel. Xi’s primary interest in supporting Russia lies in an expected reciprocation from Moscow if China invades Taiwan. What would a China–Taiwan war look like?

The Russia–Ukraine war is already a quasi-world war. Despite the combat space being narrowly confined, it nevertheless involves the participation of approximately 50 countries on four continents in various capacities.

A China–Taiwan war would likely be confined to the Taiwan Strait and its surrounding areas. However, Taiwan’s prowess in microelectronics manufacturing, which includes a near-monopoly on artificial intelligence-based data-center servers—aside from its more eye-catching and well-known 90 percent global market share in high-end microchips—means that its stability and survival as an independent state are far more critical to the world than those of wheat-exporting Ukraine. A Chinese invasion would conflagrate into a much more intense conflict, immediately impacting and pulling in all the advanced industrialized countries that depend on Taiwan’s high-tech exports.

An estimate of the total economic cost of the now three-year-old Russia–Ukraine war is around 3.5 percent of global GDP, or approximately $3.5 trillion. On the other hand, the global cost of a full-blown China–Taiwan war could easily be more than three times as large, reaching a staggering $10 trillion, according to Bloomberg Economics.

The United States, in contrast to its current peacemaking role and indirect involvement in the Ukraine war, would have no choice but to take center stage in combat. Japan would also be compelled into an important role due to geographic proximity and treaty obligations. The conflict would come closer to an actual world war.

Facing such a daunting possibility, the United States may have already begun strengthening its hand. The Senate’s Fiscal Year 2026 Defense Appropriations bill earmarks $1.5 billion for the Indo-Pacific Security Initiative, while the House version allocates $500 million for Taiwan via the Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative. Once reconciled, the bill will be ready for the president’s signature.

Moreover, the week before the Sept. 3 Beijing parade, senior defense officials from Taiwan and the United States met in Alaska. That seemingly low-key event was leaked to the press on Sept. 4 and confirmed by a U.S. official on the same day. Apparently, the timing of the meet-leak-confirm sequence was a calibrated, premeditated U.S. answer to the Beijing parade. But can Trump really deter China? He can, if he successfully puts three pieces in his grand strategy together.

Trump needs to strengthen Europe by encouraging it to reduce its extensive welfare state and allocate more resources to its defense. The same applies to Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Australia, as they need to be aligned firmly along the First Island Chain. However, behind these two geopolitical pieces must be a thoroughly revitalized United States, which, unfortunately, has seen its strength sapped by decades of socio-economic decay. Trump is achieving this through a thorough revamping of American institutions and policies regarding culture, education, industry, trade, and defense—the essence of the MAGA movement.

Like a severely wounded beast whose blood flows to the core of its body to preserve its dwindling life force, the United States, as it restores itself, may seem isolationist to countries long accustomed to enjoying the economic openness and defense umbrella provided by Pax Americana. That is a dangerous misreading of Trump by many countries, friends and foes alike.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 22:10

Trump To Slash Refugee Admissions By 94% From Biden Levels

Trump To Slash Refugee Admissions By 94% From Biden Levels

The Trump White House is poised to dramatically reduce the number of refugees that will be accepted into the United States over the next fiscal year -- with the ceiling falling a whopping 94% from the limit set by the Biden administration, according to a New York Times report. 

Citing "people familiar with the matter," the Times says a maximum of just 7,500 refugees would be admitted over the coming year, a tiny fraction of the 125,000 limit set by the Biden administration last year. Most of those slots would be reserved for white Afrikaners fleeing South Africa and its murderous violence against white people and the looming threat of uncompensated land confiscation. Afrikaners now represent less than 5 percent of South Africa's population.

Earlier this year, thousands of white South Africans rallied outside the US embassy in Pretoria, South Africa to thank President Trump for his willingness to accept people fleeing anti-white hostility (Marco Longari/AFP/Getty Images)

The pending reduction and prioritization of white refugees elicited condemnation from promoters of mass immigration. “Such a low refugee ceiling would break America’s promise to people who played by the rules," Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) president Mark Hetfield, told the Times. "Trump isn’t just putting the Afrikaners to the front of the line, he is kicking years-long-waiting refugees out of the line." HIAS has itself been hammered by Trump policies, slashing its staff by more than half after the new administration slashed funding for refugee programs.  

In May, a group of 59 white Afrikaner refugees arrived in the United States via a chartered flight, raising eyebrows given the speed with which they were whisked into the country, in contrast to people from other countries who've faced waits that extend over years. “They tell quite harrowing stories of the violence that they faced in South Africa that was not redressed by the authorities by the unjust application of the law,” Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau said after welcoming them to Dulles International Airport near Washington DC. 

On Sep. 30, Trump signed a presidential determination to reset the ceiling. However, it won't become official until after consultations with Congress that are required by federal law. For now, those consultations will seemingly have to wait until the government shutdown ends. Earlier this week, a quartet of Democratic senators and representatives used a joint letter to accuse Trump of neglecting his duty:  

“Despite repeated outreach from Democratic and Republican committee staff, the Trump administration has completely discarded its legal obligation, leaving Congress in the dark and refugees in limbo...The consequences are dire...[the virtual shutdown of the program is] betraying the nation’s promise as a refuge for the oppressed.”

Moving aggressively to put the brakes on Biden's open-border policies, Trump suspended the refugee program with an executive order signed shortly after his inauguration. He similarly suspended the acceptance of migrants presenting at the border under a different official avenue referred to as asylum. Trump subsequently carved out an explicit exception to his refugee-program suspension for Afrikaners. However, it appears the total number of Afrikaners to be accepted into the United States this year is less than 100

Making it to the United States via the refugee program often entails a multi-year wait in overseas refugee camps, along with successfully passing interviews, background checks and medical exams. Some 130,000 conditionally-approved refugees and 14,000 Iranian religious minorities who've already cleared the prerequisites are stuck in limbo. 

In other news on the immigration front, the Trump administration has started offering $2,500 apiece to unaccompanied migrant children who are age 14 and older if they'll self-deport to their home countries. The policy was instituted via a memorandum sent to the Department of Health and Human Services on Friday afternoon. NBC News, which obtained a copy, also reported that, according to rumors among immigration advocates, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has christened the self-deportation scheme "Freaky Friday." ICE refuted the name, but confirmed the program, emphasizing that it was a “strictly voluntary option to return home to their families.” In just one of many dimensions of the previous era of open-border madness, more than 300,000 unaccompanied children entered the country during the Biden administration.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 21:35

Pakistan Offers Washington New Arabian Sea Port To Tap Critical Minerals

Pakistan Offers Washington New Arabian Sea Port To Tap Critical Minerals

Via The Cradle

Advisers to Pakistani army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir proposed to US officials the construction of a new port on the Arabian Sea near the borders with Afghanistan and Iran, according to a Financial Times report released Saturday, citing a plan reviewed by the outlet.

The plan envisions US investors constructing and managing a terminal in Pasni, a coastal town in Gwadar District, Balochistan. The site is described as a gateway to Pakistan’s vital mineral reserves.

The blueprint rules out any US military bases. Instead, it highlights development finance opportunities for a rail network linking Pasni to mineral-rich western provinces, the report says.

The British financial outlet noted that the proposal was circulated to some US officials and later shared with Munir in advance of his recent meeting with US President Donald Trump at the White House. 

That meeting, held late last month, followed earlier talks in September when Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif sought US investment in agriculture, energy, technology, and mining.

According to FT, Sharif pressed Washington to encourage private-sector involvement in Pakistan’s economy, while Munir’s advisers positioned the Pasni port project as a strategic opportunity for American companies.

The report noted that the initiative reflects Islamabad’s efforts to attract western development financing, particularly for infrastructure projects linked to the country’s resource sectors.

Reuters reported that the US State Department, the White House, and Pakistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not respond to requests for comment. Attempts to reach the Pakistani Army were also unsuccessful.

Alongside economic overtures such as the Pasni port proposal to the US, Pakistan is also reshaping its defense posture in West Asia, utilizing its new mutual defense pact with Saudi Arabia to anchor itself as a security guarantor.

Defense Minister Khawaja Asif confirmed last month that the pact is defensive, not expansionist, and left the “door open” for other Arab states to join, comparing it to NATO. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 21:00

Medical Group Reveals Major Role Inflammation Plays In Heart Disease

Medical Group Reveals Major Role Inflammation Plays In Heart Disease

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The American College of Cardiology recently released recommendations indicating that inflammation should be considered when trying to predict heart disease.

A man walks in a hospital hallway in Irvine, Calif., on Oct. 11, 2016. John Fredricks/The Epoch Times

In a report issued in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology on Sept. 29, the college said that the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) blood test that measures CRP, a known inflammatory marker that increases in response to inflammation in the body, can determine whether a person is at risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD).

“Because clinicians will not treat what they do not measure, universal screening of hsCRP in both primary and secondary prevention patients, in combination with cholesterol, represents a major clinical opportunity and is therefore recommended,” said the American College of Cardiology.

In patients with known CVD, hsCRP level is at least as predictive of future events as LDL cholesterol levels, even in patients treated with statin therapy,” the college said in a separate statement.

It is referring to low-density lipoprotein that is sometimes called “bad” cholesterol, and statins, meanwhile, are a class of drugs that are used to lower cholesterol in the blood.

“In individuals with increased inflammatory burden, an early initiation of lifestyle interventions is recommended to reduce inflammatory risk,” the report said, adding that a “finding of a persistently elevated hsCRP level should lead to consideration of initiation or intensification statin therapy, irrespective of LDL cholesterol.”

The report further stated that for people who have cardiovascular disease who are either taking or not taking statins, the inflammation measurement “is at least as powerful a predictor of recurrent vascular events as that of LDL cholesterol” and shows the importance of evaluating residual inflammation in patients.

It also noted that a low dose of colchicine, a medication that is used to treat gout and sometimes a type of heart inflammation called pericarditis, has been shown to reduce cardiovascular events in individuals with chronic stable atherosclerosis, or the buildup of fats and cholesterol on artery walls.

A type of monoclonal antibody called canakinumab has been shown to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events, they said.

The researchers noted that some anti-inflammatory drugs such as methotrexate, corticosteroids, and TNF inhibitors have not shown benefits in major trials. (ZH: Methotrexate is particularly 'problematic' as they say for multiple reasons)

The group recommended that health providers should encourage people to focus on the “consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts, and olive oil” and increase the intake of omega-3 fatty acids by including fish in their diet.

They’re also encouraged to focus on minimizing red and processed meats, refined carbohydrates, and sugary beverages, it said, adding that other lifestyle changes that may be recommended for individuals with high inflammatory markers include more exercise, quitting smoking, and maintaining a healthy weight.

A study published last month, conducted by researchers at Florida Atlantic University, found that there is a correlation between people whose diets have the most ultra-processed foods and higher levels of hsCRP, the marker of inflammation.

“The time is also ripe for the development of strategies to promote increased physician awareness of the crucial role of inflammation in CVD and accelerate the adoption of evidence-based, guideline-directed anti-inflammatory therapy through dissemination and implementation research,” the college said.

*  *  * Anti-Inflammatory supplements in order of effectiveness

Turmeric

Berberine

Astaxanthin

Resveratrol

Mushroom 10x (specifically the Chaga)

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 19:50

​​​​​​​After Quiet Hurricane Season Peak, Meteorologists Monitor New Development In Atlantic Basin

​​​​​​​After Quiet Hurricane Season Peak, Meteorologists Monitor New Development In Atlantic Basin

Last year, the global-warming alarmists at Yale Climate Connections were once again citing research claiming that "human-caused climate change made many recent extreme weather events far more damaging." 

A year late, Yale Climate Connections journalists are glitching because they can't explain "Another round of weird peak-season quiet in the Atlantic tropics."

So what changed over the past year? Did global warming suddenly evaporate, or did the funding to push the narrative dry up?

But only time will tell if these progressive Ivy League elites, operating under the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, within the Yale School of the Environment, are right about human-caused climate change dooming the planet. 

After all, Democrats have pushed narratives that span everything from cow farts and Taylor Swift's private jet to gas stoves, 2-stroke dirt bikes, and petrol-powered cars that present immediate doom to the planet.

Why? Because Democrats used climate propaganda as cover for the biggest heist on the U.S. Treasury ...

Remember:

Much of their credibility has been staked on pushing immediate 'climate doom porn' - using Greta Thunberg as a puppet - insisting that unless we pay more climate taxes, drive more EVs, and destabilize the grid with intermittent solar and wind, the world is literally toast. 

However, let's return to the topic of the quiet hurricane season that has perplexed climate alarmists.

Last month, Ernesto Rodríguez, meteorologist in charge of the National Weather Service forecast office in San Juan, Puerto Rico, said that it was only the second time that no named storms had formed during the peak of the Atlantic hurricane season since modern record-keeping began in 1950. 

"Usually, conditions during this period are prime," Rodríguez said around mid-September. The quietest peak was recorded in 1992, after Hurricane Andrew devastated Florida.

But, we're not out of the woods yet, and perhaps the next tropical wave in the Atlantic Basin will provide climate doomers with some cover and generate climate propaganda in corporate media outlets. We do miss the days when climate alarmists told us the world would burn to a crisp by 2023 (read here). Yet here we are, still sitting on the Bloomberg Terminal, penning this weather note while eating a burger.   

So here is what The Weather Channel's meteorologists are focusing on ahead of next week: "The National Hurricane Center has increased the odds to a medium chance of development for a tropical wave coming off the coast of Africa."

Keep an eye on this tropical wave, which could become a tropical storm or hurricane near the Lesser Antilles - at some point next week.

. . .

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 19:15

OPEC+ Slams Reuters Leak On Oil Plans As "Wholly Inaccurate And Misleading"

OPEC+ Slams Reuters Leak On Oil Plans As "Wholly Inaccurate And Misleading"

Submitted by Julianne Geiger of OilPrice.com

Reuters and its anonymous (oil-shorting) sources are again stirring the oil market. This time, the wire says OPEC+ is preparing another supply hike in November, with Saudi Arabia pushing for something big and Russia urging restraint. But if recent history is any guide, a report of rising quotas doesn’t necessarily translate into rising barrels... and OPEC is getting increasingly irritated with the narrative.

According to Reuters’ unnamed insiders, Riyadh wants an increase of 274,000 to as much as 548,000 bpd, while Moscow is said to prefer another modest 137,000 bpd bump. The group’s eight key producers are due to meet virtually on Sunday to decide. But it’s hard to forget that just three days ago, OPEC issued an unusually sharp rebuke of the media, flatly rejecting circulating reports of a half-million-barrel hike as “wholly inaccurate and misleading.” The statement was widely read as a direct shot at Reuters, whose reports had already knocked prices lower.

The bigger issue is the difference between quota hikes and actual production increases. OPEC+ has been promising staged increases since April as it unwinds cuts, but it’s only managed to deliver about 75% of those barrels. Many members can’t raise production even if they want to.

Nigeria, Angola, and Iraq are still repaying earlier overproduction through “compensation cuts,” while only Saudi Arabia and the UAE have meaningful spare capacity.

That leaves traders stuck parsing press leaks against physical reality. On paper, OPEC+ could announce another big hike. In practice, the barrels may never show up. The result is market theater: Reuters reports a glut-in-the-making, OPEC pushes back to protect the narrative, and prices swing on expectations rather than evidence.

Brent crude is already down more than 7% this week on the latest supply-hike chatter, even though the “extra” oil hasn’t actually arrived. For now, the gap between quota headlines and physical flows is as wide as ever.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 18:40

Trump Thanks Israel For Halting Gaza City Offensive, Urges Hamas "Move Quickly" Or Deal Is Off

Trump Thanks Israel For Halting Gaza City Offensive, Urges Hamas "Move Quickly" Or Deal Is Off

The Israeli military has been ordered by the Netanyahu government to pause its offensive in Gaza City, according to Israeli army radio on Saturday, just a day after Hamas is said to have agreed to the Trump-proposed peace plan which seeks the release of all remaining hostages, living and deceased. 

The Israeli military in an official statement said it had been ordered to "advance readiness" for implementing the first stage of Trump’s plan. Army radio noted that military operations in Gaza would be scaled back to "the minimum" - but what have been dubbed defensive strikes will continue. Prime Minister Netanyahu says the hostages will be freed in days.

Source: Israeli army via Reuters

Some of these airstrikes were still observed throughout the day, with Palestinian sources saying at least 55 people have still been killed since dawn.

President Trump himself late Friday urged Israel to halt its bombardment, while also calling on Hamas to "move quickly" on implementing the 20-point peace plan.

"I appreciate that Israel has temporarily stopped the bombing in order to give the Hostage release and Peace Deal a chance to be completed," Trump stated on Truth Social Saturday morning.

But he also warned that "Hamas must move quickly, or else all bets will be off," adding that "I will not tolerate delay, which many think will happen, or any outcome where Gaza poses a threat again. Let’s get this done, FAST. Everyone will be treated fairly!"

But Hamas had only said it is ready to enter negotiations on Trump's peace plan, suggesting there are many more hurdles to go as each condition is agreed to.

Prime Minister Netanyahu in fresh remarks to reporters emphasized that the plan calls for the complete demilitarization of Hamas - but this is anything but certain in terms of whether the Palestinian militant group will actually lay down its weapons.

But Hamas did say it has agreed to releasing all 48 remaining hostages that it's ready to surrender power over the Gaza Strip, but the proverbial devil will be in the details in terms of how precisely this all comes to fruition.

It remains an open question the degree to which fighting has actually stopped in Gaza City...

The Palestinian side hopes to see 250 prisoners serving life sentences and 1,700 Palestinians detained without charge released as a result of the Trump 20-point plan.

Israeli military Arabic-language spokesperson Avichay Adraee is meanwhile telling Palestinian residents not to return to their homes in Gaza City or northern Gaza.

Still, this moment seems the best shot at truce or permanent peace in the two-year long war in quite a while, and the White House seems ready to seize the initiative and push the sides to the finish line.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 18:05

Where Beer Is Cheapest (And Most Expensive)

Where Beer Is Cheapest (And Most Expensive)

From Modelo to Carlsberg, beer prices have climbed sharply across the global economy over the past five years.

While inflation has been a driver, taxes often make up a significant share of the final price. Today, a bottle can cost as little as $0.82 in Shanghai and as high as $4.75 in Sydney in U.S. dollars.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, shows the price of a 0.5L bottle of domestic beer across major global cities, based on data from Deutsche Bank.

Beer Prices Around the World

Below, we show the average cost for a beer in 67 cities worldwide in 2025.

In Australia, beer prices are driven up by significant taxes, with beer prices at least 76% higher than in New York City.

Also placing high in the rankings is Singapore (#3), with taxes also playing a role, reflecting government-led initiatives to deter residents from consuming alcohol. In nearby Malaysia, a bottle of beer in Kuala Lumpur averages $3.32—about 30% more than in New York.

Across Europe, the gap is stark: Ireland leads with the priciest pours at $3.33 a bottle, while Prague—where beer is consumed more than anywhere else in the world—offers the cheapest at just $1.06.

To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the top countries by beer consumption in the world.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 15:45

Bitcoin Faces Its 1913 Moment

Bitcoin Faces Its 1913 Moment

Authored by Kane McGukin via BombThrower,com,

Is the Core vs. Knots battle a replay of two ideological Federal Reserve Plans that ultimately centralized gold, the original sound money?

TL;DR: The Core vs Knots battle is an attack on the Bitcoin network. A monetary struggle no different than the fight to establish the Federal Reserve in 1913.

The 1900s, like today, began with bankers at war over the governing rules of money. Two competing factions, the Aldrich Plan and Glass-Owen Plan, launched an assault on sound money because men sought more power and nations demanded more control.

Gold, like Bitcoin, is money because of its first principle origins. Yet the misconception, then and now, is that survival requires more complexity.

History shows how fragile conviction can be. An offer for a seat at the table is enough to flip once passionate defenders of sound money to enablers of credit and unlimited debt. Original goldbugs like Keynes in the 1920s and Greenspan in the 1980s proved unable to brush off the emotional pull of notoriety, currency, and control. Each flippening reintroduces inflationary tactics that corrode money’s principles and value.

Cunning design and corrupt schemes have often proven far too great for man to overcome.

Never a Dull Moment

There’s never a dull moment in Bitcoin or in the world of finance, for that matter.

The latest continuous divide within the Bitcoin community may look like another technical battle. But does it point to something deeper? While it feels like there’s a never-ending need to have something technical to argue over, beneath the GitHub commits and mailing list debates lurks a ghost from the past. The ideological struggle that gave birth to America’s Federal Reserve.

The Fed’s creation was framed in the language of decentralization and regional representation.

Yet its foundation was built on two forces: filters and control (here and here). Behind the curtain, the true drivers in 1913 were the same as they are today. A desire for power, profit, and the ability to manufacture credit money from a hard money basis. A Paper Bitcoin Summer, if you will.

Source: The Princes of Yen by Richard Werner

Ask any Bitcoin maximalist what they despise most, and the likely answers are: the Federal Reserve or the dollar’s undeniable debasement.

That’s what makes the current Core vs. Knots clash so fascinating. It’s not just a nerdy civil war inside Bitcoin development. Viewed through the lens of monetary history, the parallels come into focus. A reminder that only a little over 100 years ago, lines were drawn and sides were picked between two competing visions for a new financial system: the Aldrich Plan (big-bank, corporate centralization) and the Glass-Owen Plan (populist, individualistic ideology). With full hindsight, both promoted decentralization in name only.

Both claimed to defend the money with one important caveat, both plans led inevitably to the centralization of gold, the original “sound money”.

By expanding the Op_Return size (protocol inflation), are we not reintroducing the debasement Satoshi rooted out?

By offering a more centralized Bitcoin client, are we not centralizing trust?

Are both options not heading down a similar “Federal Reserve” path?

Regardless of side, the question we should be asking: will Bitcoin, too, cloak centralization in the language of decentralization?

Bitcoin Is a First Principle Asset

As we saw in 1913, a similar banking stalemate led to the Federal Reserve Act being pushed through on the eve of Christmas holiday. Plowing forward at all costs was not the right answer. History reminds us that just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

Heated debates tend to harden into an us vs. them mentality, where momentum overrides principle. More often than not, the final path hasn’t resolved the gripes but has paved the way for political and centralized control of money.

“Smart cows show the other cows how to bypass the filters. You know, like you can open the gate. So, you know, it’s always been the case. You could always bypass these things, but I don’t think we would agree that we should bypass the dust relay fee and start seeing a massive amount of dust clog up the network.” – Samson Mow

In the world of banking, there have always been cops and robbers. Piles of assets and monetary value have always enticed the idea of a bank heist. Bitcoin and digital money are proving to be no different. The storage source has shifted, but the mentality to capture remains the same. It’s a reminder of how you embed a European Central Bank Plan inside of an American financial system. Divide and conquer.

If you look at ordinals, that’s one. They’re it’s kind of like an ICO but with pictures. You know, they’re selling these these PFPs or whatever wizard images and cat images and then they have a war chest and they don’t care. They can print more stuff. – Samson Mow

Whether it’s printing from the FED, ICOs, DATs, or Bitcoin Treasury Companies, the invisible hand is one of fractional reserve banking policies.

Furthermore, what Samson describes with ordinals and fee compression rhymes with history. Changing the cost to process a transaction to $0.01 sat/vbytes allows unintended consequences at some point. Just as “cheap trading” fueled reckless high-frequency speculation in equities around 2008. Cheap blockspace and zero-fee incentives risk repeating the same cycle and diluting the value of Bitcoin’s network.

Lowering friction may look like innovation, but history shows it usually ends in centralization and systemic fragility.

Low fees, in essence, remove the security of a financial moat.

Greed’s Temptation and Calling

At the height of the 1914 crisis, John Maynard Keynes was asked to brief the Chancellor of the Exchequer on whether the pound should remain tied to gold. Keynes argued emphatically that it must:

… he (Keynes) had come down very strongly in favor of maintaining the link: “London’s position as a monetary center depends very directly on complete confidence in London’s unwavering readiness” to meet its obligations in gold and would be severely damaged if “at the first sign of emergency that commitment was suspended.

… But whereas before the war he had thought that the best way to achieve this was to ensure that currencies such as the pound be fully convertible to gold at a fixed value, he had now come to believe that there was no reason why linking money supply and credit to gold should necessarily result in stable prices. – Lords of Finance

If the examples of John Maynard Keynes and Alan Greenspan, along with the parallel of 1913 versus today’s Bitcoin divide, reveal nothing else, it is that inflationary pressures, though often hidden, are always present. The history of currency is a long dotted line of individuals who ultimately bend the knee to the erosion of value systems.

Their words defended markets and sound money, but their actions were of centralized control.

Core vs. Knots feels like the same corporate-led sleight of hand that steered Keynes and Greenspan and that defined the Aldrich and Glass-Owen plans. It is the same temptation facing Bitcoin today.

Source: The Princes of Yen by Richard Werner

What is clear is this: it is easy to praise sound money in theory, but far harder to defend it once the “in-crowd” offers you a seat at the table.

The lure of acceptance and the search for yield are powerful drugs. Both have the power to flip a goldbug into a credit junkie without leaving a trace of evidence.

Source: The Princes of Yen by Richard Werner

The Simple Lesson That is Hard to Live By

First principles are non-negotiable. They are like primary colors in art. Remove one, and the structural foundation for all future innovation collapses. Cloud the palette with too many colors, and the core value is drowned by unnecessary bloat. Too many features introduce the Ethereum problem. Endless left-turns disguised as innovation, when the mission could be achieved in a few simple right-turns.

Gold’s important role as sound money was pushed aside, not because it failed, but because men failed to hold the line. Bitcoin faces the same test today.

If Core vs. Knots, ordinals, or fee games erode Bitcoin’s principles, then the ghost of 1913 will win again, only this time in digital form. In a future world, Bitcoin credit will be all the rage.

*  *  *

Get on the Bombthrower mailing list here and receive a free copy of The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto and The CBDC Survival Guide when it drops.   Subscribe to Kane McGukin’s Substack here.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 15:10

China Reportedly Operated SIM Farm Network Designed To Crash NYC Cell Networks 

China Reportedly Operated SIM Farm Network Designed To Crash NYC Cell Networks 

Last month, just hours before President Trump's address to the United Nations General Assembly, the U.S. Secret Service dropped a bombshell report revealing it had dismantled a massive, decentralized SIM farm network located just 35 miles from New York City. The network had the operational capacity of a telecommunications stealth weapon capable of paralyzing the entire metro area's cell network through a massive denial-of-service attack.

New details emerged in an exclusive report from Blaze News, citing sources within the Department of Homeland Security and the U.S. intelligence community, who revealed that these SIM farms had been operational for more than a year and were operated by China's Ministry of State Security.

"This is something that is a direct threat to our nation right now," a top intelligence official told Blaze News. "A direct threat to our nation, and it needs to be shut down today — like ASAP. Only five of them have been taken down so far."

The Blaze's report continues:

The SIM networks were put in place and are managed by China's Ministry of State Security, an ultra-secretive, massive espionage agency that has grown in prominence and global activity in recent years, according to the journal China Leadership Monitor.

The MSS employs more than 800,000 people, nearly double the Soviet KGB at its peak. The MSS "now operates worldwide at a scale and tempo not seen in decades," China Leadership Monitor wrote in a recent newsletter.

Several officials who spoke with Blaze News anonymously said the establishment and use of this destructive network by China should be considered an act of war. The potential threat to America would be "second only to thermonuclear war," one source said.

"It's absolutely an act of war — an internationally recognized act of war," one intelligence expert told Blaze News. "Cyberattacks on critical infrastructure is, and facilitating terrorism to the point where you're trying to kill high-ranking members of the United States government. Those two alone are acts of war."

. . . 

"These things were being used all summer to SWAT people since Trump was elected," said one source, speaking anonymously because the source is not authorized to discuss an ongoing investigation. "Swatting — that's a terrorist act. The Trump administration declared that a terrorist act."

While the Chinese facilitated the SWAT raids, it is believed that Americans who are familiar with the system — either through a government or a criminal enterprise — are initiating the hoax calls, the source said.

The swatting of a senior Secret Service official and some Secret Service protectees last spring led to the investigation that discovered the Chinese SIM farms in the Tri-State area, the Secret Service confirmed to Blaze News. A Secret Service engineer assigned to the investigation was key to discovering the SIM network.

An intelligence analyst told Blaze News that:

What's shocking is that there may be up to 100 or more of these sites everywhere. There's probably 60, 80, 100 of these in the United States.

The discovery of weaponized SIM farm nodes by China should not come as a surprise. This is because the Chinese Communist Party's ongoing irregular warfare campaign against the U.S. has been supercharged over the years, especially in the era of Trump

The book China's Total War Strategy: Next-Generation Weapons of Mass Destruction - published by the CCP BioThreats Initiative and authored by Dr. Ryan Clarke, LJ Eads, Dr. Robert McCreight, and Dr. Xiaoxu Sean Lin - outlines how the CCP pursues an aggressive, multifaceted "total war" against the U.S. that leverages next-generation weapons, including synthetic narcotics (e.g., fentanyl and cannabinoids), bioweapons (e.g., Covid-19), psychological manipulation and influence (e.g., TikTok), and a broad arsenal of irregular warfare tools (read report).

And now, SIM farms appear to be another domain of the CCP's irregular warfare campaign, an effort to collapse America from within by paralyzing communication networks. Throughout this year, one high-level Trump official has warned us about the devastation left behind by the years-long "Salt Typhoon" cyberattack carried out by China. On another front, Congressional Republicans of the Oversight Committee have been investigating the dark money networks and political affiliations of billionaire Neville Roy Singham, a U.S. national reportedly residing in Communist China, who allegedly was funding far-left color revolutions in the U.S. to sow chaos. Are you starting to get the picture now? 

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 14:35

The Golden Age Of Spectacle

The Golden Age Of Spectacle

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

"The most useful expert, of course, is the one who can lie." Guy Debord

We're living in the golden age of Spectacle: whatever substance remains in politics is lost in the endless parade of outlandish political theater, finance is dominated by staged spectacles of media-savvy CEOs announcing the next trillion-dollar product, and online, all the world's a stage for everyone's spectacle.

French philosopher Guy Debord outlined the value of spectacle in a society and economy that is increasingly dependent on artifice rather than authenticity in his 1967 book, The Society of the Spectacle.

Here is how Debord described his 1967 book in his 1988 follow-up work, Comments on the Society of the Spectacle"In 1967, in a book entitled The Society of the Spectacle, I showed what the modern spectacle was already in essence: the autocratic reign of the market economy which had acceded to an irresponsible sovereignty, and the totality of new techniques of government which accompanied this reign."

Debord is laying out a way to understand how society has become subsumed by economic forces, specifically markets ruled by the corporate-state.

This arrangement manages the populace by turning everything into a spectacle which in Debord's view is not "real life," it's a representation that we passively accept without understanding how it transforms our identity and social fabric from "being" to "having," i.e. buying and owning stuff that is a representation of who we are.

This representation is managed by technocratic expertise.

What we refer to as propaganda, marketing and narrative are for Debord all aspects of spectacle.

Spectacle as a simulation or facsimile of "real life" speaks to a profound alienation: we passively watch spectacle and take that passive consumption as "real life" without understanding it's all managed to maintain the dominance of those benefitting from this arrangement.

This echoes many related ideas (for example, "The Matrix" films), simulacra being passed off as the authentic "real thing," and Marx's concept of alienation in which the worker has been disconnected (alienated) from the product/value of their labor.

The core idea here is that Spectacle is inauthentic, fake, a simulation, a substitution of representation for substance, that creates a peculiarly unreality. These are the themes I explore in my book Ultra-Processed Life.

The entire appeal of social media can be seen as personalizing Spectacle, as we each gain audience and influence by making ourselves and our lives into unreal representations, i.e. spectacles.

Here are some illuminating excerpts from Debord:

"Because spectacle replaces real life with a mere mediated representation of life that cannot be experienced directly, it provides a framework where mass deceptions and lies can consistently and convincingly appear as true.

It has recreated our society without community, and it has obstructed the ability to communicate in general. Such processes and their ramifications ultimately mean people cannot truly experience life for themselves: they have become spectators, bound to an impoverished state of unlife"

In The Society of the Spectacle, Debord explains that the economy subjugating society first presented itself as an "obvious degradation of being into having," where human fulfilment was no longer attained through what one was, but instead only through what one bought and displayed. As society's capitulation to the economy accelerated, the decline from being into having shifted "from having into appearing."

With respect to knowledge, therefore, experts no longer have to be experts or have expertise, they only need to take on the appearance of expertise.

"All experts serve the state and the media and only in that way do they achieve their status. Every expert follows his master, for all former possibilities for independence have been gradually reduced to nil by present society's mode of organisation. The most useful expert, of course, is the one who can lie."

"The vague feeling that there has been a rapid invasion which has forced people to lead their lives in an entirely different way is now widespread; but this is experienced rather like some inexplicable change in the climate, or in some other natural equilibrium, a change faced with which ignorance knows only that it has nothing to say." Debord

This reminds me of a comment French writer Michel Houellebecq made in an interview: "I have the impression of being caught up in a network of complicated, minute, stupid rules, and I have the impression of being herded towards a uniform kind of happiness, toward a kind of happiness that doesn't really make me happy."

A reliance on spectacle to create a peculiar unreality may not be solely modern.

If we think of late Rome's extravagant spectacles--staged battles in the Coliseum, chariot races, etc.--they were representations of a Roman strength that was no longer real.

In the real world, Rome's power flowed from its vast importation of wheat from North Africa, its lucrative trade with the Mideast and India, its silver mines in Spain and its well-trained and provisioned legions.

Once these decayed or collapsed, the spectacles in Rome were no longer manifestations of power, they were representations of a power that was rapidly dissolving in the world beyond Rome.

As a final thought, consider how AI is being presented as automated expertise. But isn't AI just a representation of true expertise that "serves the state and the media" in a new theater of Spectacle?

*  *  *

Check out my new book Ultra-Processed Life and my updated Books and Films.

Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com

Subscribe to my Substack for free

Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 14:00

Immortal Monkeys? Not Quite, But Scientists Just Reversed Aging With 'Super' Stem Cells

Immortal Monkeys? Not Quite, But Scientists Just Reversed Aging With 'Super' Stem Cells

Key Points:

  • "Super Stem Cells" boosted memory in monkeys and offered protection against neurodegeneration.
  • They halted age-related bone loss and restored vitality in more than half of the 61 tissues examined.
  • The therapy also cut back harmful inflammation and reduced the burden of senescent cells — the aged, non-dividing cells that drive aging throughout the body.

In a discovery that may have profound impacts on aging, scientists in Beijing have taken a dramatic step toward what once seemed impossible: making old animals biologically young again. The study was published last month in the journal Cell.

By fortifying human stem cells with a gene long linked to longevity, they rejuvenated aged monkeys - improving memory, protecting bones, calming inflammation, and restoring youthful activity across dozens of organs.

The work, while still in animals, is among the most compelling demonstrations yet that aging in primates might be reversible.

    The Science Behind the Breakthrough

    At the heart of the study are mesenchymal progenitor cells (MPCs) - a type of stem-like cell found in bone marrow and connective tissues. These cells act as the body’s maintenance crew, capable of turning into bone, cartilage, fat, and muscle cells, while also secreting factors that help nearby tissues repair themselves.

    But like all cells, MPCs age with us and eventually succumb to senescence  a state of permanent retirement. Senescent cells don’t divide anymore. Worse, they pump out inflammatory molecules, scar tissue signals, and other “toxic chatter” that accelerate aging in neighboring cells. In effect, senescent cells spread decline.

    Upgrading the Repair System with FoxO3

    To overcome this exhaustion, researchers turned to FoxO3, a protein known as a longevity gene regulator. In healthy young cells, FoxO3 acts like a switchboard operator, turning on DNA repair pathways, antioxidant defenses, and stress-resistance programs. In older cells, FoxO3 activity wanes - leaving them vulnerable to damage.

    Hydra, a freshwater organism capable of regenerating indefinitely, rely heavily on FoxO to keep their stem cells active. Humans share this same protein, and genetic studies link variants of FOXO3 to exceptional longevity in people.

    (Image: aip.org) The Immortal Hydra

    The Chinese Academy of Sciences team genetically engineered MPCs so that FoxO3 would stay permanently active inside the nucleus, constantly flipping on protective genes. 

    The researchers engineered senescence-resistant cells - "SRCs" - by altering genes that control DNA repair, stress resistance, and mitochondrial function. These fortified cells were then transplanted into elderly macaques whose age roughly corresponds to a human in their 60s or 70s.

    They found that SRC treatment mitigated age-related brain shrinkage, and rejuvenated multiple organs and tissues.

    Put simply: MPCs provided the hardware - the body’s natural repair crew - while FoxO3 was the software upgrade that made them resistant to aging.

    What Happened Inside the Monkeys

    The results were striking:

    • Bone health: Normally, older primates show progressive bone loss, a close analog to osteoporosis in humans. Monkeys that received SRCs maintained or even improved bone density, suggesting the treatment reversed skeletal decline.

    • Cognitive performance: When tested on memory and learning tasks, the treated monkeys performed significantly better, recalling objects and navigating mazes more effectively than untreated peers.

    • Inflammation: Blood tests revealed a sharp drop in inflammatory markers. Since chronic inflammation - sometimes called “inflammaging” - drives many age-related diseases, this finding suggests SRCs could help blunt the root of multiple disorders.

    • Organ vitality: Post-treatment scans and biopsies revealed rejuvenation in the brain, bone, and even reproductive organs. The researchers believe this widespread effect was mediated by exosomes — tiny vesicles released by SRCs that carry rejuvenating proteins and genetic material to other cells, essentially acting as messengers of youth.

    As one of the lead scientists, Si Wang, put it: "We see evidence of rejuvenation."

    Why This Matters

    Most anti-aging strategies tested so far - from rapamycin to fasting mimics - have worked primarily in rodents. Translating those gains to primates, with their longer lifespans and complex physiology, has been an elusive goal.

    This study is different. By showing functional rejuvenation in macaques, it bridges the gap between mouse biology and human potential. The findings suggest that aging is not simply the result of passive wear and tear but is, at least partly, programmable and reversible.

    If similar approaches work in people, SRCs could one day treat not just osteoporosis or memory decline, but the broader syndrome of aging itself.

    But Enormous Questions Remain

    Experts stress that while the results are promising, translation to humans is far from assured. Questions loom:

    • Safety: Will senescence-resistant cells behave predictably, or could they persist too long, increasing cancer risk?

    • Durability: How long do the benefits last? Months? Years? A lifetime?

    • Delivery: Can such cells be manufactured at scale, and will the body accept them without immune rejection?

    • Ethics: How should such therapies be tested in people, and who should have access if they work?

    This is a milestone, but we must not leap to human immortality headlines,” said an independent gerontology expert. “What it shows is that systemic aging in primates can be modulated — that is profound enough.”

    A Glimpse of the Future

    For now, the macaques remain under study, their bodies whispering signals of youth from transplanted cells. But the implications are profound: if scientists can replenish the body’s repair machinery with cells designed to resist aging, medicine might shift from treating diseases one by one to addressing their common root.

    That vision - once dismissed as science fiction - is now edging closer to scientific fact.

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 13:25

    The End Of Woke Capitalism

    The End Of Woke Capitalism

    Authored by Mark Jeftovic via BombThrower.com,

    The Egregore of Far-Left Radicalism Is Wounded – But What Will Take It’s Place?

    Today’s post is excerpted from the October edition of The Bitcoin Capitalist Letter – get a special deal for Bombthrower readers here »

    “At the physical level, we are witnessing a war of structures,
    on the meta-physical level, a battle of pendulums.”

    — Vadim Zeland

    Within the space of a few days over the second week of September, the world looked on in horror as a pair of unspeakably horrific crimes were committed; by now it’s likely everyone knows what I’m referring to.

    I’m talking, of course, about the stabbing of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska on a North Carolina transit train – and the all-too-public assassination of Charlie Kirk, at a campus event in Utah.

    The images from both events were horrific and circulated widely, there is no need to show them again here – but this “one-two” punch in my mind was the definitive knock-out blow to the far-left domination of our cultural zeitgeist.

    A few days after the Kirk assassination it became apparent that something big had shifted; at the time I called it the “Turning Point for the Radical Left”. It ran on Zerohedge and racked around 100K reads.

    The TL;DR on that, if you haven’t read it, was that Charlie Kirk’s assassination will mark the moment the cultural tide turned against the Left.

    It didn’t happen in isolation; it was the culmination of a progression that I first started documenting back in 2022, when both RFK Jr and Peter Thiel gave keynotes at the Bitcoin Conference in Miami – and it became clear to me that the entire edifice of “woke capitalism” upon which the whole left-wing, collectivist paradigm was built, was beginning to crumble.

    The process gained momentum via the through-line of the Oct 7 massacre in Israel, and the targeted killing of United Health CEO Brian Thompson.

    In the aftermath of these events, we started to see public opinion – and corporate / private governance –  start to turn against the radical left.

    After publishing my piece, and to my point, we saw lefties trying to regain the upper hand they once took for granted – with calls for Marvel to fire Guardians of the Galaxy star Chris Pratt.

    His moral crime?

    He asked the public to pray for the family of Charlie Kirk.

    Marvel will do no such thing, because, as I’ve said, those days are over.

    What did happen, however, was Marvel’s comic universe rival, DC, canceled the “Red Hood” comic book series, after its author Gretchen Felker-Martin (who is trans) posted on Bluesky:

    “Thoughts and prayers you Nazi b-tch… Hope the bullet’s okay after touching Charlie.”

    I can’t think of any alternate universe where this kind of sentiment toward anyone is okay, let alone sane. To my point that the momentum has shifted, even Bluesky suspended his account.

    Wow.

    I closed out my Bombthrower piece asking the open question about what was the fundamental driver that led to the far-left takeover of the zeitgeist?

    “Some say this ever-increasing polarization and these seemingly ritualistic events are all orchestrated by shadowy actors playing the long game. My take? It’s something deeper”.

    There are some very obvious trends and beats here that are hard to ignore.

    For starters, Kirk is not Trump, or even Elon Musk or Peter Thiel. His security detail likely wasn’t excessive; it was unlikely anybody thought it needed to be anything beyond a few bodyguards who could repel a bike lock-wielding soy-boy in a man-bun.

    If somebody really just wanted him dead, there would have been easier ways to get at him, and fare a better chance of getting away clean after.

    Murdering him in such a spectacular and shocking manner was deliberate and intentional. It was calculated to drive an effect at a mass, psychic level – and there are ritualistic elements to it, as there are wont to be in these archetypally shocking hinge-moments.

    The conspiracy minded would tell you this is intentional signalling – which may be true, at least partially – but I tend to think it’s because we live in a reality of “high weirdness” where events are playing out in a non-linear fashion across dimensional axes that we aren’t even aware of.

    But let’s follow this train of thought for a bit; I’m not comfortable sharing this publicly, so this is all between us girls.

    For years I ruminated that the Fabian Socialists had achieved complete victory in their stated mission of bringing world communism into being through a centuries-long process of inexorable infiltration of our institutions:

    They started with academia, then media and culture – and finally government and supra-governmental constructs such as the World Economic Forum.

    It was always driven by what I’ve called “the 3M’s of neo-collectivism”, namely: Malthusian, Marxist and essentially misanthropic.

    It’s an anti-human philosophy that regards our species as a cancer that needs to be managed, and ideally, depopulated.

    We’re heavily into tin-foil hat territory here – but a lot of this has been laid out in the writings of Julian Huxley, Warren Wagar and beyond.

    It’s never been refuted – and we see in the contemporary climate-alarmism movement a disdain for life itself and an embrace of the #Degrowth cause.

    So there’s that.

    Then I wonder — why all the trans violence?

    This feels so “off” to me, it’s like somehow under the hood the entire movement decided “hey, let’s make ourselves the absolute most vilified segment of the population in existence” – and proceed to carry out only the most heinous of crimes.

    This is a relatively recent development and it feels somehow deeper than plain-Jane frustration with being marginalized (and misgendered).

    The legendary ex-KGB handler Yuri Bezmenov, who defected to the West over forty years ago, warned his debriefers that the Soviets would undermine America from within. They would achieve final victory over the West, not through military force – where it was impossible to win – but through subversion.

    They would, in Bezmenov’s warnings, engage in a multi-decades program of:

    Demoralization: Infiltrate & undermine institutions, amplify antisocial behaviours

    Destabilization: Create internal conflicts & radicalize, leads to clashes

    Crisis: Collapse, leading to civil war  or invasion

    Normalization: New authoritarian rule, discard old change agents

    It’s a long game. The “demoralization” phase alone is 15 – 20 years: “a single generation of students”, in Bezmenov’s words, to take them “in the opposite direction from the society’s moral and cultural values”.

    Of course, the USSR collapsed; did they set a plan in motion that continued operating after they unleashed it? Even after the handler regime was no more?

    Or, was that same playbook adopted – essentially co-opted – by someone else, the next geopolitical rival, perchance? Like the CCP.

    China also knows they cannot, yet, defeat the USA in a military conflict, at least not outside of the Asian-Pacific theatre – but if there’s one thing the Chinese are known for, it’s thinking in generational increments and in non-linear terms.

    Cultural Marxism makes very little sense to normal, rational people. It verges on total nihilism, and yet, it caught on like wildfire over the past couple decades and is now out of control and running amok across campuses and in our streets.

    Before September we were a few smidges away from civil war – now, I shudder to think what happens next.

    I remember a few years ago I was listening to a Value After Hours podcast (I’d never be able to find the episode) where they were talking about Ray Dalio’s prediction that America had a significant probability of being in a full-on civil war within three years.

    At the time Tobias Carlisle said “that sounds absolutely bonkers”.

    Dalio was recently on Diary of a CEO – following this theme of mass civil unrest, and that was recorded before the second week of September.

    So imagine if the subversion of our universities and media over the past few decades was the result of the most far-left and radical elements being funded and encouraged by a foreign actor, like China.

    Carefully nurturing the polarization, the angst, the demoralization of the entire population – on all sides – pushing it along with specific, targeted acts of camouflaged terrorism in order to bring it to a climactic state of unendurable tension – and then, the finale:

    An act so heinous and itself so polarizing that it ignites the “response”. Those familiar with the Hegelian dialect, “problem → response → solution”  (which happens to be the “three-act play” structure of every conspiracy theory), would recognize it.

    Even I recognize this and you all know how much I disdain most conspiracy theories. It’s a cognitive bias that I know is there but I hang on to it, because, frankly – it helps me maintain my equilibrium.

    I do not like the idea of world history being the outcome of behind-the-scenes machinations by all-powerful cabals, because believing that would make me feel powerless and helpless.

    So normally I subscribe to Hanlon’s Razor, as an article of faith.

    But as I’ve been admitting lately – it’s been getting harder to keep believing that. Most recently, it’s almost impossible.

    What I notice now, is things have gotten so out of hand that huge chunks of the population would cheer for an authoritarian strongman to take over the machinery of government – either through populist movements or even soft coups (or overt ones), so long as they promised and delivered a “return to rule of law and normalcy”.

    Ngl… Trump fits the bill neatly.

    They would succeed on the first aim, through largely technocratic means, probably nodding toward the state capitalism and political meritocracy of China, and call it the new “way of the world”.

    But “normalcy” would be gone.

    What I do believe is that we are in a Fourth Turning, in the Howe and Strauss sense, and that this fourth turning is unique in that it is occurring against the backdrop of a widely intolerable acceleration in the pace of change (“Future Shock”) and massively increasing wealth disparity because we’re in the early innings of a global fiat hyperinflation.

    If you back out the Fabians, the KGB and China and just stick with Future Shock and hyperinflation, you still have all the ingredients for a tightly wound powder keg:

    What is probably in play are elements of all of these forces. That’s what makes it so difficult to get a read on what is happening.

    There is no unified, coherent cabal behind this: the more I study the phenomenon of “pendulums” (in the Vadim Zeland sense), morphic fields and even egregores, I have come to suspect that there is no “they”, but there are “its” – several of them – converging, competing, conflicting, all the while amplifying and accelerating each other.

    Pendulums feed on both positive and negative mental energy. In Zeland’s words, in order to do one of two things:  “the pendulum’s goals are always to stabilize its own or a higher structure, and to destroy a competing structure”.

    More on these larger forces another time, but for now,  frankly, it’s rather amazing the system remains on the tracks at this point.

    I don’t expect it will last; I find myself once again perusing real estate listings for bug-out bolt-holes outside of the city.

    *  *  *

    Today’s post is excerpted from the August edition of The Bitcoin Capitalist Letter – get a special deal for Bombthrower readers here »

    Sign up for the Bombthrower Mailing List here and get a free copy of The Bitcoin Treasuries Playbook.

    Follow me Twitter/X or Nostr: npub1elwpzsul8d9k4tgxqdjuzxp0wa94ysr4zu9xeudrcxe2h3sazqkq5mehan

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 12:50

    These Are The Cities With The Highest Grocery Prices Worldwide

    These Are The Cities With The Highest Grocery Prices Worldwide

    U.S. grocery prices have spiked 29% since 2020, putting strain on consumers’ wallets.

    This impact has been felt across global cities, as supply shortages, extreme weather events, and pandemic-era inflation have pushed prices higher. But where in the world do customers face the highest prices overall?

    This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorothy Neufeld, shows the cities with the most expensive grocery prices, based on data from Deutsche Bank.

    Grocery Prices in Geneva are the Highest Globally

    Below, we show the grocery price index in 2025, reflecting the average cost of groceries in U.S. dollars using New York City as a benchmark:

    Switzerland is home to two of the top three most expensive cities for grocery prices, with Geneva seeing prices 5% higher than in New York City.

    San Francisco ranks second globally, with prices rising 19% since 2020. A combination of high real estate prices and strong wages are among the key drivers behind expensive grocery costs. Last year, consumers in California spent on average $298 per week on groceries, outpacing New York’s $266 in spending.

    Coming in at eighth place is Seoul, driven by currency fluctuations and weak economic conditions, leading consumers’ purchasing power to be among the worst in the OECD.

    Grocery costs in Paris, meanwhile, are nearly 30% lower than in New York City, a level similar in Sydney, Singapore, and Vancouver.

    To learn more about this topic, check out this graphic on the U.S. cities with the most expensive grocery costs in 2025.

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 12:15

    Promised Recession... So Where Is It?

    Promised Recession... So Where Is It?

    Authored by Lance Roberts via RealInvestmentAdvice.com,

    Over the past three years, the economic conversation has been a “promised recession.” If you read the headlines, tracked economist surveys, or even listened to Wall Street strategists, you would have assumed a downturn was imminent. Many investors, bloggers, and YouTubers have had a “parade of horribles” promising a recession is just on the horizon.The logic was simple enough. The Federal Reserve aggressively hiked rates from near zero, inflation spiked to four-decade highs, the yield curve inverted for the longest stretch on record, manufacturing surveys collapsed, and stocks entered a bear market in 2022. Historically, those conditions have been reliable precursors to economic pain.

    And yet, here we are, late into 2025, and the U.S. economy is still standing. Not only standing, but GDP remains broadly positive, unemployment is relatively low, and equity markets sit at record highs. If the “promised recession” were near, none of that would be the case, and for many investors, the “recession that never came” has been one of the great surprises of this cycle.

    But does that mean we’ve escaped it altogether? Or is the downturn still lurking, delayed by policy distortions and fiscal largesse?

    I want to tackle that question today because how we answer it matters for portfolio strategy. Both the recession and the no-recession cases have merit. Each has its own probabilities, risks, and market implications.

    Why a Recession Still Looks Plausible

    Let’s start with the bear case.

    History tells us that a recession almost always follows when the yield curve inverts, well, technically, it is when it UN-inverts. Nonetheless, since the 1960s, every sustained inversion has been followed by an economic contraction, sometimes quickly, sometimes with a lag. The inversion that began in 2022 was the deepest and longest we’ve ever experienced. If that signal still carries weight, it is logical that we should expect economic weakness to emerge.

    Further, manufacturing activity has been in contraction territory for most of the past three years. The ISM Manufacturing Index, long viewed as a leading indicator, recorded 26 straight months below 50 through early 2025, briefly perked up, and then rolled back into contraction again. Historically, that kind of persistent weakness doesn’t happen in a vacuum. It usually shows up in corporate earnings, hiring, and consumer confidence.

    In addition, the role of Fed tightening has been added. Monetary policy famously operates with “long and variable lags.” The most aggressive hiking cycle in four decades would always take time to filter through credit markets, household spending, and corporate balance sheets. Post-pandemic distortions and massive fiscal deficits may have extended the lag, but we should expect that the effect hasn’t been repealed.

    And speaking of deficits, that’s another issue. Washington has effectively been running crisis-level stimulus despite a growing economy. Federal spending has helped mask underlying weakness. But it’s also raised debt-to-GDP ratios to levels that will eventually constrain fiscal policy. The “sugar high” from deficit-financed growth is not permanent, particularly since debt detracts from economic growth in the long term.

    Finally, valuations, as we discussed recently. Equity markets are priced for perfection, with mega-cap tech leading the charge. That means if growth does falter, even modestly, the downside could be amplified by the simple reality of stretched multiples.

    Taken together, these factors suggest the recession call wasn’t wrong so much as early. The patient looks healthy today, but the test results show underlying conditions that can’t be ignored.

    If we were to assign a probability of a recession in the next 12-18 months, it is likely somewhere around 55%.

    Why the Economy Might Dodge It

    Now, let’s give the bulls their due and explain why they were right to dismiss the “promised recession.”

    The biggest reason we haven’t fallen into recession is simple: spending. Both consumers and the government have been more resilient than expected, and the massive amount of liquidity injected into the economy following the pandemic has created enormous distortions to economic data. The huge surge in the monetary base has not fueled the “wealth effect” in the economy, but has sustained activity.

    Despite higher interest rates, households benefited from excess savings built up during the pandemic, increased wealth from housing and markets, and a historically tight labor market kept nominal wages elevated. As such, people kept spending and went further into debt, which kept GDP afloat.

    Meanwhile, government deficits have poured unprecedented amounts of cash into the system outside of a crisis period. Infrastructure projects, industrial policy initiatives, and entitlement spending have all provided ongoing support. In effect, Washington has been running “emergency stimulus” permanently, which has kept normal recessionary factors from occurring.

    Second, the nature of the economy itself has shifted. The U.S. is far more services-driven today than in past cycles. Manufacturing weakness is notable, but it only represents about 30% of the economy today versus nearly 70% in the 70s. Given that it is a much smaller factor in the economy, it is services that we should focus on, and while weak, they have not been in recessionary territory. The chart below, an economically weighted composite of ISM Services and Manufacturing, shows that recession risks are elevated, but no recession is likely at the moment.

    Third, corporate America has adapted remarkably well. Companies took advantage of ultra-low rates in 2020–2021 to refinance debt. Their balance sheets are stronger overall, and many firms have locked in cheap financing for years. That reduced the immediate pressure of higher Fed funds rates. However, such is not likely the case for smaller and mid-capitalization companies, and the risk of a rise in bankruptcies is not zero when they must refinance their debt. That could weaken economic growth but is not necessarily a guaranteed recessionary outcome.

    Finally, the Federal Reserve itself has shown a willingness to pivot quickly. After hiking aggressively, the Fed began cutting in September, signaling that “risk management” and preventing unnecessary economic damage were priorities. Whether you agree with it or not, that backstop has provided psychological support to markets and businesses alike.

    The bulls argue that these structural and policy supports could allow the U.S. to avoid a traditional recession altogether. Growth may slow, productivity gains (particularly from AI and automation) may cushion margins, and the expansion could grind on longer than skeptics expect.

    But that is also not a guarantee, and the assigned probability of “no recession” in the next 12-18 months at 45%.

    What This Means for Markets

    For investors, the probabilities matter less than the preparation. Whether the economy slips into recession or not, the implication is that volatility will remain elevated, and risk management is essential. It also does not mean the financial markets can’t experience a 5, 10, or 20% correction outside the “promised recession.”

    If the recession scenario plays out, equity valuations will likely compress, earnings estimates will fall, and risk assets will reprice lower. Defensive sectors, like utilities, staples, and healthcare, could outperform. Treasury bonds, ironically left for dead in 2022, would likely provide ballast as yields decline in a flight to safety.

    If the no-recession scenario materializes, markets may not be “all clear” either. Corrections occur annually and can impact portfolio performance and investor psychology. With much of the “soft landing” narrative already priced in, the risk of correction is elevated. The S&P 500 is trading at multiples historically reserved for periods of strong, broad-based growth, leaving little margin of safety. Even modest disappointments could trigger corrections.

    I always return to risk management here. As I’ve written many times, investing is not about making bold predictions but instead aligning portfolios to probabilities, protecting against the downside, and participating in the upside when it comes.

    Today, that means remaining cautious even as markets cheer new highs. It means trimming exposure where valuations are stretched, holding a healthy allocation to cash and fixed income, and being selective in equity exposure. It means acknowledging that both outcomes—recession and no recession—are plausible and positioning accordingly.

    Let’s also step back and acknowledge the broader lesson. Economists have a terrible track record at calling recessions.

    • In 2007, two-thirds didn’t see one coming.

    • In 2022, two-thirds thought one was imminent.

    Both times, they were wrong. Why? Because the economy is not a machine that spits out predictable results. It’s a complex, adaptive system shaped by human behavior, policy distortions, and unforeseen shocks. Models can tell us what should happen, but a “promised recession” or not, reality often finds a way to surprise us.

    That doesn’t mean we ignore the indicators. Yield curves, manufacturing surveys, and credit spreads all have information content. But it does mean we treat them as part of a broader mosaic, not as gospel.

    As an investor, humility is key. The market doesn’t owe us clarity. The job is not to know the future with certainty, but to navigate the uncertainty with discipline.

    So forget about a “promised recession” and focus on what matters.

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 10:30

    Mapping America's Consumers: Median Household Income By Retailer

    Mapping America's Consumers: Median Household Income By Retailer

    Goldman analysts examined twelve companies (all within the GS coverage) with high exposure to middle-income consumers, including Walmart, Best Buy, Target, BJ’s Wholesale Club, Tractor Supply, Academy Sports + Outdoors, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Ulta Beauty, Petco, Bath & Body Works, Five Below, and Dollar Tree. 

    Using GS Data Works, company data, and Pace.AI, analysts led by Kate McShane determined the median household income by retailer, finding an average of about $81,848 across the retailers in the GS universe. 

    Breakdown: 

    • The average household income across the group is $81,848.

    • Highest Income: BJ’s Wholesale Club, at $90,433

    • Lowest Income: Tractor Supply at $68,829

    Although the 12 companies vary in their relative exposure to the middle-income cohort, all maintain very high exposure levels (63%–74%) and are positioned to benefit from the tailwinds.

    Breakdown: 

    • Highest middle-income exposure: Academy Sports + Outdoors, Walmart, Tractor Supply, Dollar Tree, and Dick’s Sporting Goods. These firms also have the lowest household incomes (except Dick’s).

    • Lowest middle-income exposure: BJ’s Wholesale Club, Target, Ulta Beauty, Petco, and Bath & Body Works. These firms have the highest average household incomes.

    Median household income by retailer.

    Latest commentary from executives at the twelve companies on the middle-income consumer.

    The full note offers deeper insights into middle-income consumers. ZeroHedge Pro Subs can access this in the usual place

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 09:55

    All Currencies Will Be Stablecoins By 2030: Tether Co-Founder

    All Currencies Will Be Stablecoins By 2030: Tether Co-Founder

    Authored by Brian Quarmby via CoinTelegraph.cvom,

    Tether co-founder Reeve Collins expects “all currency” to become stablecoins by 2030 as part of a broader shift that will see all forms of finance go onchain. 

    “All currency will be a stablecoin. So even fiat currency will be a stablecoin. It’ll just be called dollars, euros, or yen,” said Collins in a wide-ranging interview during Token2049 in Singapore. 

    “A stablecoin simply is a dollar, euro, yen, or, you know, a traditional currency running on a blockchain rail by 2030,” he added. 

    Collins argues that stablecoins will be the primary method for transferring money within the next five years, as the benefits of tokenized assets have become too compelling for traditional finance to ignore.

    “Probably before that, because you’re still going to use dollars. But it depends on what your definition of stablecoin is. The definition of stablecoin is essentially that you’re moving money on a blockchain,” he added. 

    US crypto shift was the best thing to happen

    Collins said that the best thing to ever happen to the crypto market was the positive “shift in stance” toward the sector by the US government this year.

    Tether co-founder Reeve Collins. Source: Cointelegraph.

    He argued that many large TradFi firms were too afraid to enter the industry out of fear of government scrutiny, and while there is still some gray area surrounding the industry, it’s a very different ball game these days.

    The Tether co-founder stated that this shift has opened the “floodgates,” with the traditional finance world scrambling to enter the crypto sector and blockchain-based stablecoins being a key focus due to their inherent utility.
     
    “Every large institution, every bank, everyone wants to create their own stablecoin, because it’s lucrative and it’s just a better way to transact. And so those floodgates are open, and what it’s going to lead to is that soon, there won’t be CeFi and DeFi,” he said.

    “There’ll be applications that do things, move money, give loans, do investments, and it will be a mix of the kind of the old, traditional style investments, and then the DeFi types of investments.”
    The tokenization narrative is strong

    Collins said tokenized assets offer far greater transparency and efficiency than non-tokenized assets — given that they can be moved quickly across the globe without middlemen — which in turn offers more potential upside.

    “That is why the tokenization narrative is so big, because everyone realizes the increase in the utility that you get from a tokenized asset versus a non-tokenized asset is so significant that even the same two assets, just once they’re moved onchain, since the utility increases, that means the return increases.” 

    Downsides of going fully onchain

    However, Collins acknowledged there were also risks to such a monumental shift in global finance, such as the security of blockchain bridges, smart contracts and crypto wallets.

    Crypto hacks and social engineering are also key issues that need to be addressed, he said, though he emphasized that overall levels of security are “improving.”

    “And so the old trade off is still going to remain there… which is if you want to be fully in control … you can do that, but it’s technically complex,” said Collins.

    “If you want to trust a third party like you do traditionally with banks, there are a lot of those services like the custodial versus non-custodial, so that those services will get more robust, and people will have more options moving forward. So yes, there are always risks in technology,” he concluded. 

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 09:20

    Norway Oversees New Drone Base For Ukraine Established In Poland 

    Norway Oversees New Drone Base For Ukraine Established In Poland 

    Polish Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz has newly announced the opening of a Norwegian-led training center for Ukrainian soldiers in southeastern Poland.

    The newly constructed Camp Jomsborg is a project overseen by Norway’s Brigade Nord in the town of Lipa. It is capable of housing up to 1,200 troops at a time and is expected to focus on "developing drone capabilities" at a moment EU officials are advancing plans for a collective 'drone wall' defense network in eastern Europe.

    Norway's defense minister. Source: High North News

    "This is not a one-way street. An important element is that we will draw on Ukrainian experience. Right next to us is a drone launch strip," Kosiniak-Kamysz said.

    Norway’s defense ministry has already confirmed that training has begun there, with Norwegian and Estonian instructors in charge of a "three-figure number" Ukrainian troops.

    A statement previewed further that once the camp reaches full capacity, it will be able to "train several thousand soldiers".

    Citing Norwegian Defense Minister Tore O. Sandvik, regional source Notes from Poland details:

    The programme covers both basic training and advanced courses for officers and specialists. Norway has so far allocated 10 billion kroner (€860 million) to Operation Legio, covering equipment, camp construction and training. Other Nordic and Baltic countries are also contributing, with total donations sufficient to equip two brigades.

    “Our concept is that Ukrainian needs are the driving force,” said Sandvik. “Their need is for both soldiers and equipment to strengthen existing units.”

    Norway is a founding member of NATO, but also demonstrates that Scandinavian countries have risked conflict and tensions with Russia while bolstering the alliance in the context of the Ukraine war.

    Currently, northern European countries like Denmark claim to be experiencing an unusually high number of 'mystery' drone incursions, which they blame on Russia. This is all being used as justification to ramp up war-readiness and expanding defense budgets.

    Source: Forsvaret

    It is also being used to justify continued build-up of NATO military infrastructure on the 'eastern flank' and right up to Russia's doorstep, which itself has remained a rationale for the 'special military operation' from Moscow's perspective.

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 08:45

    Re-Evaluating Russia's Special Operation In Light Of The Valdai Club's Startling Insight

    Re-Evaluating Russia's Special Operation In Light Of The Valdai Club's Startling Insight

    Authored by Andrew Korybko via Substack,

    The Valdai Club, which is Russia’s premier think tank and elite networking platform at whose annual meetings Putin participates, shared some startling insight into “the changing purpose of wars”. It was included in the eponymous section of their report titledDr. Chaos or: How to Stop Worrying and Love the Disorder”, which was written by Oleg Barabanov, Anton Bespalov, Timofei Bordachev, Fyodor Lukyanov, Andrey Sushentsov, and Ivan Timofeev. They’re all regarded as Russia’s top policy influencers.

    They wrote on page 25 thatRussia would not risk its own socioeconomic stability for a decisive victory in a military conflict. One exception is direct full-scale aggression, but the probability of such an action against a nuclear superpower is close to zero…Perhaps the purpose of wars has changed. The contemporary objective may no longer lie in victories – wherein one party achieves all its goals – but rather in maintaining a balance necessary for a period of relative peaceful development.”

    This startling insight prompts a re-evaluation of the special operation, which has been going on for over 3,5 years, in no small part due to Putin’s restraint in not waging a US-inspired “shock-and-awe” campaign at the cost of Iraqi-like civilian casualties among what he believes to be the fraternal Ukrainian people.

    In light of what Russia’s top policy influencers just revealed, however, a complementary reason might be his trusted policy advisors’ reluctance to risk their country’s “socioeconomic stability for a decisive victory”.

    It can only be speculated what form this could take if Putin abandoned his restraint by ordering the bombing of bridges across the Dnieper, the total destruction of all major Ukrainian power plants, and/or targeting political sites like the Rada. Nevertheless, the salience rests in the Valdai Club’s implied assessment that pursuing “a decisive victory in a military conflict” presumably like the present one could lead to such risks, thus further contextualizing why this hasn’t yet happened and might never will.

    More insight followed on page 26. According to the authors, “The current system is not excessively unfair to any of the major players; in other words, it is not so flawed as to require revolutionary solutions. The world has experienced numerous social and political upheavals on its path to self-awareness, learning to manage nature and control the most destructive socio-political processes. This capability has now reached a significantly high level.”

    Moreover, “It appears that the era of grand ideas, overarching theories, comprehensive programmes, and great expectations is over…national plans – even the most ambitious – are based on existing opportunities and realistic, accessible means of expanding them; they do not require a fundamental restructuring of the global order.” This suggests Russia’s satisfaction with the multipolar gains since 2022 and its reluctance to risk their reversal through a “decisive victory” that might destabilize this new order.

    To be clear, the Valdai Club only represents one of Russia’s policymaking factions and their insight might not accurately reflect Putin’s calculations, which could always change in any case. Even so, it does indeed explain Russia’s willingness to compromise with the US, ideally with the aim of reforming the European security architecture as the grand strategic outcome of this conflict. Trump thinks that he can coerce Russia into concessions, however, which risks unleashing the chaos that Putin’s restraint seeks to avoid.

    Tyler Durden Sat, 10/04/2025 - 07:00

    Pages