Mathias Eick

35.4K posts

Mathias Eick banner
Mathias Eick

Mathias Eick

@MatEick

Communication Expert. Former Regional Information Officer, EU Humanitarian Aid (ECHO). Views expressed are personal, retweet does not mean endorsement

Katılım Mart 2011
1.7K Takip Edilen2.1K Takipçiler
Mathias Eick retweetledi
Crazy Vibes
Crazy Vibes@CrazyVibes_1·
His death ended a short life of pain, but it started a global movement that still fights for children today. Your carpet might have been woven by a slave, and his name was Iqbal. On April 16, 1995, a twelve-year-old boy was shot dead in Pakistan. He was not a soldier or a politician. He was a child who had spent his life chained to a loom, weaving rugs for people in wealthy countries. Iqbal’s nightmare began when he was only four years old. His family was desperately poor and owed a small debt of about 12 dollars. To repay it, Iqbal was sold to a carpet manufacturer. For the next six years, he worked more than twelve hours every single day. The conditions were horrific. He was beaten, scolded, and often chained to his loom so he could not run away. Like thousands of other children in Pakistan, he was chosen because his hands were small and fast. The factory owners preferred children because they are cheap, they do not protest, and they are easy to punish. Because of the constant sitting and the lack of food, Iqbal’s body stopped growing properly. He was a teenager with the physical height of a much younger child. In 1992, everything changed. Iqbal heard about a meeting held by the Bonded Labour Liberation Front. He managed to sneak out of the factory and attend the protest. For the first time, he learned that the system keeping him a slave was actually illegal. He refused to go back to work. Even when the owner threatened him and told his family their debt had grown to thousands of rupees, Iqbal stood firm. He began to study and became an activist. He did not just want freedom for himself; he wanted it for every child. He started traveling the world to tell his story. In 1994, he traveled to Boston to receive the Reebok Human Rights Award. He was so young that the organizers created a special category called Youth in Action. During his speeches, he was brave and direct. He said, "I am not afraid of him anymore. He is the one who is afraid of me, of us, and of our rebellion." He told everyone that when he grew up, he wanted to become a lawyer so he could continue fighting for children’s rights. His activism worked. Because of the international pressure he helped create, the Pakistani government began closing dozens of carpet factories where children were being mistreated. But this made him many enemies. The powerful people who made money from child labor were losing their profits. On Easter Sunday, April 16, 1995, Iqbal was visiting his village. While he was out with his cousins, he was shot and killed. The official police report claimed it was a random dispute with a laborer, but many people believe the carpet industry mafia was responsible. They wanted to silence the boy who was ruining their business. Even today, many questions about his death remain unanswered. While his killers stayed free, a journalist who told his story was later accused of damaging the nation's trade. Even after his death, the world did not forget him. In the year 2000, he was posthumously awarded the World's Children's Prize. His story forced people to look at the labels on the products they buy. It reminded us that a cheap price often comes at a terrible human cost. Iqbal once said, "No child should ever hold a tool of work. The only tools a child should hold in their hands are pens and pencils." >We Are Human Angels< Authors Awakening the Human Spirit We are the authors of 'We Are Human Angels,' the book that has spread a new vision of the human experience and has been spontaneously translated into 14 languages by readers. We hope our writing sparks something in you!
Crazy Vibes tweet media
English
3
57
105
3.5K
@BrennpunktUA 🇩🇪🇺🇦
👀 Look at all these „far right agitators“ in London, UK today that „just spill hatred and fear“ — The leftist’s narrative is collapsing in realtime. Nobody is believing that crap anymore. The Brits 🇬🇧 have enough with Islamist violence in their country. Keir Starmer is done.✔️
English
19
39
397
13.1K
Mathias Eick
Mathias Eick@MatEick·
@neolatyno You didn't complain when Jesus was portrayed by a white actor...although he was obviously of middle Eastern origin...
English
2
0
1
285
Omne Europa
Omne Europa@neolatyno·
Anglo-rubbish. The Odyssey was written by Greeks in Greek for Greeks. Greek characters and Greek gods are obviously in the image of Greeks themselves, who are European. Greek people do not look like Bantus, nor like Hans, nor like Incas, nor like a global melting pot: they look European. The Odyssey is set in ancient southern Europe, not in today’s America. It’s a European foundational myth, not a world phenomenon that we all share. It’s only natural that Greeks and Europeans in general, who have the Iliad, Odyssey, Aeneid, Nordic Sagas, Beowulf, Igor’s Campaign, Nibelungenlied, Kalevala, and other beautiful tales as their foundational myths, want modern adaptations of their ancestral stories to look like them and to represent them, not to look like other people and represent other cultures. I personally understand very well why Nolan’s version of the Odyssey and the many other recent American works with absurd castings are so controversial in Europe. If you don’t want to see Europeans in European tales, nobody forbids you to tell other stories that are not from Europe. I’d watch a great movie about the tales from the Zulu Empire in Africa or the Tu’i Tonga conquest of many Polynesian islands in Oceania, but i don’t want to see random Zulus in Tongan clothes fighting a Shogun on the Hudson river 🤭
Convicted_Felon_Trump@LIBERALAF4EVER

@neolatyno Apparently, the modern day Greeks, didn't inherited the good genes of the ancient Greek and are dumb as rocks...

English
17
23
254
8.1K
Ben Dreyfuss
Ben Dreyfuss@bendreyfuss·
My feed is now 100% about Helen of Troy has to be white because she is Greek and I just think that ultimately the funniest part is that Americans didn’t even consider Greeks white until about a couple generations ago! Haha
Ben Dreyfuss tweet media
English
77
21
324
17K
Elon Musk
Elon Musk@elonmusk·
@brivael Rousseau was such a diabolical asshole!
English
766
732
5.8K
688.1K
Brivael Le Pogam
Brivael Le Pogam@brivael·
Je me rappelle au lycée, j'avais une prof de français qui me répétait : « Rousseau, c'est mon auteur préféré. » À l'époque, j'étais complètement illettré, je n'avais pas lu un roman. Depuis, j'ai rattrapé un peu le retard. Et force est de constater : Rousseau est lui aussi un poison pour l'esprit français. Tu as raison de remonter à lui. Le geste fondateur est là. L'homme naît bon, c'est la société qui le corrompt. La propriété, la hiérarchie, la tradition, l'institution, tout ce qui structure une civilisation devient suspect. Le mal n'est plus dans l'homme, il est dans l'ordre. Donc il suffit de défaire l'ordre. De cette intuition découle tout le reste. La Terreur, qui croit pouvoir régénérer l'homme par le décret. Le socialisme utopique, qui croit pouvoir abolir l'égoïsme par l'organisation. Le wokisme, qui croit pouvoir purifier la société en démantelant ses normes. À chaque fois la même logique : l'homme est innocent, l'institution est coupable, donc il faut casser l'institution. C'est faux. L'homme n'est pas né bon. Il est né pulsionnel, ambivalent, capable du meilleur et du pire. Les institutions n'oppriment pas une nature angélique, elles canalisent une nature ambiguë. Détruire les institutions ne libère pas un bon sauvage, ça libère un homme livré à ses pires instincts. Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze n'ont fait que radicaliser Rousseau avec les outils du XXᵉ siècle. La matrice est la même : soupçon de toute autorité, dissolution de toute hiérarchie, fantasme d'un état originel pur que les structures auraient trahi. Donc oui, le péché originel commence avec lui. Et la France a une double dette : avoir donné Rousseau au XVIIIᵉ, et avoir donné la French Theory au XXᵉ. Deux fois le même poison, juste recombiné. Au travail.
Melissa Chen@MsMelChen

Rousseau’s Discourse on Inequality and Emile popularized the myth that humans are born good and society (property, hierarchy, tradition) ruins us. Fix it with the right education, the right state, the right social contract, and we shall return to natural harmony. This is the kernel of modern progressivism: the belief that inequality is unnatural, institutions are oppressive, and experts/moral vanguards must engineer a better humanity. From this foundation, many took it to the extremes - reign of terror, Pol Pot. But even in moderation it was harmful! Because ultimately It rejects the empirical reality that humans are flawed, self-interested, and that institutions channel that into productive order rather than radicalism and violence. French Theory (post-1968) took Rousseau’s suspicion of truth, power, and norms and turned it into an uglier monster. But the original sin starts with him

Français
258
781
3.7K
236.6K
WELT
WELT@welt·
Ausnahmezustand in London – Zehntausende bei Rechtsextremisten-Demo und Palästinenser-Protest to.welt.de/n5ByXV9
WELT tweet media
Deutsch
1.2K
54
334
61.3K
Mathias Eick
Mathias Eick@MatEick·
Oh dear...
Thanos Angelopoulos@Th_Angelopoulos

Let me be clear about where I stand before I start. I am modernist as fuck. I have no patience for the postmodern move of collapsing everything into discourse and subjectivity. So no, I am not writing this to defend postmodernism. I am writing this because your text is full of merde. Dishonest merde. You have constructed a clean, elegant narrative that feels true and is largely false. You claim that Judith Butler read Foucault and invented performative gender. This is historically illiterate. Erving Goffman, an American sociologist working in Chicago in the 1950s, had already built an entire theory of social performance in "The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life" (1959). His dramaturgical framework, rooted in American pragmatism and symbolic interactionism, showed that identity is enacted rather than given, well before Butler opened a single page of Foucault. Performativity did not cross the Atlantic from Paris. It was already growing in the American Midwest. Your genealogy of post-colonial studies is an erasure. Edward Said's "Orientalism" draws its political force from Frantz Fanon, a Martinican-Algerian psychiatrist writing from the front lines of anti-colonial struggle, and from Aimé Césaire, Albert Memmi, and the entire Négritude tradition. These were not Parisian intellectual games. They were responses to actual colonial violence. Said used some Foucauldian vocabulary, yes. But reducing his work to a derivative of three French philosophers is like saying Marx just borrowed from Hegel and ignoring the Manchester factory floors he was looking at. Crenshaw's intersectionality emerges from Critical Race Theory, a legal academic movement rooted in the American civil rights tradition, and from Black feminist thought stretching back to Sojourner Truth, the Combahee River Collective, and Patricia Hill Collins. The idea that overlapping systems of oppression compound one another does not require Foucault. It requires paying attention to what was actually happening to Black women in American courts, workplaces, and hospitals. Tracing her work back to three Parisian philosophers is not analysis. It is BOLLOCKS. Then there is your antidote: Silicon Valley, the builders, the people who believe in truth and beauty. This is where your argument collapses face-first. The intellectual substrate of the Thiel-Andreessen orbit includes low IQ Curtis Yarvin, who argues for the abolition of democracy and a return to monarchic corporate governance, and low IQ Nick Land, a philosopher so deep into accelerationism that he advocates for civilisational collapse as a positive outcome. These are the theorists being passed around in those circles right now. Compared to Derrida, Land makes deconstruction look like a children's book. Your builders are reading some of the most nihilistic, anti-humanist, low-rigour political philosophy produced in the last fifty years. And the logical architecture collapses just as fast. You commit a post hoc fallacy: wokism came after French Theory, therefore French Theory caused it, with no causal mechanism established. You use a genetic fallacy, dismissing ideas by their Parisian origin rather than their content. You run a slippery slope without defending the steps; "no fixed truth" does not automatically produce "all norms are violence." You strawman gender theory as an inability to define what a woman is, rather than engaging with any actual literature. And you set up a false dichotomy between builders and deconstructors, as if critical thinking and productive work are mutually exclusive. You built an eloquent argument but the argument itself is full of merde, illogical, and epistimonologically wrong. The answer to postmodernisn is not idiots like you not reading properly the literature, throwing a made up origin story, and adding a low IQ Silicon Valley fairy tale. Do better next time, although I highly doubt you can.

English
0
0
0
15
Thanos Angelopoulos
Thanos Angelopoulos@Th_Angelopoulos·
Let me be clear about where I stand before I start. I am modernist as fuck. I have no patience for the postmodern move of collapsing everything into discourse and subjectivity. So no, I am not writing this to defend postmodernism. I am writing this because your text is full of merde. Dishonest merde. You have constructed a clean, elegant narrative that feels true and is largely false. You claim that Judith Butler read Foucault and invented performative gender. This is historically illiterate. Erving Goffman, an American sociologist working in Chicago in the 1950s, had already built an entire theory of social performance in "The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life" (1959). His dramaturgical framework, rooted in American pragmatism and symbolic interactionism, showed that identity is enacted rather than given, well before Butler opened a single page of Foucault. Performativity did not cross the Atlantic from Paris. It was already growing in the American Midwest. Your genealogy of post-colonial studies is an erasure. Edward Said's "Orientalism" draws its political force from Frantz Fanon, a Martinican-Algerian psychiatrist writing from the front lines of anti-colonial struggle, and from Aimé Césaire, Albert Memmi, and the entire Négritude tradition. These were not Parisian intellectual games. They were responses to actual colonial violence. Said used some Foucauldian vocabulary, yes. But reducing his work to a derivative of three French philosophers is like saying Marx just borrowed from Hegel and ignoring the Manchester factory floors he was looking at. Crenshaw's intersectionality emerges from Critical Race Theory, a legal academic movement rooted in the American civil rights tradition, and from Black feminist thought stretching back to Sojourner Truth, the Combahee River Collective, and Patricia Hill Collins. The idea that overlapping systems of oppression compound one another does not require Foucault. It requires paying attention to what was actually happening to Black women in American courts, workplaces, and hospitals. Tracing her work back to three Parisian philosophers is not analysis. It is BOLLOCKS. Then there is your antidote: Silicon Valley, the builders, the people who believe in truth and beauty. This is where your argument collapses face-first. The intellectual substrate of the Thiel-Andreessen orbit includes low IQ Curtis Yarvin, who argues for the abolition of democracy and a return to monarchic corporate governance, and low IQ Nick Land, a philosopher so deep into accelerationism that he advocates for civilisational collapse as a positive outcome. These are the theorists being passed around in those circles right now. Compared to Derrida, Land makes deconstruction look like a children's book. Your builders are reading some of the most nihilistic, anti-humanist, low-rigour political philosophy produced in the last fifty years. And the logical architecture collapses just as fast. You commit a post hoc fallacy: wokism came after French Theory, therefore French Theory caused it, with no causal mechanism established. You use a genetic fallacy, dismissing ideas by their Parisian origin rather than their content. You run a slippery slope without defending the steps; "no fixed truth" does not automatically produce "all norms are violence." You strawman gender theory as an inability to define what a woman is, rather than engaging with any actual literature. And you set up a false dichotomy between builders and deconstructors, as if critical thinking and productive work are mutually exclusive. You built an eloquent argument but the argument itself is full of merde, illogical, and epistimonologically wrong. The answer to postmodernisn is not idiots like you not reading properly the literature, throwing a made up origin story, and adding a low IQ Silicon Valley fairy tale. Do better next time, although I highly doubt you can.
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.

English
3
8
69
3.8K
Carl
Carl@HistoryBoomer·
Ambushing a joke in a dark alley and beating it with a lead pipe until there's nothing left but bone chips and blood smears.
Carl tweet media
English
18
27
945
27.8K
Mathias Eick
Mathias Eick@MatEick·
@PatrickHaede China has 10x fewer Data Centers than US...do you also think China is "cooked"? FYI: Data Centers are usually close to useless on completion as their chips become obsolete during the construction time...
English
1
0
0
27
Patrick Haede
Patrick Haede@PatrickHaede·
Germany is so cooked that it does not know how cooked it is
Ole Lehmann@itsolelehmann

I'm German. Germany's ENTIRE AI data center capacity is less than 1/2 of just one site being built in Texas. We have 530 megawatts of AI data center capacity in the entire country. The US has 8.2 gigawatts. That's 15x more compute on a country with only 4x the people. Per German, the US has roughly 4x the AI infrastructure. One university computer at MIT is 4x faster than Germany's most important commercial AI facility. The obvious reaction here is "so what, German companies can just rent compute from AWS." But that's the same logic Germany applied to Russian gas for two decades. Roughly 70% of German enterprise AI today runs on American cloud providers like AWS, Microsoft, and Google. Which means it runs under American law. Every AI tool running in German hospitals, courts, ministries, banks, and factories sits on a foreign platform. Here's why this can actually become problematic. Imagine these scenarios: > The next GPU generation launches and American companies get access first because they own the data centers. German firms wait 12 months and pay 2-3x more for what's left. > A frontier AI model gets released and US export controls block it from being deployed in Germany. SAP and Siemens watch American competitors integrate it for a year before they can. > And in the worst case, a US president decides to use AI access as leverage in a trade dispute. German companies get cut off from the models their American competitors are still running. All of them are compounding problems that will negatively impact the German economy (and everyone's standard of living/jobs etc). None of this is hypothetical. > The US pulled Starlink as leverage with Ukraine in March 2025 > Chip exports to China have been throttled for three years > And the CLOUD Act lets the US demand any data stored by American cloud providers (even when the customer is a German company and the servers are physically in Germany). Germany doesn't have an answer for any of those scenarios today because the infrastructure that would make those answers possible isn't built yet. Now look at why this is actually happening on the ground. In the last 3 months Germany rejected 3 AI data center projects in a row: > Groß-Gerau, February: Vantage Data Centers, €2.5 billion, 174 MW. Voted down 18-14 by the local council > Maintal: EdgeConnex, €1 billion, 170 MW. Blocked over a backup gas generator the developer needed because grid connections in Germany take 7-10 years and a data center is built in 2 > Freyenstein, Brandenburg, April: 700 MW AI campus. Killed by protests before construction €3.5 billion in AI infrastructure turned away in one quarter. And the situation is more urgent than it looks because compute is getting harder to access, not easier. NVIDIA's Blackwell GPUs are already allocated through the second half of 2027. The American hyperscalers locked in the bulk of new production with forward orders placed in 2025. TSMC's advanced packaging lines (the actual bottleneck) are sold out through 2026. Germany has no hyperscaler of its own. That means German industry sits at the back of the queue, and the gap compounds every quarter that goes by. Where Germany is falling short right now comes down to three things: > Public backlash, because the case for what AI data centers actually do for a country has never been made to the people voting on them > Industrial electricity at €0.16-0.18 per kWh vs about $0.08 in Texas. For a 1 GW campus that's $700-900 million extra per year just for power > Grid connections taking 7-10 years for large facilities when the data center itself is built in 2. No serious operator runs on math where the wait is longer than the build And the first one is the biggest. Electricity policy and grid timelines are fixable. Public consent isn't, until someone makes the case that this infrastructure isn't nice-to-have. It's the foundation everything else runs on. The average person only feels the downside (noise, rising electricity cost, terror attack vector) We have a big messaging and marketing problem around data centers and why they are critical for everyone's future. Germany still has the foundation to win this if it moves now. Germany adopted its first national data center strategy in March 2026. 28 concrete measures, annual progress reports, doubling overall capacity and quadrupling AI capacity by 2030. The plan exists. The Industriestrompreis launched on January 1st of this year. It targets 5 cents per kWh for half of an industrial user's annual consumption. If data centers get cleanly pulled into that framework, the electricity cost gap with Texas gets significantly closer. Deutsche Telekom turned on 10,000 NVIDIA Blackwell GPUs in Munich in Q1. One facility increased Germany's available AI compute by roughly 50% overnight. And the demand is already domestic. SAP, Siemens, BMW, BASF. The German industrial anchors that benefit most from AI are German companies. The customers are at home, the infrastructure should be at home too. And this is the thing that most people forget. Germany won the second industrial revolution. By 1900 German chemical output had passed Britain's, Siemens was wiring the world, and BASF and Bayer were inventing industries that didn't exist before they built them. The companies that came out of those decisions are still the largest employers in Germany 130 years later. Germany sat out the third industrial revolution, the software one, and that was survivable because software didn't run factories. But AI runs factories. It runs hospitals, logistics, courts, and financial markets. This one is infrastructure in the same category as railways and chemical plants. The plan is written and the money is ready. The only question left is whether the country will let it get built. There's a lot of work left to do, but I'm staying optimistic.

English
4
0
12
2K