BREAKING:

In South Memphis, one community organizer has spent nearly two years pushing back against one of the most powerful men in tech — and that fight has now landed in federal court.

KeShaun Pearson is the executive director of Memphis Community Against Pollution, a grassroots group that's been challenging Elon Musk's xAI over its "Colossus" supercomputer facility, built in the majority-Black Boxtown neighborhood in 2024. According to reporting from Inside Climate News and the Southern Environmental Law Center, xAI ran dozens of methane gas turbines to power the site for over a year without the proper Clean Air Act permits — turbines Pearson says have made an already heavily polluted area even harder to breathe in.

The NAACP has since filed a lawsuit against xAI, alleging Clean Air Act violations. Pearson, who also helped lead a successful 2021 campaign to block an oil pipeline from the same neighborhood, has continued organizing residents, with activists staging a peaceful "die-in" protest outside the facility's gates in May, partly to mark how long the turbines had been running.

xAI and Memphis city leaders, including Mayor Paul Young, have defended the project, pointing to hundreds of local jobs and a city ordinance directing a share of the company's property taxes back into nearby communities. When approached for comment by The New York Times over residents' air quality concerns, xAI dismissed the criticism as "legacy media lies."

The fight in Memphis has become one of the most closely watched data center disputes in the country, raising hard questions about who benefits — and who pays the price — as the AI boom expands into more communities nationwide.

Follow this page for more on the people standing up to the data center boom!

Sources: Inside Climate News ("In South Memphis, Elon Musk's Colossus Operated Gas Turbines Without Appropriate Permits, Residents and Activists Claim"); Democracy Now! ("'Colossus Failure': Elon Musk's Data Centers Face Lawsuit for Polluting Black Neighborhoods in Memphis," April 22, 2026); MLK50: Justice Through Journalism ("Memphis activists block xAI operations to protest pollution," May 2026)

See less

The buffoons who orchestrate fascism, with its quack science, idiocy, penchant for violence and grotesque hypermasculinity, are ripe for satire. It is easy, as late-night comics do — and as the cabarets did for the Nazis in Berlin — to pillory the goons, misfits and mediocrities who hold power and spew fascist bile. But this form of satire blinds opponents to its destructive power and murderous core. It ignores the real centers of power. It does not engender resistance. It engenders disdain and cynicism. It furthers the social and political divide between us, the “enlightened” and “educated” elite, and them, the despised and ridiculed “basket of deplorables.”

There are two forms of satire. That of the educated elites, which dominates the commercial media, ridicules the foibles and pretensions of Trump and his hapless followers. This satire does not attack corporations or the war industry. It ignores the decay and rot within our political institutions, including the Democratic Party, which created Trump. It pretends we live in a democracy. It breeds cynicism, not resistance. It is characterized by a repugnant moral and intellectual superiority and heartless demeaning of the underclass. It fosters the social divisions and alienation that feeds fascism.

Antonio Gramsci warned that elitist satire is counterproductive. He called for a “passionate sarcasm,” which targets the machinery of power. Satire, he wrote, must excoriate the dominant myths and ideologies which buttress capitalism and fascism. It must expose not only the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of fascism, but acknowledge the legitimate grievances of those under its spell. It must focus on the institutions that perpetuate injustice and social inequality.

“Trump has also been necessary to expose the plastic progressives, the liberal anti-Trump imperialists who, in their opposition to Trump’s deal with Iran, can only look like warmongering imperial psychopaths,” writes Nate Bear. “From all those sharing memes on social media about surrender, from the Democrats and CNN talking heads decrying the deal, to Jimmy Fallon dragging Trump for giving Iran back the money the US stole, there is no articulation of an alternative to endlessly bombing Iran. There’s no anger from liberals over dead Iranians, or at the imperial state, at Zionism or the embedded death machinery that made this violence possible. No, they’re just embarrassed for empire. And they don’t want to recognise the limits of that empire.”

Elitist satire — whether on “Saturday Night Live” or other late-night shows — punches down. It seduces liberals into believing that the thugs and grifters who have taken power are too stupid and too inept to last. There are millions of political exiles who understand how this self-delusion, this failure to take fascists seriously, is the great facilitator of fascism. They too once dismissed the goons who now run their countries as a joke.

The Turkish writer Ece Temelkuran, driven into exile by the regime of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, in her book “Nation of Strangers: Rebuilding Home in the 21st Century,” lays out the familiar pattern:

It begins with a movement that divides society into two: the ‘real people’ versus the ‘corrupt elite’, and with a leader who insists they alone embody the ‘real’ people. The next step is the dissolution of truth and the prioritisation of loyalty above decency. Then shame is dismantled. The leader breaks the long-standing political and moral consensus with unprecedented relentlessness. The longer they remain in power, the boundaries of what is acceptable begin to stretch. What once felt unthinkable or despicable gradually becomes normal. As the institutions that hold democracy together are quietly hollowed out and the very definition of democracy is rewritten as being simply majority rule, universal values — human dignity and the rule of law — are replaced with a fierce nationalism, a proud victimhood, and a rewriting of history. Cruelty and ruthlessness are deemed just, not only in the highest echelons of politics but also trickling down to daily life. The circle of who counts as ‘us’ grows smaller, while millions of fellow citizens are recast as permanent suspects.

As Temelkuran warns, Americans, like those in other nations that have been down this path, “...soothe their fears by repeating the same illusionary line, ‘The institutions will hold.’ They do not yet dare to recognize their future country, and soon, they will not be recognized as citizens unless they follow the new rules in Trump’s America.”

Comedians such as Kimmel function like the cabaret star, Fritz Grünbaum, who during Nazism, once quipped when the power went out during a performance: “I can’t see a thing, not a single thing; I must have stumbled into National Socialist culture.” Grünbaum would eventually find himself in the Dachau concentration camp — along with other actors, performers and satirists — where he died of tuberculosis.

The Nazis moved swiftly to close the cabarets — along with all institutions that defied Nazi control — and replaced them with mindless variety shows. They hated mockery as much as Trump, who after Stephen Colbert’s final show, gloated that Colbert was “finished” and called him a “total jerk.” Trump also shared an AI-generated video of himself throwing Colbert into a dumpster, slamming down the lid and dancing. Trump wrote that Colbert’s exit was the “beginning of the end” for other late night hosts.

Jokes about dictators in totalitarian regimes are a criminal offense. Satire is permissible in fascist states only when employed to mock political opponents and demonized minorities. It is not permissible when directed at centers of power. As Gramsci pointed out, the consolidation of power by fascists requires them to win the “cultural battle,” by dominating the public discourse, policing language — including satire — and redefining social, cultural and political norms.

Elitist satire is a pressure-release valve. But because it refuses to confront the roots of our political, social and cultural degeneration — which preceded the Trump presidency — it solidifies the fascist project it seeks to destroy. It reduces the catastrophe to the clown show around Trump: the sycophantic cabinet secretaries, ICE Barbie or Robert F. Kennedy Jr’s bizarre war on medical science. It does not address our failed democratic institutions — the academy, elections, courts, Congress, or the media. It deflects attention from the billionaires and corporations that have slashed regulation, imposed austerity and deindustrialization and distorted the economic and political system to facilitate the largest upward transfer of wealth in U.S. history. It does not address the murderous war industry or the domestic security apparatus that makes us the most watched, monitored, spied upon, tracked and photographed population in human history.

This elitist satire simplifies the complex social, economic and political forces we must dismantle. It ignores or pays deference to the subterranean forces that created Trump. Gramsci’s “passionate sarcasm” is too revolutionary and too truthful to be broadcast on media conglomerates such as CBS.

“Laughter is our reaction to immediate incongruities and those which do not affect us essentially,” the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr noted in “Humor and Faith.” “Faith is the only possible response to the ultimate incongruities of existence which threaten the very meaning of our life.”

“There is no laughter in the holy of holies,” Niebuhr continued. “There laughter is swallowed up in prayer and humor is fulfilled by faith.”

When satire is the end point, it is deleterious. It masks what is coming. It must be, as Niebuhr pointed out, the entry point. It must push us, as Gramsci understood, into hard analysis and the organization of mass movements that alone can save us from tyranny. It must cease to play into the hands of a polarized nation, one where opposing factions write each other off as irredeemable. It must acknowledge that given the gravity before us, laughter is not enough.

---

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for fifteen years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief. He has taught at Columbia University, New York University, Princeton University, and the University of Toronto.Subscribe to Chris Hedges on Substack

[Find the web link for this article in the comments]

See less

 

The Banality of Peter Thiel’s Evil

Newly unearthed details of the tech giant’s secret annual retreat show the malignity of his influence—and the mundanity of his ideas.

For someone obsessed with the imminent arrival of the Antichrist and other doomsday scenarios, tech baron Peter Thiel sure is keen to place himself within the existing political order’s power elite. An early Silicon Valley recruit to the MAGA movement, Thiel donated heavily to Donald Trump’s first presidential campaign and spoke at the 2016 Republican National Convention. He then distanced himself from Trump’s 2020 campaign, but resumed his role as a MAGA kingmaker during the 2022 cycle, donating to 16 hard-right House and Senate candidates. And as his pet software and surveillance company Palantir continues to rake in massive government contracts from the second Trump administration, Thiel is already spending big to support the Republican House majority in this year’s midterms.

But electoral politics is just a small part of Thiel’s self-appointed purview as an aspiring thinker of big civilizational thoughts. Since 2006, the reclusive mogul has hosted a series of confabs called Dialog—a private, invitation-only gathering of global power brokers and influencer-types, funded by a cool $16,000 registration fee for participants. Reports of Dialog’s activities have been sketchy at best, since all the group’s sessions are held off the record, and its membership list has been jealously guarded from public view.

 

𝐈𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥 𝐖𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐞, 𝐄𝐱𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭 𝐈𝐭 𝐍𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐇𝐚𝐬: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐨𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐀𝐢𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐭 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐈𝐭

Facebook Summary:

There is a sentence the Israeli prime minister returns to whenever the pressure from his patron grows uncomfortable. If Israel is forced to stand alone, he says, Israel will stand alone. It is built for the domestic ear and aimed at the foreign one, and it has the ring of a hard truth spoken by a man prepared to face it. There is only one difficulty. The entire history of Israel at war says it is not true, and it says so beginning in October 1973, when Israel did not stand alone, because it could not.

In October 1973, attacked on two fronts, Israel burned through its arms and ammunition faster than it could replace them. As the shortages grew critical, the United States launched an emergency airlift, flying thousands of tons of weapons and equipment into Israel over the course of the war, replacing what was being consumed. [1] It is widely credited with helping Israel stabilize and turn the fighting. At the first existential test of the modern state, what allowed Israel to keep fighting was not the depth of its own resources. It was the arrival of its patron supply. That was not an exception. It was the rule. In the decades after, Israel became the largest cumulative recipient of American military aid in the world, its missile-defense systems funded substantially by the United States, its expended interceptors replaced from American production. The state that proclaims it will stand alone built its entire defense on the certainty that it never would. And the war of 2026 confirmed it on the largest scale yet: through months of fighting, Israeli air defense was sustained by a continuous American resupply of interceptors, drawn down faster than they could be made, and as the war ended the United States began rebuilding the stocks the fighting had emptied. [2] The most advanced shield in the world could not sustain itself through one war without its patron.

Set the boast beside the record. In 1973, the airlift. In the decades after, the aid that became the foundation of the defense. In 2026, the resupply without which the shield could not have functioned. At every decisive moment, what let Israel keep fighting was the supply of the United States. There is no chapter in which Israel stood alone and prevailed, because there is no chapter in which it stood alone at all. So why make the claim? Because it does work unrelated to its accuracy. To a domestic audience frightened by a patron making decisions over the head of Israel, it is a comfort. To the patron, it is a lever, a way of saying the client cannot be taken for granted. Its one function it cannot perform is the literal one. And the deepest reading turns it inside out: to declare you will stand alone, if forced to, is to concede that standing alone has become a real possibility. No leader secure in his alliance announces his readiness to do without it. The boast is not a sign of strength but a symptom of the fracture. When he says Israel will stand alone, he is not reporting a capacity. He is registering an anxiety, that the supply on which the state has always depended may no longer be assured, surfacing as bravado because it cannot be said plainly. The words are meant to suppress the fear. Instead they reveal it.

The pattern set in 1973 has never been broken, only confirmed, down to the interceptors flying off American production lines to refill a shield emptied in 2026. The state that says it will stand alone has never taken a single step alone. The boast and the record cannot both be believed, and the record is written in tonnage and dollars and the manifests of resupply, while the boast is written only in the air.

When a state insists most loudly that it can stand alone, what has just happened to make the insistence necessary?

Read the full analysis at fikr.institute:

https://fikr.institute/post.html...

Support independent geopolitical analysis. Help keep Fikr Institute running:

Website Support: https://fikr.institute/support.html

References:

1. Historical accounts of Operation Nickel Grass, the US emergency airlift to Israel during the October 1973 war; specific tonnage to be confirmed against primary sources before publication.

2. Analysis of the 2026 war on the continuous US resupply of interceptors and the multi-year stockpile rebuild, including Harvard Kennedy School and CNBC, April 2026.

#Israel #Netanyahu #1973 #YomKippurWar #NickelGrass #USIsrael #Dependency #Iran #Geopolitics #MilitaryAid #StandingAlone #MiddleEast #MuslimNations #Ummah

See less

 

Peter Thiel’s Pseudo Catholic Apocalypse: A leaked directory this week exposed Peter Thiel’s secret elite forum. The tech billionaire who lectures on the Antichrist is also the patron who led JD Vance into the Catholic Church.

Tech billionaire Peter Thiel is not a Catholic and does not claim to be one, but he is clearly obsessed with Catholicism.

On June 20 the Guardian’s Jason Wilson reported a leak that exposed the guest directory of Dialog, the invitation-only forum Thiel founded in 2006 and that critics set beside the Bilderberg Group. The list surfaced in the source code of Dialog’s own website, preserved in an Internet Archive snapshot and first flagged by a hacktivist on Bluesky. It gathered Elon Musk, senators of both parties, Trump cabinet officers, Gulf royals, the Federalist Society’s Leonard Leo, OpenAI’s president, and New York Times columnists.

The leak landed in the same season as Thiel’s other public turn, the one in which he lectures elite audiences on the Antichrist and warns that Armageddon is near. The two roles belong to one project. Thiel borrows the vocabulary of Catholic apocalypse to dignify a politics of power, and he has supplied that politics with a Catholic Vice President of his own making.

He calls himself a Christian of broadly Protestant background. He studied at Stanford under René Girard, the French literary theorist and Catholic convert whose theory of mimetic desire became Thiel’s master key to markets, rivalry, and now the end of the world. Over the past year Thiel has carried a traveling lecture series on the Antichrist from city to city -- four closed-door sessions in San Francisco in the fall of 2025, organized by the ACTS 17 Collective at the Commonwealth Club, then private talks in Paris reported by Le Monde and Politico, and in March 2026 a four-day series in Rome.

The Rome sessions ran invite-only, no recordings, no press. The Vincenzo Gioberti Cultural Association, tied to the Italian far right, organized them with the independent Cluny Institute and praised Thiel for the “courage and intellectual liberty” to discuss forces it described as bent on destroying what remains of the West.

Italian newspapers first reported the venue as the Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas -- the Angelicum, where the American-born Leo XIV once studied -- and the pontifical universities hurried to deny any role. In a parliamentary session, Italian lawmakers called Thiel’s ideas scandalous and demanded transparency about the government’s contracts with Palantir, the surveillance firm Thiel chairs. Voices close to Leo XIV called the content heretical.

A Protestant billionaire delivered a private theology of the last days a short walk from St. Peter’s Square, and the Catholic institutions of Rome backed away from the room.

Ross Douthat asked Thiel on a New York Times podcast what the Antichrist meant to him. Thiel answered, “How much time do we have?” His formula comes from Paul. The slogan of the Antichrist, Thiel says, is “peace and safety,” the phrase from First Thessalonians that arrives just before sudden destruction.

He draws the rest from an improbably assembled bookshelf: St. John Henry Newman’s apocalyptic sermons; Russian mystic Vladimir Soloviev’s A Short Story of the Anti-Christ — a 1900 tale of an Antichrist who presents himself as a humanitarian and a benefactor; German Nazi political philosopher Carl Schmitt’s katechon — the restrainer who holds back the end of the world and provides the only bridge between an eschatological paralysis of all human effort and great historical power like that of the early Christian Empire of the Germanic kings.

In Thiel’s telling, the Antichrist of this century wears the costume of a reassuring administrator who promises to end existential risk -- the regulator, the arms-control negotiator, the global-governance official, the precautionary state that slows the machines. Greta Thunberg serves as his recurring example. Thiel hands his audiences a choice between a one-world state under the Antichrist and an Armageddon if that project collapses.

His account of the Antichrist and his commercial interest run in the same direction. If safety is the slogan of the enemy, then the people who would slow artificial intelligence, audit Palantir, or restrain the surveillance frontier are doing the enemy’s work. The chairman of a surveillance company has produced an account of the end times in which restraint is the temptation and acceleration is the faithful act.

Thiel met JD Vance in 2011, when he spoke at Yale Law School and the future Vice President was a striving student from Ohio. Thiel handed him Girard. Vance has credited that encounter for his conversion, which he recounted in a 2020 essay, “How I Joined the Resistance.”

Girard was Catholic. Thiel is not. Vance became one. The line ran from the dead French Catholic to his Protestant student to the convert that student would fund into the United States Senate in 2022. Thiel is also credited with handing Vance the work of Carl Schmitt, the jurist who served the Nazi state and defined politics as the division of humanity into friend and enemy.

Girard exposed the scapegoat so that communities might stop sacrificing their victims, the crucified Christ being the innocent the civilization wronged. Critics who read Girard closely, among them the Jesuit commentators in Ireland who have tracked Vance’s turn, argue that he absorbed the mechanism and now works it -- defending the administration’s indictments, its deportations, and its lists of enemies. Thiel calls himself a Girardian while building a politics organized around the enemy: the woke, the climate activist, the globalist, the regulator. By that reading, both men took the anatomy of the scapegoat as an instruction manual.

He handles the other sources the same way. The katechon restrains the Antichrist and delays the end; Thiel reassigns it, treating the global order of safety and control as the danger and calling disruption the faithful answer. Paul’s “peace and safety” warns of false comfort on the edge of judgment; Thiel turns the phrase into the slogan of tyranny, which lets him brand AI safety, climate caution, and arms control as the devil’s work. He conscripts the texts rather than submitting to them.

The living Pope has answered the program directly. In his first apostolic exhortation, Dilexi te, Leo XIV condemned “ideologies that defend the absolute autonomy of the marketplace and financial speculation,” and he has denounced the inhuman treatment of immigrants in the United States. In April 2026, Vance -- the Catholic Thiel made -- told the Pope to be careful when he speaks about theology. The Church that received Vance now rebukes the agenda Thiel funds.

The fusion of maximal technology, friend-enemy politics, and Christian end-times language repeats a Weimar formula. The historian Jeffrey Herf called the pairing reactionary modernism, the embrace of the machine joined to a rejection of Enlightenment reason and liberal democracy, with Carl Schmitt among its theorists. Thiel revives it and routes Schmitt to the second-highest office in the country.

The faction is specific. Thiel, David Sacks, Marc Andreessen, Joe Lonsdale, and the Founders Fund orbit carry the technology side; Patrick Deneen, Adrian Vermeule, and the postliberal Catholics around Vance carry the religious one. The leaked Dialog list runs wider than that circle and older than Thiel’s turn to Trump. It holds Democrats who hurried to disown it -- Wes Moore, Cory Booker, and Jared Polis among them -- and writers with no stake in any of it. The argument is about Thiel’s faction, not Silicon Valley and not the American right.

He takes the categories -- Antichrist, katechon, the two cities of Augustine -- and the two-thousand-year vocabulary of cosmic struggle, and he leaves behind the magisterium that interprets them, the preferential option for the poor, and the Pope who is alive and disagreeing with him.

The forum the leak exposed is the material body of that vision. Dialog meets off the record under a confidentiality its members prize; Auren Hoffman chairs it, Raffi Grinberg directs it, and the group is building a permanent campus in the Washington suburbs. Wired’s account of the August retreat near Dublin listed sessions called “Navigating WWIII,” “Bring Back Nuclear,” and “Build-a-Cult.” Records released by the House oversight committee show Hoffman invited Jeffrey Epstein to the 2014 gathering, alongside Tony Blair and Hillary Clinton. Janine Wedel, who studies power elites at George Mason University, calls these closed forums “a problem for democracy,” the rooms where agendas get set past any vote the rest of us could cast.

The source Thiel cites describes a figure he seems unable to recognize. In Vladimir Soloviev’s tale, the Antichrist arrives as a benefactor and a peacemaker, a superman who ends scarcity, unites the world under a single government, wins the gratitude of nations, and convenes the churches to ask them to bow to him in exchange for everything they have wanted. That likeness fits the technologist who promises to cure death and administer the human future more closely than it fits an official asking for a safety review. Thiel drew a careful portrait of the Antichrist and addressed it to the wrong man.

Catholic social teaching levels a sharper charge than excess piety. The first commandment forbids the worship of substitutes, and a man who borrows God’s vocabulary to consecrate his own power has raised a god he can manage.

The borrowing does political work. Thiel funds the 2026 Republican campaigns, chairs a surveillance company that sells to governments, and has placed his protégé a step from the presidency. His apocalyptic story dignifies that power and brands the people Leo XIV defends, the migrant and the poor, as frightened masses who would trade their freedom for the Antichrist’s safety.

When he brought the performance to Rome, the Catholic institutions there heard him out and refused him the bow that Soloviev’s Antichrist demands of churches. The Church — and, we hope, most Catholics, can tell the difference between Thiel’s mashed-together distorted pseudo-religion for the real thing.

This post is also available on Substack: https://mikefoxcatechist.substack.com/.../peter-thiels...

See less