Pages

Saturday, February 28, 2026

2026-03-01

 ***** denotes well-worth reading in full at source (even if excerpted extensively here)

given the evolving situation in the Middle East, updating periodically through the weekend with updates 


Economic 
Fare:

In our 2006 outlook, the only scenario where 10s would fall below 4% was much weaker than expected growth, cyclical stocks look offsides and the Fed is behind the curve, again
  • Markets flashing growth concerns: Despite strong year-to-date performance in non-tech cyclicals, earnings expectations for 1Q26 have been cut sharply, and the Treasury bull flattening (falling real rates, deeper curve inversion) signals markets are aggressively marking down the “run it hot” growth outlook.
  • Earnings narrowing to AI beneficiaries: S&P 500 earnings growth remains near historical mid-cycle averages overall, but most strength is concentrated in tech and communication services tied to AI, while broader 4Q25 cyclical earnings growth was tepid and 1Q26 expectations were revised lower.
  • Bond market signaling Fed easing: The drop in 10-year yields and deepening 3m–2y inversion suggest rising economic weakness and increasing policy restrictiveness, with markets implying the Fed needs to resume rate cuts.
  • Credit stress emerging but not systemic: Weakness in BDCs, CLO equity tranches, and high-yield duration points to strain among lower-quality, floating-rate borrowers; however, overall credit growth remains subdued, making risks more idiosyncratic than systemic.
  • Capex boom not yet broadening: Regional Fed manufacturing and services surveys show tentative stabilization in current orders, but capital expenditure plans have weakened. S&P 500 capex remains heavily concentrated in the technology and communication sectors, suggesting broad-based investment remains elusive despite the powerful tax incentives in the One Triple B Act.
  • Payroll Payback: We preview next Friday’s employment report, in short, we see little evidence demand for labor has strengthened. A weak report should put rate cuts back in play despite resistance from Biden appointees and the regional repo rate resistance.
  • Cautious but not bearish outlook: While equities are vulnerable to a cyclical “growth scare” correction—especially in midterm years—we are less bearish than a year ago but are maintaining elevated cash positions looking for a better entry point to capitalize on our expectation of broader capital investment beyond AI later in 2026.


Market Fare:




Bubble Fare:



A.I. Fare:




Quotes of the Week:




Charts:
1:
2:
3:
4:
5:
6:
7:
8:
9:



(not just) for the ESG crowd:

China's newest battery runs on salt, and powers vehicles in extreme cold climates
  • China is in mass production of a sodium-ion battery, which opens vast new markets for electric vehicles.
  • Lithium-ion batteries drive most electric vehicles, and lithium has a long and complex supply chain. The refining of lithium is expensive, and poses severe environmental challenges.
  • Sodium is abundant, everywhere, and sodium batteries perform far better in cold climates.


Sci Fare:



U.S. B.S.:



War Fare:


This is the definitive war of choice. It is the exact type of war that Trump and his movement spent a decade vowing to end. And the potential for destruction is infinite.

.............. In lieu of outlining any clear mission statement for this new war, let alone a cogent exit strategy, Trump offered a laundry list of flamboyantly violent vows. 

............... The false claims behind this new war with Iran are ones we have extensively documented. In Trump’s war announcement this morning, he claimed — as he did at Tuesday’s State of the Union address — that Iran refuses to promise that it will not obtain nuclear weapons. The exact opposite is true: Iran has stated this clearly, unequivocally and repeatedly, and did so as recently as this week.

........... It is hard to overstate what a massive fraud Donald Trump, his campaign and his political movement are. For more than a decade, Trump has ranted and raved against the evils of regime-change wars and neoconservative dogma, only to launch a new war that most perfectly encapsulates and aggressively advances both. He spent years falsely warning that former President Obama would start a war with Iran because of how weak and inept Obama supposedly was at negotiation and diplomacy, only to now do that himself

.......... In contrast to the lie-driven 18-month public campaign of Bush and Cheney to convince the American public to support an invasion of Iraq, there has been virtually no attempt made, as I documented this week, to even explain to the American public why a new war with Iran is necessary or desirable. There has been no Congressional approval sought let alone obtained, notwithstanding the U.S. Constitution’s exclusive assignment of war-making powers to the Congress.

In his novel 1984, George Orwell highlighted the dangerous insanity of war propaganda with this leading example: “WAR IR PEACE.” Yet that is precisely the rationale invoked by various Trump supporters to somehow depict this new war as aligned with Trump’s vows of peace



........... "In my view, if you’re going to do something there, you better well make it about getting new leadership and regime change," the leading Republican Senator said ...... 

A big problem with this viewpoint, which ensures Washington stays in the business of 'nation building' and democratizing foreign lands (akin to the Neocon Bush era), is that almost all regional analysts say regime change is next to impossible through a purely aerial mission. Instead, this would require US boots on the ground - something the American people surely would not stomach, and which the Trump administration has pledged not to do time and again.

........ In the meantime, House and Senate Democrats announced Thursday that they will force a vote next week on War Powers Resolutions to block President Trump from launching military action against Iran without congressional authorization, as required under the Constitution. .........


From Ethiopia to our times: The Eternal Folly of Demographic Expansion

........ It is still too early to understand what’s going on with the attack on Iran and how things will evolve. What I think can be said is that the Israeli leaders are locked in an obsolete overpopulation paradigm that leads them to dream of an impossible territorial expansion by military means.

There are two distinct uses of the term “Greater Israel,” one referring to Israel plus the West Bank and Gaza, and a second, much larger, stretching from the Nile to the Euphrates. Currently, these ideas seem to be gaining ground among Israeli far-right politicians. .................



.......... I don’t even know what to write about this one, honestly.

What am I supposed to say? “Hey everybody, they’re lying to us about this war”? Everyone already knows that. Even the people who support this war know all the justifications for it are lies.

They know Iran isn’t building nukes.

They know Iran poses no threat to the United States. ............

Everyone already knows this, and it’s happening anyway. They’re just doing whatever evil things they want to do, without the slightest regard for public opinion or consent.

They’re just going right ahead with a military operation to topple Tehran, after decades of inertia for fear of the horrific consequences it would unleash. ..............

There’s an old Frank Zappa quote that’s been popping into my head more and more lately:
“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
We’re seeing a lot more bricks these days. .........



Geopolitical Fare:



Other Fare:

Archaeology, Identity, and the Politics of Origins in the Levant

................................. Let’s be blunt.

This debate is not purely academic.

The modern state of Israel invokes ancient Israelite continuity as part of its national narrative. Critics challenge that narrative by emphasizing Canaanite continuity and shared ancestry with Palestinians.

Both sides selectively emphasize parts of the historical record.

Ancient history does not grant modern moral legitimacy.

Political legitimacy emerges from contemporary ethical frameworks — international law, human rights, sovereignty, self-determination — not from Iron Age settlement patterns.

Weaponizing archaeology to justify present policy is ideological theater. ....................

If there is any honest conclusion, it is this:

No modern political project owns antiquity.

The past is not a deed to land. It is a record of human struggle, survival, and reinvention.

And if we’re serious about historical accuracy, we must resist the urge to turn archaeology into ammunition. 



Pics of the Week:

2026-02-28

 ***** denotes well-worth reading in full at source (even if excerpted extensively here)


Economic 
Fare:

Pathways, Risks, and Strategic Considerations for North America’s Economic Future



Market Fare:

BNP Gold: Lifting our forecasts on physical demand, geopolitical/macro risk (via The Bond Beat)

Heading higher: Persistent macro and geopolitical uncertainty prompts us to lift our forecast for the average 2026 gold price by 27% to USD5,620/oz – with a peak above USD6,250/oz likely by year end. We now see the average 2027 price at USD6,060/oz, versus USD4,900/oz previously




At first glance, such comparisons of liquidity issues looks silly. But this is what happens when market regimes change across assets, in real time.


Private capital’s insurance playbook has spread everywhere, raising concerns among those who pioneered the trade



In October 2025, the Ohio-based auto parts manufacturer First Brands ran into trouble with its debt load. The financial press picked up on the story not because First Brands was particularly unique, or particularly important to the US economy, but because various financial institutions began to realize that their exposure to this company—through their private credit funds—was higher than they had previously thought. Because, unlike banks, private credit funds are unregulated, it was difficult to see the potential for intertwined risks, or to carry out due diligence, or to assess the reasonableness of the loans. As the UK’s financial regulator Simon Walls, the executive director of markets, pointed out: “There isn’t a very clean distinction between the banking sector and the non-banking sector”—yet regulators can only deal with one or the other. 

The First Brands episode turned out to be the harbinger of a broader trend. Now, in early 2026, the financial press has begun to ring alarm bells about the “stress” in private equity and private credit. Private-equity firms hold $3.7 trillion in unsold companies, and sales are slowing down, prompting leading pension funds and other institutional shareholders to lower their private-equity portfolio allocations. These are symptoms of a structural change. Unregulated finance is becoming the center of gravity in financial markets, which are increasingly drawing non-wealthy households into their vortex.  Our entire financial system is moving not just into the shadows, but into the dark, with the activities of such firms highly opaque and largely protected from public scrutiny. ...............



Bubble Fare:



A.I. Fare:

Market maker scrambles to rebut the Monday Substack post, “THE 2028 GLOBAL INTELLIGENCE CRISIS" by Citrini Research, which must have struck a nerve.

Conclusion
For AI to produce a sustained negative demand shock, the economy must see a material acceleration in adoption, experience near-total labor substitution, no fiscal response, negligible investment absorption, and unconstrained scaling of compute. It is also worth recalling that over the past century, successive waves of technological change have not produced runaway exponential growth, nor have they rendered labor obsolete. Instead, they have been just sufficient to keep long-term trend growth in advanced economies near 2%. Today’s secular forces of ageing populations, climate change and deglobalization exert downward pressure on potential growth and productivity, perhaps AI is just enough to offset these headwinds. The macroeconomy remains governed by substitution elasticities, institutional response, and the persistent elasticity of human wants.


A tongue-in-cheek China version.



Artificial intelligence has rapidly become a central arena of geopolitical competition. The United States government frames AI as a strategic asset on par with energy or defense and seeks to press its apparent lead in developing the technology. The European Union lags in platform power but seeks influence over AI through regulation, labor protections, and rule-setting. China is racing to catch up and to deploy AI at scale, combining heavy state investment with administrative control and surveillance.

Each of these rivals fears falling behind. Losing the AI race is widely understood to mean slower growth, military disadvantage, technological dependence, and diminished global influence. As a result, governments are pouring money into chips, data centers, and national AI champions, while tightening export controls and treating compute capacity as a strategic resource. But this familiar race narrative obscures a deeper danger. AI is not just another general-purpose technology. It is a force capable of reshaping the very meaning of work, income, and social status. The states that lose control of these social effects may find that technological leadership offers little geopolitical advantage.

History suggests that societies unable to absorb disruptive economic change become politically volatile, strategically erratic, and ultimately weaker competitors. The central question, then, is not only who builds the most powerful AI systems, but who can integrate them into society without triggering a societal backlash or an institutional breakdown.

Karl Polanyi’s The Great Transformation, published in 1944, explains why the capacity to “socially embed” new market forces determines national strength. By “embeddedness,” Polanyi meant that markets have historically been subordinate to social and political institutions, rather than governing them. The nineteenth century idea of what he called a “self-regulating market” was historically novel precisely because it sought to “disembed” the economy from society and organize social life around price and competition rather than social obligation. As Polanyi put it in his most succinct formulation, “instead of economy being embedded in social relations, social relations are embedded in the economic system.” ....................


The global economy hinges on this fingernail-sized silicon chip.

Hidden inside every swipe, search, and AI prompt is a fingernail-sized slab of silicon — etched with billions of switches — built in $20 billion factories using machines so precise they border on science fiction. And because only a handful of companies (and a few chokepoint countries) can make the most advanced chips, the semiconductor supply chain has become the real front line of the AI race and U.S.–China competition.

In this full length interview, Chip War author Chris Miller explains how microchips are made, why their production is so insanely hard to scale, and why the world’s economic future may hinge on a technology most of us will never see.


The economic devastation that hit the Rust Belt is coming for your office (or home office). I know, because I grew up in it.

I want to tell you a story about where AI is taking us. It might seem outlandish. But I’ve lived it, and that’s why you need to hear it from me.

If you’re in the top 20%, that means your household is bringing in somewhere around $130,000 a year or more. Maybe you’re a project manager making $95,000 married to a marketing coordinator making $45,000. Y’all are a $140,000 household. You’re taking vacations. You can afford healthcare. You can afford housing. Your kids are wearing whatever name brand kids are wearing these days. You feel fairly secure, but not totally secure. And both of your jobs are done on a screen.

Here’s what you may not realize. You’re living the life that factory workers lived in the 1950s, ‘60s, and ‘70s. You’re living the life that auto workers in Detroit lived. That steel workers in Pittsburgh lived. That chemical workers across the Northeast and Appalachia lived. Back then a single income could buy a house, raise kids, take a vacation, and retire with a pension. A GM line worker in the early ‘90s was pulling the equivalent of about $43 an hour in today’s money. That life, the one you’re living right now, used to be the baseline for millions of Americans.

I can tell your future, because for me, it’s a rerun.

I grew up in Appalachia, living in the shadows of what had been. ..............................

The birthplace of the American middle class went bankrupt.

There were no other jobs. What was left was Walmart. CVS. McDonald’s. Harder work for less money, and our towns decayed. Despair set in. People turned to drugs to numb the pain, Big Pharma got rich, and 800,000 of our neighbors died. Not in a war. Not in a natural disaster. From opioid overdoses, in the very places where the factories closed and the jobs disappeared. ..................

Now the information and administration economy is next.

The economic devastation that happened over 40 years in labor is coming after white-collar workers in four. And it’s coming for the same reason. It makes no more sense to have humans doing work that can be done by machines or programs or robots. They are much, much less expensive. They don’t get sick. They don’t have drama. They don’t have needs.

I know how fast this is moving because I’m living it..... AI is building things for hundreds of dollars that would have cost hundreds of thousands. That’s not a prediction. That was Tuesday. ..............


Leading AIs from OpenAI, Anthropic and Google opted to use nuclear weapons in simulated war games in 95 per cent of cases



Quotes of the Week:

Barclays (via the Bond Beat): 
Although equities are well bid overall and growth is picking up, bonds are seeing more demand too, in fact outperforming equities for the first time since Apr'25. Investors are indeed moving away from enjoying the AI build-out phase, which should be positive for growth/productivity, to worrying about fast-growing AI disruption, which may lead to deflation. Concerns about more companies falling into the 'AI losers' camp and getting out of business are weighing on credit markets, with waning flows in the HY space and financial stocks. We doubt the two narratives will be able to coexist for too long. Something has to give, and we have more sympathy for the former than the latter, hence our preference for equities over bonds. But the jury is out and tail-risk hedges seem wise, as risk assets are arguably not priced for deflation.



Charts:
1: 
2: 
3: 
5: 
6: 




(not just) for the ESG crowd:

***** Berman: The End of Certainty

What is true? What is certain? Einstein’s answer, in effect, was that it depends on the model you’re using.

The first time I visited a deepwater drilling rig, what amazed me wasn’t the raw engineering wonder of that much steel drilling in thousands of feet of water, hundreds of miles from land. It was the stabilization system: how a massive, free-floating structure could hold position as if the ocean were solid ground. It did that with a model. Computers continuously estimated the rig’s location using acoustic transponders on the seafloor, then fired thrusters to correct drift relative to those fixed points far below (Figure 1). The model wasn’t trying to explain the ocean. It had one job: preserve stability in a field of constant motion.

That’s also how most of us manage our lives. We choose a few reference points, build a story that feels coherent, and use it to feel stable in the turbulent ocean of life. But then, from that fragile, provisional stability—created by a model—we get strangely confident. We make bold pronouncements about what’s true, what’s certain, and what’s going to happen. It’s amazing, and a little presumptuous, when you realize how much of what we call certainty is really just a stabilizing algorithm for the psyche.

Rig stabilization is a good metaphor for our modern worldview. If the rig drifts, the system detects it and corrects it. If climate change pushes sea level high enough to threaten coastal cities, we’ll build walls and run pumps. If temperatures climb too far, we’ll spray reflective aerosols into the upper atmosphere to cool the planet. Drift, detect, correct.

What’s missing from that worldview is time, and the obvious fact that most things are irreversible. Our adages about the road not taken, or that the only constant is change, are folk versions of a deeper truth: we can’t always fix our way out of our problems. .............................................

That’s why talk of depletion, biophysical limits, and limits to growth often triggers scorn. Because the crash hasn’t happened yet, and because past warnings were sometimes wrong in timing or detail, we dismiss the whole concern as Malthusian pessimism. But from the standpoint of physics, those concerns are necessary and appropriate. They describe the default behavior of complex systems over time, even if we prefer to believe that this time will be different. ........................



...................... So as stark as those estimates are, they also tell us how challenging a degrowth strategy will be to implement given that it requires significantly reduced energy usage, which, in turn, means that policy action must be targetted towards the high ends of the wealth and income distributions in the wealthier nations. ................

The practical policy problem is to get governments to start dealing with the inequality as an essential step in a degrowth trajectory.

Of course, my confidence level on achieving that requirement is very low.

The neoliberal period ended the several decades of inequality reduction that had been achieved through social democratic government policy aimed at increasing transfers, providing cheap and high quality public services, expanding public education and health, and ensuring wages growth was able to reflect productivity growth (meaning real wages grew considerably).

The neoliberal takeover of governments sought to reverse or retrench these initiatives to allow the share that capital gets out of national income to rise again. ...................


...



Sci Fare:

An ancient, fast-feeding quasar is breaking the rules of how black holes consume matter and generate galaxy-shaping jets.


Researchers keep discovering more about the long-term neurological effects of SARS-CoV-2.



U.S. B.S.:

Call your Senators and Representatives, right now.


How the tactics of war and surveillance perfected abroad are now being turned on American citizens—and what it means for the future in an increasingly technocratic state, fueling toward civil war.

There seems to be a systemic crisis rooted in the nature of the U.S. American empire, resulting in an “Imperialist Boomerang”—a consequence of decades of interventionist foreign policy. This concept, inspired by the work of psychoanalyst Carl Jung but applied geopolitically, describes the process by which the methods of control, violence, and surveillance developed and exported by the U.S. for use in foreign interventions—from the Cold War proxy battles to the post-9/11 occupations—are now being systematically re-imported and deployed against the American population. The discussion has long stopped being about political disagreements, but rather exists as a striking fundamental shift where the state begins to treat its own citizens as an occupied population, using the same legal justifications, technologies, and even personnel that were once reserved for overseas battlefields. The new realities are a turning point for both civilians and government factions that will define how the evermore technocratic U.S. navigates a digital future surrounded by global capital rat race for limited resources—particularly rare earth minerals needed for the techno-feudal future. .................

................ Ultimately, yes the U.S. as the one unilateral world power is in decline amid the rise of a multipolar world but what that means is not a rose-colored, hero vs villain Marvel film. The disappointing fact is that there is a rise in power that is not collapsing, but strengthening and that power is coalescing around a very close-knit group of people with no ideology but money, and no loyalty to anything but capital. There is now, and this will become much more apparent soon, a global struggle for resources which has led to the emergence of a new world order—unfortunately, not the one we needed or thought. But it is up to us to increasingly understand our sobering reality, so we can better face it with a clear head.


*** It’s a Good Life                                                           
History reminds us that there exists a greater proximity between laughable and dreadful than calmer times would admit. (Albrecht Koschorke)
The rapid rise of the carnivalization of politics is quickly emerging as the most consequential political transformation of the past twelve months. Through a temporary suspension of hierarchy, social norms, and authority and by infusing unseriousness, absurdity, and theatricality into public discourse, both the government bodies and media organizations have effectively marginalized a considerable segment of the population, thereby impeding their participation in meaningful political dialogue. Although this trend is not an entirely novel phenomenon — having been present since the Reagan era — its current intensity and pervasiveness have assumed such extreme levels and bizarre form that it has fundamentally (and qualitatively) altered the nature of political engagement. 

The ubiquitous frivolousness and dilettantism as well as transgressive energy of political narratives and actions now serve as a litmus test for loyalty and a measure of allegiance. Recognizing that a diminishing number of discerning individuals accept the prevailing narrative, politicians and media outlets have ceased efforts to engage such audiences — there is no longer an expectation that intelligent/thoughtful individuals will endorse it. Rather than attempting to persuade the population and shape consensus, the current strategy is one of selection — the simplistic and cartoonish nature of their ideological appeal serves as a deliberate filtering mechanism.

This shift signals a profound change in the relationship between authority and the public, where legitimacy is no longer derived from open discourse or convincing argument, but from the compliance of a carefully selected segment of population. As the narrative becomes increasingly insular, those outside its boundaries find themselves excluded not by debate, but by design, reinforcing a divide that is sustained by intentional disregard and systematic alienation. In that climate, the act of questioning is rendered irrelevant, and the separation between the governed and the governing grows ever wider. ............................

At this juncture, the contours of the ideological core begin to take shape and become discernible.  Capitalism creates desperation and victims who are ready to embrace fascism’s fraudulent promises in the absence of real solutions. The principal deficiency of capitalism in its neoliberal phase has been its propensity to generate pervasive poverty and adversity. After decades of its reign, approximately two-thirds of Americans have been marginalized, not only with respect to income or accumulated assets, but also in essential measures of quality of life, including healthcare, life expectancy, and social welfare. While one-third of the nation maintains parity with other developed countries, the remaining two-thirds continue to fall further behind, creating a disparity that appears insurmountable. 

The recent rise of fascism in the United States represents a foreseeable result — one that can be directly traced to neoliberal policy decisions. This connection offers valuable insight into current developments. ..........

The legacy and the lasting damage of this annus horribilis is a fundamental departure from how politics had been conducted in the past. Instead of expanding the Overtone window to gain broader support, the government now appears to be contracting it intentionally to maintain control over a strategically selected segment of the population: The political leadership has effectively narrowed the range of acceptable discourse within their base, while simultaneously pushing the boundaries outward for those who demonstrate unwavering loyalty. This created an insular narrative where questioning becomes irrelevant and consensus outside the selected group is dismissed. 

With each passing day, the executive branch has been isolating itself from other branches of government, from the people, and from shared reality, relying increasingly on their cult following. They are no longer attempting to adjust their policies and governing to the interests of the country and its people, but are in a search of the public willing to support the reality they invent.

This short-sighted policy is not designed to catalyze a change, but to prevent it. Its main problem is that the costs of maintaining the present system in this way exceed the benefits. The deliberate introduction of incompetence and stupidity on an industrial scale into an already fragile system, coupled with the consolidation of power within the executive branch, while dismantling established checks and balances in favor of sole reliance on the judgment and morality of a leader who has clearly demonstrated a lack thereof, is certain to yield significant consequences and will almost certainly lead to predictable outcomes.



Geopolitical Fare:

Due to its systemic decline, US-led capitalism is further arming itself in multifaceted ways, accelerated by the younger, even more aggressive faction of capital embodied by current US President Donald Trump, followed by his nervous, equally failed vassals, primarily in the EU and Asia. How, then, can cooperation among the much larger "rest" of humanity regarding international law and human rights be deepened and expanded, including at the non-state level?



From Vietnam to Iran and every U.S. war in between, the same propaganda narratives are deployed, no matter how discredited and debunked they are from all the prior times they were exposed as lies.

When President Lyndon B. Johnson decided in 1965 to significantly increase the number of American troops to fight the growing war in Vietnam, he felt obligated to justify this major escalation to the American people (this was from a quaint, obsolete era when Washington believed public support was mildly important for starting or escalating American wars). On April 7 of that year, Johnson went to Johns Hopkins University to present his definitive case for why the U.S. must fight a war on the other side of the world, against a country that had not attacked and could not meaningfully threaten the U.S.

Johnson presented the American war as one of benevolence, selflessness, and a noble desire to liberate the world’s oppressed peoples from a uniquely murderous, tyrannical regime. .................................

To say that the U.S. war in Vietnam helped nobody beyond the U.S. military industrial complex — and that it certainly did not “help” the Vietnamese people — is a drastic understatement. ..................

Despite all of this, the same exact propaganda and deceitful tactics used to sell, justify, and glorify that war have been used for selling every new American war since then. As discredited as these war justifications proved to be, those in the American government and media have never changed the script even slightly for subsequent wars: from Iraq and Afghanistan to Libya and Syria, and now the latest ones in Venezuela and Iran. ........................



On February 24, 2026, Russia’s foreign intelligence service (SVR) accused the United Kingdom and France of preparing to provide Ukraine with nuclear components or a “dirty bomb.” ..........................

Returning to the most recent SVR claims, Britain and France are said to believe that giving Ukraine a wonder weapon would allow Kyiv to negotiate more favorable peace terms. ...............

Some skeptical voices wonder that the US could possibly greenlight such a plan but they may underestimate the fanaticism of British and other European agencies that have gotten them into the mess they are already in but cannot escape. .................


And hoping for miracles.

.............. No, what I have in mind here is a problem of ignorance combined with a problem of incoherent thinking. I’ve touched on each before, as part of my argument that the defeat of the West is as much an intellectual one as anything else. So let’s take the problem of ignorance first, distinguishing as we go between the refusal to acknowledge defeat, which is essentially political, and the incapacity to understand defeat, which is an intellectual failing. In each case, the process of thinking starts at the end, from a predetermined conclusions, and works forwards, flailing around in the search for evidence to support the imposed conclusions from which you began. Let’s take the first first. ...........................


The neo-fascist in the White House is attempting to bring the Caribbean island and its government to its knees, strangling it economically once and for all, killing its people with darkness and scarcity. But this is not “just” a war against Cuba and its revolutionary tradition. It is the continuation of the war against the sovereignty of all Latin American countries and Latino peoples within the United States. Scheinbaum, Lula, Petro, Orsi and the social democratic governments must emphatically oppose this crime in all international forums and organisations.




Other Fare:


.......................... Appreciating the beauty of this terrestrial experience likewise takes practice. Everything is crackling with beauty all the time, but we don’t notice it because our attention gets wrapped up in mental stories. Just make a conscious practice of noticing beauty at every opportunity, and your aperture for appreciating beauty will get wider and wider. You can learn to live your whole life in this way, from moment to moment.

If you can get the hang of these two skills — appreciating beauty and feeling your feelings all the way through — then there will be nothing stopping you from living a joyful and fulfilling life while also having an entirely truth-based relationship with reality.



............................... We live in a time of severe socio-economic contraction and corresponding spiritual anomie, where the system’s reproductive fatigue generates a plethora of what Antonio Gramsci called “morbid symptoms”: phenomena that do not herald transformation but function to mask societal decay. Libidinal investment in such phenomena tends to deepen subjugation, as moral outrage becomes emotional attachment while collective misery is reproduced through the very spectacles that appear to expose it. The Epstein files belong to this morbid landscape, not because they are unimportant, but because they dramatize and conceal systemic decline in one fell swoop.

The first point to stress is that these are not just “Epstein files,” but the archival trace of a civilisation that has systematically reproduced itself through organised forms of violence. Capitalism and sexual abuse are driven by the same predatory logic: the capacity to dehumanize others and exploit vulnerability for profit. Within such a system, the traits that make someone a successful billionaire are disturbingly adjacent to those that enable rape, paedophilia, and genocidal violence. To be clear, then, capitalism does not simply tolerate predatory personalities; it breeds them. In this sense, Epstein’s network functions as a metonymy for the human relations that a greed-driven civilisation promotes – a laboratory exposing the inevitable convergence of economic and sexual predation. What appears as aberration is, in fact, a magnified image of the “rules of the game”. The fundamental reason why the Epstein scandal should shock us is that it reveals, in concentrated form, the rotten core of the system itself. .................

.......................... In this context, scandal cycles begin to resemble a kind of assisted social death. They do not name catastrophic collapse, but progressive anaemia. Institutions remain operative, elections continue to take place, markets appear to function. But the underlying social organism loses resilience; it loses its shared purpose, the expectation that the future will be better than the present.

This results in a feedback loop in which increasingly obscene spectacle becomes necessary to stabilize an increasingly bankrupt “new normal”. The deepest obscenity is not the scandal itself. It is the insistence, repeated endlessly through institutional language and media ritual, that everything is fundamentally still working. If this is the phase we have entered, the defining political question will be whether societies can learn to recognize these spectacles as symptoms of systemic exhaustion. Because the ideological endurance of declining systems lies in its ability to convert decline itself into an endless series of emotionally absorbing events. And if that is true, then the real danger is not sudden collapse. The real danger is a civilization that learns how to fade while believing it is still doing fine.


***** Eisenstein: From Depravity to Redemption

The word power can mean many things: moral power, spiritual power, the power to heal, the power of love. Here I will speak of another kind, the kind we use to refer to presidents and billionaires and the people in Jeffrey Epstein’s black book. It is the power to subject others to your will, to direct their actions, and to rise above the rules that others must obey. This sort of power is naturally attracted to depravity.

Some who pursue domination will naturally take it to its extreme. Even if one doesn’t pursue power, but is born or brought into it, depravity exerts an insidious pull. It may start with a subtle sense of one’s own superiority, an aloofness, a patronizing attitude toward inferiors, a tendency to associate with other powerful people as peers while subtly dehumanizing the rest. From there, under the right circumstances, with nothing to limit its drift, it may progress toward its fulfillment: the most heinous acts of complete domination of one human being over another.

The dehumanization that is so routine in modern society—that turns us into consumers, functionaries, market opportunities, profit centers, voters, sex objects, characters in degrading political narratives, occupants of racial, gender, or ethnic stereotypes, and so on—seeks somewhere to take on its most extreme forms. Any society that commodifies nature and normalizes dehumanized relationships will necessarily harbor, in its darkest recesses, in its prisons and concentration camps and black sites, behind the closed doors of its normal-seeming houses, in the recesses of its family secrets, and in the fortified compounds of its elites, the most grotesque violations of human dignity. It is an organic necessity. Abnormalized degradation complements and completes the normalized. It is impossible for a world that has one, not to also have the other.

The Epstein files are a ringing indictment of our society, but no such indictment is necessary for those of us who have studied the normalized exploitation and degradation of human beings (and other-than-human beings) on earth. We never believed the system was sound. We saw the sweatshops, the toxic waste dumps, the slums, the landless peasants, the refugee camps, the child labor, the neoliberal extraction and the wars, prisons, death squads, and torture regimes needed to maintain it. We saw the conversion of life, earth, beauty, community, and imagination to money. We didn’t need the Epstein files or notions of Satanic cabals to reject it. But for most people, these costs to humans and nature were relatively invisible, hidden behind global supply chains and ideologies of progress, of development, of the ascent of humanity. The Epstein files pierce that obscuring haze. They show us the true nature of power, in its distilled form. 

The files arouse a feeling of confirmation, of vindication, that does not depend on the factual truth of the specific claims surrounding them. The smaller truth is: “Aha! I knew it! Inhuman elites are running the world.” The larger truth is: “Something inhuman is running the world.” The second truth contains the first, neither denying nor depending on it. If the elite predators are byproducts of something greater, if they are its functionaries, if they are among its symptoms, then the task before us is much larger than merely to send them to the guillotine. ...............





................................. Whatever one thinks of China, the fact is that its elites concentrate on making the population more prosperous and the country stronger in real terms. They aren’t offshoring their steel production. They can build ships. They lift people out of poverty, they don’t shove people into it. There aren’t massive homeless encampments everywhere. They arrest senior party members and billionaires for corruption and even execute them for crimes.

They are better people than Americans. Doubtless that will outrage many, but if you think otherwise you’re engaged in special pleading. How many countries have they invaded and destroyed? How many people have they killed or impoverished, including their own people? They’re expanding education and healthcare, working hard to make housing cheaper, etc, etc…



.............. A human life, even a long one, isn’t very long. Human history operates on generations, with three and seven seeming to be the numbers which matter most.

A normal sub-ideological cycle (New  Deal and post-war liberalism, neoliberalism) is about 3 generations. Sometimes they can go longer, but making a bet of about fifty to sixty years for a run will usually work. The changes FDR made stayed substantially in place till 1980 with Reagan. Neoliberalism is dying as we speak. There’s always an overlap period, where the old order is dismantled, but substantial spars remain in place. It takes till the late 90s to repeal the major market reforms of New Deal liberalism, for example. .........

I predicted the ways that the neoliberal order would end, and was right about almost all of it: the rise of China, the end of dollar hegemony, elite capture, the effects of surveillance and electronic money, but in terms of a human life it has all felt like very a long time.

It isn’t, really, in historical terms. Fifty years isn’t very long, unless you’re living thru it. .............

................ Trump and the people around him don’t even pretend to be honest, good or honorable. They’re all cruel bastards looking out for number one and willing to hurt or kill anyone, and they don’t even pretend otherwise.

One can see that as preferable to the hypocrisies of Clinton, Bush and Obama, and in some ways it is, but it’s also an indication of how far we’ve fallen, that our lords and masters (and they are our masters, and we are their slaves) don’t even pretend to have any virtues. The only virtue left is being rich or powerful, if you’re neither, you’re nobody and if you’re nobody, in the eternal words of George Bush Jr, “who cares what you think?”

......................... This is nothing new, of course. Confucius felt this way, and died convinced he was a failure. “Stop doing all these evil things,” he screamed, and no one listened. The Chinese are good at this. They recognize there are times when public affairs are so evil that good men and women can do nothing but withdraw and try and live good lives, because any success in public affairs can only come at the cost of one’s character. 

................... Now we come to the rise of the Chinese century. I wonder how much I’ll see, and how weird it will be to no longer be a member of the important, ruling civilization, but only a barbarian, watching my civilization collapse and the glory and the future move elsewhere.

May the Chinese do more good than evil with their time in the Sun, and may they remember too, that the sun always sets.

And I’ll keep watching, because while most of this has sucked, the one virtue of interesting times is that they are interesting, and age’s great advantage is perspective.



Pics of the Week:




Sunday, February 22, 2026

2026-02-22

 ***** denotes well-worth reading in full at source (even if excerpted extensively here)


Economic Fare:

Uneven growth puts the outlook on a fragile footing.





Something is goosing corporate profits, and identifying the culprit could tell investors a lot about just how sustainable the growth will prove to be.





Not all economic indicators are created equal. Here are the best (and worst) for recession forecasting.

.................. A good leading indicator needs to do two primary things:
  1. Decline early
  2. Decline deeply
An indicator that declines early but only has a very shallow contraction will never provide enough confidence or a clear enough signal for action. An indicator that declines deeply but late is not useful for any predictive analysis. An indicator like this may be useful as a confirmation tool, but not as a leading signal.

The chart below plots 15 major components of GDP across these two dimensions, using data from all recessions between 1955 and 2019.




Market Fare:


For most of the time since the pandemic, large-cap stocks have outperformed their smaller counterparts in the US stock market. That is, the LargeCap S&P 500 index has outperformed the MidCap S&P 400 and SmallCap S&P 600, collectively the “SMidCaps.” That started to change late last year as investors increasingly concluded that the former’s earnings outlook had become riskier and its valuations stretched. The SMidCaps’ earnings, which had been flat since late 2022, began moving higher late last year, with valuations that were relatively low. Thus began the Great Valuation Rotation of the Roaring 2020s.

Early last year, global investors also began rotating away from the US toward other markets. They did so because the US had outperformed the rest of the world since 2010, raising its market-capitalization share of the MSCI to a record 65% last year. So it was time to rebalance into stock markets with lower valuation multiples. This global rebalancing is likely to continue this year…

…At the start of the year, we assigned a 20% subjective probability to a meltup/meltdown scenario. That’s relatively low. We are even more comfortable with it now that the likelihood of an AI-related stock market bubble is much less likely. The S&P 500 Information Technology sector’s forward P/E is back down to 23.7 from over 30.0 late last year (chart). A repeat of the 1999/2000 Tech Wreck is clearly much less likely than widely feared last year…..



At this late stage of the earnings season, the (blended) revenue growth rate for the S&P 500 for Q4 is 9.0%. If 9.0% is the actual growth rate for the quarter, it will mark the highest revenue growth rate reported by the index since Q3 2022 (11.0%). At the sector level, ten of the eleven sectors are reporting year-over-year revenue growth. Three of these ten sectors are reporting double-digit revenue growth: Information Technology, Communication Services, and Health Care.

However, the Q4 revenue growth rate for the S&P 500 has been increasing over a longer timeframe. On September 30, the estimated revenue growth rate for Q4 was 6.5%. On December 31, the estimated revenue growth rate for Q4 was 7.8%. Today, the (blended) revenue growth rate is 9.0%. ..........



Bubble Fare:


In seventh grade science class, we studied how things are classified – the systems used to organize various kinds of rocks, elements, species, different types of clouds. I’ve always liked the name “cumulonimbus” – the sort of big billowy heap of a cloud that has a dark grey underside – full of water, not yet transformed into rainfall. If you see those clouds and suddenly feel a cool breeze, that’s often the storm’s “gust front” racing ahead of the rain – and a good time to head for cover.

You wouldn’t look at the rainfall and think it has come from nowhere. Looking at the cloud, you know the rainfall was already there – just waiting for enough conditions to show itself. As warm, humid air rides up over the wedge of cooler air, the cloud builds – water vapor beading into droplets, gathering weight until they finally let go as rain.

We call rainfall a “conditioned” phenomenon because it depends on many other factors. When causes and conditions are sufficient, the rainfall manifests. When causes and conditions are no longer sufficient, the rainfall ceases to manifest.

We should be careful, when talking about rainfall, to consider the causes and conditions that produce rain. We might say the average amount of rainfall is this, or the average frequency is that, but if we don’t change our estimate even when there’s a cumulonimbus cloud over our head and a cool breeze in our hair, we may get soaked.

Likewise, suppose we look at historical stock market returns over any particular horizon, whether daily, weekly, or annual – regardless of valuations, market behavior, investor sentiment, monetary policy and other factors. We can collect all of those returns in a heap called an “unconditional” probability distribution. Historically, average annual market returns on the order of 10%, more or less, have been most common, so the heap is highest at that point, with progressively smaller “tails” for returns that are wildly positive or wildly negative. The overall profile looks roughly like a “bell curve.”

We might say the average market return is this, or the average frequency of a crash is that, but if we don’t change our estimate even when valuations are at the highest levels in history and market internals are ragged and divergent, we may get soaked.

It would be incorrect to say that the market plunges of 2000-2002 and 2007-2009 came from nowhere. Looking at a bubble, you know the crash is already there – just waiting for enough conditions to show itself.

Whatever market conditions may be, it can help to look at the probability distribution of returns, “conditional” on some important factor, or a combination of them. We can then ask questions like “What’s the profile of likely market returns and risk, given this or that set of conditions?” That’s what we call the “conditional” probability distribution. In nearly every case, the distribution includes both positive and negative outcomes. The average outcome may be higher or lower than the “unconditional” average, but even then, we typically can’t rule out outcomes on the opposite side. The best we can do is talk about the likely distribution of returns, rather than specific “point forecasts.” To interpret a distribution as a forecast is far too demanding about what’s possible.

That’s part of the reason we talk about the “return/risk profile” of the market, rather than relying on forecasts or scenarios. Nearly every market condition we identify is characterized by a distribution that includes both positive and negative returns, often quite large ones in both directions. To imagine that a probability distribution is a “forecast” is to be caught in a concept of reality. A classification or label – overvalued, undervalued, constructive, defensive – is only a tool that describes a distribution. It’s not something to take literally as a forecast.

The bell curves below show fitted probability distributions of actual weekly S&P 500 total returns since 1940. They’re not quite “lognormal” curves. The full distribution of S&P 500 returns has a slightly narrower peak, a bit of skew, and fatter tails than a classical bell curve. I’ve also included two “conditional” probability distributions – not because they’re great models, but simply to partition market conditions by a crude version of “valuation and market action” using commonly available indicators.

The blue curve is the “unconditional” probability distribution of weekly S&P 500 total returns. In contrast, the green and red curves are “conditional” – based on the “yield” implied by Shiller cyclically-adjusted P/E (CAPE) relative to 10-year bond yields, and the percentage of U.S. stocks “participating” in a market advance, as measured by their position relative to their own 200-day average. Geek’s note: each curve is defined by its own data subset, so the area under each is 1.0.

Notice that the conditional distributions include both positive and negative returns. For the red distribution, the average S&P 500 weekly total return is slightly positive, but lags T-bill returns by about 2% annually (that is, annualizing the cumulative S&P 500 returns that comprise the red distribution). In contrast, the average weekly return in the green distribution exceeds T-bill returns by close to 12% annually. The red distribution is the widest (has the highest “standard deviation”), while the green distribution is the narrowest. That means that unfavorable market conditions generally involve much greater volatility than favorable market conditions. Observe in particular how fat the tail of the red distribution is on the right side. When people say how much investors would lose by “missing the 10 best” days or weeks of market returns, keep in mind that these “rewarding” instances generally occur during periods when the market is crashing. ..........

The chart below shows the conditional distributions that we estimate based on our actual classification of market return/risk profiles – reflecting our adaptations in recent years – particularly in 2021 and 2024. I’ve condensed them into just two groups – bearish/hard-negative (which includes neutral positions) and leverage/constructive. There are more subtle variations in practice, but two “conditional distributions” are enough to illustrate the key idea.

While the overall profile of these distributions is similar to the previous ones that use crude gauges to classify market conditions, the average returns are profoundly different. In the red distribution, average S&P 500 total returns are negative, and lag T-bills by about -22% annualized. In the green distribution, average total returns exceed T-bills by about 28% annualized. There’s no assurance that future returns will be similar, but we see the same overall profile in subsets of the data across history, from the recent bubble all the way back to the Great Depression ...................

Every market return/risk profile we define maps into a probability distribution that includes both positive and negative outcomes. The average returns may be extremely different, but any individual outcome is largely unpredictable. It’s only by aligning our outlook with prevailing market conditions – again, and again, and again – that we have an expectation that our returns will capture some of those differences as investment returns.

Record extremes
Presently, the U.S. equity market stands at the most extreme valuations in history, on the measures we find best correlated with actual subsequent market returns across a century of market cycles. The chart below shows our most reliable gauge of market valuations in data since 1928: 
 
.....
.......
Our outlook will continue to change as measurable, observable market conditions change. In our view, the best way to take good care of the future is to take good care of the present moment – again, and again, and again. No forecasts or scenarios are required. 

Mathematics as a tool, versus mathematics as a dogma
I ran across an article in recent weeks proposing that nearly all mathematics in the field of investment is “sham” and “almost 100% phony.” I typically don’t cite writers if I’m not complimenting or drawing on their work, but my impression is that the phrase “almost 100%” may be the best example of sham mathematics in that particular article.

Now, yes, if one’s use of mathematics in finance assumes that stock prices follow Brownian motion (a pure “random walk”), that price distributions are best characterized as perfect (lognormal) “bell curves” without skew (lopsided shape) or kurtosis (fat tails), or that the correlations across assets will be reliably well-behaved even in a crisis – leading you to lever your portfolio up 40-to-1 (which is what blew up Long-Term Capital Management), or to slice up mortgage risk into securities that you imagine will be well behaved when it all hits the fan (which is what blew up Lehman and many banks during the GFC), then yes, your application of mathematics may be a reckless sham.

But it’s not math that’s the problem. Math just allows one to approach problems in ways that require structured, deliberate, systematic thinking – to understand how variables interact, and how this changes when that changes. Mathematics is merely well-structured thought. It’s the assumptions one uses when doing the math that may or may not be garbage.

For example, if you take seriously the idea that securities are claims to a stream of future cash flows that will be delivered to investors over time, you can productively use math to figure out how to price a bond, how to calculate the yield-to-maturity given the price, and how changes in growth rates and risk-premiums affect stock prices. You can examine prevailing valuations and ask what assumptions about future cash flows are needed for an investment at those valuations to actually produce an adequate long-term return. All of that is just arithmetic.

You can go further, for example, and accurately price more complicated securities like options, allowing you to study the implications of various investment strategies. All of that is a useful application of mathematics – provided you don’t take probability distributions (“bell curves”) literally, and you instead realize that the main thing any good option model does is to allow you to add up various option payoffs times their respective probabilities. You don’t have to use a lognormal distribution at all. As long as the probabilities add up to 1 and the expected value of the distribution rules out arbitrage, you can use whatever distribution you like – you just have to use a more creative integration method.

The fact that actual financial markets don’t obey simplifying assumptions like perfect bell curves doesn’t make “almost 100%” of financial mathematics a sham, unless your understanding of mathematics is that objects like probability distributions, correlations, covariance matrices, stock betas, expected returns, or other parameters are literal, fixed, and “unconditional” regardless of valuations, and regardless of whether investors are optimistic or risk-averse. The “sham” emerges if we stumble into dogma – if we assume that prices are produced by a random number generator rather than the expectations, hopes, and fears in the heads of investors. The use of mathematics doesn’t force anyone to make such dogmatic assumptions – the math is just a tool for systematic thinking.

The making of a permabear
Last month, Jeremy Grantham generously sent me a copy of his new book, The Making of a Permabear – The Perils of Long-term Investing in a Short-term World. The title alone – disarm your critics by owning their label – felt very B-Rabbit in the rap battle at the end of Eminem’s 8 Mile.

Jeremy’s book, which I greatly enjoyed and recommend, is partly an autobiography; partly a history-rich journey that combines investment wisdom with lessons in entrepreneurship; partly a deeply principled examination of our relationship with the environment that humanity relies on for its existence; and from cover to cover, an example of what it looks like to live an interesting, constantly curious life that has purpose beyond oneself.

For veterans of market cycles from the Nifty Fifty, the late-1970’s “death of equities”, the deep undervaluation of the early 1980’s (when my own career began), the 1987 crash, the dot-com bubble, the tech collapse, the global financial crisis, and on into the current bubble, Jeremy’s book provides a fascinating look at what was going on in his head while whatever-it-was happened to be going on in your own head.
............



Charts:
1: 



...


(not just) for the ESG crowd:

The world is not quitting coal

So, this is what’s actually going to determine the future of our planet. Over here in the blue square you can see the total number of new coal plants in MW that came online in 2025 around the world:

What do we see? The highest number since 2015. These numbers come from the global energy monitor, where you can easily verify them yourself. Now let’s contrast these numbers with the coal plants retired in 2025:
...
The retired coal capacity in 2025 is nowhere near the new coal capacity that came online. How are coal emissions supposed to peak, when so much new capacity comes online? If you build a coal plant then it’s going to be used. Demand for electricity will simply increase to meet the supply. The United States is trying to save coal, although it can’t compete there with natural gas, but China, India and Indonesia also seem to have no intent to quit using coal anytime soon. As long as the world keeps bringing more coal plants online, we can forget about carbon emissions peaking anytime soon.


  • The geothermal revolution includes both shallow geoexchange systems, such as The Riverie high-rise which uses boreholes for heating and cooling, and deeper, more technologically advanced "enhanced geothermal" techniques.
  • Enhanced geothermal aims to make this alternative energy source viable anywhere by borrowing advanced drilling technologies from fields like hydraulic fracturing and nuclear fusion to access the Earth's core heat.



Sci Fare:

The big bang wasn’t the start of everything, but it has been impossible to see what came before. Now a new kind of cosmology is lifting the veil on the beginning of time



U.S. B.S.:

That’s what happened, right?

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to "lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises." Tariffs are duties. Yesterday the Supreme Court had a case in front of it about a president who imposed tariffs unilaterally on the entire global economy without a single vote from Congress. Six justices looked at that and concluded he filled out the wrong form. The ruling said one statute, IEEPA, does not contain the word "tariff" and therefore cannot authorize one.(1) It said nothing about whether the president overstepped the constitutional boundary between the branches. Trump imposed tariffs in his first term under Section 232 and Section 301. Biden kept them and raised some of them. No court touched any of it for years. The only time the Supreme Court intervened on tariffs was yesterday, and all it said was that the newest batch cited the wrong law.

….. The media frames the 6-3 vote as evidence of cracks forming between conservative justices. Look at what the split actually is. Three conservatives said IEEPA authorizes tariffs. Three said it does not because the statute does not use the word. Nobody on either side said the president lacks the authority to impose tariffs. The disagreement is over which form to fill out.

But the Court did not even strike down all the tariffs. It struck down roughly half. Everything imposed under Section 232 and Section 301 never went before the Court at all. Fifty percent on steel. Fifty percent on aluminum. Twenty-five percent on every imported car. Fifty percent on copper. All still in effect. The effective tariff rate dropped from 16.9% to roughly 9.1%, and 9.1% is still the highest since 1946. The Tax Foundation estimates the surviving tariffs alone will cost American households $400 a year and raise $635 billion over the next decade. Not one headline I have found leads with the fact that half the tariffs survived untouched. .…. 

Hasen drew the bottom line: "Just because the Court takes two or three cases to reach its highly ideological decision doesn't make it any less ideological or any more comporting with principles of judicial minimalism or respect for precedent."

The Court is not functioning as a neutral interpreter of the Constitution. It is functioning as one party's legal infrastructure. And the founders had a name for what to do about that. ..............



The depth of the Supreme Court’s corruption has forced us to find new language to describe its actions. Today’s decision, undoing Trump’s massive array of tariffs that upended the global financial system, is a case in point.

We say the Court “struck down” these tariffs. But that wording is inadequate and misleading. These tariffs were always transparently illegal. Saying the actions were “struck down” suggests at least a notional logic which the Court disagreed with, or perhaps one form of standing practice and constitutional understanding away from which the Court decided to chart another course. Neither is remotely the case. There’s no ambiguity in the law in question. Trump assumed a unilateral power to “find” a national emergency and then used this (transparently fraudulent) national emergency to exercise powers the law in question doesn’t even delegate….

This is a case where the legal merits of the President’s action were just too transparently bogus even for this Court to manage and — critically — his actions and the theories undergirding his claims to the power were, for the Corrupt majority, inconvenient. The architect of the current Court — the Federalist Society’s Leonard Leo — was behind the litigation that undid the tariffs. That tells you all you need to know. In this case Trump’s claim to power was neither in the interests of the Republican Party — the Court’s chief jurisprudential interest — nor any of their anti-constitutional doctrines. So of course they tossed it out. This may sound ungenerous. It’s simple reality. ...........



........... This is the way it works. Whenever something evil is done by the powerful to the weak, they look to see if there were consequences. If not, they expand, moving inwards. Yemen is a place no one cares about in the West: there wasn’t a lot of coverage. Palestine got tons of coverage and even law cases, but in the end no one powerful suffered, and the genocide was and is pushed thru. Opponents lost their jobs, went to prison and were deported or lost their banking access (Albanese, for example.)

Since those responsible for the genocide got away with it twice, they’re now doing it a third time.

Everything the powerful do to someone else is something they are willing to do to you if they think it’s in their interest................

Every time the elites of any country get away with abusing regular people, whether foreign or domestic, the line moves on what is acceptable. ..............




Like the Iraq War, the planned war with Iran is built on false premises. Unlike the Iraq War, there hasn’t even been a real public debate.


Eight months after Trump insisted that Operation Midnight Hammer "totally obliterated" Iran's nuclear program, he has deployed the largest military presence in the Middle East since the Iraq War.

............................................ In fact, Trump’s own 2025 national security strategy released in December explicitly states that the U.S. is not going to attempt to stop repression in other countries or lecture them about the need for democratic and human rights reforms, but instead will deal with such countries as they are (that policy was designed to justify Trump’s close relationship with Saudi, Emirati, Qatari, Egyptian and Jordanian tyrants but the principle applies to Iran as well, which is at most as repressive and in fact mildly less so than those close U.S. allies). ...

The willingness of the U.S. to embrace and even support the world’s most savage regimes has, in fact, been the staple of U.S. foreign policy since at least the end of World War II; Trump, I guess to his credit, is the first to candidly admit and describe that reality. .........


The Trump administration talks the language of diplomacy while posturing for a war on Iran which, if implemented, will be the end of the American democratic experiment.

........... At some point the global analytical community is going to have to come to grips with the harsh reality that, from the US perspective, diplomacy is not an option. The policy of the US when it comes to Iran is not how to find a diplomatic path toward a compromise solution which allows Iran to enrich uranium as is its right under Article 4 of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, but rather regime change in Tehran.

Which means the United States is on a collision course for war with Iran that will happen sooner rather than later. ..................

A war on Iran will result in a disaster for all parties involved. There is no guarantee of success on the part of the United States and Israel, or failure on the part of Iran. There is a huge risk that this war will result in massive disruption of critical energy production capability in one of the most critical energy production regions in the world, triggering a massive energy security crisis that could collapse regional and global economies.

So, the key question is why Donald Trump, a man who ran on a platform of peace, willing to risk losing his political base on the eve of critical mid-term elections by betting on the successful execution of a short war with Iran that achieves the regime change outcome desired?

The simple answer is because he simply has no choice. The combination of domestic political backlash to Trump’s deployment of an army of federal agents into the streets of American cities and the ongoing political fallout from the release of the Epstein files has severely diminished Trump’s ability to guarantee that the Republican Party would retain control of both houses of Congress this coming November. The loss of the House of Representatives would signal the end of the legislative viability of Trump’s remaining years in office as Trump would be facing repeated motions for his impeachment form office.

The only hope Trump has to offset the ICE/Epstein political disasters is to deliver an unprecedented military victory over Iran, something no American President since Jimmy Carter has been able to deliver. .............



The US has amassed the largest military force in the Middle East since the invasion of Iraq almost 23 years ago and is poised once again to commit mass murder and gleefully perpetrate an astonishing amount of war crimes.

Yesterday a huge number of planes, from fighter jets to air-to-air refuelling tankers to command and control planes, left the US en route to the Middle East. The planes had stop-overs on US military bases in England and Germany, because no imperial war crime is ever complete without the involvement of Europe. 

A US attack on Iran, a flagrant violation of international law, if such a thing is even worth mentioning any more, appears imminent.

Why? For Israel, for oil, for power projection, for Trump’s legacy. Because the logic of the military-industrial complex demands that $1 trillion dollars a year and an astonishing array of killing machinery doesn’t just sit idle.

Because this is what empires do.

Because the US is violence. ............

...................... The US is a rogue state operating in plain site and a huge amount of effort goes into obscuring that fact. Because if people understood the US as a rogue state, they might question if its constant violence is not the violence of a peacekeeper or a freedom fighter, but the violence of a rogue.

They might question who, in fact, the bad guys are.................



Geopolitical Fare:

How elites in Beijing view the collapse of American hegemony

A professor at Fudan University and a former interpreter at the foreign ministry, Zhang is the author of a bestselling trilogy on what he describes as China’s “civilizational state” – a model of governance, rooted in indigenous ethical systems developed over centuries, that he presents as a coherent alternative to liberal democracy.

Zhang’s arguments have found a particularly receptive audience in Beijing: he is close to the Chinese Communist Party, and an amplifier of the ideas and views circulating among the Chinese elite. Pankaj Mishra spoke to Zhang about how the Chinese political and intellectual elite sees the collapse of American authority and the crumbling liberal international order.

............. Indeed, the Chinese are watching all this drama closely and with fascination. I think many people feel Carney was a bit more courageous than his European counterparts in calling this so-called rules-based international order a kind of disguise that allows the West to benefit – the US more, Canada maybe less. Now Donald Trump has said: we don’t need this disguise. We can approach everything based on the darkest aspects of realpolitik.

People [in China] see very clearly that these are naked acts of imperialism, hegemonism and colonialism. We have a holistic perception of all this: the crisis in in Greenland, the genocide in Gaza, the low-intensity civil war in Minneapolis and elsewhere in the US. All these are, in fact, interrelated, and it reflects deep structural problems in the Western political system.

In 2006, I wrote a small piece for The New York Times, saying that the Chinese model will be far more attractive than the American model in the Global South. Because in our model, we focus on people-centred development. The US, on the other hand, orients its political structure to favour the super-rich, and to sustain that today, they’re going back to the roots of capitalism: exploitation and territory grabs. In 2018, I gave a talk at Harvard in which I said that China’s leadership was looking to the 2050s while Trump was looking to the 1950s. Now he’s looking to the 1850s, which is clear in the US security strategy report issued at the end of last year. I remember Jeffrey Sachs saying that it is not so much anti-Russia or anti-China, it’s anti-everyone – except, perhaps, Israel. .........







Pics of the Week: