Peter Boghossian Interviews David Seymour

"One thing we know about the state is that it's generally incompetent."

Nominally, this is an interview about New Zealand.  But David Seymour, the current Deputy Prime Minister of New Zealand, offers a case study in the kind of thinking we desperately need in every western democracy.

The biggest problem for New Zealand, and for all western democracies, is that the Jacinda Ardern and Kamala Harris and Angela Merkel types will be back in charge before we know it.  And while these three examples are all women, they are as power-hungry as their male counterparts.  Say Keir Starmer, Gavin Newsom, and Tim Walz.  These people only care about power; not good public policy.  They weaponize the suicidal empathy of their voters to achieve and maintain their own power.  That's the whole game.

And power-consumed leftists win because people on the right do not know how to fight.  The right believes that the fight is with the leftist politicians.  So they talk about how incompetent Tim Walz is.  But the real fight is with the people who have voted for Walz and would vote for him again.

Let's take an example.  Donald Trump loves New York City.  Of course he does; it is his home.  But last year, the good people of NYC elected a socialist mayor.  They need to pay for that decision.  They, the voters.  And it needs to hurt.  So when New York asks for the inevitable bailout, the answer must be no.  The same for Seattle and Portland and Minneapolis and California.  End the deduction for state and local taxes.  Or at least cap them.  The fight is not with Mamdani; it is with his voters.

So long as voters never pay for the consequences of their votes, they will continue to behave in an irresponsible manner.  Mamdani and newly elected Seattle mayor Katie Wilson are power-hungry fools; but we all know exactly what they are.  The people who voted for them also know what they are.  They, the voters, must pay dearly for their decisions.

But the right will not do this; has never done this.  They wring their hands, and complain about the slow but sure leftward drift of the country.  They criticize Zohran Mamdani.

Stop trying to win over the suicidal empathy crowd.  You are never going to win them over.  Instead, start talking about how stupid they are.  And it is so easy to cite examples.  Think for example:  The Trump campaign ad about Harris is for They/Them; Donald Trump is for you.  More like this.  Much more.

How about:  Stop funding Somalia you morons.  Okay, clean it up a bit, add a little context, but that needs to be the message.  Or:  Wait, you want boys on the girl's volleyball team; what is wrong with you?  No, of course you will not win over someone who does want this.  Rather, you will win everyone else.

I would go max on voter ID.  Start with buying alcohol and cigarettes.  But find the most stupid thing that people need an ID for, and compare that to voting.  Also, voting machine manipulation compared to the numerous internet hacking cases.  High taxes are a bit more difficult, but not if you link them to stupid spending cases.  You get the idea; do not be afraid to point out stupidity.  Relish it, roll in it.

For God's sake, learn how to fight.  And learn who exactly you should be fighting.

𓐵

The Goals of Education

A teacher's final assignment

I think it is worth having a look at the actual text of the WHCD shooter's manifesto.  This guy sounds like any number of leftists that I have encountered over the last three decades.

And to be clear, at first this attitude could only be found on the fringes of leftist political thought.  But over this time period, I have watched this sort of thinking move closer and closer to mainstream left of center thought and argument.  Which of course meant that ever greater numbers of left of center types agreed with it.

Also, I am not sure what subject Allen taught, but let's hope it was not English or writing.  (More below)

Cole Allen’s manifesto in full:

Hello everybody!

So I may have given a lot of people a surprise today.  Let me start off by apologizing to everyone whose trust I abused.

I apologize to my parents for saying I had an interview without specifying it was for “Most Wanted.”

I apologize to my colleagues and students for saying I had a personal emergency (by the time anyone reads this, I probably most certainly DO need to go to the ER, but can hardly call that not a self-inflicted status.)

I apologize to all of the people I traveled next to, all the workers who handled my luggage, and all the other non-targeted people at the hotel who I put in danger simply by being near.

I apologize to everyone who was abused and/or murdered before this, to all those who suffered before I was able to attempt this, to all who may still suffer after, regardless of my success or failure.

I don’t expect forgiveness, but if I could have seen any other way to get this close, I would have taken it.  Again, my sincere apologies.

On to why I did any of this:

I am a citizen of the United States of America.

What my representatives do reflects on me.

And I am no longer willing to permit a pedophile, rapist, and traitor to coat my hands with his crimes.

(Well, to be completely honest, I was no longer willing a long time ago, but this is the first real opportunity I’ve had to do something about it.)

While I’m discussing this, I’ll also go over my expected rules of engagement (probably in a terrible format, but I’m not military so too bad.)

Administration officials (not including Mr. Patel):  they are targets, prioritized from highest-ranking to lowest

Secret Service:  they are targets only if necessary, and to be incapacitated non-lethally if possible (aka, I hope they’re wearing body armor because center mass with shotguns messes up people who aren’t

Hotel Security:  not targets if at all possible (aka unless they shoot at me)

Capitol Police:  same as Hotel Security

National Guard:  same as Hotel Security

Hotel Employees:  not targets at all

Guests:  not targets at all

In order to minimize casualties I will also be using buckshot rather than slugs (less penetration through walls)

I would still go through most everyone here to get to the targets if it were absolutely necessary (on the basis that most people chose to attend a speech by a pedophile, rapist, and traitor, and are thus complicit) but I really hope it doesn’t come to that.

Rebuttals to objections:

Objection 1:  As a Christian, you should turn the other cheek.

Rebuttal:  Turning the other cheek is for when you yourself are oppressed.  I’m not the person raped in a detention camp.  I’m not the fisherman executed without trial.  I’m not a schoolkid blown up or a child starved or a teenage girl abused by the many criminals in this administration.

Turning the other cheek when someone else is oppressed is not Christian behavior; it is complicity in the oppressor’s crimes.

Objection 2:  This is not a convenient time for you to do this.

Rebuttal:  I need whoever thinks this way to take a couple minutes and realize that the world isn’t about them.  Do you think that when I see someone raped or murdered or abused, I should walk on by because it would be “inconvenient” for people who aren’t the victim?

This was the best timing and chance of success I could come up with.

Objection 3:  You didn’t get them all.

Rebuttal:  Gotta start somewhere.

Objection 4:  As a half-black, half-white person, you shouldn’t be the one doing this.

Rebuttal:  I don’t see anyone else picking up the slack

Objection 5:  Yield unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.

Rebuttal:  The United States of America are ruled by the law, not by any one or several people.  In so far as representatives and judges do not follow the law, no one is required to yield them anything so unlawfully ordered.

I would also like to extend my appreciation to a great many people since I will not be likely to be able to talk with them again (unless the Secret Service is astoundingly incompetent.)

Thank you to my family, both personal and church, for your love over these 31 years. 

Thank you to my friends, for your companionship over many years. 

Thank you to my colleagues over many jobs, for your positivity and professionalism. 

Thank you to my students for your enthusiasm and love of learning. 

Thank you to the many acquaintances I’ve met, in person and online, for short interactions and long-term relationships, for your perspectives and inspiration. 

Thank you all for everything. 

Sincerely, 

Cole “coldForce” “Friendly Federal Assassin” Allen 

PS:  Ok now that all the sappy stuff is done, what the hell is the Secret Service doing?  Sorry, gonna rant a bit here and drop the formal tone. 

Like, I expected security cameras at every bend, bugged hotel rooms, armed agents every 10 feet, metal detectors out the wazoo. 

What I got (who knows, maybe they’re pranking me!) is nothing. 

No damn security. 

Not in transport. 

Not in the hotel. 

Not in the event. 

Like, the one thing that I immediately noticed walking into the hotel is the sense of arrogance. 

I walk in with multiple weapons and not a single person there considers the possibility that I could be a threat. 

The security at the event is all outside, focused on protestors and current arrivals, because apparently no one thought about what happens if someone checks in the day before. 

Like, this level of incompetence is insane, and I very sincerely hope it’s corrected by the time this country gets actually competent leadership again. 

Like, if I was an Iranian agent, instead of an American citizen, I could have brought a damn Ma Deuce in here and no one would have noticed s–t. 

Actually insane. 

Oh and if anyone is curious is how doing something like feels:  it’s awful.  I want to throw up; I want to cry for all the things I wanted to do and never will, for all the people whose trust this betrays; I experience rage thinking about everything this administration has done.

Can’t really recommend it!  Stay in school, kids.

End of manifesto

Less of a manifesto; more of a statement, I suppose.  And, am I the only one not surprised this guy is a teacher?  Does this episode not perfectly encapsulate where our education system has brought us?  When education becomes indoctrination, this is the result.  And this is one goal of our modern education establishment.

The left will never admit it, but God, they love it.  And Cole Allen is not alone; far from it.  Today there are millions of young people just like this guy.  If you doubt this, I would suggest you talk with recent college graduates.  You might start with a few teachers.

The ultimate goal of our modern education system is to create an army of leftists, willing to use any means necessary to remake the United States into a socialist utopia.  It is worth noting that Allen is 31 years old.  So not only is he a participant in the education establishment, but he is also a product of it.

We are not going to defeat these people in the war of ideas.  They are completely immune to logic and rational thought.  For them, it is a religion.

It is no longer a war of ideas; it is just war.

Stop pretending otherwise.

𓐵

Two Trump Supporters Grow Cold

When Trump lost the Carlson brothers, he lost the Right

Watch the whole thing, but the last twenty minutes are truly revealing.

Open questions:  Before his assassination, was Trump about to lose Charlie Kirk's support as well?  Why is the FBI only pretending to investigate Kirk's death?  Who wrote the now famous Tyler Robinson text messages?  Why all the subterfuge surrounding the Kirk assassination?  And most importantly, why does Trump allow Benjamin Netanyahu such latitude to prosecute the Iran war as he sees fit, even though Israel is clearly the very junior partner in this endeavor?

𓐵

On Ghetto Culture

Chad O. Jackson on ghetto culture

Now Jackson refers to this as black culture, and that is his prerogative, but I have met too many decent black people to refer to it this way myself.  I find the more appropriate term to be ghetto culture.  An interesting question for Jackson would be what percentage of black Americans subscribe to ghetto culture?

𓐵

An Hypothesis of Leftist Belief

Why do people on the left believe what they believe?

Bret Weinstein says that he believes communism stems from insurmountable bad luck.  And while there is some truth to this, it is not the primary cause.  Communism is primarily a function of envy.  And there is a class of people who stoke the envy, not for the good of society, certainly not the good of the working classes, but to accumulate power for themselves.

Has history not proven this time and again?  If this fact troubles you, just name one communist leader who lived a communist life?  Just one.

Weinstein goes on to argue that the best way to immunize people from communist impulses is to give people access to the market and the tools to compete in the market.

Excellent.  Left unsaid is that the left believes this can and should be done with some series of never-ending government programs.  They argue, who or what else is going to do it?  But the reality is that the best way to provide access to the market is to limit the burden of government on everyone:  Employer, employee, entrepreneur, investor, laborer, etc.

Further, Weinstein wants to hypothesize and test solutions to our various problems.  And that sounds great.  But who ends up controlling the process?  Again, the government.  And government is unwieldy and bureaucratic.  Hypothesize, test, fail, re-tool, try again differently.  This is not something government does.  It is not something government has ever done.  But you know who has always done this?  The free market.

One thing that pro-government types struggle with is the concept of incentives.  And without this understanding, government programs of any type, are doomed to fail.  Again, who gets this concept correct?  The free market.

When government is involved, they bring their bureaucracy and their group think and their politics and their power dynamics.  And their guns.  It is always worth remembering that everything government does, and every policy that it enacts, is at the point of a gun.  Group think with guns.  That pretty much sums up every government ever.

But that is not the worst of it.  Leftist power players care very little about policy.  They only care about policy insofar as it helps them achieve and maintain their own power.  They certainly do not care about the long term effects and consequences of their policies.  So Weinstein's experimentation process is never actually started much less accomplished.  The left's so-called solutions are only proposed to win elections.  To the extent that anything ever gets done, there is zero attention to efficacy.  The whole thing is a sham.

But then it gets even worse.  Because all governments lie with impunity.  Either to further their political ends or to hide their corruption and/or failures.  Yet the left seems to believe that if they could just get their imagined version of an honest, good government, then everything will work as they envision it.  But this never happens; has never happened in the history of the world.  But next time, they assure us, they will get it right.  Just in time to carry out Weinstein's experiments.

So let's keep government in a small box, doing only the absolutely necessary.  Yes, I realize this ship has sailed.  But this should be our goal.

This is so obvious that it begs the question, why do leftists believe what leftists believe?  Well there are two kinds of leftists.  The small group I mentioned above who lust for power.  And the more common useful idiots, some driven by envy, some driven by other emotions, such as an overabundance of empathy, who buy all the bullshit peddled by the power players.  Many of the useful idiots have turned away from faith in God and replaced it with faith in government.  And as with any religion, faith does not make it true.

Now let's consider Weinstein himself.  I like Bret, I really do.  And I have learned a great deal from him.  See capture; see Cartesian crisis; see Goliath; see the difference between complicated and complex systems; see his numerous Youtube videos produced during the Covid crisis and response.  In fact, I credit Bret and his wife Heather for largely guiding my thinking through the time of Global Covid Nonsense™.

So it is odd to me that in the video discussion above, Weinstein advocates for the use of complicated government solutions, yet to be identified, to solve highly complex societal problems; ignoring his own distinction between these concepts.  Why does he do this?  Yes, he is obviously smart enough to recognize that he is doing this.  So why?

Government can provide for basic societal needs.  Roads, bridges, parks, police, courts, military.  It can address, if not solve, some more complicated problems like social security, immigration, and antitrust.  So I think what happens is that pro-government types assume that it can also address complex societal problems like black family disintegration, climate concerns, drug abuse, and a falling fertility rate.  They advocate for and usually win the argument that government must act and spend vast sums of other people's money to address these and uncountable other societal problems.  But as with any complex system, government fiddling simply ensures new problems, greater problems, and/or perpetual problems.

Again, Weinstein knows this.  He is not a useful idiot and he does not lust for power.  I just cannot understand how anyone who knows this can remain on the left.

𓐵

Alphabet Rebellion

Odom:  There is a rising movement of regular gay people who are against all the nonsense

Back in January, I wrote about the gay show and how the time has come to take a considered look at the whole topic.  Well here is a gay man who agrees that the show is getting old.

I really appreciate Amir's honesty.  All the more so because of how rare it is in the alphabet community and among the left in general.

Gay fatigue is a real thing, and here I was thinking that it was just me.

In this video, Odom makes two important divisions.  Let me restate them here.  He does not make them in this order, but let me state them in a way that makes sense to me.  First, he divides the alphabet people between the LGB and the TQ+.  Then he further divides the LGB people between the normal everyday types and the gay show types.  These seem like fair divisions to me.

Now, I have no idea what percentage of alphabet people are normal gays.  And clearly, it is the gay show types that we all tend to notice.  How could we not?  Maybe the majority of gay people are normal and do not put on a show.  How would we know?

By the way, what is "normal" anyway?  Well normal people do not walk around shouting their sexuality so that everyone can see it.  That is not normal.

We are all sick to death of the show.
𓐵

Epistemic Humility on Display

Goliath expanded

It was Bret Weinstein, during the Covid response episode, who first introduced me to the contemporary metaphorical concept of Goliath.  It may be a metaphor, but it represents something real.  This is clearly true even if we cannot identify exactly what that something is.  Matthew 7:16 taught us to know a tree by its fruit.  Using this lesson, we may not know exactly what Goliath represents, but we can know its purpose by what it does.  The purpose of any system is what it does.  And today, I think we can broaden Matthew:  By its fruit, we know it exists.

There is much in this two part conversation that I disagree with; there is much more that I do agree with.  Plus, I also share many of Weinstein and Carlson's open questions.  In any case, if you want to be smarter about what is going on in the world today, have a listen.




𓐵

Grammar is a Signal

WSJ:  There's an inverse correlation between power and proper grammar

That's pretty much the long and the short of the whole article (archive).  But I would add that there is a correlation between proper grammar and respect.  So when did power come to mean a lack of respect?

I am a terrible self-editor, but I do make every effort to not make, and certainly not send, grammatical or spelling errors.  But according to The Wall Street Journal, in 2026, this makes me some kind of toady.

Have we become so blasé about written communications that we fail to comprehend that there is an etiquettical dimension to the process?  Or do we just no longer care?

I mean even if I am communicating with a subordinate, I will make every effort to write properly.  I might even make more of an effort, because I would not want them to think I am illiterate, right?  That would be shameful.  Or at least embarrassing.

Well...no.

The authors of this piece seem to be saying that we demonstrate our power by using bad grammar.  Or at the very least, power gives us permission to dispense with proper grammar and editing.  Personally, I think they have been reading way too much Foucault.

But this much is clearly true.  People today like to assume that whomever they are communicating with will not assume that they are illiterate.  The correspondent will simply assume that they are busy or blame the technology or whatever.  Or, they assume that the correspondent will simply believe that they just cannot be bothered.  So there is no embarrassment much less shame.

Is that the message that we want to send?  And if it is, what does that say about us?  Here's a question:  What would your grandmother have thought about your grandfather if his love letters were full of grammatical errors and spelling mistakes?  Maybe you would not be here.

No, consistently bad grammar and spelling is a signal.  He just cannot be bothered.  That's the signal.

Here's my question:  What else is he not bothered about?

If you believe that bad grammar signals something else; maybe it does.  It could represent any number of signals.  But all of them are bad.

And if etiquettical is not a word, I will be ashamed.

𓐵

McDonald's Update: Ice Cream Machines & Burgers

Low integrity management and low trust marketing

Let's update a post from three years ago, on McDonald's and the never-ending troubles they have with their Taylor ice cream machines.

So here I am on the other side of the world, in the Philippines.  And you often see Taylor ice cream machines here just as you do in all US McDonald's.  After that first post, I tend to notice these machines.  But yesterday I was in a Jollibee (the largest fast food chain in the country) and I noticed that they had removed their Taylor machine and replaced it with a Carpigiani, an Italian competitor.  Like the one in this photo.  Or see the actual machine, below.

So I asked the manager, Hey what's with the new machine and how long have you had it?  She said, Yeah, it's brand new, we've had it for two weeks.  Our Taylor machine was defective.  I said, Yeah, a lot of them are.

If you are wondering, machines from both companies sell for around $20,000 up to $60,0000 depending on model.  And that is before installation and setup fees, and ongoing maintenance costs. (Grok)

This was the same day that a video went viral of the McDonald's CEO, Chris Kempczinski, supposedly eating the company's newest "product," the Big Arch, with obvious distaste.  Yes, he referred to the burger as a product.  He originally posted the video in early February of this year.  Here is one reaction video:

Burger King also had a fun response.  As Lindey Glenn points out, it is practically guaranteed that Kempczinski does not eat McDonald's offerings.  Ever.  He's no Dave Thomas, or even Donald Trump.

By the way, I met Dave Thomas when I was in college; he always referred to Wendy's products as sandwiches, even the burgers.  Which I found a bit odd, but at least you never heard him refer to any of his burgers as a "product."  Kempczinski might as well be selling tube socks.

I have no doubt that Kempczinski is a smart guy.  But his inability to relate to McDonald's products, franchisees, and customers is concerning.  His unwillingness to correct the ice cream machine situation is disqualifying.  I do not believe this is gross incompetence; rather it appears to be gross misconduct.  Clearly he could solve the problem if he wanted.  But this is not an operational issue; it is an ethical problem.

Note, Dairy Queen also uses Taylor machines, though a different model, without issue.  Same for Wendy's, Burger King, and Chick-fil-A. (Grok)  Someone should insist on a remedy.

You gotta wonder how many Big Macs does the company have to sell in order to pay Kempczinski's daily tab at Michelin-starred brasseries?  McDonald's clearly hates their franchisees and their customers.  So the long history of questionable management continues.

Anyway, here's the Carpigiani machine I saw yesterday:



For reference, here is an older Taylor ice cream machine in a different Jollibee:

For those who do not know, Jollibee is primarily a chicken joint.  But they serve all of the fast food staples, like burgers, fries, and of course, soft serve ice cream.  And rice; nearly everything here comes with rice.  They also do a sweet spaghetti that is very popular with Filipinos.  In the US, where they have around eighty locations, they offer great looking chicken sandwiches.  But sadly, those are not available in the Philippines.

Update, 11 March 2026

Today, Lindey Glenn can explain Kempczinski's reaction to the new Big Arch.  My question is, if the burger is not ready for prime time, why did the CEO allow its market release?  Maybe it is gross incompetence after all.

𓐵

Again, The Experts Have Spoken

Like the Covid response and transgender mania, Tourette's Syndrome defies common sense

Tourettes activist John Davidson shouts n*gger and b*tch at Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo at the Bafta Awards in London. pic.twitter.com/mrS95IrW41

— Anthony Brian Logan (ABL) 🇺🇸 (@ANTHONYBLOGAN) February 23, 2026

I get the tics part of the syndrome.  We have all met people with tics of one kind or another.  And I can maybe understand, or at least tolerate, the verbal outbursts.  But it is the incendiary nature of these outbursts where I have to draw the line.  When two black men are on stage, a Tourette's sufferer shouts the n-word?  Why not pink elephant?  Or as one black commenter observed, "Why not shout Hallelujah?"  Indeed.

No, this is a bridge too far for me.

And yet every major medical organization supports the idea that this is involuntary.  And they have lined up in uniform to denounce those of us who question the narrative.  Just like they did with the Covid response.  Just like they did with gender confirming healthcare.  And for that matter, just like they did with lobotomies and then tonsillectomies.

We are told that this is a counter-intuitive medical condition and we should just accept the wisdom of the medical experts.

No sorry, I don't buy it.  Expert groupthink is a very real thing with a long and checkered history.

I have not always thought this way.  But today, in any conflict between so-called experts and common sense, I will choose my own common sense.  Every single time.

So what's the issue?

We are told that Tourette's Syndrome sufferers cannot suppress the use of obscene language at inappropriate times.  A condition called coprolalia.  Yet these same sufferers are able to suppress other inappropriate behaviors, say violence, crime, or reckless driving.  So it is only the obscene language that they cannot suppress.  But it seems to me that if these people have a problem with control of one inappropriate behavior, that this would manifest among other behaviors as well.

My theory, and that is all it is, is that they misbehave in this one area because they have been trained, first by their parents, and later by the medical establishment, that there are no consequences.  And they do not misbehave in other areas because they realize that there may very well be consequences of those actions.

Plus I find the use of the word suppress to be interesting.  Personally, I never have to suppress the use of the n-word.  The very idea of using it never occurs to me.  Just like acts of violence, reckless driving, other crime, or misbehavior.  I need not suppress these urges; I do not have them.  So what does it say about someone who needs to suppress bad behavior?  Really, I'm asking.

No, I view Tourette's as a factitious indulgence.  But I confess, I'm just a simple-minded coprolalia bigot.  No doubt the mental health community would dismiss my willful ignorance.  So be it.

This behavior is unacceptable for any occasion.  But I have to add that I have enjoyed both Jordan's and Lindo's work; they are both excellent at their craft.  And they did not deserve this disrespect at an awards ceremony.  Of course, to their credit, they may well be more forgiving than I am.

I had an interesting conversation with Grok on this topic.  It is rather long, but if you are interested in this topic and why it makes people uncomfortable, I think it is worth your attention.  The final three questions are most revealing.  Skip the rest if you like and read those.

𓐵