Pinned Tweet
Stella Adler, the famous acting coach, wanted more from a pupil, who was determined to play the role of Hamlet. She kept telling him, "Bigger! More! Hamlet is not a guy like you." He said, "Oh, you want larger than life?" She said, "Darling, there is nothing larger than life!" 🎭
Valus retweeted
47 Christians slaughtered by Islamists in Ethiopia.
The UN is silent.
The Left are silent.
Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens etc are silent.
Mainstream media is silent.
I will NEVER stay silent on the Christian genocide across Africa.
Valus retweeted
George Soros and the Open Society Foundations – The Capillary System.
Everyone says Soros this, Soros that. But how do they actually operate?
Most of the organizations we have described operate at the elite level – the meeting in Davos, the seminar and the committee in Brussels. The Open Society Foundations are different. They operate at every level simultaneously – from the supranational to the local, from the think tank to the street activist, from the Supreme Court brief to the district attorney election. The most complete political funding infrastructure ever built by a private individual.
Follow the money – most of it is hiding in plain sight.
Soros made his fortune speculating on national currencies – most famously breaking the British Pound in 1992. He used the proceeds to fund institutions that argue against national sovereignties, helping him make such operations. This is not irony. It is a business model. An arbitrage.
1. The mechanism is simple and almost elegant. You create a nicely named organization – an institute for open society, a foundation for democratic media, a center for justice reform. You seed it with ten million dollars of private money, enough to hire staff, produce reports, and establish credibility. Then, through the network of associates and ideologically aligned officials that decades of funding have placed inside governments and supranational bodies, you ensure that this private organization receives hundreds of millions in public funding – EU grants, USAID contracts, government subsidies. The private money creates the platform. The public hundreds of millions buy the reach. The taxpayer funds the project. The project serves the agenda.
A nice arbitrage again.
2. Let’s imagine in every country a main foundation operating as a buzzing corporate office — a headquarters — populated with people who know the agenda best and understand how it connects to the global program. Everyone comes there for instructions. Every smaller organization in the country — the migration NGO, the media fund, the arts prize committee — knows where to come for orientation, for funding, for the framing of the next campaign. It looks like a civil society hub. The people inside it may believe they are doing good. The architecture ensures that doing good means advancing the agenda.
3. The network controls the full loop. The think tank produces the paper. The advocacy group runs the campaign. The legal organization takes it to court. The media organization covers it favorably. The fact-checker delegitimizes the opposition. Each may look independent; the funding architecture connects them. The public annual reports list the grants and recipients. The architecture is not hidden. It is simply too layered for most people to read clearly.
4. The cultural layer is the most insidious. The network funds literary prizes that go to authors advancing the agenda. They fund film festivals, journalism awards, university chairs. None of this requires explicit editorial control. You don’t tell the prize committee who to select. You fund the prize committee. Over time the selection reflects the values of the funder.
5. In America, Soros-backed political groups have funded progressive prosecutors and district-attorney campaigns. The money is visible in campaign-finance records; the resulting policies are visible in the cities where they were implemented.
6. In Europe, the same architecture appears around migration: advocacy organizations, legal challenges, NGOs, political lobbying, and media narratives. The different pieces reinforce one another. One source. Every layer. Taxpayer money amplifying private money at every stage.
7. That is the capillary system: an ideological project reaching from elite institutions down into everyday life. The activist, journalist, lawyer, academic, official, and politician do not need to know one another or consciously share a master plan. Networks, institutions, and funding create the coordination.
The World Economic Forum – The People Who Decided They Should Run Everything.
Every year in January, the most important people in the world travel to Davos, Switzerland — a ski resort — to discuss the problems facing humanity. They arrive on private jets. They stay in five-star hotels. They are protected by five thousand soldiers and police. They eat very well. They talk about inequality, climate change, and the need for ordinary people to consume less. Then they fly home on private jets.
This is not satire. This is the schedule.
1. Klaus Schwab founded the World Economic Forum in 1971 – a German professor who decided that the solution to the world’s problems was to get the people who ran the world’s largest corporations into a room with the people who ran the world’s governments, and have them agree on things before anyone elected them to agree on things. If you control the conversation before the democratic process begins, you control the outcome without being subject to it. Davos is where the agenda is set. Everything after is implementation.
2. The Young Global Leaders program is the masterpiece. Founded in 2004, with its predecessor, Global Leaders for Tomorrow, running since 1993. Together the programs have formed: Justin Trudeau, Emmanuel Macron, Jacinda Ardern, Mark Zuckerberg, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, Angela Merkel, and the health ministers who designed most of the Western world’s COVID response. The pipeline runs continuously. The list is published on the WEF website. This is not a conspiracy theory. It is an alumni directory.
3. The program works because it operates before power, not after. By the time a Young Global Leader becomes a prime minister or finance minister, they have already spent years in the same rooms, sharing the same assumptions, networking with the same people. They don’t need to be told what to do. They already know – because they were formed together, in Davos, before anyone gave them the job. The Fabian Society permeates institutions over generations. The WEF does it in a long weekend, with better catering.
4. The Great Reset — announced in 2020 with timing that should give everyone pause — is the program stated plainly. "You will own nothing and you will be happy." Build Back Better. The Fourth Industrial Revolution. The language is always the language of inevitability: this is happening, the question is only how to manage it. The managed future, designed by the people in the ski resort, for the people who were not invited.
5. The irony is structural. The people most loudly "concerned about inequality" meet in one of the most expensive places on earth. Those most "concerned about climate change" arrive by private jet. Those most "concerned about democracy" design systems insulating them from democratic accountability. The gap between the speech and the life is visible from orbit. They don’t notice it. Or they notice and calculate, correctly, that nobody who matters will say so.
6. What Davos actually produces is "consensus" – the consensus of people who have implicitly agreed before arriving, because people who disagree don’t get invited. Climate policy, AI regulation, tax harmonization, digital currency – these are not debated at Davos. They are shaped there. The debate happens later, when implementation is already underway.
7. The Young Global Leaders are the tell. A program that identifies, selects, and forms the next generation of leaders before they become leaders is not a networking event. It is a formation pipeline. The Jesuits understood that if you form a person before they have power, you own what they do with the power. The WEF understood the same thing and built it into a global institution.
The question is simple:
Who decided Klaus Schwab should select the world’s next generation of leaders?
Nobody.
He just started doing it.
And the people who run things let him – because increasingly, the people who run things were people he had already formed.
Did you choose them?
Valus retweeted
Replying to @ChuckieFFS
You absolute midwit. Congrats on repeating the Wikipedia "Nazis were far-right, end of story" summary you absorbed between TikToks.
Yes, the Nazis crushed independent unions, jailed and murdered communists and social democrats, and Hitler liquidated the Strasserite "left" wing of his own party in the Night of the Long Knives. That part is not in dispute. They were not Marxist class-struggle socialists. They hated Bolshevism as a Jewish plot and treated international socialism as the main enemy. Fine.
What your middle-school history class skipped is that they still ran a National *Socialist* state: private property existed only as long as it served the Führer’s racial and war goals, wages and prices were controlled, industry was cartelized under state direction, profit was subordinated to the party, and the economy was planned for autarky and rearmament. That is not free-market capitalism, liberal conservatism, or classical right-wing economics. It is the same family of state-directed, anti-liberal, collectivist economics practiced by every other fascist and "national socialist" regime. The name was not a prank; the 25-point program and the early rhetoric were full of anti-capitalist planks precisely because they were competing with the actual socialists for working-class support.
Your North Korea comparison is the usual gotcha and it is only half-clever. Yes, names can lie. But the NSDAP did not merely call itself socialist while secretly running a Rothschild hedge fund. They nationalized, directed, rationed, and regimented. The difference from Soviet socialism was mainly that the Nazis kept the owners as managers under party orders instead of shooting them all and installing commissars. Both systems produced shortages, secret police, and mass graves; one just had better uniforms and Wagner.
Elon pointing out the obvious—that "National Socialist" is not an ironic branding exercise and that the regime was economically left of any classical liberal or conservative—does not make him a moron. It makes him less obedient to the post-1945 academic consensus that insists every totalitarian who isn’t a full Marxist must be filed under "far-right" so the left never has to share the body count. Money didn’t buy him a brain; it just bought him a platform where he doesn’t have to pretend your selective reading of 1930s Germany is the complete picture.
Keep yelling "far-right fascists" while ignoring the actual economic policies and the party’s own name. It is the historical equivalent of covering your ears and shouting.
“In the mirrors of the many judgments, my hands are the color of blood. I sometimes fancy myself an evil which exists to oppose other evils; and on that great Day of which the prophets speak but in which they do not truly believe, on the day the world is utterly cleansed of evil, then I too will go down into darkness, swallowing curses. Until then, I will not wash my hands nor let them hang useless.”
― Roger Zelazny, The Guns of Avalon
Valus retweeted
I can’t believe this but I gotta do it. I never wanna hear MAGA NURSES CAN’T BE NURSES. The shit I hear from liberal nurses is beyond unprofessional. I hope this nurse learns from this report I’m about to make on her. I’m just glad I stepped in and helped the patient who was attacked by 2 random people.
Valus retweeted
WOW: Political ad GENIUS
“We’re just people experiencing voting Republican”
This is how you bridge the gap.
This is how you reach people’s hearts.
Valus retweeted
Ilhan's family had to flee Africa because her father ran the brutal dictatorship in Somalia as a colonel overseeing outrageous atrocities. They weren't fleeing oppression. They WERE the oppression. She brought those good ol' Mogadishu family values to Minnesota.
EXCLUSIVE: Senior U.S. officials tell @Newsmax the federal probe into the mysterious past of @Ilhan Omar is being driven by the Human Rights Violators and War Crimes Unit (HRVWCU) @DHSgov, and that investigators are examining whether Omar's father committed war crimes in his native Somalia. Tune into NEWSMAX starting at noon ET for more of my reporting.
Valus retweeted
I’ve had about 10% the number of his and eventually you just become in a zen like state. If you want to change the world, you’re in the litigation business.
Most people will privately confess to me they’re scared to death of the lawsuits.
But any actual effective social change leads to litigation. Taking on fraud also leads to litigation. When you expose people or take their money away they sue you. They’ll even try changing laws to stop you.
Literally anything worth doing will lead to dozens of lawsuits.
Valus retweeted
When I say that women lack the concept of an honorable enemy, this is what I’m talking about.
Obviously a lot of the Democrats’ new vindictiveness is Trump derangement, but the Great Feminization is part of the story, too.
Men understand that the other guy is a professional just like me, and we should have an open fight by fair rules and both go home at the end of the day.
For women, conflict isn’t over until the other side is gone and they never have to talk to them again.
Men believe in hierarchy, so a fight is about establishing dominance within the hierarchy and making the other guy subordinate.
Women don’t, everything is egalitarian and consensus-driven, so if you do get conflict, the only possible outcome is total exclusion from the group.
It makes sense that the Democratic Party is abandoning old-fashioned ideas about honorable conflict as it becomes more dominated by women.
ON UCHICAGO CAMPUS: U.S. Senator from Michigan Elissa Slotkin hopes planned political prosecutions of republican leaders will scare young conservatives from getting involved in politics.
@ElissaSlotkin
Valus retweeted
Researching and writing my new book, The Zizians, nearly broke me.
The subject matter is dark, cruel and violent. And as I uncovered what happened, I saw how easy it was for the members to use accusations of transphobia to get courts, judges, police and others to freeze up, buying them time to plan their next act of violence.
The eight deaths could have been prevented.
I spoke with @RubinReport:
Valus retweeted
I don't think people fully understand just how magical the Malfoid Movement really is, especially for those on the right.
Think about it. For the last 10–20 years or so, whenever people tried to argue that the right still had some degree of cultural influence, what examples did they usually bring up?
Almost always The Lord of the Rings, and only in the last decade or so has anime become another common example. And I understand why. A lot of anime still embraces relatively wholesome themes and values that are familiar to Western audiences, such as chivalry, honor, loyalty, sacrifice, and traditional romance.
But that's the problem. It's still Japanese culture at the end of the day.
These works are written by Japanese authors, in Japanese, and primarily for Japanese audiences. Yes, many are inspired by Western culture, and some even borrow heavily from European history, mythology, and literature. But inspiration is not the same as cultural origin. You can certainly appreciate these works for their values, but trying to claim them as achievements of Western culture is rather silly when they were ultimately created within a completely different cultural environment. A Confucian environment =/= a Western environment, despite the similarities.
Unlike anime, the entire foundation of Malfoid is Harry Potter, a work deeply rooted in British and broader European culture. The boarding schools, aristocratic families, castles, folklore, social hierarchies, and even the general atmosphere of the wizarding world are all drawn from that cultural background. And regardless of what J.K. Rowling says or believes today, the fact remains that she is a British author who was born and raised within that Anglo cultural tradition. There is no need to awkwardly attribute Western cultural influences to something that was created outside of it. Those influences are already present in the original work. Just look at the Basilisk, Albus Dumbledore acting as a Merlin figure, the use of Latin, and so on. There's no awkward reinterpretation of these elements as "Kuro Ryuu" or "Kaze Ryuu." They're presented directly as what they are, like the Basilisk itself.
Now, what makes the Malfoid Movement particularly remarkable is that people are taking this existing foundation and actually creating something new from it.
And I think this is something that a lot of people, especially those who spend their time complaining about the decline of Western culture, fail to understand.
There is a fundamental difference between consuming culture and creating culture. For years, people have been pointing toward Tolkien, or more recently anime, as examples of the values and storytelling they wish were more common. But pointing toward an established masterpiece and praising it is not the same as producing and creating something yourself.
With Malfoid, however, we are seeing ordinary people create artwork, fanfiction, character interpretations, and entire romantic narratives within an existing Western literary universe.
There was no political organization behind it, no corporate campaign, and no grand attempt to manufacture some kind of cultural revival. People simply liked the idea and started creating.
And there's another aspect of this movement that I find particularly interesting, Harry Potter was originally written in English.
Seriously, can any of you imagine what would have happened if Harry Potter had originally been a Japanese LN? Before the movement could even gain momentum, we'd probably already be bombarded with localizers and self-appointed "cultural interpreters" arguing about what the author actually meant, whether the fans understood the original text, and why certain interpretations were supposedly wrong.
But Harry Potter is different, since it was written in the modern lingua franca. English-speaking fans can read the original work directly, without having to rely on a translation or somebody else's interpretation of what the author supposedly intended. Of course, people can still argue about the meaning of the story, but at least there is no language barrier separating the audience from the original text.
But going back to my original point, what makes this entire movement so remarkable is that it represents something people have been complaining about for years without necessarily recognizing it when it finally appears.
For the last two decades, we've heard endless arguments about the decline of Western creativity, the disappearance of traditional romance, and the supposed inability of modern audiences to produce anything worthwhile. And yet, here we are, witnessing thousands of people enthusiastically creating new stories and artwork based on a Western literary work. So I seriously doubt that most of the naysayers complaining about Malfoid even understand what the movement represents in the first place. And that's why I keep saying that Malfoid is bigger than all of them.
It's bigger than some niche, snobbish author trying to lecture everyone about what constitutes good literature.
It's bigger than these politically addicted commentators who seemingly cannot look at anything without turning it into another culture-war clickbait.
And it's certainly bigger than the divide between the left and the right.
Because what we're witnessing here, at least to me, is something far more interesting. I would go so far as to argue that the Malfoid Movement is an outward expression of the creative spirit of Western youth. People from different Western countries, different culture backgrounds, and entirely different walks of life are coming together to create something simply because they find it beautiful, romantic, or interesting. They aren't waiting for some established literary authority to tell them whether their ideas are worthwhile. They're simply putting those ideas into the world and allowing others to build upon them.
And isn't that what culture is supposed to be?
Not something permanently confined to a handful of established masterpieces, nor something that belongs exclusively to one political faction, but a living tradition that ordinary people continuously contribute to.
Culture doesn't survive simply because people keep pointing toward the achievements of previous generations. It survives because new generations continue to engage with it, reinterpret it, and eventually contribute something of their own!
The next genuinely great work to emerge from this movement might already be getting written right now. Whether it becomes a classic is something only time can tell, but the creative potential is certainly there.
That's why I find it so embarrassing when people who constantly talk about defending culture turn around and dismiss the very people who are actively participating in it. You cannot spend years complaining that nobody creates anything worthwhile anymore, only to ridicule people the moment they actually start creating.
At some point, you have to ask yourself whether these people genuinely care about culture, or whether they simply enjoy complaining about its decline.
The Malfoid Movement is bigger than any single right-wing movement could ever hope to be.
It's grown so large that it transcends language barriers. I've seen Japanese and Chinese people reading my stuff, liking it, and interacting with it. And that's not even mentioning the unimaginable amount of talent that's been working around the clock for the past few weeks, creating art, music, stories, and everything in between. It's a massive outpouring of creativity on a scale that the right could only dream of achieving.
And to dismiss all of that as just "genderbender Tumblr" stuff is the clearest example of why the right keeps fumbling and losing to the left. You'd think any united right-wing movement, or really any political movement with some common sense, would recognize the potential here and try to steer that cultural momentum in its own direction. Instead, all we get is this endless longhouse-esque nagging.
And honestly, this is one of the reasons I've become so much less attached to the modern right and more interested in traditional values, particularly those associated with the aristocracy. Because I've come to realize that there are genuinely beautiful, timeless values worth preserving in those traditions, while so much of the modern right and its influencers are just charlatans who have nothing meaningful to offer.
Frankly, they're a waste of time.
Valus retweeted
This right here is what paid propaganda looks like
Democrat influencers are make videos using the exact same script, word for word, targeting Elon Musk saying he’s buying the midterms elections
Again, WORD FOR WORD. All Democrats have is paid propaganda. They rely on people believing their paid propagandists reading scripts for money
Valus retweeted
Let’s be clear:
If I’m not going to sleep with you, I don’t need to know anything about your sexuality.
And children—who are not going to sleep with anyone—certainly don’t.
Your sexuality is not sacred. It’s not a personality, it’s not a protected class of performance art, and it’s not the center of anyone’s moral universe but your own. Unless we are in a relationship, I am not obligated to acknowledge, affirm, or be exposed to your private desires—especially not in public, and especially not in front of children.
This used to be understood. Now it’s called hate.
No, We Don’t Owe You an Audience
Sexuality belongs in the private realm. It is intimate by definition. If you feel compelled to wear your kink on your sleeve—or on a float, or in a first-grade classroom—you are not inviting understanding, you are demanding submission. You are violating others’ right not to participate.
Consent doesn’t vanish because your fetish is “progressive.” If anything, the burden is higher.
No one consents to being flashed on the subway. No one consents to a stranger’s arousal. No one consents to a stranger telling their child about masturbation, kink, gender identity, or pornographic categories under the guise of “inclusive sex ed.” Yet all of this is happening now—in public parks, in classrooms, in televised programming.
It is not tolerance. It is invasion.
Children Are Not Here to Validate You
Children are not queer. Children are not sexual. Children do not need to “see themselves represented” in a spectrum of adult desire. This idea—that identity is only valid if sexualized and mirrored—is narcissism, not pedagogy.
There is no legitimate reason to initiate a child into the language of sexual preference, gender identity, or alternative lifestyles. The only people who benefit from that dynamic are those looking to normalize boundary violations.
Let me state it plainly:
Children who are not going to have sex do not need to be exposed to sexuality.
Period.
Any adult who insists otherwise is not confused. They are grooming.
Public Fetishism Is Not Liberation
There is a vast difference between being gay and demanding the right to simulate sex acts in front of children. Between being transgender and insisting on teaching kindergartners about breast removal. Between being proud of who you are and insisting the whole world observe your kink play in the street.
This is not diversity. This is decay.
Men in dog masks being walked on leashes by their lovers are not brave—they are forcing strangers into their psychodrama. This is exhibitionism, and when children are present, it becomes criminal exhibitionism.
We used to know this. Peeping, flashing, voyeurism—these were considered red flags. Dangerous behaviors. Early signs of escalation. Now they’re filmed, hashtagged, and funded by public grants.
Stop Calling It Love—It’s Entitlement
This is not about who you love. It’s about how you demand to be seen. If you need the entire public to witness, applaud, and adapt to your sexuality, you’re not a pioneer—you’re an emotional colonizer.
Love does not demand a captive audience. It does not parade past toddlers. It does not demand that schools teach four-year-olds about “preferred pronouns.” Love protects children. Love guards modesty. Love waits.
And if you can’t wait—if you need to be seen, affirmed, and obeyed—you’re not talking about love. You’re talking about power.
Consent Applies to Culture, Too
We teach children that consent is sacred—so why are we failing to apply that lesson to public life?
No child consents to drag queen story hour.
No parent consents to leather harnesses on city floats.
No woman consents to being exposed to male sexuality in the ladies’ room, or in the school library, or anywhere she cannot opt out.
Consent is not just for sex. It’s for everything.
Attention. Language. Presence. Ideology. Imagery.
And we are done pretending we don’t notice when it’s violated.
The boundary is back.
And we are drawing it in bold.
Valus retweeted
Every time I write about my interactions with Muslims, some people say I make these conversations up to sell my book.
Well, this time, as usual, I decided to have a conversation with a random Muslim Uber driver in Manhatten, who is not an “Islamist,” just a normal Muslim, and show you what any honest Muslim who is not trying to deceive you or whitewash Islam believes.
Watch until the end, because what he says in the last 20 seconds is the most important part.
As I always tell you, Islam is a state that has a religion. That state has a constitution called Sharia, a foreign-policy doctrine called jihad, and frontiers that are always expanding.
All Muslims must believe that Islam will eventually rule the world because that is what Allah and Muhammad said, and all Muslims must support this endeavor whether by hand, tongue, or heart.
There is no such thing as Islamism. It is a Western construct used to whitewash Islam.
The so-called moderate Muslims represent Islam just as much as a porn star wearing a cross necklace represents Christianity.
Just know that if you vote for a Muslim for public office, then you are likely voting for someone who is on a mission to see Islam rule this country.




























