Links - 10th June 2026 (2 - UK Sikh Stabbing)

Meme - Sam Ashworth-Hayes @SAshworthHayes: ""Henry told us he was stabbed but the man who stabbed him said he didn't, so we reverted to post-2020 programming and put the dying white kid in handcuffs" is not the exculpatory explanation you think it is"
Hampshire Police @HantsPolice: "Our officers were misled at the scene, including denial of weapon use. They quickly switched to life-saving aid within minutes but, as laid out in our statement, the medical evidence shows that the injuries were not survivable. A very sad case, our thoughts are with his family."
Readers added context: "Claim HP "misled, incl denial of weapon use" is misleading. Henry stated: "I've been stabbed, I can't breathe." Officer replied "I don't think so, mate" before cuffing him as he bled out. Victim's words dismissed. No suspensions. Bodycam still withheld, Release the footage."
The same people who claim that police killing "innocent" and/or "unarmed" black men is an atrocity because the state is supposed to protect people... are denouncing those who criticise the police here of being racist

Murder of Henry Nowak sparks fresh debate on knives - "Under UK law, it is illegal to carry most knives in public without a good reason. The maximum penalty is four years in prison, an unlimited fine, or both. But the law does provide exemptions. Carrying a knife for work, as part of national costume or for religious reasons are all listed as potential lawful defences under Section 139 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The Offensive Weapons Act 2019 further protects the right of Sikhs to possess and supply kirpans - a ceremonial sword or dagger that is one of religion's five articles of faith. In his sentencing remarks, Judge William Mousley was explicit about how the law applies in practice. He said those carrying a nine-inch blade in a public place for religious reasons would typically not be prosecuted for possessing a dangerous weapon due to existing exemptions. The knife Digwa used to kill Nowak was eight inches long, and was therefore within that limit. The judge was equally clear, however, that the privilege of carrying such a weapon "brings with it huge responsibility" - and that a kirpan should only ever be used offensively as a last resort, such as in an act of legal self-defence. Digwa was carrying the large dagger in a sheath around his neck, in addition to a small traditional kirpan worn under his clothing - the standard article of faith. While the larger blade was within the legal limit, the Sikh Federation said it was not a kirpan... The judge noted in his sentencing remarks that Digwa was a member of the Nihang - a Sikh order with a tradition of carrying a second, visible blade - though he was clear it was not a strict requirement, noting that neither Digwa's brother nor father were carrying one when they arrived at the scene."
Left wingers cheer when Pastafarians say they belong to the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and wear "religious headgear" in driver's licence photos. But they will be upset by Americans who say guns are part of their religion and demand the right to carry guns in public

Konstantin Kisin on X - "If you listened to the British media today, you'd think Henry Nowak was killed by Nigel Farage's comments."

Common Sense Extremists on X - "“How could The UK police have treated Henry that way!?” Well, do you accept the premise that being a racist is the worst thing a person can be? If the answer is yes, then why are you shocked that someone accused of being a racist was treated as harshly as possible?"

Allison Pearson on X - "It is genuinely bizarre that UK has a College of Policing that teaches Critical Race Theory and other identity bollocks to aspiring coppers. It’s a cult. No common sense. Zero humanity. It left Henry to die. Urgently need to go back to without fear or favour policing"
Melissa Chen on X - "Bear in mind that during the inquiry into the Manchester Arena bombing, it came out that security guard Kyle Lawler had actually spotted suicide bomber Salman Abedi before. Abedi was fidgety and sweating in a bulky jacket on a warm night, and carrying a large backpack. Lawler had a “bad feeling” and thought something was wrong, but he hesitated and failed to report it properly. His exact words: “I did not want people to think I am stereotyping him because of his race… I was scared of being wrong and being branded a racist if I got it wrong and would have got into trouble.” 22 innocents were killed; hundreds scarred for life. This bloodbath should have been the final wake-up call about the lethal insanity of “anti-racism” and the deranged cult that treats being called racist as the ultimate unforgivable sin. Instead, Britain doubled down and rammed this poisonous ideology even deeper into the College of Policing’s training. Time to scrap the race-baiting training and fire the ideologues. Or keep burying more young, innocent Brits."
Wokeness kills

Winston Marshall on X - "How could an English police officer cuff and drag an innocent dying white boy, who'd been stabbed 5 times, gasping for his life? After George Floyd in 2020, an incident which had absolutely nothing to do with Britain, the British establishment lost their minds. The police undertook reform. Their new priority: "Reports of racist behaviour or action by officers and staff will be thoroughly investigated and will be dealt with swiftly and robustly, with appropriate support for victims and *those reporting racist behaviours*. " *Alleged* racism became the priority. As laid out explicitly as the number 1 priority in 'The Police Race Action Plan' - (link in replies) And, whilst this is specific to behaviour of police officers and staff themselves, it follows that -
1. This institutional culture inevitably influences operational priorities.
2. Officers who fail to treat an allegation of racism with sufficient seriousness fear or risk being accused of racism themselves.
In 2025 the report was updated (link in replies): "It is not enough for us to not be racist or to claim not to be racist. Anti-racism demands that we are proactive." But crucially: "It does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality)."
IT IS EXPLICITLY AGAINST RACIAL EQUALITY
So whilst we can't read the mind of the police officer in question in the Henry Nowak murder, nor should we be surprised that this sort of incident occurs. It is the horrifying outcome of an ideologically cultivated institution. An the murderer's instinct to weaponise this way of thinking shows how entrenched this rot is through our entire society Enough. No more two-tier policing. No more woke-american anti-racism ideology. Britain must have equal justice for all before the police and the law."

Suella Braverman on X - "Several serving and former Hampshire Police Officers have told me that ‘we had it drummed into us about our white privilege and unconscious bias’. Training was outsourced to a third party company and the trainer ‘was deeply hateful of white people and our culture.’ Officers have reported to me about being furious but unable to complain out of fear for their jobs. This is exactly why I blocked the Race Action Plan as Home Secretary. It is disgraceful that this stuff went on in policing. And the PCC and CC need to be held to account."

Henry Nowak: Police force at centre of arrest 'pressured' officers into diversity training - "Officers within the police force responsible for the arrest of Henry Nowak moments before his death claim they felt “controlled and pressured" after being subjected to mandatory diversity training, a survey has revealed. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary staff are trained to be aware of racism, unconscious bias, and privilege, alongside contested critical race theory. A recent staff survey uncovered by The Times found one in seven of those at the force had felt “controlled and pressured” to adopt these notions, living in fear that “mistakes would have been held against me”. A fifth also said they feared being “rejected for saying the wrong thing" – the same defence used to justify not pursuing criminal charges against those involved in grooming gang scandals. Guidance available to view on the force's website cites "treating people differently" based on ethnicity, leading to sharp criticisms of two-tier policing in Britain... The chief constable of the force since issued an apology for the actions of officers, but sternly denied allegations of two-tier policing... Chief Constable Boon added: “I don’t accept the term of two-tier policing, I don’t recognise it... Sir Keir Starmer also rejected claims of two-tier policing during Prime Minister's Questions today, and accused Nigel Farage of politicising the murder to create “grievance and division” after the Reform UK leader called for the public to respond with “pure cold rage”... The survey of Hampshire and Isle of Wight police officers was carried out following a "Inclusion Matters foundation course”, according to documents published by the College of Policing earlier this year. The force commissioned the University of Reading to assess the training, which has been completed by 6,250 officers and staff. The report forund the force had created a “more inclusive work environment by prioritising autonomy, competence, and relatedness”, and that “race disproportionality” in stop-and-search had nearly halved."
When the police proclaim not just that two-tier policing exists, but that it's a good thing... people (including the police and politicians) still deny that two-tier policing is a thing

Henry Nowak rioting the beginning of wider unrest, warns Farage - "MPs have blamed guidance, published by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) in 2025, for the actions of officers who arrested Mr Nowak. The guidance advises that a commitment to “racial equity” does not mean “treating everyone the same or being colour blind”."

Weapons-obsessed killer Vickrum Digwa jailed for Henry Nowak's murder - "Judge William Mousley KC told a packed Southampton Crown Court that Digwa had brought "shame" upon his family and his religion... Mark Nowak added Digwa "was afforded decency" and "we understand, he was never handcuffed at all"... The CPS said that Digwa chose to carry two ceremonial knives and that the judge's finding of fact made clear that he agreed with its assessment that this was a kirpan that Digwa chose to use."
What a racist judge. Doesn't he know that "minorities" who do bad things do not represent their religion or family, only themselves?

Benny Johnson on X - "New York Times stories on Henry Nowak: 0
New York Times stories on George Floyd: 6,397"
Left wing logic - Nowak's murderer got jailed, so there's nothing to see here and no problem to point out, and only far right extremists have any grievances. But of course, George Floyd's "murder" is still a reason to radically remake society

Konstantin Kisin on X - "Britain had a moment of silence for George Floyd. Our politicians kneeled en masse to show their outrage at his killing. "I can't breathe" became a slogan. George Floyd died on the other side of the world. He wasn't British. Henry Nowak *was* British and his treatment by the police was shocking and negligent in the extreme. Yet there is no minute of silence. There is no coordinated public campaign. There is no kneeling at sporting events. And we all know why. During the summer of BLM, some people said "All Lives Matter". This was treated as the highest form of racism and anyone who said this was immediately cancelled. Why? Because the people in charge don't actually think all lives matter in the same way. They have created a racial hierarchy of victimhood where a career criminal who died through mistreatment by police in a foreign country with 0 evidence of racism like George Floyd is automatically sanctified because of the colour of his skin. And Henry Nowak, a British man, one of ours, is automatically dismissed and ignored because of the colour of his. This is the ugly fruit of so-called "anti-racism", an obsession with race that has created a two-tier society which treats people differently because of the colour of their skin. This needs to stop."

Melissa Chen on X - "I think most people now can see the monstrous consequences of the lie that George Floyd’s death had anything to do with racism. America was hardest hit but not a single anglo society was spared, including (inexplicably) Britain, where the police aren't even armed. Federal agencies, corporations, universities, sports teams, the military, the music industry all dropped to their knees in ritual self-flagellation. DEI commissars flooded in like Red Guards, armed with six-figure salaries and limitless bureaucratic power. Every hire, every promotion, every contract, every training session became a loyalty test to the new faith:
Whiteness = original sin
merit = oppression
colorblindness = violence
They made your life hell for the past 5 years. Billions poured into "equity" grifts while competence hemorrhaged. Everything got a little dumber as the social fabric frayed because suddenly the color of your skin mattered more than whether you could do the job. And don't forget the "Mostly Peaceful" riots that killed dozens, burned police stations down, looted businesses, and torched entire neighborhoods - many of them the very minority neighborhoods they claimed to champion. Statues were toppled and history was rewritten. "Defund the police" became policy in some progressive cities. Together with bail reform and no-cash bail, Soros DAs ensured that crime was not only downplayed but rather, elevated to a respectable lifestyle choice. If you noticed any of this, YOU were racist. Criminals walked. Retail theft became an organized sport as shoplifting rings brazenly (and calmly) walked out with stolen merchandise. And the rest of us? We get to shop at CVS like it's a maximum-security exhibit - toothpaste, deodorant, candy, all locked behind locked plexiglass because punishing thieves became "racist." This was a wholesale cultural revolution that would make Mao blush. New gurus rose up to dictate the new customs. Can't say "All Lives Matter." Don't ask for ID. Don't notice patterns in crime stats. Exams are racist so the SAT was dismantled. Everyone was commanded to kneel, repent, and genuflect at the altar of “Anti-Racism.” Corporations that once made products now also made propaganda. Schools became grievance factories and abolished advanced-level math classes. Cities that once hummed with ambition were transformed into open-air asylums of needles, tents, and feral disorder. The legacy of Saint Floyd was a wholesale reprogramming of society, which brings us back to Henry Novak and how he was treated by the police. The total moral inversion is visible in his death where police hesitated and cuffed him, the VICTIM. They let the victim of a fresh murder bleed out in the street because the new dogma made it unthinkable to confront the obvious: that the perpetrator was not white. In a New Society where the sacred founding principle is that the WORST moral infraction is to perpetuate racism, it then becomes unfathomable to consider that a non-white person did something bad. Reality itself is routinely denied to preserve this dogma. A civilization that reaches this point has already surrendered. We now have an entire generation marinated in this poison, taught from childhood to despise the very civilization that handed them unprecedented peace, prosperity, and freedom. Breaking this programming will not be easy. It is woven into schools, media, corporate policy, and the language we’re allowed to speak. But break it we must. This only ends only when we choose truth over comfort, excellence over equity, and civilization over ritual self-hatred. We need a counter-cultural revolution."

Anti-white racism is real, and it’s been corrupting Britain for decades (aka "Anti-white racism is real, and there’ll be more Henry Nowaks until it’s crushed") - "For a while, King’s dream felt achievable. Progress in the fight against racism was tough-going, and often only partial, but we were moving in the right direction. Prejudice against black and brown people was declining, intermarriage was rising, minorities were prospering, tensions were diminishing. Then something changed: our elites lost the plot. They abandoned King’s commonsensical anti-racism. They started, over a 30-year period, to turn a blind eye, or even to justify, anti-white racism. This was not about “over-compensating” for past wrongs: it was about replacing one form of racism by another. The reason? Labour and Tories alike were adopting the nostrums of critical race theory (CRT), a far-Left, anti-white, post-modern ideology incompatible with Western civilisation. Often dubbed “wokery”, CRT rejects the existence of objective reality (racism is in the eye of the beholder), of rationalism (evidence and proof are not required), of universalism (race is essentialised) and of any possibility of progress. Western societies are deemed racist by definition, hotbeds of power imbalances and exploitation, even if nobody is actually racist. Intent is irrelevant: non-white minorities are inevitably oppressed by the white majority (which also includes Jews and other “white-adjacent” groups). The “power dynamics” are rigged. King is viewed as a victim of Marxist false consciousness, a useful idiot for the “white supremacist” camp (anybody that disagrees with wokery), a traitor even. His colour-blind ideal is dismissed as a tool to perpetuate “systemic inequity”. Any “disparate impact” from any policy – such as laws against shoplifting – on different racial groups is deemed proof of discrimination. All differential outcomes are bad. CRT rejects equality for “equity”, which must be imposed through re-education and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programmes. The result? Instead of arguing that race should be irrelevant, our companies, schools and police have become more race conscious. We were told that real justice required differential treatment. Rather than requiring immigrants to join British society, the UK’s deficiencies were highlighted. Instead of promoting on merit, there was a push for “reverse” discrimination. You will hear this approach described as “anti-racism”, but don’t fall for the Orwellian newspeak. Woke “anti-racism” is like having the Ministry of Peace in charge of war and the Ministry of Truth spreading lies. Critical theory’s great entryism came in 1999 with Sir William Macpherson’s report into the death of Stephen Lawrence. That case rightly outraged Middle England, and exposed just how endemic anti-black racism still was in our society. But while well-intentioned, correct about prejudice within the police and useful in many ways, Macpherson made two fatal concessions to CRT that continue to plague policing today. It described the police not as infected by a racist culture, which it was, but as “institutionally racist”, a woke technical term coined by Stokely Carmichael (aka, Kwame Ture) and Charles Hamilton in Black Power: The Politics of Liberation. The term implies acceptance of CRT’s nonsense, including that racism against whites is impossible; Carmichael was a rabid anti-Semite (“The only good Zionist is a dead Zionist,” he said) and a racial separatist. The second error was to adopt the view that a racist incident was “any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person”. Yes, this meant police could no longer ignore prejudice, but that wasn’t the right way of achieving such a necessary change. Macpherson’s policy was inspired by CRT’s rejection of objective reality, it helped birth the inane concept of (subjective) non-crime hate incidents, and may explain some of the circumstances surrounding the Nowak scandal... There will be more such horrors unless we root out this abominable ideology, which completed its infection of our institutions after the George Floyd and Black Lives Matter psychosis. Take the National Police Chiefs Council’s Anti-Racism Strategy, written by woke fanatics. Its evidently CRT-inspired “commitment to racial equity” means “producing equality of policing outcomes for people from different ethnic groups by responding to individuals and communities according to their specific needs, circumstances and experiences … It does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality).” Two-tier policing is on open display. As a matter of urgency, all CRT and DEI must be extirpated from British policing. We need a genuine struggle against racism, correctly defined, not a woke “anti-racism” that promotes racial animosity and division. Nowak was just the latest scandal. Valdo Calocane, the killer, was not committed to psychiatric hospital amid worries about an “over-representation of young black males in detention”. When a headmistress flagged Axel Rudakubana as a risk, she was accused of “racially profiling” Rudakubana; he went on to murder little girls at a Taylor Swift dance class. The pathological leniency towards anti-Semitic chants and activity can also be blamed on CRT’s rationalising of anti-Jewish hate. Our inability to tackle rape gangs – many of which were of Pakistani descent and targeted white girls – was partly caused by CRT."

Even the thick ones in Parliament know the woke experiment has gone horribly wrong - "the PM at his weekly Questions did not call for a minute’s silence for Henry Nowak (his knees can no longer take it), but 30 minutes of silence on the subject of two-tier policing, acknowledging that something went wrong but that it would be poor taste to ask what... Nigel argued that two-tier policing existed, the riot in Southampton was an inevitable reaction, and unless the Government acted fast, things were “in danger of getting significantly worse”. “SHAME on you!” cried Labour MPs. He almost needed a police escort to return to his seat. The Prime Minister, whose first instinct was to call the police and record a hate crime, saw a moment to shine, like a fresh coat of creosote, and said: “His response has been to appeal for rage... It shows exactly who he is.”... If the victim could not breathe, MPs cannot speak, because Westminster is paralysed by fear. They know, even the thick ones, that the woke experiment has gone horribly wrong, that it has broken trust in policing and persuaded millions that the state is biased against them – a recipe for riot, for when people don’t trust democracy, they turn to the streets instead. The result? MPs are now terrified of their own voters, particularly the poor ones, regarding them like a wild animal that has wandered into the enclosure and could turn nasty any moment. So, they step around them with caution, using gentle words in soft whispers: “Please don’t riot, please don’t riot. There, there. Who’s a good boy?” But the riot has begun, the rage at Farage is displacement. It was a desperately sad scene, as if shouting at a youth for playing with matches while, around them, the House was burning down."
Muslim terrorists are forced to kill civilians because of the Sykes-Picot Agreement, so it's not their fault, and the only way to end Islamist terrorism is to destroy Israel, but if white people riot they are disgusting, evil, far right extremists who need to be jailed forever and anyone who seeks to understand and defuse their grievances is creating division. The correct approach is to suppress white people forever - by force, if necessary

BBC apologises for misquoting Farage on Nowak murder - "Matt Chorley, the presenter, said that the Reform UK leader had told the public to respond to the murder with “white cold rage”, when he had said “pure cold rage”. Reform argued that this implied a racial element to what Mr Farage had said and changed his meaning."

The police have been failing white victims for decades - "The deaths of Henry Nowak and George Floyd share unsettling parallels: arrested by officers who put them in handcuffs as they told them “I can’t breathe”, dying in front of the people who should have assisted them. Only one, however, triggered a sudden desire in Westminster’s establishment parties to reform the British state. The reason is simple. The “lessons” Britain could draw from George Floyd – a black American who had never visited these shores, let alone encountered our police – supported the unofficial ideology of the British state. The lessons we should learn from Henry Nowak’s death condemn it... The Macpherson principle which emerged from this – that all reports of racism should be investigated as such – is the bedrock for the Babel tower of “independent advisory groups” and community tension summaries/assessments which have transformed police forces from enforcers of the law into managers of community cohesion. Look at the College of Policing’s authorised professional practice guidance, and it is remarkably open about this: the police should “respond positively to allegations, signs and perceptions of hostility and hate”, maintaining a “standard for the priority response” to “hate crime and non-crime hate incidents”. When Digwa’s brother used his 999 call to say “we’ve just been attacked by someone racially… by some white person”, he invoked the words that triggered this priority response, and the police followed their programming. Hampshire Police’s own “race action plan” sets out how following George Floyd’s death, it committed to ensuring its force would be “anti-racist in all it does”, and committed to “pursue offenders and deal with offences that cause the most harm to our ethnic minority communities”. Henry Nowak’s arrest shows what this looks like in practice. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that the legacy of the Macpherson report is confined to the police: “institutional racism” as explanation for disparities and outcomes has rippled throughout the state and public... Fears of accusations of racism meant that security staff failed to confront the Manchester Arena bomber. In each case, the mechanisms at play in the Nowak case were on partial display. The rationale which underlies them remains the same, today, as those which gave way to the bout of self-examination in the Macpherson report. Having embarked on a project to utterly remake the country through historically unprecedented levels of migration, Westminster has been playing catch-up in managing the tensions and conflicts that result, constantly attempting to maintain legitimacy with an increasingly divided and untrusting populace. The way it has chosen to do so is by identifying the risk of majority rejection of minorities (as opposed to the more manageable minority rejection of majority) as the greatest threat it faces, and accordingly by putting the management of these tensions – racism, bigotry, hatred, whichever description you choose – as the greatest priority for policing. Even the sentencing remarks for the case bear the imprint of this logic, with the judge noting that Digwa had “stirred up racial tension” and “made many Sikhs worried about their own safety”. Watch the bodycam footage of Henry Nowak’s death – quiet pleas for help ignored as officers went about the business of managing tensions – and you can see what this means in practice. This tragedy was not an aberration. It was the two-tier machine of law-enforcement doing precisely what it was meant to do. The revealed preference of Westminster, for decades, has been to run a higher risk of murder and violence so long as there is no risk that it is perceived as “biased”. This time, the consequence was caught in high definition footage. The only way to change the result the next time a similar incident plays out is to start the long, hard work of unpicking the “anti-racist” ideology that has corrupted the state."

Henry Nowak’s killer Vickrum Digwa was known to police - "Henry Nowak’s killer was arrested and released without charge by police after stealing a cache of knives two years before he murdered the university student. Vickrum Digwa’s local Sikh temple in Southampton accused him of stealing £1,000 worth of ceremonial “shaster” knives in 2023. A source from Gurdwara Khalsa Darbar told The Telegraph that the theft was reported to police and Digwa, 23, was banned from the temple. He was detained by officers at the time, but was never charged... The alleged theft occurred the year after the force launched a diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) drive... As part of its race action plan, which promised to “understand the impact, trauma and history of policing ethnic minority communities”, all officers had mandatory DEI training... The source said they would describe Digwa as a “pathological liar” with “anger problems” who came across as “believable” to many... Nicholas Lobbenberg KC, the prosecuting barrister, said Digwa had a “weapons obsession”, adding his depiction to police of Mr Nowak as a “racist, drunk, violent aggressor compounds the natural grief and loss of the deceased’s family”."

The ‘cult of diversity and inclusion’ at heart of Henry Nowak police force - "In 2022, Hampshire Constabulary’s chief constable proudly stated: “Being anti-racist, ethical and inclusive is top of our agenda.” The county’s residents might have expected catching criminals or preventing crime to be top of the force’s agenda – but major changes were afoot on the other side of the thin blue line... Current and former police officers say the two deaths are inextricably linked. They speak of a “cult” of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) sweeping through Hampshire and other forces, resulting in officers living in fear of career-ending accusations of racism, however unfounded they might be. They argue that Mr Nowak’s treatment was the tragic result of a culture that put DEI “top of the agenda”, as Olivia Pinkney, Hampshire’s then-chief constable, said in 2022... When 18-year-old Mr Nowak told officers “I’ve been stabbed”, one of them replied: “I don’t think you have, mate.” As he gasped: “I can’t breathe,” the same officer said: “Put the hand in the cuff, mate.” One senior police officer told The Telegraph: “For years, officers have been subjected to cultural awareness and DEI training that, in many cases, presents policing as institutionally racist by default. “Guest speakers are regularly brought in to discuss their lived experiences and, regardless of individual conduct or professionalism, officers are often left feeling collectively labelled as prejudiced. “That is why the Henry Nowak incident does not shock me. I can easily imagine inexperienced officers attending the scene, fearful of making the wrong decision and conscious of the professional consequences of being accused of racism or misconduct. ‘Rabbit in the headlights’ would be an accurate description. “Many younger officers are now so concerned about allegations of discrimination that they default to the safest option administratively rather than relying on judgment, experience, or common sense. In my view, the decision to handcuff Henry Nowak reflects that environment.” In 2023, Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary, as it had been renamed by then, published its race action plan, setting out its “clear commitment to nurture an ethical and inclusive culture”. It would “underpin our efforts to police with courage, empathy and respect, delivering a service that is anti-discriminatory”. It also contained a warning to officers who failed in their DEI duties. “Despite all of these efforts, there are times when our staff undermine the public’s trust and confidence and that of their colleagues by behaving in an unethical and discriminatory way. “Our internal reporting mechanisms are strong… we have a proven track record of removing those found guilty, no matter what rank they hold.” It was this document that made specific reference to Floyd’s murder as “a pivotal moment for policing in the UK, driving the need for real change”. It added: “Whilst this tragic event happened in another country, policing across the UK has over many years had a strained relationship with some communities.” The solution was DEI training for officers and staff so they could “understand the trauma and failings of the past”. Rick Prior was the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, representing rank and file officers, until he was sacked last year for saying officers were withdrawing from proactive policing for fear of being labelled racist. He said Mr Nowak’s death reflected the same issues he was sacked for talking about – that officers were being “unduly affected by the worry or threat of being accused of and investigated for racism”. He told The Telegraph: “The worst thing in the world that can happen to a police officer now is to have an allegation of racism against you because you’re taken off ops for months, and it can get dragged out for a year or two years. “So if they are turning up to an incident where there is an allegation of racism, that will be their primary focus. Rather than being objective they will be thinking ‘for God’s sake don’t mess this up’.”... Images of officers taking the knee at public events led to accusations that they had become politicised, and were taking sides. In May 2022 the National Police Chiefs’ Council began consulting on a new race plan aimed at “changing a legacy of distrust” which informed Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary’s own race action plan. The Hampshire force promised “zero tolerance of racism and ensuring [the force] is anti-racist in all it does”. It had been stung by a high-profile racism case within its ranks in 2021 when five officers, including a detective inspector and two detective sergeants, were dismissed after saying their unit’s only black officer had been “flown from Africa in a crate”, and putting a map of Africa above his desk and calling it “African corner”. That case was still fresh in the memory when Hampshire published its race action plan, but rather than talking about how it would keep ethnic minority communities safe, it talked of “Understanding the impact, trauma and history of policing ethnic minority communities”. A promise that “our victims will be put first and treated according to their needs regardless of any differences that may exist” rings rather hollow in the wake of Mr Nowak’s death."

Introduction to Gazology

As we know, only "white" people have agency and only "white" people can be villains: 

Introduction to Gazology

The origins of this essay lie in a recent visit to the Middle East shelf in a Washington, D.C., bookstore during a visit from my home in the actual Middle East. I was on a short break from the story I’ve been living and covering in Israel for three decades, and from the tragedies that have become routine for Israelis and for our neighbors since the war that began on October 7, 2023.

As a longtime denizen of bookstores in Western countries, I knew that almost any shop would carry a few titles about the evils of Zionism and Israel, a venerable genre on the Marxist left. But this time I saw a change: The Gaza war had inspired a proliferation of these titles so intense that they now filled much of a shelf. I noticed the same phenomenon in other bookstores in other cities, where there were suddenly more “Gaza” and “Palestine” books, it seemed, than books about the rest of the entire Arab world combined. Humanity now inhabited a new age, according to one title, The World After Gaza. According to another, The Destruction of Palestine Is the Destruction of the Earth. There was Gaza: The Story of a Genocide, and Palestine and Feminist Liberation,* *and many more examples in the same vein, with more soon to be published. A new literary genre had been born.

The Gaza war has been fought a two-hour drive from my Jerusalem home by people I know, and has claimed the lives of several of them. For me, reading the back covers of these books left the impression of a genre related to the actual territory of Gaza as the Dune novels are related to the actual NASA space program. At the same time, it wasn’t fringe work. Among the practitioners were authors who have recently won a National Book Award, the Pulitzer Prize, and additional accolades.

After reading more in subsequent months, I came to think of the genre as “Gazology.” By this term I don’t mean the study of the real territory of Gaza, or of the terrible human tragedy caused by the Hamas offensive of October 7 and by the Israeli response in the war that followed—vast tracts of Gaza destroyed, tens of thousands of civilians killed along with tens of thousands of combatants, and aftershocks across the Middle East. Gazology is not reportage, and most of its practitioners are not in or even near Gaza or Israel. This is a Western literary genre with its own rules, tropes, and goals.

It’s likely that much Western culture, journalism, and politics in the coming years will be downstream of these books and the ideology behind them. Students in disciplines from anthropology to medicine will be assigned these works and invited to see the world’s problems through the lens of “Gaza.” For this reason, the genre is important. What follows is a survey of five representative samples of the volumes in question, in an attempt to sketch the contours of this expanding body of writing and to understand what it is trying to say. 

ONE DAY, EVERYONE WILL HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AGAINST THIS

The memorable cover of the genre’s most popular title, and the first one I read, shows a stylized girl with a bomb about to drop on her head. The author, Omar El Akkad, was born in Egypt and immigrated to Canada, where he reported for The Globe and Mail before moving to the United States. He’s now an American citizen living in Oregon.

In the pages of One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This, El Akkad watches the war in Gaza unfold in portrayals on television and online, describing it as an era-defining evil that people will eventually claim to have opposed, like the crimes of the Nazis or the conquistadors. The war resonates for him as someone living with the displacement of his own migration from the Islamic world as a teen, with a heightened sensitivity to racism, and with the abiding discomfort of a Muslim man living in North America.

The book’s title, particularly the word this, led me to expect an account of the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, or the war itself, but the strangest aspect of One Day, Everyone Will Have Always Been Against This is the author’s slim interest in any of those topics. We follow his travels in Oregon, and in Montreal. He listens to Nirvana. His backyard deck collapses in a way that feels emotionally significant, an episode that gets more space in the book than the entire ideology of Hamas—including the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews in pursuit of the supremacy of Islam—which is never mentioned at all. He writes sentences like “We are all governed by chance. We are all subjects of distance,” and “Fear obscures the necessity of its causing.” His daughter, we learn, “turns seven soon, a hundred in dragon years. She is made of dreaming.” The book won last year’s National Book Award for nonfiction. 

El Akkad complains about racism from officials on the U.S.-Canada border, about the hardships of the writer’s life, and about the immoral Israeli investments of people who once gave him a Canadian book prize worth $100,000, which he doesn’t mention giving back. “I’ve sat through a wildly uncomfortable book tour interview once after I joked that I write all my novels in Arabic and then run them through Google Translate, and the interviewer believed me,” he tells us. We’re meant to sneer at this prejudice and sympathize with its victim, but why wouldn’t the interviewer believe him? And why does an author claiming to have discovered the age’s defining evil seem to be concerned primarily with himself? This was confusing at first, but as I read Gazology more deeply, I realized this approach is a characteristic of the genre: In these books, Gaza is not a subject but a stage.

The author gives no indication of ever having set foot in Gaza or in Israel, and when he talks about witnessing events, the recurring phrase is “I watch footage.” Some events are “witnessed” in this fashion—that is, via images that are subject to Hamas censorship and intimidation in Gaza, often curated by Western activists practicing journalism as agitprop, and then supercharged by the various Qatari, Chinese, and Russian information campaigns bending our online algorithms. Other events are not witnessed but ignored to the extent possible, most notably the October 7 massacre that began the war. In what turns out to be another feature of the genre, El Akkad sidesteps the butchery of that day by homing in on one false story promulgated after the attack about Israeli babies who were beheaded or put in an oven. That didn’t happen. But a reader doesn’t learn what did happen: namely, a premeditated mass murder committed by teams of terrorists going house to house through Israeli communities, burning families in their bedrooms, kidnapping toddlers and grandparents, and gunning down more than 350 young people at a music festival. To a reader of this book the motivation behind the attack remains mysterious. Though it was carried out by the Islamic Resistance Movement, known by the Arabic acronym Hamas, the words Islam or Islamic appear in the entire book a total of four times. The word genocide, on the other hand, appears more than 40 times.

This word is key to this book and to the entire Gazology genre: Genocide is the equivalent of water in Dune, the substance that moves the storyline along. If the Jews have committed genocide, everyone else can finally stop thinking about the genocide committed against them, can turn without guilt against the state that allowed Jews to protect themselves for the first time, and can sink with relief back into pre-Holocaust thought patterns—because by committing the ultimate evil, the Jews have finally proved that those thought patterns were correct. The accusation serves to justify violence against Israelis, including, retroactively, the violence of October 7, thus making them responsible for a war launched by Palestinians. The “Gaza genocide” may be an obvious falsehood, but it’s an irresistible story.

After two-and-a-half years of a brutal war fought by Israel against an enemy that makes itself indistinguishable from civilians by design, the population of Gaza is alive. Hamas’s own statistics put military and civilian fatalities—a distinction the group doesn’t make—at just over 3 percent of the prewar population, and the people of Gaza are largely displaced and suffering but have increased in number since the beginning of the war. The genocide charge is not an analysis of Israeli operations but a tool designed to shift attention away from the people who started the war and built the twisted battlefield on which it would be fought, and to mass-produce a verbal weapon that can be used to anathematize opponents and obscure their concerns. Using the term is a way not to think, for example, about the real options available to an Israeli officer approaching a Gaza town containing 15 miles of Hamas tunnels, 1,000 jihadists dressed like civilians, and several dozen Israeli hostages alive or dead in unknown locations. 

El Akkad, watching on the internet from Oregon, is convinced that he’s seeing “the wholesale murder of a people” and “one of the largest killing sprees of Muslims in recent history.” The practice of inversion, I found, is a habit of the writers in this field, which explains the following sentence: “Of all the aftereffects of the War on Terror years, the most frequently underestimated is the heightened derangement of language for the purpose of sanitizing violence.” 

GAZA FACES HISTORY 

Enzo Traverso, an Italian historian on staff at Cornell, opens his own contribution to the genre, Gaza Faces History, with an admission: He is “not a specialist on the Middle East, nor on the Arab-Israeli conflict, nor on Palestine.”

Nevertheless he would like to share his thoughts. “We are not dealing with two armies, given the disparity between the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] and Hamas, but with executioners and victims, an army and a civilian population—precisely the conditions associated with genocide,” Traverso writes. He does admit “a gap” between what we would usually call a genocide and the events in Gaza—the gap presumably being that the victims in this case aren’t dead. But genocides, he assures us, “differ in scale and may be committed using a variety of means.” The professor then proceeds to his real topic, which isn’t Gaza but Jews. 

The Jews, we are to understand, have used the Holocaust to justify their own crimes, culminating—with a kind of literary inexorability—in their transformation into Nazis. The word jihad, which is Hamas’s word for its own ideology and actions, doesn’t appear in Gaza Faces History, but the Warsaw Ghetto appears four times. When the word tunnels makes its single appearance, this is the context: “[T]he destruction of Gaza by the IDF recalls the razing of the Warsaw ghetto by General [Jurgen] Stroop in 1943, and the combatants leaping out of tunnels to strike at an occupying army that sees them as ‘animals’ inevitably suggests the Jewish fighters in the ghetto.”

He goes on to discuss Al Jolson and minstrel shows, and includes a tangent about a scholar who once wrote that the medieval blood libel against Jews was actually true. It’s hard to understand what he means by this, but it’s clear that in the mind of this European scholar, “Gaza” exists not in the Islamic world but in the mental plumbing of Christian Europe, his home court. When he does turn his attention to the place mentioned in the book’s title, he begins to trip over his own ideas. “Nothing can justify” the actions of Hamas on October 7, he writes, and then justifies them repeatedly: Gaza was an “open-air prison,” so massacring Jews at a rave in southern Israel is not, he assures the reader, like massacring French concertgoers in Paris. “All that Hamas can do, not being a state, is to take hostages and launch rockets. Hamas’s terrorism is just the dialectic twin of Israeli state terrorism. Terrorism is never pretty, but the terrorism of the oppressed is generated by that of their oppressor.” And we must understand why so many people rejoiced on October 7, an event which, like El Akkad, he avoids describing in detail: “[S]chadenfreude is a human emotion, like the wan smile on the faces of Auschwitz inmates when they heard the news of the bombing of German cities.” 

By now Traverso has forgotten that he is “not a specialist,” and also that Hamas’s atrocities can’t be justified, and continues with decreasing coherence. Israel “has every right to exist,” he writes, and continues, in the same sentence, “but the future of this nation is threatened by the political entity governing and representing it today.” There seems to be no editor on hand to intervene. “Faith,” the historian declares, passing judgment on poor souls who don’t share his clarity, “often calls for a denial of reality.” 

THE DESTRUCTION OF PALESTINE IS THE DESTRUCTION OF THE EARTH 

Andreas Malm, a Marxist academic from Sweden, would like to widen the lens: Israelis are responsible for the destruction of Palestinians, to be sure, but that’s not all. They’re also complicit in the destruction of the entire planet. In The Destruction of Palestine Is the Destruction of the Earth—part of a new Gazology series from Verso Books, whose website boasts a commitment to “radical publishing”—we learn that Zionism and fossil fuels are not merely the dual evils facing the world but conjoined twins.

The author quotes Theodor Herzl: “If I wish to substitute a new building for an old one, I must demolish before I construct,” which Malm explains is a reference to “the construction of racial colonies.” In fact, this line from The Jewish State refers to writing, and specifically to Herzl’s method for building an argument on the page. Malm clearly hasn’t read the text. In his defense, the author apologizes for his busy schedule: “Work on other projects has prevented me from giving more than a rough (and lightly referenced) account,” he writes in his introduction.

In his real life, the author seems to be an employee of the Swedish welfare state as an associate professor in the Department of Human Geography at Lund University. His fantasy life is quite different: “If I lived in Gaza, I would, I imagine, be a long-standing member of the PFLP,” he writes, referring to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. If he were a woman, “I would have joined the women’s brigades of the DFLP,” that being the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. (Both are leftist factions famous from the days of Palestinian airline terrorism and eclipsed since the 1980s by jihadists.) He believes that the Gaza war is not just a genocide, but possibly worse than past genocides because it’s supported by countries in the West: “I must confess to some naivety here: I had not expected quite this voracious an appetite for Palestinian blood.” He’s not thrilled by every aspect of October 7, but admits with refreshing honesty that he did greet the massacres with “cries of jubilation.” 

The Destruction of Palestine Is the Destruction of the Earth argues for a special link between Israel and global environmental degradation. The author’s thesis revolves around the year 1840, when the British Empire first used armed steamboats in the Levant, demonstrating the supremacy of coal and also sparking the early glimmers of Christian Zionism among British aristocrats. “Here is the first moment of articulation: the moment that ignited the globalization of steam, through its deployment in war, was also the moment that conceived the Zionist project.” Steam can obviously be linked to nearly every historical development on Earth since its invention, and the unique connection to Zionism remains elusive to a reader despite the author’s passion, which is expressed in sentences like: “However mighty they may be, the fossil fuel and Zionist lobbies are epiphenomenal excrescences from deep structures that have operated over a very longue durée.”

The central irony of Malm’s thesis is that until a few years ago Israel had no fossil fuels to speak of, unlike its traditional enemies, who include the world’s greatest oil producers. Replying to a colleague who seems to have politely pointed this out, the author concedes that the issue is less fossil fuels than who’s using them. When the Soviet Union used oil revenue to defeat fascism or to fund his own heroes from the PFLP, that was good. Oil is also good when the Islamic petro-dictatorship Qatar uses the proceeds to fund its propaganda channel Al Jazeera, which the author describes as the “single source of sustained sanity in the global media landscape.”

From his command post in the faculty lounge at Lund, the author calls for bloodshed. “Limiting, stopping, reversing the destruction of Palestine and the planet therefore require, as a logically unassailable condition, the destruction of fossil fuel infrastructure and racial colonies,” he writes; however, “not necessarily their physical destruction; but necessarily their decommissioning and repurposing, in the cases where that is possible, and where not, on the path to their abolition, yes, their physical destruction.”

THE WORLD AFTER GAZA

A reader of Gazology discovers not only that Jews are committing a great sin, which they are trying to hide, but that these actions exist at the heart of the age. Once again, it turns out, some “physical destruction” may be necessary to save the world from them. As the Irish novelist Sally Rooney recently told an audience, echoing the title of Malm’s book, “By standing in solidarity with Palestine, we are learning how to fight for life on Earth.” Or in the words of another English-language novelist, the American writer Susan Abulhawa, referring to the “vile colony” of Israel: “The only way humanity has a fighting chance at a moral future is if this cancer is excised from our political, moral, and social reality.” This belief is held by figures as seemingly divergent as Candace Owens, the popular American podcaster, who told her followers this month that “There will never be peace in the world while Israel exists,” and the defense minister of Pakistan, who posted on X that “Israel is evil and a curse for humanity.”

The World After Gaza is the contribution from Pankaj Mishra, a writer who was born in India and lives in Britain. In keeping with the genre, the book’s subject is not Gaza. It’s about literature, and specifically Jewish literature, and more specifically Jewish literature related to the Holocaust. The words Holocaust or Shoah appear more than 250 times in The World After Gaza, four times as often as the word Gaza. The book begins with a blizzard of quotes from Jewish writers like Hannah Arendt and Sigmund Freud before proceeding to Isaac Babel and, eventually, to five whole pages about a novel by Saul Bellow. A reader gets the impression that Jewish writers are being stacked here like sandbags against the suspicion that the author may be engaged in something other than honest analysis when he describes the Israeli war in Gaza as “an act of political evil,” a “livestreamed mass-murder spree,” and a genocide to rival the Holocaust. There are other tragedies on Earth, to be sure: “Yet no disaster compares to Gaza—nothing has left us with such an intolerable weight of grief, perplexity, and bad conscience.”

Once a Gazology reader realizes that the goal is not an analysis of an actual war in Gaza, the search begins for the real use to which “Gaza” is being put. Mishra’s project, as far as I can tell, is to replace the genocide of Jews in the Western mind with a genocide by Jews, and then to replace the Jewish writers whom the author admires with—well, with himself. He returns repeatedly to the celebrated Italian novelist and Holocaust survivor Primo Levi, who is mentioned dozens of times in a book that has “Gaza” in the title, in which the name Yahya Sinwar is not mentioned once. Mishra seems to want to be Primo Levi, and even if we understand this is impossible—because Levi is gifted and Mishra is not, because Levi is a witness and Mishra is a voyeur, because Levi’s Holocaust was real and Mishra’s is an ideological fantasy—one still finds something authentic and plaintive in this longing.

The slipperiness of Mishra’s book made me miss the Swede who identifies as a PFLP commando, and who at least says what he means. Mishra regrets that the Palestinians have been outmaneuvered by “internationally connected and resourceful Zionists.” He sees “the insidious racism that had helped prioritize the interests of the West’s chosen nation in the Middle East while demeaning Palestinian suffering in Western eyes.” Getting insidious racism and chosen nation in one sentence is, a reader senses, what he considers daring. He quotes Roald Dahl: “Never before has a race of people generated so much sympathy around the world and then, in the space of a lifetime, succeeded in turning that sympathy into hatred and revulsion.” Mishra calls Dahl an “antisemite,” and seems to agree with him. 

BEING JEWISH AFTER THE DESTRUCTION OF GAZA: A RECKONING 

Any worldview that places Jewish malfeasance at its center will draw Jewish adherents who see the advantage of being at the center of something, and on the Gazology shelf we find a sad little volume by Peter Beinart, an American journalist. This one begins, as usual, not with Gaza but with the author, in America: He’s in college, or at a conference in Colorado, holding forth on the Bible and on an alphabet soup of American Jewish organizations he doesn’t like.

Unlike the other books, Being Jewish After the Destruction of Gaza: A Reckoning takes the trouble to describe and humanize some of the Jewish victims of October 7. But the author thinks Hamas gunmen are akin to anticolonialist rebels in Haiti or the Mau Mau of Kenya—that is, that their actions are an effect, not a cause, and that their grievance is justified. Hatred of Jews who live outside Israel is bigotry and a feature of the political right, Beinart explains. Hatred of Jews in Israel is rational.

The project of this particular “Gaza” book is to find a place for Jews in a Western left increasingly gripped by anti-Zionist conspiracies, while simultaneously offering other leftists a Jewish reassurance that their current preoccupation with Jews is unrelated to the historically recurring preoccupation with the same group of people. The chant “from the river to the sea,” which is a call to replace the single Jewish state with a Muslim-majority state, expresses a “democratic vision,” he writes, so there’s nothing to worry about unless you oppose democracy. He endorses the idea that the Jewish side of the recent war must be at the center of the world’s understanding of injustice: “In its unchecked cruelty and unbearable pain, the destruction of Gaza is a symbol of our age.” 

DISPLACED IN GAZA: STORIES FROM THE GAZA GENOCIDE 

The last category on the Gaza shelf is different from the others. It consists of testimony from people actually in Gaza, rather than of the thoughts of foreigners energized by this tragedy. Displaced in Gaza, for example, introduces 27 Palestinian civilians rendered homeless in the devastation of the war. A woman named Aisha Osama Abu Ajwa gives a harrowing account of being on the move under fire with six children, living in shelters: “We just want the war to stop and to return to our lives before the war.” Another account is from Fidaa Fathi Abu Yousef, a mother of four: “I feared for my children due to intense bombardment. Occupation forces bombed several houses adjacent to us, and dozens of our friends, neighbors, and loved ones were martyred.” Her son Odai is killed.

The correct response to these suffering people is compassion. No one would want to be in their place. An observer can only point out what isn’t in any of the testimonies: Hamas, the group that has ruled Gaza for two decades, which started the war, prolonged it for two-and-a-half years, and fought it from inside and under the houses of the people in the book. Whether because of coercion or ideological sympathy, these Gazans do not admit to seeing any of the group’s tens of thousands armed fighters, or any of the thousands of tunnel entrances across Gaza. They didn’t see the Israeli hostages and corpses paraded through their streets on October 7, and weren’t in any of the cheering crowds.

I don’t mean that the presence of Hamas is played down in Displaced in Gaza but that the word Hamas doesn’t appear even once. The same is true of a recent New York Times essay written by Ghada Abdulfattah in the same vein, “Gaza’s Rubble Is the Grave of Our Future,” and it’s true of most first-person accounts from Gaza aimed at Western audiences. In Hamas messaging for Middle Eastern audiences, by contrast, like speeches from the group’s leaders and viral videos with red triangles marking Israeli targets, the brave fighters of the Islamic Resistance are said to be striking the Zionist enemy with the support of a population committed to victory and martyrdom.

In the work of Mosab Abu Toha, for example, a writer whose vivid essays in The New Yorker made him perhaps the most prominent Gazan voice on this war, Hamas does appear by name, but as a distant actor in the background of a catastrophe engineered by Israel. It would be interesting to read what Abu Toha, who fled Gaza and now lives in the U.S., actually knows about Hamas; he likely has acquaintances or relatives in the organization, as do most people in the Hamas-controlled territory. But this knowledge is out of bounds. When a library he founded was destroyed early in the fighting, he blamed “Israel’s genocidal campaign to erase Gaza and everything that breathes of life and love,” and in February, Abu Toha could be found on X accusing Israel of trafficking in the skin of dead Palestinians. Early last year, around the same time a book of his poetry was published by Knopf, Abu Toha decried the fact that the Israeli hostage Emily Damari, who was shot and seized from her home near the Gaza border on October 7, was considered a hostage even though she was a police officer; the poet’s post ended with the phrase, “Fuck your language.” Last spring he won the Pulitzer Prize in commentary.

The disappearance of Hamas is the key tactic in making Israel seem irrational or malign. It’s like describing the American war in the Pacific without mentioning Japan, or describing all Japanese on every Pacific island as civilians. If you understand there’s a Hamas commander in a given house, for example, it’s possible to perceive the reasoning behind the air strike that destroys the house, even if you think the civilian casualties are tragic or immoral and feel sympathy for mothers like Aisha Osama Abu Ajwa. If there is no Hamas, the strike is just a massacre.

The genre I’ve called Gazology makes three central claims. Firstly, that the war in Gaza is not a response to the attack of October 7, which was either unimportant or justified, and was in any case unrelated to the faith and ideology of the attackers or of the hundreds of millions who support them across the Islamic world. Secondly, that no firsthand experience, language skills, military knowledge, or even proximity are required for an author working in the genre, because all relevant facts are incontrovertible and available online. And lastly, and most importantly, Gazology rests on the idea that the Gaza war is not just Israel’s fault, a bad decision, or even a crime, but the doorway to the dark workings of the world.

It’s in the last point that a reader glimpses the battery powering the genre. Gazology is a literature of Jewish evil. Its origins lie not in journalism or academic inquiry but in the pseudosciences that have sprung up over the centuries to explain the problems of humanity with stories about the malevolence of this group of people. 

When I began working as a correspondent for the international press in Israel 20 years ago, I was surprised to find myself participating in coverage guided less by curiosity than by activist ideas that were then taking hold in the Western left. One of these ideas, common in Soviet propaganda and in Marxist circles since the 1970s, portrayed the Jewish state as the prime embodiment of the ills of the West—particularly imperialism, racism, and militarism, if not apartheid and genocide. A similar process of ideological capture was playing out in those years across much of the storytelling apparatus of the West—the academy, human-rights groups, the United Nations, publishing—merging to create an information bubble that was inflaming public opinion while making the real world harder and harder to understand.

I had a sense of what one result would be. In 2014, after leaving my job as a correspondent for the Associated Press, I wrote two essays describing what I’d seen and warning that the kind of journalism now being produced “laid bare the resurgence of an old, twisted pattern of thought and its migration from the margins to the mainstream of Western discourse—namely, a hostile obsession with Jews.” Just over a decade later, the Gazology shelf shows that the migration is complete. These alarming ideas are now accepted by many as so self-evident that they no longer require defense.

It’s tempting to mock these writers as the grandchildren of phrenologists. It would be honest to point out how shoddy the inquiry, how poor the writing, how evident the pathologies at work. But dismissing them would be a mistake. This is an old poison, and a strong one. It shows every sign of working.

Links - 10th June 2026 (1 - General Wokeness [including Juries])

Politics UK on X - "🚨 NEW: Mohammed Fahir Amaaz and Muhammad Amaad have been cleared over the alleged assault of a male police officer at Manchester Airport Two juries failed to reach a verdict and no further trial will take place"
Tom Harwood on X - "Lee Kuan Yew abolished trial by jury in Singapore after determining that it was too easy for defence lawyers to appeal to racial and religious biases of juries in multicultural Singapore. He writes in his memoirs how as a young lawyer he was able to get three clients acquitted who he was sure did commit murder. LKY writes that he "worked on the weaknesses of the jury -- their biases, their prejudices, their reluctance really to find four Muslims guilty of killing in cold blood or in a heat of great passion, religious passion, an RAF officer, his wife and child." He writes "The judge was thoroughly disgusted. I went home feeling quite sick because I knew I'd discharged my duty as required of me, but I knew I had done wrong.” Study after study shows that in multi ethnic societies, there is significant in-group bias on juries."

FischerKing on X - "The jury system isn't some static thing that emerged in England and has remained unchanged as the bedrock of common law. It started more as a fact-finding enterprise. Traveling judges, in the name of the King, would go around to hear cases in far away places, and gather evidence from the locals - this was the "jury." They were more like witnesses and fact-finders. Over time this evolved into a "jury of your peers" who decided guilt and innocence, which was a way to decentralize power away from potentially corrupt judges who might be doing the bidding of the monarch or someone else who paid him off. Now we are at a point in diverse societies where we cannot expect juries to convict guilty people for tribal or ideological reasons. Everyone remembers OJ Simpson. It was for this kind of reason that Singapore abolished juries in criminal trials back in the 1960s - because it wasn't working to administer justice. We may have to rethink the jury system in the USA - which wouldn't be the end of the world, just a recognition that things have changed."
The American Tribune on X - "The other thing is that the "jury of your peers" part came about because of the Peerage, and everyone knowing that allowing cross-class juries would lead to spite-driven rulings. Hence why until the 1950s, the Lords could choose to be tried in the House of Lords  Now, the point of the jury selection process is to screen out the "peers" of a normal, productive person. Particularly, the defense of a career criminal will try to get as many of his co-ethnics on the jury as possible, screen out the learned and competent, screen out men who look like they don't like criminals, etc. And of course it's the same thing when suing some normal guy who had to defend himself from such a criminal  If you aren't a multi-generational welfare lout with a penchant for criminality, to deal with a jury trial is to, in almost every case, be tried by those who are definitively not your peers"

Meme - Harrison H. Smith: "Black jurors show a 50-point swing based on the race of the defendant. That's an insane level of bias. We're talking about life-and-death decisions."
"BME= black minority ethnic jurors. This study shows that the bias in BME jurors render them utterly useless for a fair trial.
"Juror Guilty Votes by Defendant and Juror Ethnicity (n=319)"
"White Defendant Guilty - White Juror 39%, BME Juror 73%
BME Defendant Guilty - White Juror 32%, BME Juror 24%"

Dapper Detective on X - "🚨BREAKING: Judge declares mistrial in Tren de Aragua capital murder case after a Liberal packed Dallas jury remained deadlocked. These illegal aliens of a designated foreign terrorist organization kidnapped a man and his children and then executed him in front of them. UNREAL."
Councilwoman Vickie Paladino on X - "Leftist jury nullification is very real, and it’s going to destroy the last semblance of public trust in the social compact. This is happening in blue jurisdictions nationwide.  If we can no longer trust juries to convict a gang member who executed a man in front of his children, we cease to have a constitutional means to persevere public order.   Trust in the jury system is nothing less than the cornerstone of civil society, and the left is eagerly destroying it through identity politics and oppression theology.   Once it’s gone, things will get very brutal very fast."

Unlimited L's on X - "🚨NEW: Trial for the murder of NYPD hero Jonathan Diller erupts into chaos after one jury said they couldn't reach a unanimous verdict; FOUND NOT GUILTY OF MURDER  Guy Rivera, 34, was waiting for his verdict when a juror suddenly spoke up, saying the decision read in court was not unanimous  When the foreman first announced an acquittal on the top charge, the fallen officer’s family broke down in the courtroom  The jury later returned and confirmed Rivera was not guilty of first-degree murder  He was found guilty on lesser charges, including aggravated manslaughter, attempted murder, and weapon possession  Rivera was on trial for the fatal shooting of an NYPD officer during a traffic stop in Far Rockaway on March 25, 2024"
The American Tribune on X - "Jury trials don’t work because they are no longer trials of our justice-minded peers, but rather ethnic headcount’s that are determined by the in group preferences of the jurors Particularly, black and Hispanic jurors show a notable tendency to side with their ethnic group"

J.T. Alexander on X - "I prosecuted in a very heavily White area.  Jury trials aren't only failing because of ethnic tribalism.  They're failing in large part because a jury's expectation of evidence is cartoonishly high, completely divorced from reality. They expect *everything* to be on video nowadays.  They're also failing because juries are more prone to nullification than ever before. Not for any principled reason, such as believe the crime was just, but that they simply don't trust the state to charge and punish people properly and/or they don't care.  E.g., I've had DUI cases where someone who was OBVIOUSLY guilty was acquitted. Multiple. In one of them I spoke to the jury afterward and they flat out told me "All the evidence was there." They just felt bad for the defendant and wanted to go home.  They're also failing because judges and statutes are more pro-criminal than ever before.
 Judge Example: In a prosecution for DV Assault, I was prohibited from introducing evidence the Defendant having assaulted the victim previously, despite the fact the law in our jurisdiction explicitly allows for this, because the judge felt it was "too prejudicial."  (Btw, this Defendant testified and confessed to every single element on the stand and the jury still returned a verdict of Not Guilty.)
 Statute Example: I prosecuted a woman for stealing $400,000. By law, I could not even ask for jail time because it was her first offense. The Judge had no power to grant a sentence of jail time.
If you try to break the collapse of the justice system down to being only an ethnic/tribal thing, you're going to fail, because that's not anywhere near the only issue."

Yuri Bezmenov's Ghost on X - "Leftists use pathos to override logos in order to push their activism. The “pity play” is a common form of this. It disarms you by flooding you with pity, guilt, & moral urgency so your judgment and discernment never gets a chance. Cue the crying child, or the one-sided history. Then comes the demand: accept the leftist moral frame and the activism that follows. If you resist, the label is not just an insult. It’s a social activation switch, greenlighting attacks on you: “racist,” “hateful.” The point is to mobilize bystanders, raise the social cost of saying no, and make you the example so others learn that compliance is the price of staying “decent.”"

Santa Clara University’s Crazy Idea of Human Sexuality - WSJ - "Recently, I walked out of class. Prof. Chongzheng Wei had just played a video of a female “influencer” engaging in sexual bondage activity. When the lights came up, the professor smiled and asked if we wanted to try it ourselves. Maybe it was a crass joke to break the tension, but I didn’t want to find out if a live demonstration was next. What began as a simple accommodation request in a required course called Human Sexuality turned into a case study in the reshaping of therapy training—not by science but by critical theory, a worldview that filters human experience through left-wing assumptions about power, oppression and identity, particularly regarding race, “gender” and sexuality. The first time I enrolled in the course, students were assigned to read sadomasochistic erotica and a book called “The Guide to Getting It On,” featuring sexually explicit illustrations. We were told to write an eight- to 10-page “comprehensive sexual autobiography,” which could include early sexual memories, masturbation, current experiences, and future goals with an action plan—all uploaded to a third-party platform for grading. The syllabus allowed that students “are not required to disclose anything that causes extreme discomfort,” but that disclaimer rang hollow attached to an assignment requiring us to discuss such personal matters. On ethical and religious grounds, I requested an alternative assignment. Cary Watson, the department chairman, denied my request, suggesting I change my plans and pursue a different type of license. In an email, she described the course as “an ‘inoculation’ of sorts . . . exposing you to content you *might* come across” as a licensed therapist. She told me that if I did encounter such things in a professional setting, I could “assuredly communicate that discomfort” to clients and decline to work with them. So why did it have to be part of my training? I appealed to the dean, the provost, the Title IX office, the university president and even Campus Ministry. I’m not sure who was more shocked, the priest reading the syllabus or me, screen-sharing sexually explicit videos and images with him. The course is a graduation requirement, so I re-enrolled with Mr. Wei, who is new to the school. I requested the same accommodation that Ms. Watson said “Muslim women students” had received: to complete the course remotely. Mr. Wei instead scheduled a Zoom meeting with me. He promised a professional tone and said sexual disclosure wouldn’t be required. But in the classroom, among other things, he showed a how-to bondage video featuring a submissive wearing a “gimp suit” (a full-body garment designed to restrict movement) and played songs like “WAP” and “I Beat My Meat”—racial slurs included. A guest speaker, a male transgender psychologist, told us “only trans women have p—s that can blow up the world” and described being sexually aroused while looking in the mirror. One exercise included anonymously writing down something we disliked about our genitals or breasts, to be read aloud in class by another student. I again requested to complete the course remotely. I was told no—I could drop the course or be dropped. Ms. Watson granted a “one-time exception”: take the W (for withdrawal, not win), pay out of pocket for a continuing-education course to fulfill licensure requirements, and enroll in an extra three units at Santa Clara to be eligible to graduate. When I asked for a tuition refund, she called my request “astonishing.” My objections weren’t treated as signs of a systemic issue but as a personal grievance to be managed quietly. (Ms. Watson didn’t respond to a request for comment from my editor at the Journal. Mr. Wei referred the editor’s inquiry to a university spokeswoman, who offered no comment on the record.) When I went public anonymously on Substack, I realized I had stumbled onto something larger. The entire field of educating therapy has been hollowed out and filled in with critical theory. Therapists are no longer trained to be neutral; they’re trained to be agents of political change. Concepts like modesty and marital privacy aren’t merely treated as optional or even dismissed. They’re seen as oppressive norms to be actively combated. In Multicultural Counseling, we were told that “objective, rational, linear thinking,” “delayed gratification,” and making a “plan for the future” are traits of “white culture.” I was required to preface mock therapy sessions by “naming my whiteness” and warning that I might misread clients because of my race. In Human Sexuality, we were taught that children with six months of “gender distress” should be “affirmed” in their belief that they are of the opposite sex—without deeper assessment, even when trauma or autism was present. These ideas are being promoted by the field’s top bodies. The American Psychological Association, American Counseling Association and Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs have adopted standards grounded in critical theory. Therapists influence decisions about “gender transition,” family custody, school discipline and even criminal sentencing. When clinicians are trained to see everything through an ideological lens, rather than with ethical neutrality, the consequences extend far beyond the therapy room."

Facebook - "Naomi asked for the same remote accommodation that Muslim students were given for their human sexuality class at Santa Clara University. As a Christian, she was denied. In just two classes, she was told to discuss m*sturbation in a mixed group and later write an 8–10 page “sexual autobiography”—including her past, present, and future erotic goals. This is what passes for “education” in therapy programs today. Watch episode 1207 of Relatable for my entire interview with Naomi."

Naomi Best on X - "Blew the whistle in @WSJopinion on ideological rigidity in therapy training. A week later, I am fired from my internship with the regret of my boss. This field is in crisis. The public needs to know."

Ontario Proud on X - "#REPORT: The Waterloo Region District School Board admits that they spent over $175,000 to rename Sir John A. Macdonald Secondary School. The WRDSB only released the full cost after Ishan Acharya, a 10th grade student at the school, submitted a Freedom of Information request."
Damn Poilievre wasting money on an unnecessary by-election! But when it pushes the left wing agenda the amount spent is a rounding error. Not to mention they wanted to spend millions to rename Dundas Street

Meme - "The 34-Year-Old Anti-Asoomer
"You can't just assuuume that."
Believes literally no generalization is valid
Confuses being a free-thinker with refusing to acknowledge obvious patterns
"I can't argue with that data, but every individual is different. You can't make blanket statements."
Believes past incidents have absolutely no predictive power regardless of closely correlated they are
Demands carefully collected data to support basic anecdota observations
Hides behind the moral shield of individualism to explain away things he doesn't want to acknowledge. Fine with assumptions that suit his beliefs."

Meme - Seth Simons @sasimons: "Mark Normand says Netflix asked him to remove a joke about Muslims from his new special, and he told him he'd only do it on condition they admit Muslims are "a dangerous people" - which he says they did"
Seth Simons @sasimons: "Mark Normand on his new special: "I hit every group. I feel like everybody does trans jokes; I do trans, Mexican, Black, gay, Muslim, everyone. Equal opportunity. I'm inclusive... I'm writing jokes that I would want to hear or my friends growing up would want to ..."

Ottawa announces funding for new initiative to support young Muslims in the Maritimes - "The federal funding will support the Ummah Society’s new youth initiative, supported through Public Safety Canada’s Youth Gang Prevention Fund. The project, Gang Busters: Reducing Youth Violence and Gang Involvement, focuses on Muslims aged 15 to 30 in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. The government says it will address risk factors such as social isolation, discrimination, and economic instability."
Isn't it Islamophobic to say that Muslims are more likely to join gangs?

Mike Solana on X - "yeah no, we need to 100x the muslim jokes. until a comic can mock islam without *fearing for his life* we have a problem on our hands, and it isn't islamophobia."
Lachlan Markay on X - "As @DouthatNYT put it after the Charlie Hebdo shooting: “If a large enough group of someones is willing to kill you for saying something, then it’s something that almost certainly needs to be said, because otherwise the violent have veto power over liberal civilization, and when that scenario obtains it isn’t really a liberal civilization any more. Again, liberalism doesn’t depend on everyone offending everyone else all the time, and it’s okay to prefer a society where offense for its own sake is limited rather than pervasive. But when offenses are policed by murder, that’s when we need more of them, not less, because the murderers cannot be allowed for a single moment to think that their strategy can succeed.” https://archive.nytimes.com/douthat.blogs."

Nurseries urged to report racist toddlers’ hate crimes to police - "Welsh nurseries have been advised to report children for “racist incidents” in guidance backed by the Labour Government. The taxpayer-funded guidance for childminders aims to make nurseries and play groups “anti-racist” environments. Childcare workers are advised to call police if a “racist incident” occurs that could be deemed a hate crime. Advised actions include calling 999 for emergencies, or otherwise speaking to police officers and taking “relevant action in conjunction with the police, ensuring you record all details of the incident”. If the incident is not a hate crime, childcare workers can instead take steps including offering “age-appropriate learning support opportunities for the perpetrator”. Should this be “met with resistance”, childcare workers are advised to draw up a “disciplinary route”, with various outcomes explained in a flowchart... Childcare professionals are advised to audit their spaces to ensure that books, dolls, posters and displays are suitably diverse, and to “make sure your anti-racist stance is visible”, including in snacks provided. The guidance also tells workers: “Toileting practices vary across cultures. These practices may be very different from your own, but it does not make them unsanitary or incorrect.” The toolkit suggests that a risk assessment could be undertaken by leaders to protect “global majority” staff against the threat of racism, which it says has been heightened by a “changing political context” and “racist demonstrations taking place across the UK”. This guidance is contained in a document created by Diversity and Anti-Racist Professional Learning. The organisation, based at Cardiff Metropolitan University, has been allocated more than £1.3m by the Welsh Government since 2021, and Labour ministers have endorsed its teaching in Wales. Guidance, including advice on reporting hate crime, has also been shared by the National Day Nurseries Association... The toolkit advises that it is “never too early” to speak to children about skin colour, and that children should be told about the “beauty/complexity of melanin”... In 2022, following Black Lives Matter protests, Welsh Labour announced plans to make Wales an anti-racist nation by 2030."

Thread by @America1stLegal on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "🚨EXPOSED — Biden CIA’s War on Motherhood: Newly released CIA documents reveal the Biden Administration identified “motherhood” and “homemaking” as indicators of “white racially and ethnically motivated violent extremism” (REMVE).
The intelligence assessment reveals the top-to-bottom bias at Biden’s CIA. An agency with critical intelligence responsibilities was spending its resources targeting women promoting motherhood. The Trump Administration recently retracted a 2021 intelligence assessment titled “Women Advancing White Racially and Ethnically Motivated Violent Extremist Radicalization and Recruitment.” The now-retracted CIA intelligence assessment defines “white REMVE-sympathetic” actors as those who “may not openly advocate violence” but instead amplify “narratives” about “perceived threats” from multiculturalism and globalization.
What are these “narratives” that Biden’s CIA viewed as threats? Promoting TRADITIONAL MOTHERHOOD and HOMEMAKING as “women’s most important responsibility.” Motherhood and homemaking may be added to the list of other everyday behaviors that made everyday Americans “radicalization suspects” under the Biden Administration.
The CIA intelligence assessment is just the latest example of the Biden Administration’s War on Parents, in addition to its other efforts like branding concerned parents as “domestic terrorists.” Biased intelligence products like this undermine Americans’ confidence in the federal government — and reveal yet another viewpoint the Biden Administration treated as a domestic terror threat. After branding mothers, parents, and government critics as domestic terrorists, the Biden Administration utilized the full force of the federal government to censor them. The Biden Administration didn’t stop there. It also coordinated with foreign governments to censor domestic extremist threats.
President Trump has rightfully retracted this Biden-era CIA intelligence assessment. U.S. intelligence agencies exist to protect Americans — not target them."

Paul on X - "I still think this is the wildest police footage I've seen. Guy is the victim of a hit and run, tells dispatch he's going to follow the guy because he looks like he's going to run and black, and the officer lets the hit and run driver go while citing the victim because of "Racism". This is Green Bay Wisconsin. People will look at this and say "White men aren't discriminated against"."

Farewell to the Liberal Patriot - WSJ - "The Liberal Patriot announced Thursday that it is shutting down after five years of what president and executive editor John Halpin called “upsetting the partisan applecart” with its signature mix of “economic nationalism and cultural moderation.” TLP was a home for sane liberals. Neither party seemed to want to hear its message. But I did. So I’m very sad to see it go. Ruy Teixeira co-founded TLP with Mr. Halpin in December 2020 to push the Democratic Party toward a “pro-worker, pro-family, pro-America” platform. Mr. Teixeira signed off with a lengthy post Thursday outlining what he considers the problems Democrats must solve if they’re going to figure out a way back to the “vital center” of American politics. The first problem is cultural, specifically “the yawning gap between the cultural views of the Democratic Party, dominated by liberal professionals, and those of the median working class voter.” The Democrats are too haughty, too elite, too cocksure. They believe things about race, sex, biology and economics that are alien to most Americans. And they are pigheaded about it. They expect hatred of Trump to force normies to hold their noses and join the unruly coalition of angry misfits and smiling communists who increasingly set the Democratic agenda. Problem No. 2 is the inability of Democrats to figure out how to appeal to working-class and rural voters... The third problem is related to the first two: the trans issue, which Mr. Teixeira calls “a massive political liability” and “the most potent exemplar of Democrats’ lack of connection to the real world of ordinary Americans.” Most people think Democrats have completely lost their minds on this matter. Until they come back to earth on simple, objective, biological reality, Democrats aren’t going to get anywhere with the middle of the country. Immigration is problem No. 4. Democrats are for the unrealistic policy of open borders. Over time, Mr. Teixeira writes, the “intense unpopularity” of this position “has contributed hugely to tanking Democrats’ working-class support.” If Democrats want to win back the working class, they have to come up with an approach other than let ’em all in. Problem No. 5 for Democrats is economics. In Mr. Teixeira’s eyes, their policy has been mostly subsumed by the green agenda and sloganeering—“tax the rich,” etc. Their latest empty catchphrase is “affordability.” So far, he writes, Democrats have offered nothing on affordability other than a “grab bag of price caps and controls, subsidies and new regulations.” In other words, a return to the Biden economy that Americans ran from in 2024. They ran like it had the cooties...
'Looking over this list of problems, one thing that stands out to me is that Democrats have never come to terms with how profoundly mistaken many of their priorities have been. These haven’t just been minor errors in implementing an otherwise fine program. Much of the program was simply wrong and, arguably, not even progressive. It’s time—past time—for Democrats to discard the conceit that they are on the right side of history and that therefore their positions are, and have been, noble and correct. Until they do so, I do not expect them to develop the dominant majority coalition they seek and vanquish right populism. Indeed, it could be the other way around. That’s a sobering thought.'"

Thread by @aimeeterese on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "Biden was giving a giant pot of money exclusively to black farmers ($2 billion), they still complained even though it was so discriminatory as to have been found illegal by SCOTUS, Trump winds back this measure & black farmers refuse to do the paperwork necessary to get his grants, reframe it as racism & exclusion from the program. You can’t make this shit up.
Refuse to do the paperwork to get the money, blame the admin & call them white supremacists."

Thread by @lymanstoneky on Thread Reader App – Thread Reader App - "A LOT of people look at the mental illness diagnosis data and assume that conservatives stigmatize seeking help so just get fewer DIAGNOSES. This view is false, and we can prove it. Conservatives really are mentally healthier.
The Pew survey has diagnosed mental illness, has a battery of questions about mental health (anxiety, deepression, happiness, worry, loneliness, etc), and has ideology. We can ask, of respondents who have THE SAME REPORTED MENTAL HEALTH, do rates of DIAGNOSIS differ by ideology? I include controls for age, race, and sex. Here's rates of diagnosis by ideology and intensity of mental health symptoms. As you can see, among bad-mental-health-symptomatic people, conservatives have the SAME diagnosis rate as liberals. In fact, "very conservative" people who are in the upper-third most sad, lonely, worried, anxious people have HIGHER rates of being diagnosed than liberals! So when it comes to people with the "highest third" of bad mental health symptoms (i.e. plausibly mentally ill people), there is NO DIFFERENCE is dignosis by ideology.
There IS a difference among people with low-to-moderate symptoms of poor mental health. But.... that proves the point of conservative resiliency! Liberals have higher rates of mental illness because liberals who are NOT objectively experiencing bad mental health nonetheless PURSUE DIAGNOSES.
In other words, the difference in diagnosed mental illness between conservatives and liberals has two factors:
1) Conservatives are actually happier, less worried, less anxious
2) Objectively fairly-mentally-well liberals nonetheless pursue diagnoses of mental illness
If you want to say conservatives are just "undiagnosed mentally ill," then prove it. Shoe me evidence that conservatives have worse mental health in terms of symptoms, and show me evidence that poor-mental-health conservatives go undiagnosed. It's not there...
Yes, conservatives probably observe emergent negative affect and respond in the healthy way, that is, not identifying with that negative affect. If we assume all people experience emergent episodes of negative affect at similar rates, we must ask why for some people it seems to metastasize so much. Many factors, external, genetic, social, etc matter. Among those many factors, one contributor however is exactly what @JonHaidt flags: how you cognitively respond to emergent negative affect. CBT gives one particular healthy script.
CBT is not the only possible healthy script for responding to emergent negative affect. But the point is, we do know some very UNHEALTHY scripts, which CBT helps name, that basically boil down to dwelling on negativity all the time. So the argument that conservatives actually are experiencing unhappiness, but just not reporting them, is dubious, because it presupposes that people experiencing emergent unhappiness SHOULD preserve that mental state long enough to report it. But that argument.... is itself arguing IN FAVOR OF cognitive scripts that we know lead to poor mental health! It's an ouroboros!
Now, I am not arguing FOR repression. But I am saying that in principle if you start to feel sad for no super strong reason it is not unreasonable to try to focus on happier things and to not give the sadness power over your life by identifying with it. Notice, acknowledge, move on, and when you take a survey the next day, ask yourself what defined the day, not what happened for 3 minutes before you moved on."
Clearly, this proves that conservatives are in denial and refuse to seek out help for their mental illness, and getting a professional diagnosis so you can identify as ill and a victim when you have minimal symptoms is very important and healthy. There is no problem of overdiagnosis, only underdiagnosis and everyone is crazy. Because it was posted on Twitter and doesn't push the left wing agenda, even though Lyman Stone has a PhD in Sociology at McGill University and has worked at many organisations in related fields, anyone citing this is a joke and not credible