Sara K. Eisen

It's almost as if all lazy humans agreed that instead of *feeling bad* about not doing the work: building society, sustaining complex thought, having hard conversations, containing emotions, being generous, etc., they'd all just make *ideologies* of why it's more moral not to.

Today, during the Lebanese cabinet meeting, the prime minister of Lebanon said that “Israel didn’t carry out any strike on any building in Beirut without a reason, it was because Hezbollah stores weapons there or because Hezbollah leaders hide there.” This is based on testimonies from cabinet members given directly to this Hezbollah journalist. The useful idiots and the woke reich are lying to you.

A student today at my elite university admitted to me today that she took a class so she could work on reading for more than 20 minutes at a time. She can't read. She mainly skims and summarizes, she says and still gets A's. This student is, by professional standards, illiterate. Gonna have high GPA when she graduates. This conversation was had after 6 of 22 students dropped my course because the maximum reading per week in one week was over 100 pages. What people aren't grasping is that this is literally *dangerous*. These people are going to be come doctors, engineers, etc. They are - by any metric - vastly less capable than prior generations. These effects are cumulative over a lifetime. This grade inflation is part of the problem, but not even close to the entirety. And the problem obviously starts in K-12. Students don't know history because, you can't actually become historically literate on the advice of 'never assign more than 30 pages a week'. You can't develop any of the skills that came with literacy. This is, quite honestly, a civilizational catastrophe.

US fertility reached 1.57 last year, the lowest ever recorded, and the WSJ explanation is "uncertainty about finances, relationship stability, and the political climate" my great grandma had eleven children during the second world war, in a country being bombed, in a house with no running water, on rations. poor people have always had kids. the poorest people on earth right now still have kids and the financial excuse is a story we tell ourselves because it makes us feel good and the real one is unbearable the real mechanism is that we got rich enough to redefine children as an expense instead of the point. somewhere in the last fifty years the cultural goal inverted and a child stopped being what life is for and became a line item competing with the lifestyle. once you frame it that way the math never works, because the math isnt supposed to work. that's the point we are living in the richest moment in human history and we decided to use the surplus to buy ourselves out of the future. the most prosperous civilization that has ever existed is committing demographic suicide at the altar of personal optimization and comfort, and the official line is that we cant afford it the birthrate is a lagging indicator of a civilization that forgot why it was alive

Old Twitter was very much a walled garden. If the admins would not give you a blue check, you had zero amplification — you basically didn’t exist. The entire “discourse” was among employees of online media outlets like Buzzfeed, Vice and The Mary Sue, and those people’s privileges on this platform gave them a lot of power and influence they would not have had organically. And a lot of people remember the Twitter of the early 2010s and do not realize that it changed. But the era where unknown comedians could turn funny tweets into a career ended due to back-end changes to the platform around 2015-16. After that nobody but blue checks could grow their accounts. A lot of media professionals described Twitter before Musk tore down the walls as like a “cocktail party” with their friends. Because they were the only ones who were really allowed to speak and everybody else was on mute. And because the blue checks were weird, the discourse got weird. Ibram Kendi happened because of Twitter. Robin DeAngelo happened because of Twitter. A lot of weird and bad stuff happened because of Twitter. I honestly think Twitter might be the reason hundreds of pediatric gender clinics opened between 2015 and 2022. I am not thrilled with a lot of things about the current version of X. There’s a lot of slop and third-world engagement bait in my feed. Hate figures are monetized on this platform. There’s antisemitism in the replies to pretty much everything I post. I’d like the platform to surface interesting articles, and I don’t like that it buries all posts with links. But despite all that it’s better than it was.

@SwipeWright A nitpick: Al Jazeera and Russia Today are considered neutral?

More viewpoint diversity would be better, but that's impossible to create when one side actively rejects it. Before Elon bought Twitter, the right created alternative platforms out of necessity because the left severely censored right-wing views. When Elon bought Twitter, the left voluntarily created alternative platforms specifically to avoid contact with right-wing views, not because they were being censored. So when leftists criticize X for its users skewing right, that's their own fault. They could always just... start posting on X to balance things out. Bluesky is even more ideologically skewed than X, but to the left. But the right isn't able to meaningfully increase viewpoint diversity there because they get banned for uttering basic facts.

The Jewish people came before the Jewish religion. For that reason, Jews remain Jews even when they no longer believe, practice or identify as Jews. Jewish communities around the world or connected through language, history, and of course religion. This explains why when Jews were expelled from Spain, they were welcomed by Jewish communities in Greece and Turkey. Why the Jews of Istanbul paid ransom for the Jews kidnapped by Cossacks and sold in slave markets. Why English and French Jews campaigned for the freedom of Aleppos kidnapped Jews. Why French Jews welcomed Jews from North Africa. Why the Jewish community of Shanghai took in Jewish refugees from Russia during the second world war. Why Persian Jews took in eastern European and Iraqi Jews.

What vexes me about this story is that so many talented and qualified people were silent /complacent being highly paid to basically check out. Theoretically, when you hire the best and the brightest, someone along the way should have raised a flag out of frustration before being prodded /outed. Human nature, yadda yadda, but it does not bode well as a statement of work ethic, character, curiosity, agency of our times, especially as we move into a possible age of UBI, where we might be building exactly this type of entitled lazy person at scale.

I am reaching out to the @X community for advice with the likely risk of sharing TMI. I have been sufficiently upset about the whole matter that I have lost sleep thinking about it and I am hoping that this post will enable me to get this matter off my chest. By way of background, I started a family office called TABLE about 15 years ago and hired a friend who had previously managed a family office, and years earlier, had been my personal accountant. She is someone that I trusted implicitly and consider to be a good person. The office started small, but over the last decade, the number of personnel and the cost of the office grew massively. The growth was entirely on the operational side as the investment team has remained tiny. While my investment portfolio grew substantially, the investments I had made were almost entirely passive and TABLE simply needed to account for them and meet capital calls as they came in. While TABLE purchased additional software and other systems that were supposed to improve productivity, the team kept increasing in size at a rapid rate, and the expenses continued to grow even faster. While I would periodically question the growing expenses and high staff turnover, I stayed uninvolved with the office other than a once-a-year meeting when I briefly reviewed the operations and the financials and determined bonus compensation for the President and the CFO. I spent no time with any of the other employees or the operations. The whole idea behind TABLE was that it would handle everything other than my day job so that I would have more time for my job and my family. Over the last six years, expenses ballooned even further, employee turnover accelerated, and I became concerned that all was not well at TABLE. It was time for me to take a look at what was going on. Nearly four years ago, I recruited my nephew who had recently graduated from Harvard and put him to work at Bremont, a British watchmaker, one of my only active personal investments to figure out the issues at the company and ultimately assist in executing a turnaround. He did a superb job. When he returned from the UK late last year after a few years at Bremont, I asked him to help me figure out what was going on with TABLE. When I explained to TABLE’s president what he would be doing, she became incredibly defensive, which naturally made me more concerned. My nephew went to work by first meeting with each employee to understand their roles at the company and to learn from them what ideas they had on how things could be improved. He got an earful. Our first step in helping to turn around TABLE was a reduction in force including the president and about a third of the team, retaining excellent talent that had been desperate for new leadership. Now here is where I need your advice. All but one of the employees who were terminated acted professionally and were gracious on the way out (excluding the president who had a notice period in her contract, is currently still being paid, and with whom I have not yet had a discussion). The highest compensated terminated employee other than the president, an in-house lawyer (let’s call her Ronda), told us that three months of severance was not enough and demanded two years’ severance despite having worked at the company for only two and one half years. When I learned of Ronda's request for severance, I offered to speak with her to understand what she was thinking, but she refused to do so. A few days ago, we received a threatening letter from a Silicon Valley law firm. In the letter, Ronda’s counsel suggests that her termination is part of longstanding issues of ‘harassment and gender discrimination’ – an interesting claim in light of the fact that Ronda was in charge of workplace compliance – and that her termination was due to: “unlawful, retaliatory, and harmful conduct directed towards her. Both [Ronda] and I [Ronda’s lawyer] have spoken with you about [Ronda’s] view of what a reasonable resolution would include given the circumstances. Thus far, TABLE has refused to provide any substantive response. This letter provides the last opportunity to reach a satisfactory agreement. If we cannot do so, [Ronda] will seek all appropriate relief in a court of competent jurisdiction.” The letter goes on to explain the basis for the “unsafe work environment” claim at TABLE: “In early 2026, Pershing Square’s founder Bill Ackman installed his nephew in an unidentified role at TABLE, Ackman’s family office. [His nephew]—whose only work experience had been for TABLE where he was seconded abroad for the last four years to a UK watch company held by Ackman—began appearing at TABLE’s offices and conducting interviews of employees without a clear explanation of his role or the purposes of these interviews. During this period, he made a series of inappropriate and genderbased [sic] comments to multiple employees that created an unsafe work environment. Among other things, [his nephew] made remarks about female employees’ ages (“Tell me you are nowhere near 40”), physical appearance (“Your body does not look like you have kids”), as well as intrusive questions about family planning and sexual orientation (“Who carried your son? Who will carry your next child?”). These incidents were reported to senior leadership at TABLE and Pershing Square. Rather than being addressed appropriately, the response from senior management reflected, at best, willful blindness to the inappropriateness of [his nephew]’s remarks and, at worst, tacit endorsement.” The above allegations about my nephew had previously been brought to my attention by TABLE’s president when they occurred. When I learned of them, I told the president that I would speak to him directly and encouraged her to arrange for him to get workplace sensitivity training. The president assured me that she would do so. When I spoke to my nephew, he explained what he actually had said and how his actual remarks had been received, not at all as alleged in the legal letter from Ronda’s counsel. I have also spoken to others at the lunch table who confirmed his description of the facts. In any case, he meant no harm, was simply trying to build rapport with other employees, and no one, as far as I understand, was offended. Ironically, Ronda claims in her legal letter that TABLE didn’t take HR compliance seriously, yet Ronda was in charge of HR compliance at TABLE and the person who gave my nephew his workplace sensitivity training after the alleged incidents. In any case, Ronda, as head of compliance, should have kept a record or raised an alarm if indeed there was pervasive harassment or other such problems at the company, and there is no evidence whatsoever that this is true. So why does Ronda believe she can get me to pay her nearly $2 million, i.e., two years of severance, nearly one year of severance for each of her years at the company? Well, here is where some more background would be helpful. Over the last two months, I have been consumed with a major family medical issue – one of my older daughters had a massive brain hemorrhage on February 5th and has since been making progress on her recovery – and I am in the midst of a major transaction for my company which I am executing from a hospital room office next to her . While the latter business matter is publicly known, the details of my daughter’s situation are only known to Ronda because of her role at our family office. Now, let’s get back to the subject at hand. Unfortunately, while New York and many other states have employment-at-will, there has emerged an industry of lawyers who make a living from bringing fake gender, race, LGBTQ and other discrimination employment claims in order to extract larger severance payments for terminated employees, and it needs to stop. The fake claim system succeeds because it costs little to have a lawyer send a threatening letter and nearly all of the lawyers in this field work on contingency so there is no or minimal cash cost to bring a claim. And inevitably, nearly 100% of these claims are settled because the public relations and legal costs of defending them exceed the dollar cost of the settlement. The claims are nearly always settled with a confidentiality agreement where the employee who asserts the fake claims remains anonymous and as a result, there is no reputational cost to bringing false claims. The consequences of this sleazy system (let’s call it ‘the System’) are the increased costs of doing business which is a tax on the economy and society. There are other more serious problems due to the System. Unfortunately, the existence of an industry of plaintiff firms and terminated employees willing to make these claims makes it riskier for companies to hire employees from a protected class, i.e., LGBTQ, seniors, women, people of color etc. because it is that much more reputationally damaging and expensive to be accused of racism, sexism, and/or intolerance for sexual diversity than for firing a white male as juries generally have less sympathy for white males. The System therefore increases the risk of discrimination rather than reducing it, and the people bringing these fake claims are thereby causing enormous harm to the other members of these protected classes. So what happened here? Ronda was vastly overpaid and overqualified for the job that she did at TABLE. She was paid $1.05 million plus benefits last year for her work which was largely comprised of filling out subscription agreements and overseeing an outside law firm on closing passive investments in funds and in private and venture stage companies, some compliance work, and managing the office move from one office to another. She had a very good gig as she was highly paid, only had to go into the office three days a week, and could work from anywhere during the summer. Once my nephew showed up and started to investigate what was going on, she likely concluded that there was a reasonable possibility she would be terminated, as her job was in the too-easy-and-to-good-to-be-true category. The problem was that she was not in a protected class due to her race, age or sexual identity so she had to construct the basis for a claim. While she is female and could in theory bring a gender-based discrimination claim, she reported to the president who is female and to whom she is very close, which makes it difficult for her to bring a harassment claim against her former boss. When my nephew complimented a TABLE employee at lunch about how young she looked – in response to saying she was going to her 40-year-old sister’s birthday party, he said ‘she must be your older sister’ – Ronda immediately reported it to our external HR lawyer. She thereby began building her case. The other problem for Ronda bringing a claim is that she was terminated alongside 30% of other TABLE employees as part of a restructuring so it is very difficult for her to say that she was targeted in her termination or was retaliated against. TABLE is now hiring an external fractional general counsel as that is all the company needs to process the relatively limited amount of legal work we do internally. In short, Ronda was eminently qualified and capable and did her job. She was just too much horsepower for what is largely an administrative legal role so she had to come up with something else to bring a claim. Now Ronda knew I was a good target and it was a good time to bring a claim against me. She also knew that I was under a lot of pressure because on March 4th when Ronda was terminated, my daughter had not yet emerged from consciousness, she was not yet breathing on her own, and my daughter and we were fighting for her life. I was and remain deeply engaged in her recovery while at the same time I was working on finishing the closing for the private placement round for my upcoming IPO. Ronda also knew that publicity about supposed gender discrimination and a “hostile and unsafe work environment” are not things that a CEO of a company about to go public wants to have released into the media. And she may have thought that the nearly $2 million she was asking for would be considered small in the context of the reputational damage a lawsuit could cause, regardless of the fact that two years of severance was an absurd amount for an employee who had only worked at TABLE for 30 months. She also likely considered that I wouldn’t want to embarrass my nephew by dragging him into the klieg lights when her claims emerged publicly. So, in summary, game theory would say that I would certainly settle this case, for why would I risk negative publicity at a time when I was preparing our company to go public and also risk embarrassing my nephew. Notably, she hired a Silicon Valley law firm, rather than a typical NY employment firm. This struck me as interesting as her husband works for one of the most prominent Silicon Valley venture firms whose CEO, I am sure, has no tolerance for these kinds of fake claims that sadly many venture-backed companies also have to deal with. I mention this as I suspect her husband likely has been working with her on the strategy for squeezing me as, in addition to being a computer scientist, he is a game theorist. My only advice for him is to understand more about your opponent before you launch your first move. All of the above said, gender, race, LGBTQ and other such discrimination is a real thing. Many people have been harmed and deserve compensation for this discrimination, and these companies and individuals should be punished for engaging in such behavior. Which brings me to the advice I am seeking from the X community. I am not planning to follow the typical path and settle this ‘claim.’ Rather, I am going to fight this nonsense to the end of the earth in the hope that it inspires other CEOs to do the same so we shut down this despicable behavior that is a large tax on society, employment, and the economy and contributes to workplace discrimination rather than reducing it. Do you agree or disagree that this is the right approach?

Yes. Take the charge out. The question itself is a kind of aggression. If you diffuse and just act curious it’s like a staring contest, and either it becomes interesting or shuts it down. This works for so many things -insults, provocations, sexual harassment, even. Been doing it for years.

@IterIntellectus You gotta be super autistic in this scenario - ask for all the details. How did you switch bodies? Is it permanent? Am I switched also? Who switched us? She’ll get annoyed and give up eventually

maybe not today, maybe not even tomorrow, but one of these days your girl is going to ask you this question prepare accordingly. there’s only one correct answer

A lot of people are mentally ill and completely emotionally dysregulated and so our ‘politics’ is becoming increasingly dependent on manipulating these tendencies.

@grayce_notes @amiKozak @realDonaldTrump Me too!!

@amiKozak @realDonaldTrump I’ve snort laughed

Making Pesach Programs Great Again @realDonaldTrump

The people most committed to communism in the Soviet Union weren’t the workers—it was the educated elite. A retrospective study conducted in the 1990s titled "Work Ethics and the Collapse of the Soviet System," examined which groups were most supportive of the Soviet system. The researchers found that, compared to factory workers and semi-skilled laborers, individuals in white-collar positions—especially those with higher levels of education—were significantly more likely to express loyalty to the Communist Party. In some cases, support was two to three times higher among elites. In other words, the strongest support for the system came not from those at the bottom, but from those in relatively advantaged positions within it. This runs counter to the common assumption that egalitarian or redistributive ideologies are primarily driven by the least well-off. In practice, they are often most strongly endorsed by people closer to the top of the social hierarchy—those who benefit from the system’s institutional structure, or who are positioned to navigate it successfully.

Marco Rubio’s 2015 denunciation of Obama’s JCPOA was prophetic.

@DefiantLs Yup.

💯

Western civilization may never win another war if this keeps up This is maddening. The radical left, mainstream media, and the woke right are running the exact same playbook with the US/Israel campaign against Iran as they did with Israel in Gaza They create impossible standards in terms of: -Zero Casualties -Zero Economic Disruption -Zero Uncertainty -Zero Time to Accomplish the Mission -Zero Collateral Damage And everything the bad guys do is actually our fault because we made them do it….same script as Gaza…the bad guys have no agency and it’s actually our fault Day 32 of the Iran war: -degraded missile factories, nuclear sites, IRGC bases, and proxy networks -the Supreme Leader is gone…and his replacement is s vegetable -all the top leadership is gone…in fact, we don’t even know who’s in charge Yet the all you hear is endless doomerism And all of this sounds exactly like the demoralization propaganda from Russia, China, and Iran, that has infiltrated our society for years via social media and retarded influencers chasing click This isn’t responsible skepticism It’s weakness… And you’ll never get peace through strength when the opponent knows you lack resolve and they can just wait you out This is madness

I don’t think you understand that for someone like Piker, "Israel is bad" isn’t a mere moral stance, it’s actually a foundational belief that carries its implications with it. And one of those implications is that America, Israel’s closest friend and partner, is worse and deserves to be punished/destroyed/looted. A moderate Democrat who concedes that premise thinking they can quarantine it will find that every moderate position they try to defend afterward is already invalidated by the thing they just agreed to.

There is a Midrashic concept derived from the Book of Esther that God provides the antidote before the plague: Esther was in place before Haman hatched his plan. Here we have a certain segment of the human race embracing nihilism and extinction alongside suicidal jihad. Only westerners who procreate will make it, long term.

Britain has become a circus. Pride flags, trans flags, Hezbollah flags. ISIS flags. Hamas flags. All at once.

@memeticsisyphus …a certain kind of woman. x.com/sarke/status/2…

Woman is attracted to instability. With instability comes excitement, chaos, newness. Idk when or where my next paycheck is coming from means you can’t really plan for the future. Extreme openness leads to the inability to build anything lasting. The founder becomes boring after he starts to succeed, there’s always another couch surfer you could explore the Appalachian trail with. A new adventure, a new city, a new a new a new and suddenly you look around and realize you don’t have anything lasting. No family, no husband, no kids, maybe something new?

The Islamic world is still divided on Iran. Muslim countries who have expelled regime officials: - Lebanon 🇱🇧 - UAE 🇦🇪 - Saudi Arabia 🇸🇦 - Qatar 🇶🇦 Muslim countries who refuse to expel regime officials (non-exhaustive): - Britain 🇬🇧 - Canada 🇨🇦 - France 🇫🇷 - Spain 🇪🇸

It’s archetypal; Aphrodite - highly sexual woman- gets with temperamental single actors - Ares (warrior- founder type), Hephaestus (damaged loner-founder type), even Dionysus (stoner party boy). Apollo - the professional/ scientist - the “normie” - had a series of failed relationships w nymphs, mostly. The power wife/mother/warrior women were either fine alone (athena/artemis) or attached selves to apex predators (Zeus-Hera / Demeter-Poseidon).

everyone’s losing their minds at her for this but she’s literally just saying what brute de force, colty brah and idk joe rogan have been saying for years: the men at the very top and the very bottom have more in common with each other than either does with the average guy. the founder and the drifter are both playing their own game. the guy clocking in 9-5 with a middle manager and a meal deal is playing someone else’s. that’s the difference. it was never about money

My strongest blackpill belief is that UBI will lead to an overwhelming amount of mental illness most people if they are honest w themselves need external boundaries and challenges imposed on them You're asking everyone on the planet to self-govern their whole lives when most cant even go to bed on time now when they have work early