Vasilis

A very sad announcement. I have just been convicted a second time for 'hate speech' and it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail —to the judge's frustration. In an ironic turn of events it's actually thanks to my previous prison sentence (for memes in a private group chat) that I am now still free —in a physical sense, at least. Call me naive but I didn't think they would take it this far, given that this precedent criminalises many of the arguments used by even the most moderate politicians critical of mass migration. In February 2024 I gave a lecture at Catholic University Leuven wherein I linked mass migration to crime and a deterioration of our quality of life. Every single point I made was 100% the truth and based on scientific evidence. Cynically, even the judge that convicted me admits as much by writing in his verdict: “Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information. He is charged with presenting facts in a way that incites hatred against persons on the grounds of one or more of the protected criteria in the Anti-Racism Law.” That's a lot of words just to say he wants to send me to prison for speaking the truth. Even the regime media write: "It did not matter to the court that Van Langenhove was quoting scientific sources. The judge argued that Van Langenhove's main message was that a big part of the societal problems like insecurity, housing shortages and lowering educational standards are due to mass migration." You may think the regime media are being sympathetic to me in the first sentence, but in reality they are warning people: even if you speak the truth, if you go against our narrative, we will crush you in every way possible. Both the public prosecutor and the judge did not present a single real argument as to how or against whom I would have incited hatred. So even if I would accept their crazy, dystopic law, I still did not break it. The only argument they present is that I created a "hostile atmosphere of us versus them” in regards to migrants. But even this silly argument (which is not even a punishable offence) is not true. To me, the deadly disease is self-hatred and one of its worst symptoms is replacement migration. My enemy is thus NOT the migrants themselves but those orchestrating the mass migration. Sadly, in Belgium, evidence is not needed and ‘vibes’ are enough to put someone in jail. Given the fact that I have another court case coming up in September and that I have a dozen active criminal investigations for hate speech, time is running out for me. I have already paid more than €420,000 in legal fees and there is no ending in sight. I have been in an intense battle of attrition for eight years and must now regroup to make sure I can still win. If you want to help me, you can do so via the links below. If you can help in other ways, please contact me via DM. If you live in a country that still has free speech, never let them touch it, however noble they make the motives sound, because this is where it leads to.

A very sad announcement. I have just been convicted a second time for 'hate speech' and it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail —to the judge's frustration. In an ironic turn of events it's actually thanks to my previous prison sentence (for memes in a private group chat) that I am now still free —in a physical sense, at least. Call me naive but I didn't think they would take it this far, given that this precedent criminalises many of the arguments used by even the most moderate politicians critical of mass migration. In February 2024 I gave a lecture at Catholic University Leuven wherein I linked mass migration to crime and a deterioration of our quality of life. Every single point I made was 100% the truth and based on scientific evidence. Cynically, even the judge that convicted me admits as much by writing in his verdict: “Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information. He is charged with presenting facts in a way that incites hatred against persons on the grounds of one or more of the protected criteria in the Anti-Racism Law.” That's a lot of words just to say he wants to send me to prison for speaking the truth. Even the regime media write: "It did not matter to the court that Van Langenhove was quoting scientific sources. The judge argued that Van Langenhove's main message was that a big part of the societal problems like insecurity, housing shortages and lowering educational standards are due to mass migration." You may think the regime media are being sympathetic to me in the first sentence, but in reality they are warning people: even if you speak the truth, if you go against our narrative, we will crush you in every way possible. Both the public prosecutor and the judge did not present a single real argument as to how or against whom I would have incited hatred. So even if I would accept their crazy, dystopic law, I still did not break it. The only argument they present is that I created a "hostile atmosphere of us versus them” in regards to migrants. But even this silly argument (which is not even a punishable offence) is not true. To me, the deadly disease is self-hatred and one of its worst symptoms is replacement migration. My enemy is thus NOT the migrants themselves but those orchestrating the mass migration. Sadly, in Belgium, evidence is not needed and ‘vibes’ are enough to put someone in jail. Given the fact that I have another court case coming up in September and that I have a dozen active criminal investigations for hate speech, time is running out for me. I have already paid more than €420,000 in legal fees and there is no ending in sight. I have been in an intense battle of attrition for eight years and must now regroup to make sure I can still win. If you want to help me, you can do so via the links below. If you can help in other ways, please contact me via DM. If you live in a country that still has free speech, never let them touch it, however noble they make the motives sound, because this is where it leads to.

Dries has just been convicted again: This time for speaking the truth about the disastrous consequences of mass migration. The most insane part is that the Belgian court even admitted Dries spoke the truth, as what he said was factual, but deems it a crime because it could incite hatred. Let that sink in. They’re criminalizing the truth and they’re using Dries to set an example. Let’s come together to help him. Dries is a young father, a brave patriot and the Belgian establishment has been trying to destroy him for years. He’s taken so many hits, he really deserves our help.

"L'IA dissout complètement toutes les théories où l'État doit intervenir dans l'économie." Je me souviens d'une conversation avec un ami il y a quelques années. On parlait des fondateurs de Google. Il m'avait lâché : "Tu sais, les fondateurs de Google, c'est deux gauchistes universitaires." Ça m'a marqué. Aujourd'hui, Sergey Brin fait son coming out républicain. Bezos vire chad. Zuckerberg se masculinise. Musk est devenu le porte-étendard de l'accélération. Ce n'est pas un hasard. Ces gens-là, ce sont les cerveaux les plus brillants de la planète. Et ils utilisent l'IA plus intensément que n'importe qui. Ils baignent dedans 24/7. Ils l'ont construite, ils la nourrissent, ils l'interrogent. Or l'IA a une propriété que les idéologies détestent : elle ne pardonne pas l'incohérence dans la data. Tu peux mentir à un militant. Tu peux mentir à un journaliste. Tu peux mentir à un prof de Sciences Po. Tu ne peux pas mentir à un modèle qui a digéré toute la littérature économique, toute l'histoire des civilisations, toutes les courbes de croissance, tous les effondrements soviétiques, vénézuéliens, cubains, nord-coréens. Quand tu lui demandes honnêtement de regarder la data vraiment la data, pas les narratifs il n'y a qu'une conclusion possible pour quiconque n'est pas complètement dogmatique, fou, ou avec un ego qui a quitté l'atmosphère : Le système économique le plus optimisé, le plus producteur de richesse, le plus producteur de progrès humain, c'est la liberté totale des marchés. L'État n'a rien à y faire. Pas "un peu". Pas "avec nuances". Rien. Toutes les fois où l'État a "corrigé" un marché, il a créé une distorsion qui a coûté plus cher que le problème initial. Toutes les fois où il s'est retiré, l'humanité a fait un bond. Ma thèse, c'est que les cerveaux de cette planète sont tous en train de s'en rendre compte en même temps. Pas parce qu'ils ont lu Hayek ou Mises (la plupart ne les ont jamais ouverts). Mais parce qu'ils passent leurs journées à dialoguer avec une intelligence qui n'a pas d'agenda politique et qui leur renvoie la cohérence brute des faits. Le virage de Bezos. Le coming out de Brin. La radicalisation de Musk. Le revirement de Zuckerberg. Ce n'est pas une mode. C'est un signal. L'IA est en train de diluer les idées à la con. Le gauchisme en tête. Et ce n'est que le début. Parce que dans 5 ans, ce ne seront plus seulement les fondateurs de la Silicon Valley qui auront fait le chemin. Ce sera n'importe quel gosse de 16 ans qui aura passé 1000 heures à challenger ses idées reçues avec un modèle plus intelligent que ses profs. La gauche intellectuelle a survécu un siècle grâce au monopole narratif des universités et des médias. Ce monopole vient de tomber.

Are you pro-censorship too?