Sabitlenmiş Tweet
If you learn nothing else in this world, learn to follow the money.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based
5.3K posts
🇺🇸 Left Based
@LeftBased
Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me. - A. Solzhenitsyn Ephesians 6:12 I follow back.
Katılım Şubat 2021
1.3K Takip Edilen185 Takipçiler
@StephenSayler @aakashgupta No wonder 2024 seemed to go by so fast.
English
@aakashgupta great post. Quick question on this statement: "In 2024 alone, 28 shut down. One per week."
Should that be one shut down every ~2 weeks?
English
Universities had 17 years of warning. They responded by doing the opposite of what the math demanded.
In 2008, American birth rates fell off a cliff. The Great Recession made people stop having kids. Those never-born children would be turning 18 right now. The number of U.S. high school graduates peaked at roughly 3.9 million in 2025. By 2029, that number drops 15%. By 2041, it drops by nearly half a million students per year.
Every school in this tweet had access to the same Census data. They all saw the same curve.
Administrative positions at U.S. colleges grew 60% between 1993 and 2009, ten times the rate of tenured faculty growth. Non-instructional spending (student services, administration) grew 29% from 2010 to 2018. Instructional spending grew 17%. Average tuition at public four-year schools went from $3,500 in 2000 to $10,560 in 2023. Yale now has more administrators than undergraduate students. 5,460 administrators for fewer than 5,000 undergrads.
They built the cost structure of a growth company on top of a customer base that was mathematically guaranteed to shrink.
The split in this data tells you everything. Clemson, Syracuse, Duke, UNC, and Indiana are all cutting because the model broke. Alabama, Ole Miss, and the University of Florida are turning away more applicants than ever. Harvard gets five applications for every spot. The middle is where the cliff hits. Elite schools absorb demand. Everyone between elite and community college fights over a shrinking pool. The Fed published a study in December 2024 predicting 80 colleges will close in the next five years. Since 2016, over 100 already have. In 2024 alone, 28 shut down. One per week.
These program cuts and layoffs are a decade late. The birth rate data was sitting in Census spreadsheets the entire time. Everyone in higher education administration saw the enrollment cliff coming. They hired more administrators anyway.
Anthony Bradley@drantbradley
Clemson is $1.5B in debt. Syracuse is closing or pausing 93 programs, UNC-Chapel Hill plans to cut spending by $89M over 3 years. Duke recently let 600 employees go in a $350M budget cut. Indiana public colleges announced a plan to eliminate or merge 580 programs statewide.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
This real-time 1948 article from The Economist completely destroys the modern “Nakba” narrative that was invented decades later as political propaganda.
Straight from British eyewitnesses in Haifa, October 2, 1948:
“Jewish authorities urged all Arabs to remain in Haifa and guaranteed them protection and security ... However, of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in Haifa, not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained.
The most potent factor was the announcements made over the air by the Arab Higher Executive, urging the Arabs to quit ... those who remained and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.”
They didn’t flee because of “Zionist ethnic cleansing.”
They fled because Arab leaders ordered them to get out of the way so their armies could “drive the Jews into the sea.”
Then they lost the war they started — and spent the next 77 years rewriting history to blame the Jews.
The “Nakba” you were taught? Pure revisionist fiction.
Captain Allen@CptAllenHistory
The word “Nakba” (catastrophe) wasn’t invented by Palestinians to describe Jewish “ethnic cleansing.” It was coined in 1948 by a Syrian Arab historian, Constantin Zureiq, in his book The Meaning of the Disaster. He used it to describe the humiliating failure of the Arab world — their leaders’ arrogance, their lies to their own people, their military incompetence, and their refusal to accept a Jewish state. Zureiq wrote that the Arabs had “imaginary victories” and put their public “to sleep” with boasts — until the real disaster hit: they couldn’t wipe out the Jews. The original Nakba wasn’t about refugees. That a rebrand from several decades later. It was about the Arab leaders’ catastrophic decision to launch a war of extermination ... and lose. They’ve spent 77 years rebranding their own failure as Jewish guilt. That’s the only real "Nakba" they can’t forgive.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
Aujourd'hui je déconstruis la déconstruction.
La déconstruction est le virus mental le plus efficace jamais conçu contre une civilisation. Il a été fabriqué en France entre 1966 et 1980 par trois hommes : Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze. Il a été exporté aux États-Unis, hybridé avec le puritanisme racial américain, et il est revenu trente ans plus tard sous le nom de wokisme paralyser l'Occident entier. Voici comment il fonctionne, et pourquoi il faut le détruire.
La thèse est simple. Toute vérité n'est qu'un rapport de pouvoir déguisé. Tout texte sacré, toute loi, toute science, toute norme, toute hiérarchie, toute identité, toute institution cache en réalité une domination. Déconstruire, c'est montrer le rapport de force sous le vernis du vrai. C'est arracher le masque. C'est "démasquer".
Formulé comme ça, ça paraît inoffensif. Voire utile. Qui n'aime pas un peu d'esprit critique ? Le piège est là. La déconstruction se présente comme une méthode. Elle est en réalité une ontologie. Elle ne dit pas seulement "interrogeons les normes", elle dit "il n'y a *que* des rapports de pouvoir". La différence est civilisationnelle.
Une société qui interroge ses normes reste debout. Une société qui croit que ses normes ne sont *rien d'autre* que de la domination s'effondre. Parce qu'elle ne peut plus rien défendre. Plus une frontière, plus une loi, plus une science, plus une langue, plus une histoire, plus une biologie, plus une famille. Tout devient suspect. Tout devient négociable. Tout devient "construit donc déconstructible".
C'est la première raison pour laquelle c'est un virus. Il s'auto-réplique. Une fois inoculé, il transforme tout ce qu'il touche en cible. La science est patriarcale, donc déconstruisons-la. Le langage est colonial, donc réinventons-le. La méritocratie est raciste, donc abolissons-la. Le sexe est une construction, donc choisissons-le. Il n'y a plus de roc. Tout est sable.
Deuxième raison. Le virus est *non-falsifiable*. Si vous défendez une norme, c'est que vous êtes l'oppresseur. Si vous niez être oppresseur, c'est la preuve de votre privilège inconscient. Si vous citez des faits, vos faits sont contaminés par le pouvoir qui les a produits. Si vous citez la raison, la raison elle-même est blanche, masculine, occidentale. Il n'y a aucune sortie possible. Le système est conçu pour rendre toute objection irrecevable par définition.
C'est exactement la structure d'une secte. Et c'est exactement ce qui s'est installé dans les universités, les RH, les médias, les administrations, les conseils d'administration depuis vingt ans.
Troisième raison. Le virus s'auto-réfute mais ne s'auto-détruit pas. Si toute vérité est pouvoir, alors la phrase "toute vérité est pouvoir" est elle-même du pouvoir, donc sans valeur. Logiquement, la déconstruction se mord la queue dès la première phrase. Mais elle s'en moque. Parce qu'elle n'a jamais cherché la cohérence. Elle cherche l'efficacité politique. Et son efficacité politique est immense. Elle désarme ses ennemis et arme ses militants. Elle paralyse le défenseur et libère l'attaquant. C'est une arme asymétrique parfaite.
Quatrième raison. Le virus produit des humains diminués. Une génération entière a appris à déconstruire et n'a jamais appris à construire. Elle sait soupçonner, jamais admirer. Elle voit le pouvoir partout et la beauté nulle part. Elle peut produire mille pages sur le caractère opprimant de Shakespeare et zéro ligne qui vaille la peine d'être lue dans cent ans. Elle a confondu l'intelligence critique avec la pose critique. Elle est stérile par construction. Un esprit nourri à la déconstruction est un esprit qui ne sait plus rien édifier.
Cinquième raison, la plus grave. Une civilisation se tient debout sur trois piliers. La croyance qu'une vérité est accessible à la raison. La croyance qu'un bien se distingue d'un mal. La croyance qu'un héritage mérite d'être transmis. La déconstruction a méthodiquement dynamité les trois. Pas par méchanceté. Par jeu intellectuel, par fascination du soupçon, par haine de la bourgeoisie qui avait nourri ses prophètes. Mais le résultat est là. Une civilisation qui ne croit plus en sa vérité, ni en son bien, ni en son héritage ne se défend pas. Elle s'excuse en attendant la fin.
Voilà ce qu'on a fait. Voilà ce qu'il faut nommer.
La bonne nouvelle, c'est qu'un virus mental ne survit que tant qu'on lui cède l'autorité du discours. Il meurt dès qu'on cesse de jouer son jeu. Dès qu'on réaffirme tranquillement qu'il existe une vérité, un beau, un bien, un héritage. Dès qu'on cesse de demander la permission aux déconstructeurs pour bâtir. Dès qu'on refait. Dès qu'on transmet. Dès qu'on crée.
Les bâtisseurs ont toujours le dernier mot sur les commentateurs. Toujours. Parce qu'à la fin il reste ce qui est construit, et rien de ce qui a été déconstruit.
Alors aujourd'hui je déconstruis la déconstruction. Et demain je construis.
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael
Je veux présenter mes excuses, au nom des Français, pour avoir enfanté la French Theory (qui a enfanté la pire des merdes idéologiques : le wokisme). Nous avons donné au monde Descartes, Pascal, Tocqueville. Et puis, dans les ruines intellectuelles de l'après-68, nous avons donné Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze. Trois hommes brillants qui ont fabriqué, dans l'élégance de notre langue, l'arme idéologique qui paralyse aujourd'hui l'Occident. Il faut comprendre ce qu'ils ont fait. Foucault a enseigné que la vérité n'existe pas, qu'il n'y a que des rapports de pouvoir déguisés en savoir. Que la science, la raison, la justice, l'institution médicale, l'école, la prison, la sexualité, tout n'est qu'une mise en scène de la domination. Derrida a enseigné que les textes n'ont pas de sens stable, que tout signifiant glisse, que toute lecture est une trahison, que l'auteur est mort et que le lecteur règne. Deleuze a enseigné qu'il fallait préférer le rhizome à l'arbre, le nomade au sédentaire, le désir à la loi, le devenir à l'être, la différence à l'identité. Pris isolément, ce sont des thèses discutables. Combinées, exportées, vulgarisées, elles forment un système. Et ce système est un poison. Car voici ce qui s'est passé. Ces textes, illisibles en France, ont traversé l'Atlantique. Les départements de Yale, de Berkeley, de Columbia les ont absorbés dans les années 80. Ils y ont trouvé un terreau qui n'existait pas chez nous : le puritanisme américain, sa culpabilité raciale, son obsession identitaire. La French Theory s'est mariée à ce substrat, et l'enfant de ce mariage s'appelle le wokisme. Judith Butler lit Foucault et invente le genre performatif. Edward Said lit Foucault et invente le post-colonialisme académique. Kimberlé Crenshaw hérite du cadre et invente l'intersectionnalité. À chaque étape, la matrice est française : il n'y a pas de vérité, il n'y a que du pouvoir, donc toute hiérarchie est suspecte, toute institution est oppressive, toute norme est violence, toute identité est construite donc négociable, toute majorité est coupable. Voilà comment trois philosophes parisiens, qui n'ont probablement jamais imaginé leurs conséquences pratiques, ont fourni le logiciel d'exploitation à une génération entière d'activistes, de bureaucrates universitaires, de DRH, de journalistes, de législateurs. Voilà comment on a obtenu une civilisation qui ne sait plus dire si une femme est une femme, si sa propre histoire mérite d'être défendue, si le mérite existe, si la vérité se distingue de l'opinion. C'est de la merde pour une raison simple, et il faut la dire calmement. Une civilisation se tient debout sur trois piliers : la croyance qu'il existe une vérité accessible à la raison, la croyance qu'il existe un bien distinct du mal, la croyance qu'il existe un héritage à transmettre. La French Theory a entrepris de dynamiter les trois. Pas par méchanceté. Par jeu intellectuel, par fascination du soupçon, par haine de la bourgeoisie qui les avait nourris. Mais le résultat est là. Une génération entière a appris à déconstruire et n'a jamais appris à construire. Une génération entière sait soupçonner et ne sait plus admirer. Une génération entière voit le pouvoir partout et la beauté nulle part. Je m'excuse parce que nous, Français, avons une responsabilité particulière. C'est notre langue, nos universités, nos éditeurs, notre prestige qui ont donné à ce nihilisme son emballage chic. Sans la légitimité de la Sorbonne et de Vincennes, ces idées n'auraient jamais traversé l'océan. Nous avons exporté le doute comme d'autres exportent des armes. Ce qui se construit maintenant, en silicon valley, dans les labos d'IA, dans les startups, dans les ateliers, dans tous les lieux où des gens fabriquent encore des choses au lieu de les déconstruire, c'est la réponse. Une civilisation se reconstruit par les bâtisseurs, pas par les commentateurs. Par ceux qui croient que la vérité existe et qu'elle vaut qu'on s'y consacre. Par ceux qui assument une hiérarchie du beau, du vrai, du bon, et qui n'ont pas honte de la transmettre. Alors pardon. Et au travail.
Français
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
This obsession with the genetic fallacy is also what lies behind their obsession with censorship and deplatforming. It never occurs to them that people can infer things from observation; all thought has an exterior origin, because they themselves have no independent interiority. Thus their epistemology becomes a subset of epidemiology: you don't "refute" ideas, you "prevent them from spreading". In practice this simply results in ensouled people becoming enraged as they all have the same experience of being silenced for independently drawing similar conclusions from the same data. It's a total failure of theory of mind arising from the absence in libs of anything but hivemind.
Auldluð@oldluth
Midwits ask "where is this coming from" instead of "is this true" because they are inherently suspicious of any thought emerging from individual intelligent minds rather than from the prevailing social consensus.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
The assumption of “putting yourself in someone else’s place” is that it will create sympathy. But I’ve been poor, struggled with mental health issues, etc. I never started robbing stores or punching random grandmas. When I imagine the edits to my psychology I’d have to make to get to those behaviors, it makes me less sympathetic, not more.
The proponents of “empathy” engage in no such thing. They do not realistically model the psychologies of the most dysfunctional people in society. Rather, they tell themselves a little fable totally unrelated to other people’s actual minds, feel an emotion in response, then congratulate themselves for this solipsistic exercise and vote to give away other people’s money.
“Do unto others and you would have them do unto you.” What I want done unto me is to be held to a fair, uniform standard of self-reliance and good conduct. And that is what I do unto them.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
When it comes to billionaires my take is the opposite of Leftists:
Billionaires SHOULD consume all their wealth: megayachts, English castles, mountains of cocaine, own a dozen homes and 30 cars - do it! Spend it all!
The worst thing that can happen is for a billionaire to try to ‘do good in the world’ and shovel money to NGOs for some cause they get excited about. That’s the worst thing that can happen. Charitable donations should be taxed at 500%. A billionaire’s lavish lifestyle poses no threat to me but their misguided ‘good intent’ is absolutely cancerous and potentially civilization ending.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
@FREAKMMA1 I am convinced that gratitude is the fundamental right-wing emotion just as envy is the fundamental left-wing emotion.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
Republicans in the former Confederate states keep nominating black candidates who the white Democrats keep voting against. The racism is not on the GOP side.
Chris Towler@blkprofcct
The fact that almost EVERY former confederate state is moving to completely eliminate Black representatives almost immediately after the SCOTUS decision should be more than enough proof that voting rights still need protection and racism is far from gone in this country.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
Anyone using the goofy phrase “late-stage capitalism” should be required to explain what happens in late-stage socialism and late-stage communism.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
Nice mask-off moment.
Your Smart, Reasonable Centrists, sir.
Explicitly says he doesn’t care about legal reasoning and that the courts should act on behalf of partisan interests.
As has been said before, they’re all spiritual Leftists.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
That voice coming out of AOC’s mouth when she says, “you can’t earn a billion dollars” is familiar. I know it’s a very old voice, but it’s sadly still very strong & it should be familiar to you too.
It’s the voice of Cain… just before he killed his brother.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
People haven’t lost trust in “science,” they’ve lost trust in a self-selected self-perpetuating academic priest class who rely on constant alarmism or revisionism to secure funding and who look upon dissent as heretical to an extent that would make the medieval church blush.
Simon Maechling@simonmaechling
The collapse of trust in science is going to go down in history as one of the most sad, bizarre, and destructive social contagions of modern times. We fed billions, cured diseases and powered nations - yet people ran toward conspiracies instead.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
I’ll never understand why libs went after normie Republicans so hard (eg Romney in 2012, the SPLC going after milquetoast pro life groups, etc.).
Libs had a defanged, captured opposition who were happy going 60mph in the same direction the Left was heading towards at 90 mph and who just wanted things to be a little more ‘free market.’
Libs should have buttressed Chamber-of-Commerce Republicans. That they didn’t and instead tried to anathematize them was a generational political error.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
When you realize that performative online leftism is largely a response to being downwardly mobile, things start to make more sense. This person has no future and little earnings so she finds meaning in anti-western and anti-capitalist activism.
free palestine 🇵🇸@eclairification
the federal minimum wage is still 7.25. I am 34 and have never made more than 20k/yr, rarely more than 15. it’s really important that i, as a working person oppressed by capitalism, follow news and politics coverage written by people paid 6 figures to live in the culture city.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
Yesterday I argued race-based districts inflame segregation but I think the deeper question is one nobody in the civil-rights establishment wants asked.
What did those guaranteed seats actually deliver during the past 60 years in Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis, Memphis, Detroit, Philadelphia, and Cleveland?
The same cities, decade after decade, anchored by the safest minority Democratic seats in the country.
Look at the schools, the murder rates, the median household wealth of the constituents those seats were designed to protect. Look at how many of those incumbents have ever faced a serious primary, let alone a competitive general.
The seats were always safe, unlike the neighborhoods they represented.
A guaranteed seat with no competition produces a representative with no incentive to deliver anything beyond the performative grievance that the district expects.
The strongest argument for what the Court did this week is not legal but ethical: that the people those districts were drawn to "protect" have the least to show for 60 years of protection.
John Tillman@JohnMTillman
Today's Supreme Court decision on race-based redistricting is bigger than people even realize. I've watched this play out for two decades, mostly in Chicago. The argument for race-based districts was always that they protect minority representation. What they've actually done is inflame segregation, and not just for voters but also for the elected officials. When, say, ~90% of one racial category dominates a legislative district, the lawmaker representing it is incentivized against interacting with the world beyond it. They don't have to find common ground because there is simply no coalition to build. Alienation is a requirement of the job. Now imagine a Chicago aldermanic map drawn for compactness rather than identity: a 65/20/15 district. You literally would not be able to win a seat on city council by pandering to one single group. You'd actually have to go talk to people about how they actually live and things they care about: schools, safety, jobs, taxes. Working-class voters of every background want roughly the same things. Identity-based districts function to paper over that. But a blended district would necessitate it. The superficial grievance model of left-wing politics relies on the existence of racially sorted districts. Today's ruling makes that sorting harder. That's what matters here.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
We're in an era where people who don't see violence as a solution to political problems are called "extremists" by people who do.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
I wasn’t happy when Clinton, Obama or Biden won, but I didn’t call them fascist/dangerous/threat to democracy. I didn’t hope someone would assassinate them. I went on with my life with gratitude. Friends on the left, please try this. Your life and our country will be better.
English
🇺🇸 Left Based retweetledi
I've written for the last decade about the educational divide in the US, but culturally there is now a large divide between generations — specifically those over sixty versus basically everyone else.
The sixty-plus cohort (Boomers which I'm at the very tail end of) have a lot more certainty that they've discovered the Truth — or the high point, and often end point, of many things. From music (rock will always be here), to fashion (why would anyone wear anything but blue jeans), to politics (liberal democracy with emancipation from all forms of obligation as a human Telos).
Younger people are much more uncertain and relativistic. They don't accept the claim that it's been solved, and the Boomers' rigidity and religious-like certainty seems to them either laughably naive or arrogantly condescending.
The Boomers see everyone else as having fallen away from the path to historical perfection they paved, and are uniformly angry about that. What most of the Boomers miss is that the younger generation is living in the world they built — of hyper-individuality, of smashing of prior norms, and of moral relativism.
This post-truth, post-gatekeeping, hyper-partisan world is an endpoint of their worldview, and yet they are angry about it.
English
@mtaibbi This is what I used to call "the CNN hole." You get opinions and reactions and characterizations of the event, but objective facts are notably missing.
English
Making readers jump through hoops to find the full quote or original source document is a gross new propaganda technique.
Robby Soave@robbysoave
I'm always flummoxed when mainstream news sources describe a lawsuit, indictment, or pertinent document without actually linking to it. The SPLC indictment isn't linked in New York Times, AP, BBC, The Guardian, or any of first 10 sources I checked. Just have to take their word for it.
English