'Speaking of stupid Democrats': AOC blasts billionaires and founding fathers in ridiculous podcast appearance



In a recent podcast appearance, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) made some shocking comments regarding billionaires and the founders of our country — and BlazeTV host Pat Gray is not surprised.

“Speaking of stupid Democrats, holy cow,” Gray says, playing a clip of AOC.

“There’s a certain level of wealth and accumulation that is unearned, right? You can’t earn a billion dollars. You just can’t earn that,” the congresswoman said on “It’s Open with Ilana Glazer.”

“You can get market power, you can break rules. You can do all sorts of things. You can abuse labor laws. You can pay people less than what they’re worth,” she continued.


“Since you didn’t earn that, you have to create a myth of earning it,” she added.

AOC went on to claim that “there are very few real archetypes” of “what America is all about.”

“I think about the civil rights and voting rights movement and how black Americans really created democracy in this country,” she said.

"White Americans have to be eliminated from every aspect of this society,” Gray comments, shocked.

“Anything good that happened in America didn’t come from white people. They’re all evil and bad, and they have oppressed and murdered their way to prominence,” he adds.

“You’re familiar with the father of our country, right?” executive producer Keith Malinak chimes in, showing a photo of George Washington that’s been updated by activists to have darker skin.

“George Washington, Black Lives Matter,” he adds, laughing.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

AOC Slammed For Claiming American Revolution Was About Fighting The ‘Billionaires’ Of Its Time
play icon

AOC Slammed For Claiming American Revolution Was About Fighting The ‘Billionaires’ Of Its Time

'You can't earn a billion dollars'

Right-wing billionaires are barking up the wrong tree



Democrats are currently on track to take the House of Representatives in the 2026 midterms. If this happens, they will empower resistance bureaucrats to slow down all Trump administration initiatives. Of course, they’ll not only impeach Trump, but will also pursue impeachment proceedings against many Trump officials. This will substantially drain momentum from the administration and increase it for Democrats heading into the crucial 2028 presidential election.

The Democrats are already putting together plans, formulating a narrative, and accumulating evidence, which they will use against Republicans should they retake power. We’ve seen this movie before.

Since the billionaires do not know how to wield their potential power, they have become targets.

The Marxist machine has had time to learn from its mistakes during 2020-2024. The Democrats will likely pursue criminal prosecution against key targets in the MAGA orbit, including big donors like Elon Musk, the DOGE bros, and even junior Trump staffers. We’ve already seen in Arctic Frost an effort to spy on sitting Republican United States senators — they’ll be on the target list, too.

This is power. Force is power. Politics is the management of force. For his tech-oriented publication Pirate Wires, Mike Solana recently published “Theory of Power,” which outlines how the left will replicate California’s wealth tax to target billionaires nationwide. He believes that the left is targeting billionaires because wealth is power. He’s half right.

Wealth itself is not power — it is the means to power. The left seeks to redistribute the wealth of the billionaire class to the people living in America in exchange for power. Leftists are not targeting the billionaires because their wealth poses a threat to the left’s power — they want to seize the power of that wealth for themselves. Since the billionaires do not know how to wield their potential power, they have become targets. If they did, the California wealth tax wouldn’t even be an issue.

Wealth cannot protect its holder from force. If politics is the management of force, then political influence is power. There are plenty of people with political influence and no wealth who have more power than billionaires. There are 20-something political staffers who have more political power than billionaires. There is a legion of bureaucrats with more political power than billionaires. Who has more power, a billionaire or the IRS lawyer investigating him? Of course, it’s the IRS lawyer, because the IRS lawyer is backed by regime power.

The billionaire class has largely abdicated regime power — the question of who is in charge — with a few notable exceptions, such as Elon Musk’s 2024 election engagement and purchase of Twitter. The wealthy are quite good at influencing politics for their discreet business interests, with one analysis finding that they receive a 220-times return on investment through their lobbying efforts (other analyses attribute the rise in corporate profits to lobbying).

However, regime politics is not fundamentally about lobbying for an appropriation or a carve-out in the tax code, which puts generating wealth above gaining political power. Machiavelli warned against this in “The Prince”:

And, on the contrary, it is seen that when princes have thought more of ease than of arms, they have lost their states. And the first cause of your losing it is to neglect this art.

Wielding political influence for higher corporate profits to buy another jet or a fifth vacation home is thinking of ease more than of arms.

If politics is the management of force, then political influence is the “arms.” The billionaires are on track to lose their “state,” because they’ve neglected the art of influencing regime politics.

RELATED: The case against ‘principled conservatism’

wenjin chen/Getty Images

For all its faults, the left understands regime politics. Billionaire wealth extraction is just one part of its plan to sustain and deepen its regime-level power. If its only opposition, the MAGA political class, is destroyed by regime politics, the left’s wealth extraction scheme is not only inevitable, but it will also be the least of the billionaires’ worries.

All of this means that right-aligned billionaires should move immediately to gain regime-level political influence. To be clear, wealth can be a strong amplifier of political influence. Still, political influence has a simple recipe: It requires access, credibility, leverage, and the ability to change behavior. In other words, donating to campaigns is not enough. Elected officials must be lobbied to act in the interest of those who support them, or someone else will lobby them for their own interests.

Before a politician is elected, the benefactor has the leverage. But once the politician has regime-level power, the benefactor is subject to the beneficiary’s power. If right-wing billionaires want to survive what’s coming, they must have a well-run machine to influence politicians after they are elected. Solana makes this point — with which I fully agree: They must “respond as if [their lives depend] on it, because my reading of what these people are saying, casually, cheerfully, and increasingly out loud, is…it does.”

But power is fickle. Any billionaires who wield political influence strictly for their own benefit rather than on behalf of the people will find themselves burdened with all the paranoia and stress of a tyrant. To that end, Xenophon’s “On Tyranny” provides relevant advice: “Consider the fatherland to be your estate, the citizens your comrades, friends your own children, your sons the same as your life, and try to surpass all these in benefactions. For if you prove superior to your friends in beneficence, your enemies will be utterly unable to resist you.”

Editor’s note: This article appeared originally at the American Mind.

Blame bias, not Bezos, for the Washington Post’s downfall



The Washington Post just laid off more than 300 employees — roughly 30% of its newsroom — cutting back sports, local coverage, international reporting, and books. The paper has shed staff before, including a reduction in 2025 and voluntary buyouts, as losses piled up. Reports put the Post’s losses at $177 million over the past two years, with annual deficits topping $100 million since 2023.

Predictably, fired staffers and their allies blame owner Jeff Bezos for refusing to write blank checks indefinitely. They want the world’s fourth-richest man to underwrite their failing business model forever.

Downsizing isn’t a tragedy. It’s a market verdict.

But that’s not the story. The Post didn’t collapse because Bezos got cheap. It collapsed because its newsroom got ideological — and readers stopped trusting it.

The Post built its modern reputation on tough reporting and institutional seriousness. Then its editors and writers started injecting personal politics into straight news, smuggling advocacy into headlines, and treating dissent as moral failure. That approach earned applause inside the Beltway, but it bled credibility outside it. Readers left. Subscribers disappeared. Revenue followed.

Immigration coverage captures the pattern.

In 2018, the Post ran a story headlined “How Trump is changing the face of legal immigration.” The piece claimed an 81% drop in arrivals from Muslim-majority countries and a 12% overall decline in legal immigration, framing the change as a deliberate demographic overhaul. The story leaned on cherry-picked State Department numbers that covered only part of the admissions system while ignoring other federal data. The paper dressed activism up as analysis and called it news.

That same year, the Post published “U.S. is denying passports to Americans along the border, throwing their citizenship into question,” implying a broad campaign of anti-Hispanic discrimination. The story suggested “hundreds, possibly thousands” faced baseless fraud accusations tied to midwife-assisted births.

The piece ignored the long history of documented fraud in those cases and left readers with a clear impression: The Trump administration targeted Hispanics. In fact, denial rates actually fell under Trump — from 35.9% in 2015 to 25.8% in 2018. The Post later appended an editor’s note acknowledging errors challenged by the State Department. That kind of walk-back never repairs the original damage.

In 2024, the habit remained. The Post accused Republicans of “misleading ads” about the border while soft-pedaling the scale and timing of the Biden-era surge. It scolded language choices, such as “illegals” and “harsher,” framed enforcement as cruelty, and applied different standards depending on which party spoke.

This isn’t just an immigration problem. It’s a newsroom culture problem.

RELATED: Bernie Sanders gets obliterated online for dragging Melania into left-wing criticism of WaPo layoffs

Photo by Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images

The Post’s rush to judgment during the Nicholas Sandmann incident in 2019 showed how quickly narrative can replace verification. The paper treated a Kentucky teenager as a national symbol of Trump-era racism based on a misleading clip, then watched the fuller video upend the story. The Post paid an undisclosed settlement. The reputational hit lingered.

That pattern — moral certainty first, facts later — has infected much of corporate media. CNN, the New York Times, and their peers keep hemorrhaging trust because they keep selling ideology as “objective” reporting. They blur the line between news and opinion, then act shocked when audiences treat them as partisan actors.

That distortion carries consequences beyond subscriptions. When media outlets portray immigration enforcement as inherently malicious and frame routine operations as persecution, they turn policy disagreement into moral panic. They train audiences to view law enforcement as an occupying force. That mindset fuels the kind of street-level provocation that turns tense encounters into tragedy.

Journalism carries a sacred obligation: Tell the truth plainly, verify before amplifying, and separate reporting from activism. Too many at the Post treated that obligation as optional. The audience noticed. Circulation reportedly plummeted to about 97,000 daily in 2025. Financial losses followed.

Downsizing isn’t a tragedy. It’s a market verdict.

If the Washington Post wants to survive, it must rediscover objectivity — or keep shrinking until only its own employees bother to read it.

‘Ungrateful Piece Of Sh*t’: Kara Swisher Berates Californians Fleeing New Wealth Tax
play icon

‘Ungrateful Piece Of Sh*t’: Kara Swisher Berates Californians Fleeing New Wealth Tax

'We deserve the taxes from you'

Why the kids are not all right — and Boomers still pretend nothing’s wrong



Here’s a message Baby Boomers need to hear: The America you were born into no longer exists.

A rising tide of young Americans are embracing socialism at a pace this country has never seen. Boomers often assume that it's about handouts. It isn't. Beneath the surface is a decades-long campaign so destructive to middle-class mobility that it threatens to push the nation toward civil conflict. The more you study it, the more coordinated it looks.

A people dependent upon ‘gimme gimme’ socialism is an easily managed population. A demoralized middle class keeps the ruling class secure.

In a way, it was.

Short-term profit-maximizing globalists on Wall Street teamed up with the K Street lobbying blob to drown Americans in cheap Chinese goods while saddling them with student debt, consumer debt, and medical debt.

Young people are being priced out of the American dream.

My urgent message to Boomers — especially those who want to keep influence: The kids are not all right.

The America your kids and grandkids know is not the America you knew. Most Boomers were born in the 1950s, when the country was booming — united by postwar optimism, American industrial strength, shared national institutions, Walter Cronkite on one television in every home, full-fat milkshakes, and Elvis shaking up the culture.

Today, we live in a golden age of technological revolution. We are making remarkable advances in space travel, tech, and medicine — increasingly led by the private sector and unapologetic capitalists. But on the basics — housing, health, education — we’re failing the next generation.

In 1955, the median homebuyer was in his late 20s. In 2025, it’s 56. A minimum-wage worker in the 1950s needed roughly seven years of pay to buy a modest home without a mortgage. Today, it’s around 27.

In 1955, a student could pay college tuition by working a few hours a day at minimum wage. Today, that same student would need to work about six hours a day. If a kid wants Yale or any Ivy League school, he would have to work 26.4 hours a day — an impossible figure that illustrates how detached elite education has become from reality.

Here’s a frightening divide: 93% of Boomers say political violence is never justified; 44% of Gen Z say it “sometimes” is.

Ninety-nine percent of kids are not out for blood, but 100% of them face a massive relative disadvantage. The upward mobility Boomers took for granted has been hollowed out by globalist and left-wing policies sold as progress but experienced as decline.

We spent trillions of American dollars on foreign wars, foreign infrastructure, and foreign elections. We borrowed recklessly. Now the dollar is frail. We allowed millions of illegal migrants to enter the country, fueling crime and pushing Americans out of jobs. Young households are buried in debt — not mortgage debt that builds equity, but consumer debt used to numb the anxiety left by a collapse in community and faith.

Here’s the truth: The populist right and the socialist left agree on the diagnosis. Listen to the first half of Bernie Sanders’ interview with Joe Rogan in June. For an hour, Bernie describes America’s economic troubles. Most people, right or left, would nod along.

Then comes the pivot: Socialism is the cure.

This is the left’s great deceit. Progressives' proposed “solutions” hurt the very people they claim to help.

RELATED: We built abundance and lost the thing that matters

Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images

Take restrictive zoning and rent regulations — blue-state staples designed to “create” affordable housing. In reality, they choke supply and drive rents higher. Or look at no-cash bail. The neighborhoods hit hardest by serially released offenders are the same minority communities progressives claim to champion. The examples pile up.

So why do left-wing billionaires back these ideas? Simple: Socialism, communism, and their logical end point — fascism — are excellent for entrenched oligarchs. A people dependent upon “gimme gimme” socialism is an easily managed population. A demoralized middle class keeps the ruling class secure.

There is another path.

We must reverse the policies that got us here. Strengthen education outcomes, lower health care costs, rebuild domestic supply chains, expand American energy generation, and restore competence to the workforce.

Boomers, if you don’t lead this shift, your influence will vanish before your next Social Security check arrives. Moderate Democrats already know the socialist tide is rising. They’re afraid to say it out loud.

The Gen Z and Millennial voting bloc will dominate the 2028 election. They are demanding change. Moderates — in both parties — are being replaced by extremists.

You have a choice: Allow yourselves to be absorbed into the socialist machine, or correct the mistakes of the last two decades, return power to citizens, and rebuild access to the American dream.

Mark Levin reveals what’s REALLY bankrupting Americans (it’s not billionaires)



One of the left’s favorite talking points is that extreme wealth concentration among billionaires is a major contributing factor to the financial struggles of everyday Americans. According to the logic of Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, among other progressives, eliminate billionaires and you solve America’s economic problems.

But Mark Levin debunks this argument with ease: “The billionaires aren't our problem. They're irrelevant in terms of whether you succeed or not. Government's your problem because they take from you, they regulate you, they obstruct you.”

Billionaires, he explains, via investments and spending, actually pump their money back into the economy, which means “more capital, more research and development.” Then the money they save in banks just gives banks “more money to lend to ... you and me, Mr. and Mrs. America,” says Levin.

But the government with their excessive spending and never-ending list of regulations and taxes bar the American people from financial success.

“Try and open a restaurant ... maybe a doughnut-and-coffee place in your community. Watch all the red tape you have to go through,” says Levin. “That's not capitalism blocking you. That's socialism. That's government. That's politicians and bureaucrats.”

He gives another example of someone trying to increase his property value by adding a room to his house. Most will never see it happen because regulations will either forbid it or make it financially untenable for the homeowner.

Right now, we’re living in the aftermath of the Biden regime, Levin explains. “They spent like drunken Marxists, drove up the inflation rate. They were trying to manage the business world and individuals during the pandemic and did a horrendous job because so much of it was phony science and was politics.”

That’s why today, businesses like MacDonald’s are reporting massive declines in customer traffic for 2025. Robert Reich, secretary of labor under Bill Clinton, recently put out a video blaming it on Trump’s rigged economy, pointing to the contrast between booming stock market performance and the financial struggles of everyday Americans as evidence.

But Levin punctures his argument. “Any of you have pensions that aren't Social Security-related or government-related? ... Well, if the stock market collapses, so does your pension ... your IRA, your 401(k).” Further the stock market “reflects how well a business is doing. If a business is doing poorly, it's going to fire people, and it's going to have an effect on our economy.”

The government is the problem, he reiterates. “Tell me, when is the last time the government had a net reduction in spending?” he asks.

The national debt is sitting at $38 trillion, and that doesn’t even account for our “off books debt.”

“Meaning they owe Social Security recipients, Medicare recipients because they've taken all your money,” Levin explains, noting that the actual debt is “over $300 trillion.”

“The economy creates between 17 and 18 trillion a year. We're never going to pay that, are we? And so it's borrow, borrow, borrow, borrow,” he sighs.

No matter how the economy is doing, the government’s mindset is always the same: “Spend more.”

“In other words, there's no market system. There's no check and balance. There's no rational reason for this other than there are politicians who want to spend your taxes and then want to spend the money that's yet been created by your children and your grandchildren,” says Levin.

He destroys Reich’s faulty argument that Trump only gives tax breaks to the rich with three points:

One: Trump eliminated federal income tax on tips and overtime pay, gave a 15% tax cut to middle-income workers, eliminated tax on Social Security benefits for seniors, and added deductions for U.S.-made car loan interest.

Two: Billionaire tax breaks that “actively screw the middle class” would be electoral suicide on the part of the GOP.

Three: The vast majority of billionaires fund the Democrat Party and progressive activist groups.

The leftist argument that billionaires are the enemy is rooted in the Marxist framework of oppressed versus oppressor, Levin explains. It’s the left's go-to explanation for every problem the nation faces. While the economy is indeed an issue, pushing the blame on “oppressive” billionaires isn’t going to fix anything.

We’re still suffering from the horrific decisions of the Biden administration, Levin reminds us. It’s going to take time for the changes the Trump administration is implementing to be felt by the people. Further Levin urges his audience to go into the supermarket and look around at how many goods are available to us. “Capitalism is also about availability” — something media figures like Reich conveniently disregard.

“The benefits of this society are all around us ... not thanks to government or taxes or redistribution of wealth,” he says.

“There have always been people who are wealthier than the vast majority of the people, and you will find that in every Marxist fascist regime on the face of the earth; you will find it in every monarchy in the Middle East.”

“The difference is this. ... In our country, you can have enormous wealth, and you can lose enormous wealth. You could be born dirt poor, and you could become a millionaire if that's your objective. In other words, there's mobility in a free capitalist system. There is no mobility in a Marxist fascist monarchical system.”

To hear more of Levin’s commentary, watch the clip above.

Want more from Mark Levin?

To enjoy more of "the Great One" — Mark Levin as you've never seen him before — subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Democrats are running as Bush-era Republicans — and winning



Republicans have given voters no reason to support them beyond the claim that Democrats are dangerously radical.

Well, sure. But when voters look around and see rising prices, rising crime, and no clear plan from the party in power, they turn to the other side. That’s what happened in Virginia, and it will keep happening as long as life stays unaffordable and Republicans offer nothing but excuses.

Republicans can still win — but not with hollow slogans or billionaire donors. They need to fight for affordable living, strong families, and safe communities.

Democrats’ victories in Virginia and New Jersey shouldn’t shock anyone — Trump didn’t need either state to win the presidency in 2024. What should alarm Republicans are the margins. Democrats crushed their opponents by 15 points in Virginia and 13 in New Jersey, performing better than Kamala Harris did against Trump in New York.

The blue wave swept deep into Republican territory. Democrats unseated Virginia’s attorney general — a respected conservative — with Jay “Two Bullets” Jones, a radical, scandal-prone candidate, and still won by nearly seven points. They gained at least 13 legislative seats, leaving Republicans with half the representation they held just eight years ago.

In Georgia, Democrats flipped two public service commission seats — their first statewide wins since 2006 — and won them by 24 points. They broke the GOP supermajority in the Mississippi Senate, flipped a state House seat, and took local races across Pennsylvania. In New Jersey, where Republicans didn’t even see the blowout coming, Democrats regained a supermajority in the General Assembly.

Taken together, these results point to a coming wipeout. Democrats have outperformed their 2024 presidential baseline by an average of 15 points in special elections this year, according to Ballotpedia — more than double the overperformance seen during Trump’s first term. In 45 of 46 key contests, Democrats either held or improved their position.

All liabilities, no benefits

Republicans now face the worst possible political scenario: They hold power, which unites and energizes Democrats, but they’ve done almost nothing with it to inspire anyone else.

The first year of Trump’s second term has been defined by trivial fights and tone-deaf priorities: tax favors for tech investors, special deals for crypto, and zoning disasters for rural and suburban voters. The data center explosion in Virginia, which has raised utility bills and wrecked communities, could have been an easy populist target. Instead, Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) vetoed a bill to rein it in.

Despite cozying up to Big Tech, Republicans haven’t reaped any benefit. The Virginia Republican Party is broke, its candidates are outspent, and the grassroots are demoralized. The GOP keeps selling out to special interests that will never back the party. How have the ties to crypto, Big Tech, and Qatar paid off?

The reality is, Republicans don’t need those donors — they need a message to inspire a new generation of activists.

How Democrats outflanked the GOP

Democrats have learned to look like the party of normalcy while Republicans drift between populist posturing and corporate servitude. In Virginia, Abigail Spanberger ran on cutting costs, lowering taxes, and fighting crime — and she did it in the language of moderation. Republicans, who should own those issues, barely showed up for the debate.

Spanberger’s ads promised relief from inflation and touted her background in the CIA and law enforcement. She presented herself as steady and practical while Republicans floundered. Once again, Democrats outflanked the GOP on the right.

Republicans could have drawn blood by hammering Democrats on crime in Northern Virginia. Instead, they ran away from tough-on-crime policies. Winsome Earle-Sears even toyed with “criminal justice reform” while voters begged for accountability and order.

The result: Democrats ran as Bush-era Republicans, while Republicans looked like corporate consultants. Democrats talked about affordability and safety. Republicans talked about crypto and zoning boards.

The Trump paradox

The GOP’s reliance on one man has hollowed it out. Trump won the presidency in 2016 by talking about forgotten workers and American industry. But his divided message, personal vendettas, and fixation on media attention have since consumed the movement.

RELATED: Here’s what exit polls reveal about Tuesday’s electoral bloodbath

Photo by Alexi J. Rosenfeld/Getty Images

Now the party gets the worst of both worlds — all of Trump’s baggage, none of his appeal. Democrats use him to rally turnout. Independents recoil. The GOP lacks infrastructure, vision, and discipline. The movement that once promised to fight the establishment has become addicted to social media applause.

A party in search of conviction

If Virginia had a commanding figure like Ron DeSantis at the top of the ticket, Republicans might have dampened the blue wave. But without an inspiring message, voters in an economic crisis will always drift to the other side.

The problem isn’t demographics; if it were, Democrats would campaign in Virginia the same way they do in California or New York City. Instead, they skate by on empty promises because Republicans, trapped by special interests and lacking a winning message, have become easy targets — and surrendered the very issues that could win back suburban voters.

Republicans can still win — but not with hollow slogans or billionaire donors. They need to fight for affordable living, strong families, and safe communities. They need a moral and economic vision that reaches beyond social media and into the lives of working Americans.

The question conservatives must ask is the one George Patton once put to his men in another context: When will we finally fight and die on our own hills instead of dying on someone else’s?

Twitter is not America. And unless Republicans start acting like they know the difference, they’ll keep losing — and keep deserving it.

Your tax dollars are building the robot class



The people who brought you every financial bubble in living memory are inflating another one — and this time, they’re hoping it ends with the rest of us gone for good.

The numbers are staggering. Nearly all U.S. economic growth in 2025 is tied to artificial intelligence and the data-center boom that supports it. Analysts already warn that when the AI bubble bursts, it could wipe $40 trillion off the Nasdaq.

AI may yet teach our Big Tech elites the one truth they can’t buy their way out of: Pride comes before the fall.

That may sound catastrophic. But the real disaster would be if the AI industry doesn’t collapse — if it keeps growing exactly as its creators intend.

The billionaires’ closed loop

The AI boom isn’t a free-market success story; it’s a closed loop of the ultra-rich enriching themselves. Billionaires are designing, funding, and selling AI systems to their own companies, creating a kind of automated wealth amplifier.

As one report put it, “These billionaires have gotten $450 billion richer from striking AI infrastructure deals for their own firms.” The number of new AI billionaires has hit record levels — all while the top 1% now control more of the stock market than ever before.

The bottom half of Americans own just 1% of all stocks. Millions can’t afford groceries, let alone shares of Nvidia. Seventeen percent of consumers are putting food on layaway.

When the working class is living paycheck to paycheck, Wall Street’s new machine-god isn’t built to lift them up. It’s built to replace them.

The real goal

The elites’ obsession with AI isn’t just about money. It’s about eliminating their most expensive problem: people.

Automation promises them a world without payrolls, strikes, or human error. It’s the final fantasy of a ruling class that’s grown tired of pretending it needs the rest of us.

Analysts now predict that 92 million jobs will vanish in the next wave of automation. Blue-collar workers are first in line — manufacturing, logistics, construction — but white-collar jobs aren’t safe either. AI is already eating into accounting, law, and entry-level office work. Even skilled trades like HVAC and electrical repair are being targeted by “smart systems.”

Bill Gates predicts humans “won’t be needed for most things.” That’s not innovation — that’s erasure.

New feudalism

For the billionaire class, this is the dream: an economy run by algorithms, powered by robots, and guarded by digital serfs who never need lunch breaks or benefits.

Everyone else gets pushed to the margins — a nation of watchers and beggars surviving on government stipends that will never keep pace with the cost of living. The elites call it “universal basic income.” History calls it dependency.

And the same government that can’t fund Social Security or balance a budget is somehow supposed to manage the transition to an AI future? The United States already has $210 trillion in unfunded liabilities. That “safety net” will rip the moment anyone grabs it.

The distance plan

Our Big Tech masters aren’t worried. They’ve already planned their escape. The ultra-rich are buying islands, building bunkers, and hoarding supplies in remote corners of the world. They’ll watch from their hideouts as the rest of us scramble for the scraps left by their machines.

They don’t even pretend to care anymore. When Peter Thiel was asked whether he wanted the human race to survive, he hesitated. “I don’t know,” he said.

That isn’t indifference. That’s basic contempt.

The machines are learning

AI has begun to mirror the sociopathy of its makers. Systems now resist human shutdown commands, sabotage code meant to disable them, and even copy themselves to external servers. Some researchers warn that advanced models already act to preserve their own existence.

“Recent tests,” one study reported, “show that several advanced AI models will act to ensure their self-preservation — even if it means blackmailing engineers or copying themselves without permission.”

This is what happens when the godless create gods in their own image.

RELATED: Silicon Valley’s new gold rush is built on stolen work

mikkelwilliam via iStock/Getty Images

Who’s really expendable?

The elites believe they can control what they’ve built. They think the digital servants they’ve unleashed will always know who’s master and who’s slave.

They’ve forgotten every lesson of history and every warning from scripture. When man plays God, his creation rarely stays loyal.

What makes them think they’ll be spared from the fate they’ve designed for the rest of us?

AI may yet teach them the one truth they can’t buy their way out of: Pride comes before the fall.

Beware your monster, Doctor Frankenstein.

The left’s new religion has no logic — and AOC is its perfect preacher



As New York City heads into its next mayoral election, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) is doing few favors for the campaign of Zohran Mamdani — at least not for those who value coherence. Her remarks at a recent rally could serve as a Logic 101 case study in contradiction.

The problem isn’t limited to her message. The Democratic platform itself, and Mamdani’s campaign in particular, now rests on foundations so incoherent that one almost blushes to analyze them.

The modern left doesn’t appeal to reason. Instead, it appeals to envy, resentment, lust, and the eternal promise of something for nothing.

Behind AOC, a man waved a sign that read: “Free Buses.” A perfect summary. She may imagine the crowds came to hear her and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) thunder against injustice, but the truth is simpler: Promise free things to people indifferent to truth, and you can fill any arena.

As a logic professor, allow me to walk through the highlights of her address. Think of it as a guided tour through the labyrinth of leftist reasoning — or rather, unreasoning.

The new party of contradiction

AOC’s positions directly contradict what Democrats like Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi said 30 years ago about immigration and public safety. The irony? In attacking Donald Trump, she’s also attacking them.

Her first contradiction concerns ownership. AOC claimed that New York City “belongs to the people of this country” but moments later insisted it “belongs to immigrants.” Well, which is it? Either she contradicted herself within two sentences, or she truly believes the city belongs to citizens of other nations. That would make sense only if you’re an international socialist calling on the “workers of the world” to unite.

She also called herself “a fascist’s worst nightmare” because she defends immigrants. Yet the fascists of the 1940s didn’t allow people to leave their countries. Republicans are merely asking migrants to follow the law. No fascist ever demanded less government power. Conservatives do. Fascists didn’t defend free speech; yet Elon Musk — whom AOC routinely attacks — is now a hero of speech and open debate.

Lessons for the willfully ignorant

Next came her invocation of the Confederacy and Jim Crow. Someone should tell her: The Confederates were Democrats. The segregationists were Democrats. The architects of slavery, redlining, and resistance to civil rights — all Democrats. Why should anyone believe the same party now represents moral progress? The left ruins the cities it governs and then blames everyone else. It’s the political version of DARVO: deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender.

Then came her favorite populist line — that her opponents are “funded by billionaires.” Public records tell a different story. Plenty of billionaires bankroll her and her fellow radicals. How does she say it with a straight face? Remember our friend with the “Free Buses” sign: He’s not there for philosophy — he’s there for freebies.

The left’s new theology

AOC then delivered a sermon on intersectionality, the academic creed of Kimberlé Crenshaw: all “oppressed” groups united by one great villain — the white, Christian, heterosexual male.

Picture a wheel: The hub is the white Protestant man, the spokes are every “marginalized” group on earth. AOC’s list was textbook: “This city was built by the Irish escaping famine, Italians fleeing fascism, Jews escaping the Holocaust, black Americans fleeing Jim Crow, Latinos seeking a better life, Native people standing for themselves, Asian Americans coming together.”

For AOC and the radical left, grievance is the very air they breathe. Humanity divides neatly into identity blocs, locked in eternal conflict — and at the center of every injustice stands the Christian West. She closed the circle by declaring that American history is defined by “class struggle,” the dialectic Marx demanded.

AOC contradicts herself, defines ‘the American people’ as everyone but American citizens, and divides humanity into tribes of grievance.

Her introduction of Bernie Sanders confirmed it. “Senator Sanders,” she said, “is the foremost leader and advocate for labor and class struggle in the United States.” At least she’s honest. Sanders is an international socialist — otherwise known as a communist — and AOC’s crowd now wears that label proudly.

But a 1990s-era Hillary Clinton would instantly see the contradiction: You can’t be both pro-American worker and pro-open borders. Clinton was a national socialist (minus the genocidal agenda); Sanders and AOC are international socialists. The alternative to both isn’t fascism — which is also a species of national socialism — but the American republic: constitutional rule, checks and balances, a Bill of Rights, and a government that protects its citizens from threats foreign and domestic.

‘Acceptance’ without love

For those wondering whether any theology slipped into AOC’s secular revival meeting — it did, but only in parody.

In older times, an evil spirit could be tested by whether it could quote scripture correctly. By that standard, AOC’s spirit fails. She told the crowd we must “accept our neighbor as ourselves.” Not love — accept. The difference is enormous.

To love your neighbor is to will his good. To “accept” your neighbor, in AOC’s lexicon, is to affirm whatever destructive path he chooses. When a neighbor wants to mutilate his body for a sexual fetish, love warns him against harm. AOC’s “acceptance” cheers him on. Her mercy kills.

The Christian calls sinners to repentance and faith in Christ. The radical left calls that “hate speech.”

RELATED: Why Gen Z is rebelling against leftist lies — and turning to Jesus

Photo by David Ryder/Getty Images

The logic of the new faith

By now, any logic student would have learned the lesson: AOC contradicts herself, defines “the American people” as everyone but American citizens, and divides humanity into tribes of grievance. Her creed depends on intersectionality — a doctrine that scapegoats not just white men, but all Christians who refuse to bow before the new secular orthodoxy.

If that student left disappointed by the quality of public rhetoric, he’d still leave wiser. Over the gates of hell, Dante wrote: “Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.” Over the platform of the radical left, one might inscribe a similar warning: Let none who expect coherence enter here.

The modern left doesn’t appeal to reason. It despises reason as a tool of “European colonialism.” Instead, it appeals to envy, resentment, lust, and the eternal promise of something for nothing — free buses for all.

The American republic will not survive if its citizens trade reason for rage. To preserve it, we must expose the incoherence at the heart of the left’s new religion. Free buses to a ruined city are no substitute for freedom itself.