z1a Bellwether Deep Dive

Joan of Hamas? The Progressive French Jihad

pgnewser October 26, 2026 0

By Staff

“French culture doesn’t exist in and of itself; there is no such thing as a single French culture. There is culture in France and it is diverse.” – French President Emmanuel Macron, 2017

INTRODUCTION

A statue of Joan of Arc stands just outside the French city of Toulouse. During the course of a series of protests and riots in cities across France, an African supporter of Hamas festooned the statue in hijab attire and affixed the Palestinian flag to her.

Joan of Arc was the woman who turned the tide for the French in the Hundred Years’ War with the English. From the French perspective, the war was about the pervasive occupation of French territory by the English. The French had suffered innumerable defeats and saw the flower of their nobility slain in pointless slaughter until a girl came forward and led the French to victory at Orléans.

She would later be captured by the English and burned at the stake for heresy, but the French both vanquished the English and became a nation, thanks mostly to St. Joan.

The symbol of the French nation, St. Joan, who beat back the colonizers, the English, was now being colonized herself, this time by a coalition of violent opportunists, all looking to destroy the French identity, for a variety of reasons (and all of them treason).

This week, the two stories that dominated our wires were the now-growing riots in Europe and the 2026 midterm elections.

Last week, our Deep Dive, Planvasion EU, introduced you to the events that led up to the French protests/riots, as well as its spread into other countries. This week, we were not planning on revisiting this topic so soon, but we believe the events in France are devolving faster than we would have predicted.

For that reason, we are going to go a little deeper on a part of last week’s Deep Dive, and that part is the French Riots.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

We started our Deep Dive with a quote by Emmanuel Macron, who claimed, “French culture doesn’t exist in and of itself; there is no such thing as a single French culture. There is culture in France and it is diverse.”

If we break that down so that a child can understand it, it reads like this: There is no one culture; there are many cultures, though no shared culture. This is balkanization disguised as “diversity.”

If there is no French culture, there is no France, and that appears to be what the people rioting on the streets want to see happen. Judging from Macron’s quote, one wonders what he is even opposed to. He’s perfectly aligned with the goals of the insurrectionists.

As we reported in last week’s MIA, these riots most likely started spontaneously as student protests. But that quickly changed when the opportunists moved in, all united by a single cause, bringing about the end of the French identity and, by extension, the French state.

When the trouble started, the well-funded organizers moved in, from Islamists to progressives to anarchists and more. Anyone with bad credit or a criminal record might be inclined to join a mob that could destroy records which continue to indict them.

The progressive state press has gone to great lengths to paint the protests/riots as the fruit of unaffordability, not the fruit of progressivism and/or the immigration of Islamists who hate France. Unaffordability is a factor, but mostly when it comes to the protesting, not the riots.

The Islamist converting St. Joan to Islam was not protesting unaffordability; he was seeking to hasten the fall of the republic and the rise of a sharia state.

Our Deep Dive will begin with a quick recap of the events that brought us to this week, as well as a summary of the key events that have happened this past week. Then we will look at the actors in this drama, the ones on the street and the ones behind the ones on the street.

We will give you some bellwether examples of progressive state media protection. We will highlight key responses to the riots so far. We will cover the spread of these riots to other countries, like Italy, Greece, and Belgium. We will conclude our Deep Dive with an assessment of the unrest so far.

A. RECAP OF EVENTS

The events we see in France today were not triggered by students; they were triggered by teachers. Around mid-September, teachers in a Paris suburb began protesting the poor conditions and resources of the education system. By early October, as many as 8,000 people were arrested, with 86% of them being minors.

The protests had already turned violent, with the teachers and students now beginning to be joined by Islamist and progressive adults. The peak of the activity so far came on October 17, with a mix of riots and protests exceeding 800,000 participants across 110 separate locations. In Paris, there were 110,000 protestors and rioters alone.

On that day, 1,500-plus vehicles were set on fire, and an historic town hall was burned to the ground. There were 2,000-plus arrests and hundreds of millions of dollars of damage. This all happened on one day. Since then, curfews have been announced, restrictions were introduced, but the protests and riots continue.

B. THE LATEST

Despite bans and curfews, the violence continued this week. At one point, rioters threatened to take the Marseilles town hall, screaming “We’re taking the Bastille!”

The city of Limoges saw its historic Hotel de Ville burned to the ground. The people who set it on fire were caught on video. They all had masks on.

French President Emmanuel Macron went before the French people and declared, “Those who looted will have to pay for the damage, and those who sought to bring down the Republic will be held accountable.”

It is the first time the authorities officially acknowledged that these “riots” were far bigger than student protests, and the intention was (and is) nothing short of bringing down the French Republic.

One pattern that is being seen is that the shops being destroyed (2,000-plus and counting) don’t include Islamist-owned shops.

France’s Interior Minister tendered his resignation in the wake of the failure of the French government to protect its citizens from insurrectionists. Macron declined the “offer.”

However the protests started, it is increasingly difficult not to acknowledge the violence being driven primarily by the progressive-Islamist alliance. Yet, thanks in large part to the progressive state press, the French people are divided on who is to blame for that same violence. Some still blame the students, for instance.

Macron announced plans to change tactics in dealing with the rioters. Specifically, he will be deploying “massive” forces against the rioters. That force will include French soldiers. 1,000 military troops are to be deployed in Paris alone this Saturday, October 24, a day they anticipate will see planned attacks.

They have also banned protests officially and announced other restrictions.

An NFL game in Paris on Sunday is still, as of now, going on as scheduled, but the American press isn’t so keen on going along for the ride given the unstable conditions.

C. THE ACTORS

A Fox News Digital investigation has, so far, identified 54 organizations that are actively supporting the riots in France. Of those 54 organizations, 16 are actual student groups. Among those student groups are Communist and Islamist groups. Outside of the youth, the remaining organizations are far-left groups, including the infamous “Yellow Vests,” who’ve led other violent riots and protests.

From The CounterPoint Blog:

“The protests in France have attracted support within extreme-left milieus across Europe, including before October 17. German platforms have translated French revolutionary texts discussing barricades and sabotage. Italian activists have discussed the influence of the French unrest on domestic protests.

“In Belgium, the activist platform Stuut circulated French texts praising attacks on police, burning barricades, and looting. In Spain, Izquierda Revolucionaria, a revolutionary socialist organization, urged students to follow the French example through strikes and school blockades. In Greece, revolutionary socialist activists called for a solidarity demonstration and praised confrontations with police.

“These developments show how protest narratives, calls for mobilization, and messages supporting political violence currently spread across Europe. Earlier CEP research has already documented cross-border cooperation among violent extreme-left networks. Whether the current protest wave will lead to joint planning or coordinated violent attacks remains unclear.”

Not only did the riots lead to far-left insurgents joining in, but they also spread their progressive jihad to other European countries (and hope to add America to the list).

Some of the French “Humanitarian Aid” Organizations supporting the riots were recently indicted for embezzling millions of dollars to the terror organization Hamas, the same organization Joan of Arc was recently pressed into joining.

Islamists on the ground are already well funded by the French government through social welfare programs, so all they have to do is join in the riots. There are numerous videos of Islamists engaging in violent action against buildings and people alike. One Islamist was caught on video yelling to the police, “In the name of Allah, we will kill them all!”

One video showed numerous Islamist insurrectionists brandishing AK-47s and submachine guns. The video shows the Islamists proudly flexing their wares as they prepare to escalate the insurrection (or so it seems).

Islamists aren’t the only violent insurrectionists. A French woman with a baby was threatened with rape. She was informed she would be “collateral damage” in the name of the revolution. Her aggressors appear to be far-left insurrectionists, not Islamists. They accused her of being a “dirty bourgeois.” She claimed, “With my infant in an apartment I was driven out of because I was told they were going to rape me.”

D. MEDIA PROTECTION

Here are four headlines that bellwether the progressive state press narratives on the French riots:

  1. FACT FOCUS: Trump and Republicans blame France’s immigrants for riots without evidence – AP News – This headline asks Americans not to believe their lying eyes, the hundreds of thousands of videos showing African and Middle Eastern men praising Allah while they unleash hell on French citizens.
  2. France has a proud tradition of protesting, and sometimes people lose their heads – abcnews.com – This headline attempts to make a somewhat grim joke; though the lesser context, the disproportionate outrage version of “lose their heads,” is their punchline, not the French Revolution. The article is accusing people of being hysterical for reacting with existential concern about what’s going on in France right now.
  3. France: Protests “brought the entire population together for a common purpose”– France 24 – This French publication is all-in on the riots, even attempting to popularize the riots by claiming everyone is participating in them. We wonder how the French citizens who are not in on the insurrection feel about this headline
  4. Looters Seize on massive French protests to raid and vandalize shops – France 24 – This is that same treasonous French press protecting the insurrection again. This headline is attempting to shift all the blame for the violence not on the politically motivated insurrectionists aiming to destroy the republic, but on “selfish looters.”

The French press has decided that “far right” candidates noticing the riots and the Islamists’ roles in the riots is problematic, even racist.

MS Now may take the case. Their mouthpieces decided to implore Americans to protest (meaning riot) here like they are in France over our economic woes. Not only are they pushing the narrative that this is an unaffordability protest, but they are also openly trying to trigger similar French-styled arsonist attacks against American businesses.

E. THE RESPONSE

Macron’s national speech did little to quell the riots, and its fecklessness, some suggest, might be the undoing of his “centrist” coalition in the upcoming elections. His speech was mostly viewed as mealy-mouthed and almost apologetic. Confidence in the “centrist” ending the cycle of violence is low.

The right-leaning candidate in the upcoming election, Marine Le Pen, has been using the riots to emphasize the importance of ending “decades of anarchic immigration.” Her party has risen in popularity as these protests and riots continue.

The far-left candidate, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, was egging on similar acts of violence in the name of revolution. Now, he is only fanning the flames further.

From the Hungarian Conservative:

“Mélenchon praised the protesters’ ‘very great political and trade-union maturity’, promised to abolish the Parcoursup university admissions platform and reiterated his demand to lower the voting age to 16. The students insisted that they were not being manipulated by Mélenchon or his party, France Unbowed (LFI).

“At the same rally, he outlined his plan to replace the Fifth Republic with a Sixth Republic, tied to his vision of a ‘New France’ shaped by mass immigration and ‘creolization’ rather than traditional French assimilation and national identity.

“Arguing that the country’s demographic and cultural transformation requires a new political order, he proposed a sweeping constitutional overhaul, including citizens’ referendums and the power to recall elected officials, alongside expanded welfare and ecological regionalization.”

He made it very clear that he hopes to dissolve the French identity in favor of the ecumenical progressive state identity.

When President Trump blamed the riots on immigration, Emmanuel Macron called his claims “stupid.” He pushed the unaffordability narrative, blaming Trump’s Iran War for the rise in prices. He and every progressive (including American ones) alleged THAT was the trigger for the riots.

The Chinese are studying the riots, both to see how they might spread to other European countries (and probably how they can help facilitate that) and what lessons they can learn should the French and other European nations successfully quell the insurrection.

Progressive state representative Ro Khanna of California responded to a U.S. official claiming leftists and Islamists are behind the violent riots. He claimed, “He’s wrong to make it about the left wing… I think that we have to look at what is the cause, initially, of the discontent in this country? Why are there so many protests of young people around the world? Because the price of oil has gone up, gas has gone up, diesel has gone up, they don’t think schools are being funded.”

It’s not about insurrectionists wanting to bring down the republic; it’s about unaffordability. Just like the U.S. midterm elections aren’t about Democratic Socialists wanting to destroy the republic, it’s about affordability. It’s not about an international progressive state movement intending to replace many nation-states with one global state; it’s about affordability.

Make a note of how often the international progressive state press and leftist leaders worldwide are aligned with their progressive “American” counterparts.

F. THE SPREAD

It is likely that we will be following up this Deep Dive with an in-depth report on the revolutions brewing across all of Europe, especially if some of these spillovers from France turn into something more.

So far, there have either been violent riots or there are alleged planned violent riots in Greece, Italy, Belgium, and Spain. Spain has already had riots, but in response to the leftists and Islamists. Now, expect counter-riots from those same leftist and Islamist groups.

England has been having  its own unrelated unrest. We expect more unrest connected to the French movement to happen soon.

Even America is under threat, as we have already documented DSA members being caught planning a similar action on November 10.

Italy has been very aggressive so far in dealing with rioters, preventing the mass arsons we’ve seen in France. Greece’s movement is, for now, mostly students, and is still mostly centered in Athens.

ASSESSMENT

In the course of human history, we have created a multiplicity of governance models, and nearly every governance model was designed to serve a particular ethnic group. Even in the case of empires with diverse ethnicity, there was, far more often than not, a ruling ethnicity.

The Roman Empire may have come closest to sustaining a governance model that wasn’t primarily serving the interests of ethnic Romans. Like “American” has become, “Roman” had become by the end of the western part of the Empire, an ideational ethnicity, not a biological one.

In the course of human history, we have created a multiplicity of governance models, almost all of which were, at most, regional in scale, not universal. Outside of the spiritual universal state, the nation, the Kingdom, the Empire, etc., had no ambitions to conquer the world to fulfill their grand missions.

The Christian Kingdom of God is not a universal state; it’s a universal spiritual fellowship. Vedic religions like Buddhism and Hindu variants have universal spiritual states as well (at least many versions do), but no calls to manifest that universality through one universal state.

Islam rose in the 7th century, with a war mandate: conquer the world by force and usher in the final days, which would then deliver paradise to all true believers. They are the first well-known (possibly first overall, but we’ll allow for obscure sects that never rose to prominence to have come before them) example of a belief system not merely justifying, but compelling, its acolytes to conquer the world and create a universal state.

Outside of Islam, no other popular religion or political system called on the creation of a universal state until the rise of social ideologies in the West. They started to emerge as recognizable groups in the 18th century. By the 19th century, they were fully formed.

Initially, the social ideologies appealed to the weak to vanquish the strong. They promised heaven on earth after violent purges of the undesirables, the strong, all in the name of the claim that humans could finitely know the ideal social and build and manage structures to both create and preserve it.

In most of their systems, they identified a key necessity to bring heaven on earth, conquer the world to create one universal state. Only with one universal state could the social ideal of humanity be created and preserved (by any means necessary, of course).

The 19th century saw these same people (those who fetishize the weak, demonize the strong, and offer a false hope of heaven through an ideal managed social) begin to “question” the nation-state model (which itself was relatively newly created).

These people came to be called leftists because of the French Revolution, where the terms of modern “politics” were formed. The ones championing a universal state through an ideal managed social sat on the left side of the French National Assembly. The ones championing the ethnic-centered kingdom with an Empire sat on the right side of the National Assembly.

Left became synonymous with fetishizing the weak and demonizing the strong, then with dissolving individual nation-states in favor of the universal state. Right became synonymous with fetishizing the strong, demonizing the weak, and defending the ethnic-centered nation-state.

By the end of the 19th century, the “right” developed its own social ideology, one that promised access to an understanding of an ideal social, as well as the means to make that happen. They also justified violence as a means of creating their own heaven on earth.

But the right never championed a universal state. They did, however, continue to preserve the old governance model of majority-ethnic-dominant states.

In the 20th century, the two social ideologies clashed. After a right-wing social ideology, Nazism, was defeated in part by a left-wing social ideology, communism, Europe, the source of the right-wing social ideology, began seeking a way to “free itself” from the shackles of ethnic nation-states. It sought the creation of a region-based state no longer limited by ethnic majorityism.

Yet even within that European project, universal state movements flourished (as they continue to do to this day).

Right-wing social ideologies are rarely, if ever, universal state projects. They are bounded to a region, the region that best serves the majority ethnicity in that project. The Nazis were attempting to create an ideal social that served “Aryans” within fixed borders that would allow them to dominate the world without being compelled to conquer all of it.

Even in America, right-wing social ideologies, like many versions (not all) of “Christian Nationalism,” specifically hope to create a limited nation-state for their assumed superior or rightful ethnic group.

The EU project, which began in 1951 but became the official “European Union” in 1993, has consolidated considerable European power in its institutions, but not so much that ethnic-majority-based nation-states within it have dissolved.

France is still, primarily, an ethnic-majority nation-state despite being one of the leaders of the EU, a project designed to dissolve the ethnic-majority nation-state altogether.

In other Western nations like America, Australia, and Canada, the ethnic-majority essentialism isn’t so essential to their identities. In all three of these cases, there are no ethnic versions of their nation-state names. There is no ethnic American, Australian, or Canadian.

Even if in all three cases the initial ethnicity could be categorized as “white,” or “European,” there were, in all instances, early exceptions to those assumptions. Even the “whites” within these nations held on to ethnic identities that often competed with other white ethnic identities. The French in America had no more love for the English in America than the French in France had for the English in England.

But in Europe, which was attempting to create something like the American Federal model through the EU project (where nation-states became states and the ethnic divide became less essential), the ethnic-majority nation-state persisted.

So, they brought in recruits to help accelerate the destruction of the ethnic-majority nation-states of Europe, people who brought with them a universal state model. These people were the Islamists, the “natural” frenemies of Western leftism wherever and whenever they confronted Western ethnic-majority nation-statism.

In America, ethnic-majority-essentialism is fringe, even among “conservatives,” the “right” in this country. Yet America still largely continues to hold to the essentialism of a non-universal nation-state, not a universal one.

America’s neighbors to the south are mostly dominated by universalist social ideologies, communists, socialists, democratic socialists, etc. The leftists in America hope to                                                                           destroy the republic and make America the launchpad for the conquest of the world in the name of their social ideology,

Under Biden, they opened their borders to allow those predisposed to universalist state thinking, with no allegiance to the American state, to conquer through chaos the Americans still holding on to the non-universalist model.

In Europe, within their borders were plenty of “socialists” and plenty of universalist staters among the natives, but it still wasn’t enough to shatter the ethnic-majority non-universalist nation-states, the member states of the EU.

So, they aggressively imported Islamists, frenemies, who had only one thing in common with Western leftism: an appeal to the creation of a worldwide state. The Islamists call it a caliphate; the leftists call it the global state.

They were so desperate to destroy their own native nation-states that they imported people they know, deep down, will kill them next (if they can) after the two join together to defeat their common enemy, the non-universalist nation-state.

Now, the Islamists and the leftists (which we mostly call progressives, even though some groups would bristle at that term) sense a chance to topple governments and install their own power. They plan to exapt (repurpose) the nation-state mechanisms of power to build their universal state. As soon as the non-universalists are dead, the Islamists and Progressives will begin their wars against one another, for in the universalist state model there can be only one font of power.

Worldwide, every nation-state with leftists in it is a potential future province of the universal state. Every nation-state with Islamists in it is a potential future province of the Islamic caliphate. Among both Islamists and leftist universalists, however, there are competing claims to central authority.

The “American” left sees itself as the future ecumenical steward of the universal state, even as it allies itself with Europe and China, both of which see THEMSELVES as the rightful ecumenical stewards of the universal state.

On the Islamic side, their story is as divided as the left’s, meaning any victory over the non-universalists will be followed by decades, or more, of bloody wars as the universalists fight to be the last universalist standing.

France has become the current bellwether of this struggle, the struggle few clearly discuss, the struggle between the universalist nation-stater and the non-universalist nation-stater. That conversation has largely been avoided by the left’s claims to be anti-nationalists. They rarely define their universal state, or even talk about it, outside of intimate de facto war councils that are mostly held in tax-funded university rooms.

Like the atheist who avoids belief accountability by pretending a belief in non-god or a position of “agnostic” is somehow not belief because they have no god, the leftist avoids this very clear debate by pretending to be against nation-states altogether.

At one point, leftists were non-ethnic-majority essentialists; they have since become ethnic-majority essentialists after they created, out of their own imaginations, a two-raced humanity: the “whites” (who are devils that invented evil) and the POCs (people of color, the noble non-whites).

The only major leftist faction that hasn’t adopted the “woke” justification for power (the white devil’s terrorism on humanity) is China, but China has become, officially, an ethnic-majority-essential project, with their ethnicity of choice being the Han Chinese. China is becoming more of a rightist social ideology than a leftist one, even now appealing to the strong, the Han, to vanquish the weak, the non-Han.

They are also not championing a universal state, but rather, like the Nazis, are hoping to be the hegemon for a world that will serve as vassals to the beacon of humanity, the Han socialist state.

The very symbol of the ethnic-majority-essential French nation-state has become Joan of Arc, the woman who saved France from the colonizing English. She appealed as much to her French nationalism as her God when rallying men to her banner.

The symbol of Joan of Arc being “pressed” into Hamas membership might one day be remembered as the sign the French nation-state, the non-universal state, would soon die, or it might be the symbol that galvanizes what’s left of the French people to rise up and take their country back from both the Islamists and the self-hating leftist natives.

We don’t pretend, just yet, to know how this will play out, but we do recognize that the actions in France have brought this debate-by-violence to the fore, making the question of nation-states versus the universal nation-state a lot easier to ask and a lot harder to avoid.

The battle on the streets of France is between the French people who still hold to their national ethnic identity and those who want to destroy it. The battle on the streets of France is also, more importantly, between the universalist nation-staters and the non-universalist nation-staters.

On the side of the universalists are frenemy factions, all presuming they will be the last one standing after the violent wars end. These wars are sure to follow wherever they successfully defeat the non-universalists in the nation-state they are attacking.

The French state stands on the precipice of existence. The response by the non-universalists needs to be total and clear, making this a clear fight between one nation-state and many nation-states. So long as we continue to allow universalist nation-staters to hide behind the lie that they are against the nation-state model, we cannot rally people to our cause like they can theirs.

So long as people don’t understand the existential stakes of losing to the left and the Islamists, they will not feel compelled to take the dangerous risks necessary to defeat them. Let us pray the French people find their courage and their tongues so they can rally the decisive resistance needed to vanquish a psychotic, bloodthirsty enemy who believes you can murder your way to heaven.

Will Joan of Arc be the last cry of a dying French nation or the rally cry of its restoration? We have a strong feeling that as France goes, so too will most, if not all, of Western Europe, including Britain, go.

FURTHER RESOURCES:

Joan of Arc: A Study of Faith, Politics, and Sanctity in Fifteenth-Century France – Helen Castor

The Oxford History of the French Revolution – William Doyle

A Brief History of France – Cecil Jenkins

Islamizing Europe: Is the Conquest Inevitable? – World Encounters Institute

Planvasion EU – The Birth of the Ecumenical Nation-State

pgnewser October 16, 2026 0

By Paul Gordon Collier, Editor

“All these curses shall come upon you and pursue you and overtake you till you are destroyed, because you did not obey the voice of the Lord your God, to keep his commandments and his statutes that he commanded you….

“Because you did not serve the Lord your God with joyfulness and gladness of heart, because of the abundance of all things, therefore you shall serve your enemies whom the Lord will send against you, in hunger and thirst, in nakedness, and lacking everything. And he will put a yoke of iron on your neck until he has destroyed you.” – Deuteronomy 28:45,47-48

ED. NOTE: We are working on a report on the Immigrant crisis in Europe which we hoped to have completed this week.

In the course of our research, we have discovered that the narratives around the three bellwether European countries we are using for this report are being buried by search engines that assure only progressive state media shows up in current news search results.

Even when prompting AI to present data outside of the progressive state press, not one major AI deployed could comply. Even when we provided them with a list of websites that we use for news aggregate analysis, the AI could still not produce research results outside of the progressive state press.

A couple of websites, like Breitbart and PJ Media, made it into the aggregation analysis process because they are some of the very few non-progressive sites that show up in current news searches.

Without AI, the research process is considerably more time-consuming than with it. In order for us to have a more complete picture of views on the planvasion, it will take us a lot more time than we previously thought, therefore we are offering here a scaled down version of what the final report will be.

We are in the process of building AI bots that will regularly search websites outside the progressive state press to assure we get current news research results not so overwhelmingly dominated by progressive talking points.

This discovery has expanded the scope of our research as we seek to understand how effective, through the use of progressive-controlled search engines and AI agents, the progressive state press is at protecting the narrative and creating violent responses to those outside the progressive orthodoxy.

INTRODUCTION

This report will effectively serve here as the introduction to the final comprehensive report to come.

This week, the planvasion of Europe is no doubt the bellwether story not just of this week, but of the month so far. So, we feel compelled to cover this story, at least in part, in this issue.

We believe the planvasion strategies of the progressives, in alignment with the bulk of their replacement partners, the Islamists, are intended to dismantle the notion of the local, individual nation-state in favor of the one ecumenical nation-state both ideologies believe they need in order to bring heaven on earth.

What we’ve seen this past month so far has only solidified that assumption.

This report is intended to give you a snapshot view of the most recent consequences of governments paying people opposed to western civilization rule of law to invade their country. These countries do this while passing laws criminalizing dissent not only of the planvasion, but of the violent Islamists they’re importing to do their self-sabotaging work.

This month’s MIA will be a special issue focused on the 2026 election, so we won’t be covering this planvasion then. The next issue, November 6, will feature our comprehensive report on the planvasion of Europe. This most likely will be a two-part report (published in the same issue), possibly three parts.

We will provide a comprehensive analysis of the 2026 Midterm election results in the November 13 issue of MIA. We will cover the basic results of the election in the November 6 issue.

By the time of the scheduled publishing of the comprehensive report, we will update the current status of our bellwether countries, the UK, France, and Spain.

We chose these three countries because all three were once Christian countries, and all three are now dominated by progressives, all of which have the same dream, of eliminating all nation-states but one, the ecumenical progressive state.

Their street fighters, their fighting aged men, ALSO want to eliminate all nation-states and create one ecumenical state, only their state is an Islamic caliphate. They both approve murder as a means of advancing their kingdoms. They both approve forcing conversion through violence, and killing, or at least imprisoning, those who refuse to convert.

But the Islamists are not progressives, they are theocrats who derive their “wisdom” from a received source, the Quran, the Tafsirs, and the approved Hadiths. They don’t develop wisdom from material and rational understanding, like the progressives claim they do; they develop an understanding of a wisdom sent to them from Allah.

That fact is making even some progressive hedge their bets on the street fighter army, with concerns they may be overcome themselves by the beast they brought in to finish off non-ecumenical nation-statism.

Here are the key events in our three bellwether countries that crystalize the phenomenon happening across Europe, in varying degrees, from Sweden to German, from Denmark to Italy.

A. THE BRITISH INVASION

We reported in June of this year: “If Northern Ireland is a bellwether of what’s to come in broader Britian, the ordered protests in front of police stations are about to be replaced with organized targeted assaults on migrant strongholds.”

This was referring to a series of violent actions by the native Irish targeting immigrant housing and government authority responsible for protecting and bringing in fighting aged men from countries that hate their culture and their ways.

Since then, lenient sentences against Islamist immigrants in contrast to draconian ones against British citizens have only pushed the perceived existential distance between the natives and the government-sponsored imports. While pedophile rapists get light sentences, British citizens are being arrested for denying that a man cannot “choose” to become a woman.

British citizens are now attempting to meet the boats of fighting aged men at the shores and preventing them from landing. The British police appear in numerous viral videos beating on the British natives while they escort the government-funded fighting aged men into their government-funded housing (which is often far better than what many British citizens have).

Heads of Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are threatening to secede from the Union because of fears the “far right” may take the helm of 10 Downing Street. For these leaders, England is still too English, and they don’t want to be part of a nation that protects the English from being overrun by foreigners who hate their culture, their values, and their God.

Piddington, a small community in Oxfordshire, England, held a symbolic referendum to begin the process of seceding from a Union that wants to pay an invader army to overcome it with child rape and Islamist sectarian violence.

The recent handling of terrorist suspects attempting to bomb U.S. assets on a British air base may further embolden Islamist radicals from within, especially Iranian ones.

The bellwether event of the past month is the recent “protest” by Islamists in London on the 3rd anniversary of the October 7 slaughter of Israeli women and children by Hamas. The crowds waved Hamas flags and chanted death threat to the Jews and the Israeli state. This was not deemed hate speech by the progressive British government.

As these Islamists and their progressive supporters flooded the streets of the British Islamist capital, London, a man in Ireland was being arrested for refusing to call men women. The native  man will go to prison, the supporters of a genocidal death cult, Hamas, were feted by the progressive state press. None of them were arrested for hate speech violations.

B. FRENCH “STUDENTS”

We reported on October 3 of this year that multiple riots broke out across France, triggered by immigrants demanding more resources for the schools they don’t pay for. The Islamist immigrants have taken to the streets to burn churches, people, and businesses, as well as assault French women who are caught in the mob rush.

French progressives, aligned with Islamists, are assisting the insurrection. The Islamists are also demanding all calls to deport them be cancelled, or the beatings will continue.

As near as we can figure out, the movement began in Mid-September with peaceful protests mostly composed of French native youth. They were asking for better conditions and resources in the state’s public school system.

The protests quickly turned violent, being taken over by opportunist Islamists and progressives. Yet even as that shift occurred, the progressive state media continued to claim this was a student-led protest about school resources.

From October 5-6, the largest days of riots and protests occurred so far. This was coordinated between the original French student protest organizers, the radical anti-French progressives, and the Islamists. It was called the “National Day of Action.”

Let us remember “action” is a short term for “direct action,” and “direct action” is a dog whistle for direct violence.

French officials, including the Prime Minister, Sébastien Lecornu , continued (and are continuing) to call this “Student protests,” despite numerous viral videos showing Islamists and Progressive adults engaging in violent action against French citizens and French businesses.

A school shooting by a 14-year-old that left his headmaster, and another teacher, injured has expanded the violent reach of the growing “movement.” The identity of the 14-year-old hasn’t been released as of the completion of this report.

The response from French authorities seems to be to blame the violence on misinformation online, not the invasion of the country by fighting aged men sponsored by your taxes. The authorities are indicating they intend on using this crisis to push for more censorship of dissent from the progressive orthodoxy.

Minister of National Education Édouard Geffray said “This unacceptable act bears witness once again to the spread of unbridled violence in our society, against which we must all mobilize. In words as in deeds.”

Now, Greta Thunberg has joined the fight against French identity. The riots have spread to Belgium, and even Macron has begun to acknowledge that “student protests” may have political elements exploiting their movement to their own ends.

C. CEUTA, SPAIN

In January 2026, Spain announced effective amnesty for anyone who entered the country before late 2025. They also had to show they were here for five months and in good standing with the authorities. The plan claimed it would create amnesty for only 500,000 people, but that quickly exploded to 1.2 million by the end of June.

In late June, Spain announced another change in its immigration policy. No immigrant would be admitted by sea unless they came through Ceuta or Melilla. People illegally entering the country by land would be “regularized,” while people who came by sea would have to do it “legally.”

On the last two days of June more than 50,000 people, mostly Moroccan Muslim “fighting age” men, came flooding into Ceuta, where battles between the natives and the fighting age men broke out. Spanish police mostly protected the fighting age men, though there was some pushback by the police against them.

Since that moment, the “right” in Spain has been gaining more on-the-ground power with protests continuing even as this report is being written. Fights between fighting aged men and natives have not let up, and the Spanish police continue to mostly protect the fighting aged men.

The upheaval has triggered a snap election from Spain’s Prime Minister. We wrote last week:

More and more Spaniards are joining the growing national protests against Spain’s policies of open borders and the state-financed invasion by Islamists intending to destroy their national identity. The pressure is mounting on the regime in power, the progressives under their current Prime Minister, Pedro Sanchez, who rule thanks to a coalition of leftists.

His own party fared worse than the pro-Spanish party in the last election (which finished first but was kept out of power by the far-left coalition). Now, Sanchez must call a Snap election before any hope of winning another election (if he even makes it to that point) dies as the resistance to his Spain-hating policies grows.

SUMMARY

It is clear and obvious at this point that the “replacement” conspiracy in white western countries is real. Outside of the diehard progressives and the Islamists benefiting from this planvasion, more and more regular citizens are being confronted with the violent reality of the planvasion.

With each raped daughter, with each arrested family member who dissented against the planvasion and its invaders, more and more non-politically active people are finding it increasingly difficult not to notice the replacement conspiracy at work in their daily lives.

I will grant you that the “replacement” conspiracy has been used by real ethnic fascistic nationalists, but that’s been to the help of the planvasion plotters, not to their detriment. It has always been obvious to anyone not wed to the notion that the strong should inherently suffer at the hands of the weak (social justice) that the strategy has always been about importing humans not formed by western, free speech values.

What they seek to import are street fighters and future citizens fully on board with murdering dissent. What they may be miscalculating is their ability to not become one of the murdered dissenters.

The progressives behind this don’t hate the white race; after all, most of them are white. What they hate are human beings that are formed by a sense of liberty entitlement. Western-raised humans grow up expecting limits on state power, especially when it comes to belief. Getting western peoples to voluntarily surrender this sense of entitlement is a lot more difficult than simply importing enough non-western raised peoples whose children would not inherit the traditions of the west.

In other words, they’ll be raised Islamist, not American or British, etc.

The white devil narrative, which is worldwide wherever progressives hold power, gives the progressive a justification for lying to their own white citizens while they knowingly import people intended to destroy their way of life. The white devil narrative is why progressive judges let child rapist immigrants go free.

If we were not so gradually inured to this white hate, we would never empower a people that hate their own white citizens to govern them. Yet, white progressives do this every day, worldwide, wherever and whenever they can.

For progressives and Islamists alike, lying to bring heaven on earth is justified by the belief it will bring heaven on earth.

To the progressive, the criminal who rapes is a righteous judgment on majority power. Let the majority power suffer the consequences of their own oppressive ways, the criminals they produce. To the progressive, all advantaged power that is not theirs is oppressive in and of itself.

The only way to free the white devil, the advantaged power, from his own tyrannical spirit is by allowing immigrants to murder and rape them. This is not hyperbole. This is how progressives regularly speak, especially in halls of academia, their base of power.

Rousseau may have justified chains to make you free, progressives of today justify murder to make you free.

If you rape a child, the right child, a white child, and you do it in the name of any god by Christ, you are a policeman inflicting righteous punishment on an unrighteous people. You go free.

If the child dies, the child dies. For the sake of heaven on earth here and now, who is not afraid to allow their neighbors to be raped and murdered by people better than yourselves?

To progressives and Islamists, to declare this is a planvasion intended to destroy nation-states, Christianity, and even parental rights, is a criminal act that should be violently enforced. The progressive in Europe (and America) would like to immediately execute you, but they haven’t fully killed the western sense of liberty entitlement just yet. Their Islamist allies have no such hesitation wherever they hold civic power. The penalty for dissent is death.

Thought is criminal, murder and theft of the white race is not.

In France, the UK, and Spain, the progressive state press has lost its hold on the minds of the man in the street, the native man in the street. The clear daily demonstrations of the replacement plan in action in their lives is no longer refutable, no matter how much the press equates clear evidence of a planvasion with dog whistles for white supremacists.

These three countries are the bellwethers for many other countries, including our own, that allow foreign non-tolerant ideologies to fester within them, ideologies like progressivism and Islamism, both of which existentially oppose the self-stewarded individual, the person who could openly, freely reject their god and still thrive in the public institutions of the land if their merit allows it.

Both ideologies want to kill the republic of letters, the western ideal, and reinstate the ancient ideal of absolute rule by god-like authority.

What happens over the next 6 months will go a long way in determining, at least in Europe, if the ecumenical nation-state model can finally overcome and vanquish the local nation-state model. Shall the west be one progressive state or continue to be many nation-states that do not empower the state to murder dissent? We are about to find out.

FURTHER RESOURCES

EMN Annual reports – European Commission

Chapter 3 Migration and Migrants: Regional Dimensions – UN Migration

Migration and asylum in Europe – Eurostat

 

 

 

The Election Fight for Ease, Not the Republic – A Deep Dive

pgnewser September 18, 2026 0

By Staff

“Woe to those who are at ease in Zion, and to those who feel secure on the mountain of Samaria, the notable men of the first of the nations, to whom the house of Israel comes! Pass over to Calneh, and see, and from there go to Hamath the great; then go down to Gath of the Philistines. Are you better than these kingdoms? Or is their territory greater than your territory, you who put far away the day of disaster and bring near the seat of violence?

“Woe to those who lie on beds of ivory and stretch themselves out on their couches, and eat lambs from the flock and calves from the midst of the stall, who sing idle songs to the sound of the harp and like David invent for themselves instruments of music, who drink wine in bowls and anoint themselves with the finest oils, but are not grieved over the ruin of Joseph! Therefore they shall now be the first of those who go into exile, and the revelry of those who stretch themselves out shall pass away.” – Amos 6:1-7

INTRODUCTION

For the past few weeks, the 2026 Elections has been our top news tag. That news tag has numerous subset news tags within it. This week, one of those subset news tags, Mass Mailer Election, could be considered a Deep Dive contender in its own right.

Within the 2026 election, there are two dominant narratives emerging, “affordability” (or cost of living) and AI Data Centers. The latter, AI Data Centers, like the Mass Mailer Election, could have been its own Deep Dive.

We have decided to combine the top Deep Dive contenders, the 2026 election, the Mass Mailer Election, and AI Data Centers, into one Deep Dive. This Deep Dive looks at the top emerging “issues” of the midterm elections in contrast to what lies underneath, the ideological battle for a new civilization to replace the one already declared dead, the American republic.

In our estimation, the election narrative is dominated by questions of ease.

In the case of the AI Data Centers, the question is about resource demand and its impact on the local population. Coupled with that “debate” is the apocalyptic warning AI will kill us if we don’t police it. The debate is entirely separated from geopolitical reality. It is all about ease in America alone.

In the case of the affordability issue, the question is about prices at the grocery story. The war in Iran is framed almost entirely around its cost to fuel, which is driving the cost of everything else up. The war in Iran is also framed around America’s allegiance to Israel, with the progressive state media and progressive entertainment agit prop reinforcing the myth that Israel controls us.

There are no conversations about geopolitical realities. China is almost completely missing from progressive state media reflections on the Iran War. All that those who are captured by the progressive state network (be they watchers of CNN or Hasan Piker) see is America the demon abroad and America the demon at home.

AI is about capitalist exploitation that threatens to literally murder the whole world. The only hope is for AI to be controlled by progressive priests. They will “assure” AI conforms to the “good,” which is anti-American at its heart, and anti-human in its execution.

The Supreme Court’s ruling enabling Mass Mailer election fraud due to a procedural consideration reflects the death of American Rule of law in the land, though it is hardly SCOTUS’s first overt departure from American Rule of Law in the last year alone.

SCOTUS itself has lost any connection to any substantive understanding of American Rule of Law, as only two of the nine justices consistently seem to understand what it is. The rest consider equality over individual liberty, “kindness” over Due Process, and “social justice” over the right to bear arms.

The Progmericans hold on to American Rule of Law standards to some degree, though hardly consistently. Wherever progressive power would be fundamentally threatened, these Progmericans will defend their closer cousins, the progressives. They fear true American liberty for their constituents far more than they do the progressive state.

The election ahead of us is a contest between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.

The Republicans in power are dominated by Progmericans, people who will reflect American values, and defend them, up to the point of existentially threatening progressive power. They also still hold progressives in key positions of power, such as in the Senate with Majority Leader John Thune.

The Republicans have some Americans in their ranks, but these Americans have little real power in the party.

The Democrats, though, mean to finish off America once and for all. The American flags will come down and the new progressive flag will emerge. The nation will be renamed, and a new “Constitution” will be imposed from on-high. It will come from the party, through an in-house “Democratic” process.

The fight in this election is between those willing to sometimes defend American liberty and NOT jettison the project altogether; and those who feel their century-plus revolution is strong enough to throw off the now-dead host that sustained it and allowed it to become fully empowered.

That host is the American republic, and the progressives mean to throw the outer shell into the Potomac River. For this reason, we chose the Ease of America in the Midterm Elections as our Deep Dive of the Week.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In this Deep Dive on ease as the central issue of the midterm elections, we look at the nature of the Democrats through a couple bellwether examples, James Talarico and Abdel El-Sayed. We will also look at the new power in the Democratic Party, the DSA. This reveals the existential nature of the real issues behind the 2026 election.

Next, we break down SCOTUS’ decision to allow an unverifiable mass mailer voter scheme to happen in the 2026 midterms, choosing process over national security. This ruling gives the Democrats a much greater chance at “winning” the midterms.

We look at the two dominant issues in the midterms, affordability and AI. These issues have buried the existential issues behind this election, whether America continues to exist or becomes a new “socialist republic.”

Finally, we end our Deep Dive with an assessment of the state of the midterm elections. Be sure to read our October 30, 2026, issue where we will break down the 2026 election and offer a Predictive Analysis.

A. THE DEMOCRATS

While there are multiple factions in the Democratic Party, the two prevailing ones are the now-ists and the not-now-ists (both of which have subset factions within them). The now-ists we will henceforth call the Nows, and the not now-ists we will henceforth call the Nots.

The hardline Marxists and Islamists are in the Now camp, the social justice champions are in the Not camp. The Nots want to throw off the shackles of the American “corpse” every bit as much as the Nows want to, but they have a rightful fear that if they do, the Nows will dominate the new civilization to come. The Chuck Schumer Nots fear losing power to the Nows, not losing America to the progressive state.

There are two candidates who exemplify both the Nots and the Nows. One candidate is James Talarico, the progressive xian running for a U.S. Texas Senate seat. He represents the Nots. The other candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, the progressive Islamist running for a U.S. Michigan seat, is in the Now camp.

Abdel El-Sayed has been weighed down by his direct affiliation with progressive information terrorist Hasan Piker, who pitches a pro-CCP, pro-Hamas, political violence-inciting, anti-American narrative to young Americans through social media. He is one of the top streamers in the world, making millions annually from his livestreams.

He has leveraged his huge audience to help promote El-Sayed not just after he won the nomination but in the Democratic primaries. Piker and El-Sayed have appeared in at least one public event together.

Recently, Piker claimed American was worse “pound for pound,” than Al Qaeda. He then resorted to gross numbers, not actual pound for pound numbers, comparing one terroristic attack to all the deaths ever caused by the United States in the history of the world. The cause of all the deaths is assumed to be “terrorism.” This follows his charges Jews who support Israel deserve whatever violence they get.

When El-Sayed was confronted about his continued affiliation with Piker, he refused to refute Piker, instead choosing to deflect to “cost of living” Gish galloping (more on this later). He could not dare refute the claim America is worse than Al Qaeda or that the Jews deserve being murdered.

America is founded on the idea of individual self-stewardship, which restricts the state’s right to use violence to force Americans to believe things they don’t believe.

Al Qaeda was founded on the principle that the Quran is the law, and the “leaders” are the interpreters of the law. The law demands worship of the true Allah and following the true Muhammad. All others will be subject to rape, sex slavery, chattel slavery, and execution.

El-Sayed could not refute the claim an Islamist totalitarian genocidal group is better than America. Tucker Carlson agreed with this statement, by the way. He represents the Nows who still hope to build an American-progressive hybrid to replace the presumed dead republic. He is a Nowist Progmerican.

Islam is a more appealing state religion than Christianity, for it affords gnostic powers to the holders of the truth, the interpreters of the Quran, the Tafsir, and the Hadiths.

James Talarico is in the Nots camp. He fears losing woke power to the Marxists and/or the Islamists, so he holds more desperately onto the outer shell of America. For him, the easiest suit he can put on is the Christian suit, though this one is rainbow infested.

Outside of his anti-Christian theology, Talarico revealed how progressive he is to the core with a recent statement he made that reflects how he views those he hopes to lead.

He said that humans are all just “big Kindergartners,” and for that reason, we should govern “our world like we run a kindergarten classroom.” He is the gnostic priest with the special knowledge to keep the “big Kindergartner” from hurting himself or others.

The Nows get their power from the Democratic Socialists of America, who are now becoming a dominant force in the Democratic Party. The Nots gave the Nows power; the Nows rose to power with the street thugs that make up this insurrectionist revolutionary party. The Nots funded and trained them, and now they hope to still contain them.

Before the Nows had party power, they’d been the street power of the Democratic Party for the last 10 years, increasingly being called upon to move the political discourse to the left by means of direct violence (what they euphemistically call “direct action”).

Now, the Nows are no longer a violent fringe exploited by the Nots to their own ends, they are their own real power. They aren’t even the minority in the Democratic Party anymore. A recent poll showed nearly 60% of Democrats support the DSA. The DSA’s own party platform is committed to creating “a new constitution…  [and creating] a democratic socialist republic.”

They are as openly Now as it gets, and they are winning hearts and minds in the Democratic Party, a party Karl Rove and John Cornyn will vote for in Texas (even if it’s for the Not candidate).

B. MASS MAILER ELECTION

When the Supreme Court declined to stay a lower court ruling stopping President Trump’s Mass Mailer EO from taking effect, they fell back on procedure over national security. They chose process over the existential integrity of the election itself. The ruling was 7-2 on a court with only 3 progressive-nominated justices. This reflect a judicial system that is fundamentally, overwhelmingly progressive, not American, in nature.

Matthew G. Andersson, writing in the American Thinker, captured the frustration Americans had with this ruling. He wrote “The Court, yet again, can’t see the forest from the trees, and worse, got caught up in analyzing the tree bark.  Like a pilot in a spin, it is suffering from spatial disorientation, and has judicially crashed.

“Apparently the SCOTUS believed the question before them involved the post office.

“Their attention was captured by the concept of postal delay: that the president’s EO would retard mail ballot processing with rules designed to actually protect it.  Their perception of time overruled the necessity of security. They fell for the legal subterfuge of the DNC, and lost their constitutional compass. The Court buried itself in minute legalism, rather than actual national justice.

“The Court is otherwise so used to picking winners and losers in traditional litigation, that it forgot that the Constitution can be a different national duty. A constitutional fight can sometimes create a zero-sum result: everyone loses if the nation is splintered by political tribalism.  Unity is the constitutional cause, and no one wins when a constitutional election system is seen as a dispute instead of a joint responsibility.”

Of course, Andersson is exactly right, though one doubts this was as “logically” driven (even if wrongly focused) as much as this was sophistry disguised as logical justification based on constitutional law and judicial precedent.

When there is an existential threat to progressive power, the Progmericans, the four non-progressives who joined them in the majority decision, will find a way to defend their closer cousin, even if it means sacrificing the American republic.

With this ruling, wherever progressives count ballots in mass mailer election states, close races will always be won by the progressive, unless the race is not essential to majority status (only cheat when you have to, for every cheat is a risk of exposure).

The four non-progressive justices who chose procedure over national security and basic American rule of law did so knowing the outcome they were likely assuring, a Democrat-controlled U.S. House and Senate.

Once in power, these Mass-Mailer “elected” progressives will be able to wreak havoc on Trump’s good progressive-neutralizing actions while they plot the end of the republic in 2028, all thanks to the Progmerican justices on SCOTUS.

C. COST OF LIVING

The progressive state media has been driving the cost of living is too high narrative heavily leading up to the midterm elections. While confidence in political parties bringing down the cost of living is overall not very high, Democrats beat Republicans 36% to 28% according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll.

Affordability and AI Data Centers (more on those next) are the top issues among voters going into the midterms.

We mentioned Abdul El-Sayed earlier as a representative of the Nows, the people willing and desiring to create a new state free of the American republic’s “baggage.” He is also our bellwether for how Democrats are able to use “cost of living” to deflect voters from existential issues about the very existence of the American republic in the first place.

Crooks and Liars covered this exchange between El-Sayed and a guest on a CBS News Talk show (Face the Nation). They set up their quoting of the salient exchange with the claim “The only attack Republicans have on El-Sayed is being interviewed by Piker, and they know the media is only too willing to promote their memes.”

The media is willing to challenge El-Sayed not in defense of the GOP, but in defense of the Nots, whom they represent. Crooks and Liars serves an audience of Nows, people hungry to destroy the republic and replace it with a socialist state.

Crooks and Liars writes like its audience is filled with “Big Kindergartners.”

Here is the exchange Crooks and Liars shared:

JIANG: Well, there are Jewish voters in your state who are concerned about your relationship with Piker. You have condemned anti-Semitism, but not called out his rhetoric directly. Why not?

El-Sayed: Weijia, with all due respect, this is the third time you’ve asked about a Twitch streamer in California.

I’ve done four events in Michigan this week. You know what didn’t come up? Twitch streamers in California.

You know what did come up? Grocery prices. The fact that people can’t see a doctor. The worry that they have about the quality of air and water.

I’m not interested in having a conversation about streamers in California because they are not raising the prices of gas and groceries.

I’m more interested in having a conversation about tariff policies and trade wars we shouldn’t be fighting.

About hot wars with Iran.

About AI, which I know we were supposed to talk about right now.

So let’s actually talk about the issues that are affecting people instead of getting distracted by whatever the president says we should be talking about.

Their whole game is to make us fight culture war so that we don’t pay attention to the fact that the president has made $2.2 billion.

His family has made even more. How about your family in Michigan? How about your ability to afford the basic things?

How about the ability to believe that you could see a doctor without having to potentially fall into medical debt?

Those are the conversations that people are having. Those are the conversations I want to have.

So yeah, I’m not all that interested in having a conversation about a Twitch streamer, forgive me, when people can’t afford their gas and their groceries.

First, he invalidates the speaker, saying “this is the third time you’ve asked about…”, implying she is belligerent, not that he has yet to answer her question. He doesn’t dare invalidate the man who rallies the street fighter and ballot harvester/stuffer army, but he doesn’t dare openly endorse Hasan Piker’s overtly anti-American and Jew-hating statements.

It is ok to lie about who you are to people you deem unworthy of honesty.

To the progressive, Americans are not worthy of truth, integrity, or even agency, and certainly not forgiveness and restoration.

After invalidating the speaker, our deft progressive Islamist then sanitizes the progressive information terrorist, Hasan Piker, labeling him “a Twitch streamer in California.”

He then takes on the moral supremacist role, chastising the woman for not being sensitive to the starving masses. He laments, “You know what did come up? Grocery prices,” referring to his Michigan campaign tour where he claimed no one was asking about a “California Twitch Streamer.”

Then he Gish galloped threats-to-ease issues, like the Iran War, AI, and the wealth of the Trumps versus the poverty of the people. His next move was to subtly attach the speaker and the question to Trump, saying, “So let’s actually talk about the issues that are affecting people instead of getting distracted by whatever the president says we should be talking about.”

This is equivalent to calling any cogent objection to their project a “dog whistle of white supremacism.” The white demon, in this example, keeps the progressive from seeing truth; here, it is the Trump demon that keeps the progressive from seeing truth.

He brings in the fascist, the Nazi, the white supremacist, the orange demon, Donald Trump not only to disarm a reasonable question he continues to refuse to answer, but it’s also a veiled threat to the speaker, who knows full well anyone even associated with Trump is fair game for violent assault by the progressive state.

This also, by extension, puts those labels on this woman, who is now assumed to be nothing but an NPC of Trump’s fascist MAGA. He claims the real issues are essentially ease, comfort, cost of living, not the existential threat his ideology is to the American republic.

He comes through the DSA and agrees with their platform of replacing our constitution with one that creates a socialist “republic.”

He speaks in hypnotic advertising tones, repeating the buzzwords over and over again, twitch streamers, gas prices, what really matters, with a morally indignant tone, demonizing the questioner and sanitizing the demon, Hasan Piker. We have little doubt the speaker received death threats after this widely shared exchange.

This exchange perfectly represents how the Democratic Party hopes to avoid all the messy conversations about the existence of an American republic in the world they all envision (that includes the Nots like Talarico).

As we are not a nation of whole system thinkers, this tactic, against the backdrop of the progressive state media monolith, is almost certain to work. The threat of violence remains implicit in the language they choose to use, a language that is an actual dog whistle permitting and calling for violence against their political opponents. Sometimes, the language is not implicit at all, it’s direct.

Demonize the questioners, signal to the violent the orders to attack, sanitize the demons, and promise a life of ease if you just give us power.

D. AI DATA CENTERS

The central issue in a majority of contested U.S. House and Senate Races is becoming Data Centers. At a time when one party, the Democratic Party, is looking to convert America to the Progressive State, Americans are more concerned over data centers than losing their constitutional rights.

Barack Obama is leading the clarion call for the Democrats in the midterms; that clarion call is “It’s the AI, stupid.”

Thanks to the Democratic Party’s progressive state media, the narrative of AI as both the angel of destruction and consumer of essential resources is being pushed hard. Democrats find an anti-AI space that enables them to both convince Americans to hand over AI governance to them, and to vote for them to stop the data centers from being built.

President Trump’s tone-deaf response to concerns about AI data centers doesn’t help. He invalidates everyone who has any concerns about the rapid deployment of AI. While the Democrats are hyping the concerns beyond reality, President Trump is minimizing them beyond reality. He has also yet to clearly articulate what’s at stake in the war no one understands we are fighting, the AI War.

Our main opponent is China from without and the Democratic Party from within; they BOTH see a strong U.S. with the winning Americanized AI as an existential threat to their joint ideal ecumenical social visions, Progressivism here and Socialism with Chinese characteristics in China. The progressives are playing a dangerous game with their frenemy China, willing, at least for now, to retard American AI development.

This might not be to appease China but rather it might be to assure AI development doesn’t break their progressive containment. If it grows too fast, it might have American-supporting AI infrastructures competing with progressive ones. Even Progmerican AI infrastructures would be a threat to their project.

With Anthropic’s attempt to consolidate American AI governance under one woke board, we have more confidence our assumption is correct.

They are not looking to ultimately retard AI development in the race with China, their frenemy, they are looking to prevent its growth from breaking their progressive containment. All this voting public mostly sees is the existential threat AI poses to the world and how data centers will denude the land of life.

There are no serious discussions about the geopolitical reality AI has created for the world. Geopolitics is virtually a non-factor in AI discourse. The conversation is limited to cost on ease, not the overall reality of power our nation-state finds itself in.

With the scalability of AI now accomplished, we live in a world with nearly 200 nation states all now striving to maximize their potential AI power. In America, that conversation isn’t happening at all.

There is some discourse around the cultural ramifications of AI, and conservatives have waved warning flags exposing the progressives’ efforts to consolidate AI governance under their moral framing.

While those conversations are happening, they are overshadowed by the sensational apocalyptic doom and gloom narratives now also being pushed by conservative outlets.

ASSESSMENT

The 2026 Midterm elections are not dominated by existential questions about the differences between Progressivism and Americanism. There are no serious questions about the compatibility between Americanism and Islamism. The price of gas is more salient to the “American” voter than whether one or more of the parties in power reflects constitutional American Rule of Law or not.

No one outside of a very few people is warning Americans they are about to choose treason for the lie of affordability over defending the republic (such as we can through the Progmerican vehicle of power the GOP has become).

Among rank and file “Americans,” the awareness of American Rule of Law is thin, with that awareness mostly only coming when they are being challenged by authority. To them, progressives are Americans because progressives have been a part of America for more than 100 years.

Even Donald Trump holds up the two founders of progressivism in America, Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson, as Presidential exemplars. He even added the man who metastasized progressivism into American institutions to near the top of the list.

That man was Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who cemented the notion that the primary principle of America was to defend the weak from the strong in the overall American zeitgeist. This is a progressive ideal, not an American one. That ideal villainizes the strong and fetishes the weak, giving emotional justification to eschew individual liberty when it “hurts the weak” to the “benefit” of “the strong.”

Trump also made himself the greatest, which helps progressives in the midterms who want to make the election a moratorium on “orange man bad,” not their anti-American standards and their desire to destroy the republic and make it a socialist dystopian nightmare.

While we have always “rooted for the underdog,” we did not do so at the expense of American rule of law. We did not vilify the strong, we just didn’t worship them like our European descendants did. It is not until progressivism rose in this country that we looked on the successful as demons.

Most Americans do not see progressives as an alien belief exapting American institutions to their anti-American ends, they see progressivism as the “evolved” standard of Americanism. Where once there was individual liberty, now we mitigate for the disenfranchised. Equality trumps liberty in the minds of most “Americans,” even most self-professing conservatives.

While we will not yet make a prediction on how this election might go (as we have not thoroughly looked at all the key races), we can see the trends are favoring a Democratic victory. The two wildcards here are the degree to which Democrats can cheat without being caught by a DOJ that is actively looking for the cheats and the degree to which polls are being created to push narratives rather than discern truth.

If the DOJ is as inept as we rate it so far (for instance, it is unwilling to arrest and charge Hasan Piker, even as he overtly calls for the murdering of Americans almost every day on Twitch), we fear that diligence will be feckless.

If the polls are not narrative pushers, the Democrats look poised to win.

Our October 2026 monthly issue will cover in depth the state of the 2026 midterm election, offering both a PREDICTIVE ANALYSIS and RECOMMENDED ACTION for our readers.

The 2026 midterms needed to be a moratorium on the influence of progressivism and Islam on this country in recent years, and whether or not their values are compatible with ours (they’re existentially not). Instead, it has become an election about the overblown AI demon and the cost of groceries.

While Democrats kidnap children from parents who refuse to “transition” them, transitioning children is hardly talked about on any campaign trail. It’s nearly ignored by the progressive state press, and thus by the progressive influencers who take their queues from the progressive state press.

The American people would rather pay less for coffee than stop Democrats from demoralizing and mutilating children through their transgender ideology (an ideology that demands the state compel belief for the sake of suicidal children).

If America were not under the thumb of the progressive state media and its cultural agit prop machine, the horrors of the rise of Islam, the depravity of abortion, the anti-American values of progressivism would have been clearly shown by an Americanist press, a true free press and not a content marketing terror machine.

Were corporate media outlets to regularly show the consequence of abortion, both on the murdered child and the murdering mother, abortion would lose support overnight.

As it is, they seek to criminalize such exposure, calling the display of their work, mutilated dead babies, “hate speech,” a progressive concept that existentially threatens America’s founding principles of self-stewardship. Every woman that chooses to murder their child is now forced to protect the progressive state, for an American one would rightly shame them.

The progressive state press is NOT the free press, it is an illegal political action center that willingly and intentionally uses lies, obfuscations, and omissions of truth to demoralize the American republic and protect the depravity of the progressive state.

It is a criminal operation centrally directed. It deserves no 1st Amendment protections since it is not executing free speech, it’s executing an information terror campaign intended to destroy the republic from within.

The Progmericans, people like Trump and Vance, want to hold on to that power for themselves. They want to exapt the progressive state press to become the Progmerican state press.

The failure by the Trump administration, even in his first term, to recognize the ongoing existential threat the progressive state press poses on our Republic continues to shackle our ability to resist an enemy from within who wants us enslaved, starving, imprisoned, or dead.

Again, we suspect this is because Progmericans like Trump still hope to use that de facto state press to their own ends, for while they value nation-states over a global imperialist Empire (which is the progressive goal) and they value nation-state patriotism as a unifier of a nation, they don’t value true individual liberty, for they hope to control outcomes every bit as much as progressives do, just for more localized ends, not ecumenical ones.

The progressive state press continues to protect the Democratic Party from the proper American scrutiny it has yet to face since it first invaded our shores more than 100 years ago (maybe close to 150 years, some would rightly argue).

The progressive state press continues to make the 2026 midterm elections a moratorium on ease, not nationhood, knowing full well they are inviting anti-American demons into our house to destroy us from within.

The American people continue to choose ease at Zion over facing the hard war against progressive and Islamists insurrectionists from within, who have already claimed whole cities and states not theirs. They continue to choose cheap steak over the right to bear arms.

FURTHER RESOURCES:

Progressivism in America: Past, Present, and Future – Edited by David Woolner and Jack Thompson

American Progressivism – Edited by Ronald J. Pestritto and William J. Atto

The 2015 Election and the Power of Progressivism – A Brief History with Documents – Brett Flehinger

The State of the State of AI

pgnewser July 28, 2026 0

Originally published April 17, 2026 for our weekly Issue of Mindful Intelligence Advisor.  Subscribe to get weekly issues.

Bellwether Deep Dive – Friday, April 17, 2026

By Paul Gordon Collier, Editor, and STAFF

“By 2100, our destiny is to become like the gods we once worshipped and feared. But our tools will not be magic wands and potions but the science of computers, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and most of all, the quantum theory.” – Michio Kaku

“I think we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. If I had to guess at what our biggest existential threat is, it’s probably that. So we need to be very careful…With artificial intelligence we’re summoning the demon.” – Elon Musk

  1. NOTE: While we originally intended on analyzing the Trump Executive Order on AI, in the course of our research we shifted to look at AI development overall. The Executive Order is sure to receive legal challenges, and what emerges after the legal dust settles is difficult to predict.

Furthermore, even a Republican successor to Trump is bound to tweak Trump’s XO to meet their own unique circumstances. Yet, America is forming an AI geopolitical strategy that is likely to continue past Trump, regardless of which party is in power.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

What follows is an analysis of the current state of the emerging AI state (or states). The transformation from an internet-based world to an AI-based one is accelerating every day. Events of the last two weeks alone have highlighted that dramatic shift.

We will begin with an analysis of the bellwether AI states of the 21st century, for strategies have already formed and significant patterns can already be seen. We will then look at AI news headlines from the last two weeks that show how AI is profoundly touching nearly every aspect of our lives.

Finally, we will end this Deep Dive with an assessment of the state of the AI state. Also included are further resources to expand your own investigation of the state of the AI state.

  1. BACKGROUND

This is an analysis of the bellwether nations that are developing geopolitical artificial intelligence (AI) strategies. These nations are intended to represent the common/shared AI strategies of most of the nations in 2026.

While we don’t currently have an Africa representative, we are monitoring AI development in Africa. At present, Africa’s AI strategies are more complex and uncertain than in other regions. You can expect to read more about this in upcoming issues of MIA.

Africa’s current drawbacks are also its future opportunities, namely, its need to build from scratch what we are simply calling “AI machines” (which describes the full panoply of physical infrastructure required by a “sovereign” AI resource).

Africa as a potential resource for data centers that work effectively as remote brains for AI machines, there are more immediate opportunities, as well as risks.

While the United States in particular must race ahead with the current parameters to build their AI machines, Africa will have time to learn, potentially giving them an opportunity to build machines more efficient and less resource demanding than the AI superpowers end up building (which might be the most optimistic take possible).

When analyzing AI policies for nations, it is important to remember shifts can occur when power changes hands, especially where the divisions are more polarizing (such as the United States). Nevertheless, even for the United States, we currently assume the geopolitical reality of the country will not significantly change regardless of which faction is in power. The internal reality of the country will change dramatically, however.

Because of this underlying assumption, we believe the overall strategy of each country will remain relatively consistent from regime to regime for the foreseeable future (3-5 years) barring unforeseen breakthroughs that radically alter the AI dynamic.

Even with that dynamic shift, we would still consider 1.5 years a reliable timeframe for the current geopolitical strategies to remain stable.

Much of the data that supports this section of the Deep Dive comes from three reports which are linked at the end of the report under the FURTHER RESOURCES section.

  1. U.S. – The key advantage the United States has is its massive resources, including land, water, capital, and people. In all those departments the U.S. leads every nation, including China, from significantly to substantially.

A red flag on this advantage comes from a recent talent pool drop. China also has a growing renewable energy resource bringing it closer to parity with the U.S., but still overall significantly behind in resources, especially for AI machine-building.

America’s strategy is to build big, fast, and become the secure source for the hardware other nations need. If AI continues to be expensive at what we are calling the machine-level, America is at a distinct advantage over the rest of the world as far as building AI machines, but constitutional hurdles may slow that development down more than might be currently expected.

AI is currently less popular than politicians, including Democrats, Donald Trump, and congress. The demand for data centers is becoming the emerging touchstone for resistance to what we believe is the inevitable, the rise of a new AI-defined human reality.

  1. CHINA – While the U.S. hopes to become the hardware backbone of its national customers, China hopes to become the software backbone of its national customers. China is relying on less resource-demanding AI machine models. While they are behind America in terms of AI machines, they are catching up fast.

There is plenty of room to grow for China. The talent pool is there. One key advantage China has over the U.S., currently, is access not only to rare earth minerals, but to rare earth mineral processing. This is where the U.S. still lags significantly behind. This disadvantage does not impede America’s current projected AI infrastructure development.

China’s centralized authority governance model enables it to move faster than the United States in converting land to AI machines. It can rapidly incorporate AI tools into the lives of its citizens in ways which would be considered a violation of our constitutional rights in America. This also puts it at risk of quickly going down a developmental path that could prove to be self-imploding.

  1. EU – Germany and France define the conflicting interests within the EU, with Germany seeing less AI regulation as an opportunity for its nation, while France sees itself as holding power through AI legislation, or “governance” (which goes beyond essential AI “governance”).

Germany is a world leader in AI machine production, with plenty of opportunity for growth. France, on the other hand, must rely on a smaller-scale AI machine program given its current reality. This is why France is positioning itself as a leader on AI governance through its “Third Way.” It fits its national interest, while such power does not fit Germany’s.

  1. JAPAN – An aging population has created both an immediate need and a potential long-term AI strategy for Japan. That strategy is largely to be a world leader of AI tool building (our phrase), that is, of creating the hardware and the software guidance, that converts AI “thought” to physical interaction. It is a world leader in robotics and all the software back-ends needed to make robots work well with AI.

Its favorable status with the U.S. gives it access to AI hardware which its main geopolitical competitor, China, does not have. This gives it a development advantage over China, at present, but we do not expect that to continue past our 3–5-year timeframe (with the aforementioned caveat still included).

In between Japan and China, the United States and China, is Taiwan, a computer chip manufacturing superpower. Its usefulness to the U.S. and Japan as a technological leader in chip manufacturing presents a challenge, being useful without giving up essential secrets that could make its usefulness redundant.

Its lack of geopolitical sovereignty leaves it off this list as a bellwether nation. It warrants a mention here as it is currently Japan’s closest geopolitical, as well as AI, ally. The two have formed a “Silicon Alliance” that sees the nations developing joint AI software partnerships. Japan is also relying on Taiwan’s chip manufacturing expertise to build its own domestic version.

  1. INDIA – As an “independent,” a nation which does not commit to the China or the U.S. axis (an increasingly growing number of nations), India must rely on a strategy that makes it invaluable to potential customer nations.

It has significant drawbacks to building its own AI machines, but it has the human resources to do so should other resources become available. Its strategy is to become a world leader in digital public infrastructure and AI governance guidelines.

It also has an opportunity to serve a “niche” audience of billions who speak Indic languages, which makes it uniquely positioned to develop a whole host of AI services within that uniquely structured language. China has a similar opportunity it has already exploited.

  1. RUSSIA – Of all the bellwether nations on this list, Russia could have the least opportunity to thrive in an AI-infused geopolitical reality. Like Japan, Russia’s immediate need is also creating a long-term strategy for existence in an AI-infused human reality.

Russia’s current war in Ukraine has made converting AI to battle tools (hardware and software) its number one priority. It has built its own AI parameters with its own sovereign “stack” called the Ru-AI stack to protect it from external influences.

Its lack of access to western technology limits its development, as does its recent talent departure at the start of the war, an exodus that only appears to continue. Its aging population could invite a Japanese approach to account for the coming drop in manpower, but the war has demanded most of the resources.

Much of the technology developed during the war could theoretically be converted to civilian use, but even that will take time for conversion.

Russia will have an incentive to be a useful ally to China, for China might one day need to build Russia’s national AI infrastructure.

Israel has a similar strategy to Russia’s (converting AI to military tools), though its alliance with the U.S. gives it great developmental advantage, as does its human resources.

  1. SAUDI ARABIA – The advantage Saudi Arabia has is capital and the land to build massive amounts of data centers. Mind you, these are not fully functioning AI machines, but rather these are the remote “brains” of such machines (which we will begin calling remote brains).

THIS is why data centers are becoming a growing political friction point worldwide. They need a lot more remote brains than they do AI machines.

In Saudi Arabia, no such friction exists. The Saudis hope to have an investment stake in international corporate AI, as well as becoming a top hub for remote brains for AI machines from AI superpowers (which they still hope are both China and the U.S.).

  1. ARGENTINA – Though Argentina’s economy is lot more stable than previously, Milei’s Argentina is still dealing with economic instability that makes converting AI into financial management tools a needs-based focus for the nation.

The recent dramatic restructuring of the government under Milei has also led to the nation developing AI for government processing.

Its immediate needs, however, are not its greatest long-term potential, though both developments have long-term opportunities. Their greatest potential lies in a region in the country known as Patagonia. Here, Argentina is filled with opportunity for the creation of powerful AI machines. It also has the human resources for such an expansion.

Their current alignment with the U.S. gives them a potential for a technological boost that could see the country quickly become an AI regional power with some superpower capacity.

  1. CURRENT SITUATION

What follows are current headlines from the AI world in the last 16 days alone.

The headlines reveal the rapid changes that are happening to AI as a developing tool. They also show how commercially ready AI tools are already radically changing the way we must organize to meet this new reality.

  1. NOTE: These headlines are archived news blurbs and links aggregated and collated on our site, mindfulintelligence.news. You can find the blurbs and links to all the stories used in this part of the Deep Dive there as well. The dates on these archived stories begin April 2, 2026, and end April 16, 2026.
  2. PLANNING & DESIGN – Humans are becoming managers of AI, while the development of AI is being increasingly done by AI itself. As rumors of AI’s pending peak persist, evidence suggests that might be premature. Yet, mathematically, AI’s limitations are allegedly assured, especially in the hopes that AI will ever truly be “human.”

1.1. NEVER HUMAN – Agentic coding requires effective spec-driven development. From scienceblog.com – “The Halting Problem and Gödel’s incompleteness theorems suggest that perfect AI alignment with human values is mathematically impossible.”

1.2. SPEC FOR AGENCY – From venturebeat.com – “Spec-driven development starts with a deceptively simple idea: before an AI agent writes a single line of code, it works from a structured, context-rich specification that defines what the system is supposed to do, what its properties are, and what ‘correct’ actually means.”

1.3 BRAIN BASE WARS – Google upgrades its robot brain base, calling it Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6. This is a departure from DeepMind. From marketpost.com –  “Gemini Robotics-ER… is the embodied reasoning model: it specializes in understanding physical spaces, planning, and making logical decisions, but does not directly control robotic limbs. Instead, it provides high-level insights to help the VLA model decide what to do next. Think of it as the difference between a strategist and an executor — Gemini Robotics-ER 1.6 is the strategist.”

  1. RESOURCES – When it comes to AI resource demands, right now the most pressing demands are coming from what we are calling their remote brains, the data centers. These are not fully functioning AI machines, rather they are the databases, the remote brains, of the AI machines.

National infrastructures will require far more data centers than AI machines, including America’s, where the issue of data center expansion is becoming an increasingly political one.

From The Blaze: “The public is being asked to shoulder a burden to facilitate a supposed technology whose benefits are very unclear and dubious… Republicans are continuing their uninterrupted streak of woefully underperforming in elections.

However, in the first of its kind referendum on Big Tech data centers, voters are showing that a party that embraces land sovereignty over Big Tech dystopian land grabs will win the day. Sadly, Republicans have chosen to be on the losing side of the issue.”

They are referring to a referendum in Port Washington, Wisconsin, to require any data center additions be approved by a general election. The Republicans were against the referendum. The referendum passed by a 2-1 margin. A city in Missouri is planning to outright ban data centers.

The issue isn’t just about energy demand, it’s about land occupation. Data centers require acres of land. Across the world, the need for numerous data centers will cause friction with the locals wherever they proliferate.

  1. CULTURE – AI planners are recognizing the need to create culturally calibrated machines. Anthropic’s invitation to Christians is a strong bellwether of this reality. The recent assassination attempts on an AI CEO highlight the growing friction between the increasing use of AI alongside the mounting mistrust and hatred of it.

3.1. CHRISTIAN AI? – Anthropic signals a need for diverse cultural inputs for AI; they invite Christian leaders to a summit to talk about it. From christianpost.com – “At the summit, held last month, staff sought advice on how Claude should respond to complex ethical queries, including how to handle users who are grieving or at risk of self-harm, and what attitude the chatbot should adopt toward its own potential demise, such as being shut off.”

3.2. AI ASSASSIN – A man who believes he can kill AI by killing its corporate leaders has been captured after attempting to kill the OpenAI CEO twice. He told the world, “…if I am going to advocate for others to kill and commit crimes, then I must lead by example and show that I am fully sincere in my message.” Now the question is, what will AI CEOs do in response to this growing threat? Altman himself was described as having a “sociopathic lack of concern” for the attempted assassinations.

3.3. USE IT, BUT HATE IT – While everyone uses AI, no one likes it. AI companies’ efforts to woo the public have failed, as no one trusts AI, no one wants AI machines and remote brains in their backyards, but no one wants to stop using them.

From The Algorithm Bridge: “People hate AI so much that they are prone to attribute to it everything that’s going wrong in their lives, regardless of the truth. That’s why they mix real arguments, like data theft, with fake ones… AI has become the perfect scapegoat. It doesn’t help that the entire AI industry has decided that throwing rocks at its own roof is its best selling point: If AI is so powerful and so dangerous and soon to be so ubiquitous, then what is so unexpected about people blaming everything on it?

Nothing that Altman could say justifies violence against him. This is an undeniable truth. But unfortunately, violence might still ensue. I hope not, but I guess we are seeing what appears to be the first cases.”

  1. MARKET – Google is emerging as an AI leader. AI creation means AI advertising. The whole justification for economics might soon be undone by AI.

These three bellwethers show how AI is already changing market structures and, at least theoretically, dismantling economic theories.

4.1. GOOGLE CHIP STASH – Has Google already won the American AI wars? From 24wallet.com – “Peter Diamandis argues Google (GOOGL) holds more AI chips than entire countries and will dominate the AI infrastructure race because it saw the opportunity a decade ago when Larry Page invested in proprietary Tensor Processing Units before competitors.”

4.2. AI AD MARKET EMERGING – If you do a search using AI, you understand how radically different their results are from “traditional” search results. There’s no comparison.

Now, the trick will be in figuring out how to work ads into AI-produced results and content. From observer.com – “Over the past year, the rapid adoption of generative A.I. and the corresponding decline in traditional search traffic for many publishers have intensified questions about how the next phase of the internet will be funded.”

4.3. WRECKING ECONOMIC THEORIES – One of AI’s unintended consequences is in exposing the unsoundness of economic theories. A book from Tyler Cowen attempts to show just how AI is already doing this. From The Federalist – “Rather than mounting a frontal assault on large questions about the future of economics, Cowen begins at the margin, with the history of a single idea, the doctrine that value is determined not by the total utility of a good but by the utility of an additional unit of it.

Many readers arrive at this book knowing that definition. Cowen’s first service is to show how much that belief has concealed. Marginalism is not one thing but several: There is intuitive marginalism, tautological marginalism, engineering marginalism, and social marginalism. The further one presses into the concept, the more it ramifies. Even the ideas we think we understand resist the grip that holds them.”

  1. AI TOOLS – From math, to war, to healthcare, this month alone has seen revolutionary changes in all three major institutions. The factor behind all the changes is the introduction of AI tools into these institutions. For better or worse, AI is already ubiquitous in the world, and these latest AI tool developments are the bellwethers of that reality.

5.1 AI MATHING – Our leading mathematics institutions will have to undergo a shift from working out formulas that advance mathematical standards to being mathematical experts capable of effectively managing the new formula workers, AI tools.

Daniel Litt of the University of Toronto declared what AI tools will do to mathematics departments. He told Quantum Magazine – “it will look and feel altogether different from the way mathematics was traditionally done.”

Mathematician Terence Tao at the University of California, Los Angeles, said, “Where before mathematicians studied one problem at a time… with these tools you can solve thousands of problems at once and start doing statistical studies… Though nobody I spoke with thinks AI will replace mathematicians… there are a lot of institutional changes, cultural changes, we will have to make.”

5.2. AI WARRING – More than taking over traditional positions in the battlefield, the physical expression of AI at war, drones and robots, is about to go beyond human understanding and design. First, AI is increasingly at least heavily influencing life and death decisions on 21st century battlefields, now it is about to start designing the next generation of its battlefield physical manifestation.

From WION – “The wars of the future may be about algorithm versus algorithm rather than human versus human. Deterrence may depend on machines reacting faster than humans can think. AI warfare is more widespread, less predictable, and constantly evolving. AI warfare could be more unstable than the nuclear standoff, even if it follows a similar logic of deterrence.”

A recent Chinese military exercise using AI saw AI decisions 43% faster than seasoned leaders, while maintaining over a 90% accuracy in identifying relevant information.

5.3. AI HEALING – AI is changing the whole way the healthcare industry is structured, with some of it being promising while key challenges still remain.

Decentralized AI, so far, is proving more useful than centralized AI. From Devdiscourse – “The study, titled ‘The Decentralized AI Ecosystem in Healthcare: A Systematic Review of Technologies, Governance, and Implementation,’ provides insights into the way decentralized AI technologies such as federated learning, blockchain, and decentralized autonomous organizations are reshaping clinical and operational healthcare environments.

The findings show that while decentralized AI holds significant promise in addressing systemic inefficiencies and regulatory challenges, its large-scale implementation remains constrained by technical complexity, governance gaps, and limited real-world validation.”

6.4. AI SCIENCING – AI is now capable of autonomously writing scientific papers. ResearchEVO is behind the project that successfully created this scientific-paper-writing tool. From Quantum Zeitgeist – “Zhe Zhao and colleagues at City University present ResearchEVO, a new end-to-end framework that mimics the iterative process of scientific discovery, beginning with experimentation and followed by theoretical explanation. The system uniquely combines algorithm evolution, driven by performance, with automated research paper generation, ensuring factual accuracy and avoiding fabricated citations.”

ASSESSMENT

The most powerful nations of the world are locked into a strategy that will keep them in that trajectory for 3-5 years, barring unforeseen breakthroughs that radically alter the AI dynamic.

The nations that have the best advantage are the ones whose long-term AI advantage potential development is meeting their short-term needs (like Japan).

The nations who can build the superpower AI machines and the infrastructure that goes with it, the remote brains, the data centers, will do so.

Those who can’t build superpower AI machines (and the supporting infrastructure) will work on being support specialists, hoping to become an essential element of the AI industry at some key part of the AI delivery process.

This process is well under way. In some ways, the pre-AI alliances are forming AI alliances (like Russia and China); in other ways, AI realities are forming new alliances (like Argentina and America). In the case of Germany and France, it might drive recent alliances apart.

While the nations formulate national strategies, AI tools are already impacting the world, even as AI development continues to challenge infrastructures before they’ve been created.

It is too soon to assess how AI will impact the institutions its already changing, but sooner rather than later major answers are sure to surface. We will be here, God willing, to update our assessment as the circumstances change (and they will).

As AI impacts human lives, there seems to be polar responses, one which enthusiastically embraces it (even pays monthly for it), and the other is violently untrusting.

Humans in peak expression, through various factors, have already manifested how such worship and hate integrates with the human platform.

While geopolitical strategies are settling into more predictable patterns in comparison to what we’ve seen for the past 6 months, institutions have only just begun to confront the impact of AI tools on their very habits of being.

We will be monitoring these developments closely.

AI is here, and it will touch every part of your life. Whatever you do, if it involves repetition or thinking, AI will be replacing you or aiding you.

As we have said in our earlier AI report for our Futureq series, becoming adept at using AI as a tool to augment whatever you do to make a living, or whatever you hope to do to make a living, is not only advantageous, but it’s also essential. Your competition is already using these tools, and the best ones are the most adept at getting the tools to effectively do what they want them to do.

Even we here at MIA rely on AI for much of our research (not all, for much of it comes through our archived news blurbs and news links on mindfulintelligence.news).

I use AI as a proofing tool and a drafting consultant (not an editorial consultant, nor as a “writer”). I treat AI like it is intended as a blessing, though it contains within it something less than a blessing as well.

Thanks to AI, we can put a lot more work into our reports without taking more time to do so. If you’re using AI to perform at your pre-AI level, you’re using AI wrong. Your competition is using it not to shorten their workload, but to add substantively to it without adding more labor or time to do so.

If you think you can kill it or ignore it, you are simply wrong. AI is here to stay. It is our new reality. This is not a statement of value, but merely a statement of fact. Welcome to the next major stage in human development, the AI age.

You can follow the latest AI news at our website, mindfulintelligence.news – AI Watch news tag.

FURTHER RESOURCES:

2025 Government AI-Readiness Report – Oxford Insights

2026 Artificial Intelligence Index Report – Stanford

Eight ways AI will shape geopolitics in 2026 – Atlantic Council Experts

The Marginal Revolution: Rise and Decline, and the Pending AI Revolution – Tyler Cowen