Let them 'rot': Former Marine's solution to fixing California is about as anti-establishment as it gets



California used to be a land of promise that produced fine Americans who mocked D.C. elites, a former U.S. Marine officer says.

In the face of failed state and federal leadership in the Democratic Party, an ex-soldier has a message for inland communities.

The coastal cities and elites are supported by the inland residents, says security expert and veteran Adam Castillo.

'I'm tired of being the butt of jokes for MAGA.'

In an interview with Blaze News, Castillo explained that he found opportunity in Myanmar after being left as an "unemployed veteran as part of that massive sequestering period by the Obama administration around 2013."

Promises from the Barack Obama administration of finding jobs for veterans turned into nothing more than a check-box item for hiring managers, Castillo claimed, who would then say, "Hey, we we interviewed a veteran," and move on.

Castillo ran a security company during Myanmar's 2021 coup d'état, which taught him a valuable lesson: things can be done properly with the right leadership, even under the harshest conditions.

It is that experience that brought Castillo to believe the inland communities of California should be the focus for Republicans while the rest of the state crumbles around them.

"To be frank, who do you think supports these coastal cities? The inland desert communities, right? We're the ones commuting to the cities to make sure they're run, to make sure that the sanitation infrastructure is run [and] the electricity is run," Castillo declared.

RELATED: Self-driving trucks are about controlling the roads — not making them safer

George Rose/Getty Images

Republicans and conservatives should start with town councils, school boards, and the like before splintering outward into state legislatures, Castillo suggested.

"When you start going inland, specifically into the deserts, this is where it gets really conservative. ... They are the power of California."

"What we need to concentrate on in terms of organization at the community level is the inland communities, not the coastal cities," he went on.

"School board, city council, mayor, state legislator, then congressman, then senator," Castillo said.

For the coastal elites, Castillo says the voters need to deal with the consequences of their elections for a bit longer.

"I think we just let the liberal coastal cities rot," the former officer bluntly stated. "Honestly. They're already rotting. So let them continue to rot. They do not represent us. They don't even have that many representatives."

RELATED: The left spots fake reality only when Hollywood gets hurt

Your browser does not support the video tag.

While Castillo's remarks could be seen as divisive or jarring by some, he remained confident that a Republican governor in 2026 and beyond would set an amazing precedent in smaller communities and provide much-needed inspiration.

In the end, his belief that Californians can still recapture their glory years serves as his ongoing motivation.

"I'm tired of being the butt of jokes for other states. I'm tired of being the butt of jokes for MAGA," he concluded.

"We're Californians. We were better than you people," he said of D.C. elites. "We were born better than you people. It's about time we reclaim our seat at that power."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Want to be a man of action? Start a family



Do you matter? Does what you do matter? Are you doing anything at all? Does your will have any impact on the world? Are you living with vitality?

Or are you just a hamster on a wheel in a little cage in the back of a middle school classroom thinking you are doing something when really you are just wasting your time here until lights out?

Because we can all do it, we forget that it’s special. It’s so ordinary, we forget it’s extraordinary.

To answer the first question: You do matter, and what you do matters. It doesn’t matter who you are; you matter, and you have an impact on the world. Maybe it’s a big one, or maybe it’s a little one. But even something as simple as saying good morning and smiling to the cashier who rings up your pack of cigarettes and full tank of gas is some kind of something or some kind of impact on someone else’s world.

Hamster wheel

But are you living with vitality? That’s not quite as simple. That bit about the hamster wasting time dinking around on the wheel — that’s certainly a depressing scene, but it’s a feeling all too common in a world in which many of our physical needs are satisfied whether we really do anything at all.

Everyone matters in our world, and everyone matters to someone. That’s a fact. But everyone doesn’t feel like they do, and many don’t feel like they are living a very vital life either. The hamster-wheel job that’s stable and hard to lose, the climate-controlled car that tells you when to slow down. An uneventful and seemingly predictable life finished off with some controlled simulated struggle at the gym three nights a week without an end, a shock, or a surprise in sight.

Some people dull the pain of the malaise with drugs, others zone out with Netflix or the internet.

Family matters

Still others seem to think that the only way to feel alive in our age is by seeking out extremes: dangerous travel, feats of endurance, and any other pursuit risking life and limb.

Fine for those who have the opportunity, I suppose. But honestly, vitality can be found much closer to home.

The real truth is that the most vital thing you can do in the year 2026 is something that just about everyone can do: raise a family.

Falling in love, getting married, having children, and raising a family is the last real, and completely real, thing on planet Earth.

It doesn’t matter if everything becomes entirely fake. It doesn’t matter if everyone has fake jobs, if no one owns anything for longer than six months, if all the food is processed, if all the appliances are designed with planned obsolescence in mind, and if AI takes care of just about all our needs. The entire world could be completely fake. But one last real thing will remain: family.

And it is the realness of the family that matters and that makes it so vital. When we raise a family, we are completely crucial. Our decisions determine real-world outcomes, both short term and long term. The family is not a theory or spreadsheet. It’s not a surrogate activity that stands in simply for the sake of simulating some kind of other struggle.

The family is real.

RELATED: Why I'm not worried about AI 'replacing' me

Universal Images Archive/Getty Images

Royal reproduction

A looming intuition in our postmodern, anti-vitalistic ennui is the feeling that we don’t have any control. Our health insurance policies, our jobs, the new charges that don’t make any sense on the phone bill, the screwed up politics, the fact that you can’t even talk to someone who speaks English on the phone anymore when you need something fixed, and that nothing seems to last very long either, and no one cares.

But of course, there is one domain where we are monarchs no matter how lowly our job or how faceless the large systems that govern our society may be.

The family.

A mother is a queen, and a father is a king. What Mom and Dad say goes. Mom and Dad don’t answer to anyone. They don’t need to ask permission, and they won’t be reprimanded by HR. When you are a parent, you are a monarch of a micro-kingdom. That might sound weird, but that’s the way to think about it. You dictate the religion, the calendar, the diet, the schedule, the language, the attitude, and everything about family life.

Dynasty building

It’s here, in this domain, where the most potent and impactful kind of vitalism still lives and will always live. Cultivating new life is the definition of impacting the world and the future. Yes, your kingdom might be small, but your impact is total, and it’s all yours.

Your vision is what matters. You are in control. What could possibly be more vital than conceiving children, naming them, raising them, teaching them, and then eventually sending them off to do the same things with the tools and ways they learned from you? You are creating a dynasty.

Because we can all do it, we forget that it’s special. It’s so ordinary, we forget it’s extraordinary. We might devote so much time and energy to thinking about money, influence, stability, the markets, the Middle East, geopolitics, sports, and work, but by far the most real and most vital thing you can do in 2026 is a seemingly most ordinary thing.

Raise a family.

Canada-US coalition emerges against Mark Carney's surveillance bill



What happens when a government can order technology companies to create a back door into encrypted communications that even they cannot access?

A rare cross-border coalition of Canadian civil-liberties advocates and Republican lawmakers is warning that Canada's proposed surveillance legislation could threaten privacy rights on both sides of the border.

'Privacy is not a luxury in a free society.'

Sweeping vulnerability

Supporters of proposed Bill C-22 say such powers are necessary to help law enforcement investigate terrorists, organized crime, and other serious threats in an age of encrypted messaging. Critics counter that once a vulnerability is built into a system, it cannot be confined to one country, one agency, or one investigation.

Last Friday, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms presented a petition to the office of Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney. More than 40,000 people signed the petition opposing Bill C-22, which would expand the government's ability to obtain electronic communications and other digital evidence during criminal and national security investigations.

US opposition

VPN providers are already threatening to leave the Canadian market if the bill becomes law. In a May 7 letter, Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Brian Mast (R-Fla.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, warned Canada's Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree that the legislation could jeopardize privacy rights in both countries.

"Canada's Bill C-22, currently under consideration in Parliament, would drastically expand Canada's surveillance and data access powers in ways that create significant cross-border risks to the security and data privacy of Americans," the lawmakers wrote.

"We write to express our concerns that, if enacted, Bill C-22 would allow Canadian government officials to compel American companies to build backdoors into their encrypted systems, thereby introducing systemic vulnerabilities that could be exploited by hackers, foreign adversaries, and cybercriminals."

The lawmakers also warned that the bill's language is sufficiently broad to permit secret ministerial orders.

"If a U.S.-based provider is forced to redesign its system to facilitate Canadian authorized access to content that is currently inaccessible even to the provider itself, the resulting capability cannot be geographically limited," they wrote. "This directly threatens the privacy of U.S. persons who expect and depend upon robust encryption to protect sensitive communications, health data, financial records, and personal correspondence from unwarranted intrusion."

RELATED: Albertans are ready to vote on Canadian secession — so why is their premier stalling?

Separatist leader Mitch Sylvestre at a rally in front of the Elections Alberta headquarters in Edmonton, Canada. Henry Marken/Getty Images

Stark terms

At a Friday news conference before submitting the petition to Carney, JCCF board member John Robson, a prominent Ottawa historian and journalist, described the bill in stark terms.

“I'm here on Parliament Hill today because we are delivering a petition with 42,344 signatures asking Parliament not to proceed with Bill C-22 ... because [Prime Minister Mark Carney] is the moving force behind this bill, and we're hoping to persuade him that all these signatures from Canadians across the country ... represent legitimate, serious concerns about the scope of this bill,” Robson said.

Robson noted that many Canadians and the constitutional scholars at the JCCF “are concerned about Bill C-22 because it would require service providers to compile Canadians' electronic data, to develop systems for extracting information from it and turning it over to the government.”

“It's not that Canadians ... are against law enforcement having appropriate powers, including to fight organized crime,” Robson said.

“It's one more ham-fisted way of targeting ordinary, law-abiding people instead of adopting tailored measures suitable to the real crime problems. And privacy is not a luxury in a free society.”

‘Godball’: Are outspoken athletes Christianity’s most powerful evangelists?



Christian affiliation in America has been in steep decline for decades, with church attendance falling and nearly 30% of adults religiously unaffiliated.

Pew Research Center has argued that there is “no clear evidence of a religious revival among young adults,” but sports fans might reach a different conclusion when tuning in to post-game interviews and press conferences, where they frequently hear athletes boldly professing their faith and giving glory to Jesus Christ.

‘You’re not alone in seeing it, and you’re not alone in recognizing that it is a revival.’

While Pew’s latest polling shows that the long decline has only plateaued, New York Times bestselling author and sports journalist Steve Eubanks believes there are undeniable and meaningful signs of revival, particularly among athletes.

Teed up

In his forthcoming book, “Godball: How Athletes Are Saving Christianity,” which releases June 9, Eubanks takes a deeper look at the faith resurgence sweeping America and how these outspoken athletes have become Christianity’s most powerful evangelists.

“I don’t think I would have noticed it if it hadn’t been for the event that you and I talked about three years ago,” Eubanks told Blaze News, referring to a 2023 incident in which the leading golf publication he then worked for attempted to censor his interview with professional golfer Amy Olson. When Global Golf Post refused to run the piece unless Eubanks removed Olson's references to her Christian faith and pro-life views, he “resigned on the spot.”

At the time, Eubanks told Blaze News that widespread leftist bias had created a “sad state of affairs” for journalism.

But now Eubanks says the experience had a silver lining: showing him that outspoken Christian athletes like Olson were more common than he realized.

“I thought, ‘Wow, for an athlete to say something like this is extraordinary,’” Eubanks told Blaze News.

“Well, then I started paying attention, and I thought, ‘Maybe it’s not that extraordinary; maybe it’s something that’s happening every day, and I just hadn’t noticed.’”

Jesus first

Combing through press conferences and pre- and post-game interviews proved his hunch correct. More and more athletes seemed to be using the spotlight to profess their faith, sidestepping questions about athletic performance to give thanks to Jesus and share the gospel.

“It’s a huge movement now,” Eubanks declared. “Really, it’s a revival.”

RELATED: Exclusive: Golf writer says staff 'went ballistic' over story on pregnant golfer's pro-life, Christian views — and outlet's higher-ups refused to run it

Steve Eubanks. Image source: Steve Eubanks

When asked why athletes tend to be more outspoken than other public figures, Eubanks pointed to the confidence that comes from succeeding in “one of the few meritocracies left.”

Leaderboard

Sports also instill a willingness to resist the herd, Eubanks said.

“From the time they were 7 or 8 years old, they were the leaders of the teams,” Eubanks said. “They had been told by the coaching staff, ‘Look, you’re the person who has to step up.’ And it’s a natural extension of that.”

Eubanks asserts one of the main reasons these athletes are speaking out now is tied to the COVID lockdowns. He highlighted that an athlete’s career is significantly shorter than most other professions and that, during the lockdowns, everything they had dedicated their lives to was put on hold for an uncertain, lengthy period.

“I just think COVID radicalized these kids,” he stated. “Those people realized that their entire lives could be taken away from them in an instant and that it was important for them to stand up for the things that were really important and to go ahead and make these proclamations of faith.”

He argued that athletes have become the “cultural drivers” of American society, more so than artists and musicians.

Bad bets

Eubanks hopes that church attendance, particularly among young men, continues to grow, but expressed concern about one emerging threat within the sports community that could impact the current Christian revival.

Image source: Steve Eubanks

“If there’s anything that could derail it, it is the sports gambling,” Eubanks told Blaze News. “It can compromise the integrity of the sports themselves.”

He detailed how throwing a game used to mean deliberately manipulating the entire outcome, but recently, some athletes have been indicted for allegedly engaging in spot-fixes, rigging small moments, such as a specific baseball pitch, for prop bets.

Eubanks also noted that the barrier to gambling has been substantially lowered, from having to seek out a local bookie to using your phone to place numerous bets in seconds.

“It’s almost the slot machine effect. There’s just enough bells and whistles to keep you engaged and to keep you throwing money down the rathole,” he said. “There’s a huge, huge addiction problem out there with this that we haven’t recognized yet, but that could really derail this revival movement in my eyes.”

RELATED: When Archie Comics found Jesus: Strange artifacts from a once-Christian culture

Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone. Erica Denhoff/Icon Sportswire/Getty Images

Walking the walk

To sustain and grow the revival, Eubanks believes athletes must become more vocal about their faith and take a stand against immoral practices in the sports industry, including opposing sports betting and the playing of songs with obscene lyrics at stadiums and arenas.

“In order to walk the walk, you’re eventually going to have to stand up and say, ‘This is not right; we shouldn’t be doing this,’” he said.

Eubanks hopes that readers of “Godball” understand this revival movement is significant and expanding. He also aims to inspire young athletes to express their faith publicly, which could spark a domino effect of fans being drawn to Jesus Christ.

“There’s an entire legion of people out here who are seeing exactly the same thing. You’re not alone in seeing it, and you’re not alone in recognizing that it is a revival,” he stated.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

D-Day drama ‘Pressure’ celebrates forgotten values



The new movie “I Love Boosters” asks us to root for thieves who steal designer clothes sans regret. Next month’s “Carolina Caroline” follows a pair of adorable, lovestruck thugs who swindle strangers for cash.

Whatever happened to actual “good guys”?

‘When he looked into the eyes of the 101st division, he took the time to ask their names, to shoot the breeze about fly fishing and their girlfriends.’

Look no further than “Pressure,” a new World War II saga based on incredible true events.

Extraordinary heroes

Honor. Loyalty. Courage. Heroism. The ability to make a tough decision and stand by it, no matter what. No victim complexes or complaints about rough childhoods. Just extraordinary heroes taking history into their hands.

It’s one reason we still can’t get enough of World War II films. Those qualities are front and center in this well-told tale. And it helps that the premise behind “Pressure” will strike audiences as unfamiliar, even shocking.

Rain day

The most consequential battle of World War II almost got rained out, a story that proves a snug fit for America’s 250th birthday.

Brendan Fraser stars as Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, the supreme commander ready to storm the beaches of Normandy and liberate northwest Europe. That risky plan required an assist from Mother Nature.

Would the forecast allow for a massive amphibious assault? Or should the Allied powers wait a few days, even weeks, jeopardizing the element of surprise in the process?

Andrew Scott of “Fleabag” fame plays James Stagg, the meteorologist brought in to advise Gen. Eisenhower on the best path forward. He predicts that conditions will turn D-Day into a disaster. Is he right, or does the existing weather expert (Chris Messina) have the right forecast?

Earned respect

Fraser, the “Whale” alum who once again changed his physique to play “Ike,” told Align why he admires the man who not only helped win the war but later became a two-term U.S. president.

“He was an excellent communicator; he was a diplomat of sorts,” Fraser said. “He conducted military operations over dinner tables. Apparently he was very funny and charming at them. ... That’s a form of communication too.”

There was a method to his unorthodox ways, the Oscar winner said.

“He did all this because he cared intensely about the troops’ well-being,” Fraser said. That extended to bonding with the men facing daunting odds of survival, especially in the D-Day invasion.

“When he looked into the eyes of the 101st division, he took the time to ask their names, to shoot the breeze about fly fishing and their girlfriends. He was respected because he earned it. ... It was almost like a secret weapon in the operation,” the actor noted. “They wanted to please him, and they knew what they were up against.”

RELATED: 'Call Sign Courage': One soldier's fight against creeping Marxism in the military

Root/Cause

Historic battle

Director Steven Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan” captured the early stages of the Normandy invasion without flinching. It’s one of the goriest war sequences ever shot, showing how soldiers ran toward a wall of bullets that took hundreds of lives in a flash.

“Pressure” doesn’t attempt to out-do Spielberg’s version, but the film shows how the beaches were quickly stained a deep red color.

“It was no secret that they were going into a bare-knuckle fight with a chainsaw,” Fraser said of that historic battle.

The project gave Fraser, now gearing up to shoot another “Mummy” film with co-star Rachel Weisz, an appreciation for Ike’s role in history.

“He was the type of leader who did not want to punish his foe, his enemy. ... He didn’t let him off the hook, either. ... He partnered with them, neutered them that way, and made them accountable,” he said.

Little-known perspective

Fraser’s co-star, Irish actress Kerry Condon, gets a less splashy but still consequential role in the war drama. She plays Captain Kay Summersby, Gen. Eisenhower’s loyal aide.

“She brought the emotional intelligence when the men were struggling,” the actress said of her role, including a critical subplot involving Stagg’s pregnant wife. Summersby would later move to the U.S. and become captain in the Women’s Army Corps.

Many moviegoers may not have realized the role weather played in the D-Day invasion. Count Condon among that group.

“It was shocking to think it was one person who changed the course of history. ... That’s why I wanted to do [the film]. It’s a very interesting perspective on World War II.”

The great motor oil shortage of 2026 is another fake, media-driven panic — and drivers are paying the price



America is running out of motor oil!

At least, that’s the latest media-driven crisis making the rounds — and making consumers nervous. Shelves stripped bare by panic buying, retailers quietly raising prices, and everyone blaming “supply chains.”

Older vehicles were often far more forgiving. Many could run multiple oil viscosities without major drama.

Sound familiar?

It should. Welcome to the reboot of 2020’s “great toilet paper shortage.” This time, the same playbook is being used with synthetic motor oil.

Spoiler alert: There is no nationwide motor oil collapse.

Slick trick

Your car is not about to become undrivable because America suddenly “ran out” of lubricants. Most drivers will probably notice little more than higher prices and fewer discount sales.

Yes, there is a legitimate supply issue involving some specialty synthetic base oils used in certain ultra-low-viscosity lubricants. Shipping disruptions, refinery problems, and instability in parts of the Middle East and Asia have tightened supply for these specialized lubricants.

The American Petroleum Institute even activated emergency provisional licensing flexibility for some lubricant formulations because certain approved ingredients became harder to source. That’s not something done casually.

But these high-end Group III base oils — thinner oils designed primarily to help automakers meet fuel economy and emissions targets — are only used in specific synthetic formulations like 0W-8, 0W-16, and certain OEM-specific blends required in some newer vehicles.

So if your car has a new Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, Ford, or GM engine designed around low-viscosity lubricants, you could face higher prices, fewer choices, or occasional temporary shortages of specific formulations.

That’s a very different story from, “America is running out of oil.”

RELATED: This used-car odometer scam is everywhere — and impossible to detect

CBS Photo Archive/Getty Images

Primed for panic

Even if your car is affected, the impact will likely show up as higher maintenance costs, reduced sales promotions, and occasional difficulty finding certain premium synthetic blends. That’s annoying, especially when vehicle ownership costs are already skyrocketing from inflation, insurance increases, expensive repairs, and high interest rates. But it’s hardly an automotive apocalypse.

But the media narrative is turning a narrow industrial issue into another broad consumer panic, and once again, fear is becoming profitable.

Most conventional motor oils are still widely available. Most drivers using common viscosities like 5W-30 or 10W-30 are not likely to face major supply issues. You can still walk into most parts stores, retailers, and service centers and find plenty of oil on the shelf.

But that nuance doesn’t generate clicks.

Instead, social media influencers and breathless news coverage are lumping everything together under the terrifying word “shortage” because panic spreads faster than facts. Suddenly consumers start hearing rumors that oil changes may become impossible, stores will run dry, and everyone needs to buy cases of oil immediately before it disappears forever.

That panic buying itself becomes the problem.

Memory wipe

The toilet paper fiasco proved how quickly consumer psychology can create artificial shortages. There was never a true nationwide inability to manufacture toilet paper. The system broke because consumers started hoarding far more than they normally purchased, overwhelming distribution and retail inventory systems that were never designed for panic-level buying behavior.

Now we’re watching the same pattern develop in automotive service.

Some repair shops and distributors are already stockpiling certain synthetic products because they expect higher prices and tighter inventories. Consumers are hearing “shortage” and buying extra oil they otherwise would not have purchased. Retailers are responding by raising prices early, sometimes well ahead of any actual supply impact.

Which raises the question: At what point does anticipation become opportunistic pricing?

Thin is in

The bigger question, however, is why we’re in this situation at all. The answer points to increasing government pressure on the auto industry.

Modern engines have become increasingly dependent on hyper-specific lubricants largely because automakers were chasing federal fuel economy targets. Thinner oils reduce internal drag slightly, helping manufacturers squeeze out small efficiency gains that look good on government testing charts.

But that engineering strategy also created greater dependence on specialized synthetic supply chains.

Older vehicles were often far more forgiving. Many could run multiple oil viscosities without major drama. Today’s engines are increasingly calibrated around exact formulations, exact additives, and exact viscosity requirements. That means even a relatively small disruption in specialized synthetic oil supply suddenly becomes a much bigger issue for dealerships and owners of newer vehicles.

If you own an older truck running conventional 5W-30, you’re probably in much better shape than someone driving a brand-new vehicle requiring a very specific OEM-approved 0W-8 synthetic blend.

If your vehicle requires a highly specialized synthetic oil, keeping enough for your next oil change is reasonable. Buying a lifetime supply because somebody on TikTok said that “the shelves are going empty” is exactly the kind of irrational behavior that creates unnecessary shortages in the first place.

The bigger concern should actually be how quickly we’re manipulated into panic consumption cycles every time there’s even a modest supply disruption.

We’ve seen this movie before.

And unless consumers stop reacting emotionally every time a scary headline appears, we’ll probably see it again with the next product too.

What 'fur babies,' 2D boyfriends, and 'sharenting' tell us about the West's future



Discussions about demographic decline in the West tend to focus on mass immigration, with good reason. Debates over borders, assimilation, and the so-called “Great Replacement” dominate political discourse across Europe and America, often framed as a demographic transformation imposed by elites.

But there is another kind of "replacement" under way — one that appears far less imposed and more self-managed. Across much of the developed world, societies are suppressing the primal biological imperative to reproduce, turning instead toward technological, emotional, and economic substitutes for children and family life.

Playgrounds grow quiet as kindergartens are repurposed into elderly care homes.

Birth rates are falling off a cliff, and the debate has long since outgrown dry statistics, morphing instead into a full-blown dystopian spectacle. As biological motherhood retreats, a new era of artificial and symbolic surrogacy is emerging. From robotic companions to the vicarious consumption of mommy blogs, the traditional cradle is being replaced by market-driven alternatives.

Fur-baby boom

While I often praise South Korea for its socially conservative traditions, its penchant for great zombie movies, and its willingness to lock up annoying American YouTubers in labor prisons, the country also faces an unfortunate distinction: It now has the world’s lowest fertility rate. At 0.8, this figure is far below the 2.1 replacement level needed for population stability without immigration.

As a result, unusual trends have emerged among Korean women. For example, 2023 marked the first time that pet strollers outsold baby carriages. This is more than a passing trend — last year the number of South Korean households with "fur babies" hit 15 million — or one in three.

The country’s infrastructure is visibly transforming to reflect its shrinking youth population. This March, at the start of the academic year, more than 200 elementary schools admitted no new pupils. The result is the rise of ghost schools across rural provinces — empty buildings that once housed children but now stand silent.

With nearly half of South Korea’s population expected to be senior citizens within 30 years, the government has taken drastic measures. Playgrounds grow quiet as kindergartens are repurposed into elderly care homes. What was once celebrated as the miracle on the Han River has evolved into a cautionary tale of a society that has optimized itself for productivity at the expense of its continuity.

RELATED: Meet the 'femosphere': Angry young women who love to hate men

Francis G. Mayer/Getty Images

Cartoon courtship

While South Korea replaces children with pets, Japan has pioneered replacing human intimacy with a Wi-Fi connection. Some young woman have adopted a new sexual identity — 2D exclusive. A product of otaku (geek) culture gone mainstream, 2D aficionados — including Japanese Minister of State for Economic Security Kimi Onoda — prefer anime characters over living, breathing men, who tend to be less compliant and far more demanding.

Across the West, the refusal to reproduce is commonly framed as a personal choice. Scratch the surface, however, and you often find a reaction to powerful external forces. Chief among these is eco-anxiety about climate change, a sentiment especially pronounced among Western women.

Much like postcolonial studies, green ideology has inculcated a sense of guilt and victimhood, convincing many that bringing children into the world is reckless because of the Earth’s inevitable heat death. A major survey published in the Lancet revealed that 52% of Americans under 25 hesitate to have children, specifically due to concerns about the climate. The prevailing belief is that the worst thing a woman can do is increase her carbon footprint by bringing a baby into a doomed world.

The sharent trap

The vacuum left by declining birth rates has also allowed a strange new form of parasocial parenting to emerge. In the United States, the rise of a kind of "digital godmother" culture enables millions of childless followers to experience motherhood vicariously. Influencers like Savannah LaBrant carefully curate a highly scripted version of domestic life, offering their vast audiences an illusion of participation in parenthood.

LaBrant engages in "sharenting" — because everything fashionable now needs a stupid portmanteau — where parents share intimate details of their children’s lives online. Her followers develop deep one-sided emotional bonds with her three children, Rosie, Zealand, and Sunday, witnessing their lives from ultrasound images to toddler — yes, even their births were documented. Strangers offer advice, believing they are actively participating in raising the children.

The constant stream of photos and videos drives engagement and enhances the most important thing — brand value. Sponsorships range from HelloFresh to mobile gaming apps. (Nothing quite says "home and hearth" like an ad for RAID: Shadow Legends.)

Unbirth of a nation

In the United Kingdom, mass immigration goes hand in hand with reproductive policy. The number of abortions performed since 1968 — 10.9 million — almost equals the number of immigrants currently residing in the U.K. Immigration has replaced a generation of unborn children and sustained the workforce. Rather than incentivizing native births, state policy has increasingly adopted a neoliberal model that treats people as fungible units — importing adults to fill labor needs, instead of nurturing local family growth.

This global trend is more than a simple decline in birth rates — it marks a paradigm shift in our assumptions about what gives life meaning. For many, it used to be the simple yet profound drive to leave a legacy for the next generation. The free market has proven itself quite adept at selling quick-fix alternatives to this rewarding, yet often thankless, pursuit. Immigration reform is badly needed, but no amount of border security will sustain a culture that cares so little about its future.

Aging is inevitable — catastrophic decline is not



You're likely familiar with the cultural script on aging.

It reads less like a list of life stages and more like a slow-motion obituary. Hit 50, and the back gives out. Hit 60, and the memory springs a leak. Hit 70, and sleep comes in seven installments, courtesy of the bladder. Hit 80, and people start congratulating you for standing up. Hit 90, and they congratulate you for waking up.

Consistency, the least marketable word in wellness, turns out to be the key to thriving well past retirement age.

The script is, and always was, a lie.

Boomer bashing

My Irish grandmother is in her 80s and still as sharp as a tack. She remembers names, dates, family scandals, who owed whom money in 1987, and every embarrassing thing any grandchild ever did. You don’t win an argument with her. If you’re lucky, you survive it. She runs mental laps around people half her age. She’s not an anomaly or some statistical freak. This is what a properly engaged human brain looks like in its ninth decade.

So why does society treat people like her as exceptions to a rule that isn't real? Because ageism remains the last fully acceptable prejudice in America and beyond.

Try selling a birthday card that mocks any other group. Now walk into any drugstore and count the ones mocking the elderly. There's a whole aisle. Sitcoms cast grandparents as lost souls who can barely use a cell phone. Tech companies build entire pitch decks around how hopelessly out of touch anyone over 40 has become.

"OK, Boomer" was marketed as a joke. In reality, it was thinly veiled contempt, aimed at the very people whose work made possible the lives of those mocking them. The bias is so normalized that it barely registers as bias, which is exactly how the worst ones operate. And ageism is the most destructive of them all. Every other prejudice targets a group most of us will never belong to. Ageism targets the group nearly all of us will join.

Brain boost

That casual contempt fuels the narratives about aging more than biology ever did. Tell a population for 50 years that decline is destiny, and the population obligingly declines. Tell people they become invisible at 60, and many will retreat into the shadows.

The trouble is that the data has stopped cooperating with the cruel, condescending script.

A recent study from the Center for BrainHealth at the University of Texas at Dallas suggests it never should have. Researchers tracked nearly 4,000 adults between the ages of 19 and 94 across three years and found measurable improvements in brain performance at every age. People in their 70s and 80s improved. Some of the biggest jumps came from those who started with the lowest scores. The brain behaves less like a dying battery and more like a muscle. Train it, and it adapts. Ignore it, and it atrophies.

And by training, I don’t mean learning Mandarin or memorizing pi to a thousand digits. Small daily habits did most of the heavy lifting. A few minutes of intentional mental work: a crossword, sudoku, some journaling. Real conversation with real humans. No magic pills, no ice baths, no hyperbaric chambers in the garage. Consistency, the least marketable word in wellness, turns out to be the key to thriving well past retirement age.

RELATED: To lose weight, ditch the 'unisex' approach

ABC Photo Archives/Getty Images

Geriatric gains

Aging is real, of course. Time charges rent. But modern culture keeps confusing aging with abandonment, and those are entirely different events.

Consider muscle loss. The standard line is that getting weaker after 60 is simply nature taking its course. But research on resistance training in older adults keeps producing very different results. Nursing homes that add basic strength programs see residents regain and even improve their balance and mobility.

The brain, as the aforementioned study shows, follows the same pattern. Older cab drivers memorizing routes, musicians practicing scales, retirees picking up chess, grandparents who refuse to stop hosting Sunday dinner: These people keep their wits because their wits never get a day off.

Meanwhile, plenty of 35-year-olds are already mentally cooked. Screen addiction, sleep deprivation, isolation, ultra-processed food, chronic stress, and the dopamine slot machine in everyone's pocket are producing cognitive burnout in people who still rely on Mommy and Daddy for money. A 20-year-old flicking through TikTok at red lights may have a shorter attention span than a 60-year-old who reads two books a month and still finds silence tolerable.

Seasoned seniors

The myth that older people cannot learn is exactly that — a myth, and a lazy one. They process some things more slowly, then make up the difference with pattern recognition, emotional regulation, and the kind of patience that only comes from having already survived the worst version of yourself. Communities that lose their elders lose their memory. Civilizations that worship only youth end up run by impulsive adults trapped in permanent adolescence, which explains a great deal about the past few decades.

Emotionally, older adults often report more gratitude, steadiness, and perspective than they had at 30. After enough funerals and failures, trivial drama loses its grip. An 80-year-old who buried a husband and raised five kids on a tight budget has a much more grounded perspective on reality than a heavily medicated influencer melting down over a comment thread.

The brain stays dynamic longer than anyone assumed. The body stays trainable longer than anyone assumed. The real tragedy isn't aging but how early people are taught to give up on themselves.

There is your chronological age and your biological age, and the two are often barely on speaking terms. Plenty of 40-year-olds are running on fumes and ibuprofen. Plenty of 80-year-olds are operating with the energy and mental wattage of someone half their age. My grandmother certainly is.

Albertans are ready to vote on Canadian secession — so why is their premier stalling?



To many Americans, Alberta may seem like a distant Canadian province. But the oil-rich western region increasingly resembles a northern version of America’s populist red states — deeply distrustful of liberal federal power, economically tied to energy production, and increasingly willing to challenge the legitimacy of national institutions.

The difference is that Alberta’s growing independence movement is no longer content merely to complain about Ottawa — it wants out.

'Who amongst us thought when we were growing up that one day we'd have the opportunity to create a new country?' Rath said. 'How much fun is this?'

Now, Alberta independence advocates are accusing Conservative Alberta Premier Danielle Smith of blocking a referendum on separation in order to maintain relations with Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government in Ottawa.

Pipe dream

Jeff Rath, legal counsel for the Alberta Prosperity Project and one of the leading voices advocating Alberta independence, claims Smith is quietly delaying a provincial referendum on separation in hopes of securing federal support for a pipeline route through neighboring British Columbia.

Rath does not oppose pipelines themselves. In fact, many Alberta separatists increasingly argue that the province’s economic future lies in deeper integration with American energy markets rather than continued dependence on Ottawa and Eastern Canada.

Rath also questioned whether the proposed pipeline is even necessary, arguing that Alberta will soon have substantial additional export capacity through existing and expanding infrastructure connected to U.S. markets.

In his view, Smith is trading away referendum momentum for a politically compromised deal that still leaves Alberta subject to Ottawa’s climate and energy policies.

“She’s literally sold out everybody in Alberta for a completely unnecessary pipeline,” Rath said. Rath told Align that a source close to Smith informed him of what he described as a behind-the-scenes arrangement between the premier and Carney.

Slowing momentum

The dispute highlights growing tensions inside Alberta’s separatist movement, which has increasingly clashed with Smith despite her frequent criticism of Ottawa and the Liberal government. While Smith has positioned herself as a defender of Alberta’s autonomy within Canada, many independence advocates now accuse her of slowing momentum at a moment when they believe public support is surging.

The conflict intensified after Alberta Court of King’s Bench Justice Shaina Leonard questioned the legitimacy of an independence petition signed by more than 300,000 Albertans. Leonard ruled that Elections Alberta may have improperly assessed the petition because some indigenous bands oppose Alberta separation.

Leonard, who was appointed by former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, has since become a target of separatist frustration over what many in the movement view as judicial interference in a democratic process.

RELATED: FREE ALBERTA! Nod from US energizes Canada sovereignty movement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

Referendum on a referendum

But Rath insists that neither the courts nor Smith can prevent Albertans from voting on independence.

The lawyer — who has met several times with members of President Donald Trump’s administration — said he was astonished that Smith is now proposing what critics have described as a referendum on whether to hold a referendum.

Rath argues that Smith already possesses the legal authority to move forward immediately.

When asked by Align whether an independence referendum can proceed despite Leonard’s ruling, Rath replied: “One hundred percent."

Rath pointed to paragraph 76 of Leonard’s decision, which he says explicitly affirms the Alberta government’s authority under the province’s Referendum Act to place the question on the ballot without relying on the Citizen Initiative Act petition process.

“What’s going up to the Court of Appeal is whether or not ... there's a requirement for First Nations consultation or whether it's unconstitutional — not whether the question goes on the ballot at all,” Rath said.

Rath sharply criticized Leonard’s ruling, calling it political rather than legal.

“This is fundamentally a political decision and not a legal decision,” he told Align.

Gathering steam

He also argued that the ruling has backfired by energizing the independence movement rather than slowing it.

“People in Alberta are furious,” Rath said. “Even people that are sitting on the fence are telling me, ‘I was sitting on the fence until I see that all it takes is one liberal justice to tell me that I don't have a right to do something, and I'm done with this.’”

Rath said frustration with Canada’s judiciary is now fueling broader constitutional discussions inside the province, including calls for an elected judiciary similar to the American system.

The controversy, he argued, has transformed Alberta independence from a fringe political idea into a serious constitutional debate.

“This is probably good for another 5%,” Rath said, referring to support for separation.

Once in a generation

Despite the legal battle and political uncertainty, Rath described the movement in optimistic terms, framing Alberta independence as a once-in-a-generation opportunity.

“Who amongst us thought when we were growing up that one day we'd have the opportunity to create a new country?” Rath said. “How much fun is this?”

Smith, meanwhile, remains in a politically precarious position. Although she has repeatedly said she opposes Alberta separation and would campaign against it in any referendum, many members of her governing United Conservative Party support giving voters the opportunity to decide the issue directly.

Even many Albertans who oppose separation still support holding a referendum, Rath said.

“100% of those people believe that Albertans are adults and should have the right to be able to answer this question."

Whether Smith can continue balancing Alberta nationalism with her federalist instincts may determine not only the future of her government but also the trajectory of a separatist movement that no longer appears willing to wait patiently for Ottawa to change course.

Self-driving trucks are about controlling the roads — not making them safer



Americans have become strangely accustomed to driverless cars. In cities like San Francisco and Austin, people casually summon Waymo robo-taxis the way they once called Uber.

Now imagine the same technology attached to an 80,000-pound tractor-trailer moving at highway speed.

My fellow truckers already know the problem. Modern collision-avoidance systems have been triggered by shadows, weather conditions, lighting changes, and animals.

It’s happening; large carriers are already purchasing hundreds of robotically operated highway trucks as they prepare to eliminate one of the country’s most common occupations: the truck driver.

Supermarket swindle

Those pimping the technology tell us it is the necessary solution to a catastrophic shortage of truckers, with the additional benefit of making the roads safer. As I explain in my new book, "End of the Road: Inside the War on Truckers," neither claim holds up under scrutiny.

This hardly matters, as the demand for more road robots is hardly organic. Instead, it is the product of a massive marketing campaign designed to acclimate us to a radical new future, one that may ultimately curtail the rights of all American drivers. Picture something like the “motor law” envisioned in the classic Rush track “Red Barchetta.” The late Neil Peart was a man who understood the precious freedom of the open road.

Waymo robo-taxis already roam San Francisco and Austin, while autonomous tractor-trailers test on Texas interstates. The technology, however, remains immature and heavily dependent on human oversight.

You won’t see this mentioned in recent paid content from Aurora Innovation, one of the leading developers of autonomous big-rig systems. Almost seamlessly inserted among actual articles on online news platform Axios, the piece’s headline promises to explain “the link between autonomous trucks and your grocery bill.”

The article opens with a bold claim: “Autonomous trucks — trucks that operate without a driver — could lower shipping costs, helping reduce grocery prices while improving safety and supply chain efficiency.”

But what the slick interactive video infographic and official-looking statistics fail to reveal is that the cost of trucking, in general, only represents between 1% and 3% of any consumer product. Consider that the industry has spent the last four years in a “freight recession” driven by weak demand, oversupply, and depressed rates. Did you notice your groceries getting cheaper? Of course you didn’t.

'Shortage' scam

Aurora’s advertorial also employs one of the autonomous truck lobby’s favorite justifications: the so-called shortage of truck drivers. This “crisis” has been going on since the 1980s, when deregulation and the attendant sharp decline in truck driver pay and working conditions created massive turnover in the industry. Now it is being used to convince investors and lawmakers that we don’t need truck drivers at all.

The problem is that even the trucking industry itself has largely stopped pretending the shortage exists.

Bob Costello, chief economist for the American Trucking Associations, allegedly declared that the “truck driver shortage is gone” at a recent carrier conference in Florida; just prior to this, he told trucking media outlet CCJ Digital that “what we have in the United States is a quality problem around drivers, much more so than an absolute number.”

That distinction matters because the trucking industry, like much of the country, has spent years lowering standards. The Biden administration’s de facto open borders policy opened the industry to large numbers of illegal aliens, refugees, and dubious asylum-seekers. Truckers — and the motoring public — have been dealing with the consequences ever since.

RELATED: The deadly trucker crisis — and why mass migration is to blame

Justin Hamel/Bloomberg/Getty Images

Unsafe at any speed

Road safety could improve overnight by revoking the questionable CDLs and driver’s licenses handed out to poorly vetted, poorly trained migrants in recent years. Instead, declining standards are quietly accepted while automation is presented as the solution. One doesn’t have to be a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist to wonder whether a more chaotic and less trustworthy driving environment makes the public easier to sell on “safer” autonomous systems.

As mentioned above, however, these “driverless” systems still depend heavily on human oversight. Aurora, for example, requires remote operators to monitor its trucks. In a July 2024 investor report, the company promised to reduce the number of such operators by increasing the number of trucks under each assistant’s watch. In the report, that number is 100.

Most readers will understand how difficult it can be to keep an eye on all of the traffic around you while operating one vehicle. What Aurora is proposing here is that the company will hand off the responsibility for 100 tractor-trailers to one remote “driver.”

Controller cowboys

And what skills does it take to pull this off? Anyone with a CDL or actual road experience can move to the back of the line; apparently this is a job for gamers and flight simulator enthusiasts.

The autonomous taxi industry is no better. Waymo has admitted it uses remote operators in the Philippines. An insider tells me Kodiak Robotics, whose supposedly driverless trucks operate in Texas’ Permian Basin, does the same. America’s highways already resemble "Mad Max" often enough. Soon they may look more like "Grand Theft Auto: 18-Wheeler."

To be fair, language recently added to the proposed Build America 250 Act would require remote operators to possess CDLs and be based in the United States. Whether that language survives the lobbying process remains to be seen.

Virtual insanity

The industry’s safety claims deserve skepticism for another reason: Much of the confidence behind autonomous systems comes from “virtual miles,” simulations where AI software learns by effectively playing billions of miles of video games. Real-world highway testing – which subjects drivers to less predictable, more challenging situations — remains only a tiny fraction of that total.

Waymo, the current leader in autonomous cars, already accounts for most autonomous vehicle incident reports filed with the California DMV. Those are only the incidents publicly reported. What happens once thousands of autonomous semis begin operating across Texas?

Texas became the center of autonomous truck testing precisely because regulators took a light-touch approach. Investors certainly appreciate that; the public, unwittingly enlisted in the beta testing of this technology, may not.

Phantom menace

A major potential danger is phantom braking, a problem the industry is barely willing to acknowledge. As Dr. Missy Cummings, a former Navy fighter pilot and director of the Mason Autonomy and Robotics Center at George Mason University, recently warned the New York Times: “There is no identified solution on the horizon for phantom braking. And it will not be addressed soon, because nobody wants to admit that it’s happening.”

Cummings added that this malfunction — which has already caused incidents with robo-taxis — will likely have far more dangerous repercussions in significantly heavier class-eight semis.

My fellow truckers already know the problem. Modern collision-avoidance systems in human-operated trucks have been triggered by shadows, weather conditions, lighting changes, and animals, sometimes causing jackknife accidents.

Human touch

Autonomous driving technology is clearly flawed, and there’s no reason to assume that more bugs won’t emerge in the future. Yet developers continue to insist that software-driven vehicles are safer than those operated by humans. The steady drip of dramatic dashcam crash footage on social media subtly encourages this view.

But human drivers are already remarkably safe overall. Automotive site Jalopnik calculated that autonomous vehicles would need to avoid crashes 99.999819% of the time just to outperform human drivers.

Even if autonomous driving were capable of meeting such a high standard, we would have to consider the economic impact. What is being proposed here is not some minor technological upgrade. Truck driving directly employs roughly 2.5 million Americans, while the broader trucking industry supports around 8 million jobs and contributes an estimated $200 billion annually in wages.

The math pushed by autonomous vehicle boosters is absurd. They tell us that every 1,000 autonomous trucks will “create” 190 jobs, while conveniently ignoring the hundreds — perhaps thousands — of driving jobs simultaneously eliminated.

Who gets to DRIVE?

If we take the inevitability of driverless vehicles as a given, at the very least the people pushing that inevitability should be much more honest about the consequences. Lawmakers ought be more concerned for their constituents, rather than pandering to tech investors or indulging in baseless fearmongering about China flooding the market with robot vehicles.

At least three bills currently before Congress seek to accelerate autonomous vehicle deployment. One of them, sponsored by Republican Rep. Vince Fong of California, would effectively prevent states from regulating autonomous vehicle technology on their own roads.

So much for federalism.

The name of Fong’s bill? The “America DRIVES Act.” Ironic, considering that the people behind these policies seem to want a future in which Americans no longer drive at all.

As a trucker who has spent nearly 30 years on the road without a single collision, I have one response to all of this: No thanks. I’m sure millions of Americans agree.