Video surfaced this week from Walt Disney World in Florida where, at the Wilderness Lodge resort, the company appears to have cast a biological male to play the role of Snow White’s wicked queen. 

“….the Evil Queen without a doubt had a man’s voice,” said the father of a family who dined at Wilderness Lodge, Brietbart and That Park Place reported. 

The father reportedly said: “I told my waiter that I had a problem with something. He then asked what was the issue and I simply stated I have a problem with Evil Queen being a man dressed in drag. The waiter immediately said he was going to get a manager and he looked panicked…”

He continued, telling That Park Place: “At first I said I wanted to formally complain about the Evil Queen being a man and that I felt very disrespected by Disney because this is not the sort of thing my family values and they didn’t give us any type of notice that this sort of thing was even a possibility.”

“After that my wife then signaled for me to stand up and take a step from the table so that our kids didn’t have to overhear the conversation. So I stood up and continued my chat with the manager which lasted about one to two mins maybe (felt like an hour). I stated we are a conservative Christian family, I’m spending $8,000 on this current trip in addition to the tens of thousands I’ve spent together in the past at Walt Disney World and Disney Cruises, and that this is not right.”

A family has reached out to That Park Place claiming they spent over $300 on a character meet and greet dinner at Walt Disney World… only to discover the Evil Queen character was almost certainly a biological male. This represents the first time we’ve heard of Disney using a… pic.twitter.com/jHRt64wl4O

— wdwpro (@wdwpro1) April 23, 2024

Then, the father claims the manager told him: “I can assure you that she is a woman.”

“She went even further,” the father detailed to That Park Place, “trying to shame me, informing me that ‘she’ was so excited to get the part as the Evil Queen. For a brief moment I thought ‘oh… maybe I’m wrong’ but then I realized that I was just being gaslighted.”

“I politely told the manager that ‘I know what you are doing and that I do not appreciate the fact that you are trying to be funny and disingenuous.’ So since the manager doubled down I also doubled down and asked ‘is the Evil Queen a biological male?’ The manager’s reply was, ‘I’m sorry sir, I cannot answer that.'”

Brietbart notes that this isn’t the first time Disney has included drag performers at its theme parks. Disneyland in Anaheim previously featured a male employee in drag greeting children at the Bibbidi Bobbidi Boutique.

The Walt Disney Company has also been promoting gender non-conformity in its children’s entertainment, creating multiple transgender characters and hosting a pride-themed musical special starring drag queen Nina West.

In recent years, Disney has also made its parks more gender-neutral by replacing “ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls” with “dreamers of all ages” and offering gender-neutral restrooms.

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

If people have learned anything from the past few years of Ivy League elites and TV talking heads feeding them economic predictions, I hope they finally understand that the “experts” are usually wrong and that alternative analysts have a far better track record. Whenever establishment economists make a a call the opposite generally turns out to be true.

By extension, alternative economic predictions are usually well ahead of the curve – What we talk about might be labeled “doom mongering” or “conspiracy theory” today. In three years or less it will be treated as common knowledge and the mainstream “experts” will claim that they “saw it coming all along” while taking credit for financial calls they never made.

This has been a long running pattern and it’s something those of us in the alternative media have come to expect.

For my part, I warned for years about the threat of the impending stagflationary crisis which ultimately struck hard in the “post-pandemic” US. The establishment gatekeepers denied such a thing was possible. When it happened, they claimed it was “transitory.” Now, they argue that a soft landing is imminent and there’s nothing to fear from trillions in helicopter money being pumped into the system. They claim nothing of significance will change.

I also predicted that the Fed would create a Catch-22 scenario in which interest rates are raised into economic weakness while inflationary pressures expand. I suggested that the central bank would keep rates higher for far longer than mainstream analysts claimed. This is exactly what has happened.  My position is simple – The Federal Reserve is a suicide bomber.

Who are you going to believe? Independent economists who have proven correct time and time again? Or, the Ivory Tower guys who have been consistently wrong? I’ll say this: If success in economics was actually based on merit and correct analysis, people like Paul Krugman or Janet Yellen would have been out of work a long time ago.

As for the ongoing narrative of a soft landing, the question I have to ask is HOW exactly they are going to make that happen? First, let’s clarify why central bankers are the problem (along with the governments they covertly influence)…

Central Banks Are At The Core Of Economic Troubles

There are only two logical reasons for central bank induced inflation: To hide the effects of a massive deflationary slowdown caused by too much debt, or, to deliberately trigger a currency collapse. Both motives could apply at the same time.

Central bankers don’t just facilitate this inflation at the behest of governments, they tell governments what to expect and what to promote to the public. Anyone that claims otherwise has an agenda. Central banks write their own policy and control their own mechanics. Governments have no say whatsoever in their operations, as Alan Greenspan once openly admitted.

The reality is, governments go begging hat in hand to central bankers and the banks decide whether or not to give them that sweet stimulus nectar. Politicians engage in collusion with central banks on a regular basis and they defer to bankers on an array of economic decisions. Economic advisers to the US president almost always include high level central bankers who then cycle right back into the Federal Reserve.

Central banks and their private international counterparts are in control, political leaders are simply pawns. Whenever there’s a crash the public focuses on government while the central banks fade into the background and avoid all scrutiny.

Inflation Addiction And The Ultimate Catch-22

Inflation for banks is a tool for fiscal change, but also social change. It’s not a coincidence that financial crisis events always lead to more centralization of global power into fewer and fewer hands; this is by design. Inflation allows the establishment to delay or initiate a crisis with greater precision.

An even more powerful tool is the WITHHOLDING of stimulus and cheap money once an economy is addicted to the flow of fiat.

I have been arguing for many years that central banks were constructing a situation in which the system is utterly dependent on fiat stimulus in order to maintain the illusion of growth. If the bankers return to lower rates and QE, inflation will continue to explode. If they stay with higher rates and a trickle of stimulus then a global crash is inevitable.

It’s one or the other, there is no soft landing when trillions in money creation are at play in such a short period of time. Central banks must return to near zero rates and QE if they hope to prevent a debt implosion. This might seem like a soft landing scenario at first, but when CPI ramps up (as it is starting to now at the mere mention of rate cuts) consumers will be hit even harder.

I’ll ask this question once again because I don’t think some people are getting it: What if their goal is to create a crash?

The Great Global Slowdown Has Already Started

In the past six months both the World Trade Organization and the World Banks released statements warning of an impending global slowdown. After an initial surge in exports and imports caused by massive pandemic stimulus measures, the effects of the helicopter money are now fading. By the end of 2024, global trade will register the slowest growth since the 1990s.

The UN also suggested growth deceleration was coming in the next year due to falling investments and subdued global trade. Keep in mind that the alternative media has been warning about this outcome for the past couple years at least as covid funding dried up. Globalist institutions are simply informing the public at the last minute; too little, too late.

The World Bank asserts that global trade is flatlining and international trade data supports this theory. China’s export market plunged by 7.5% in March, far more than expected and well below the 2.3% decline predicted by a major poll of mainstream economists by Reuters.

By the end of 2023 European exports declined by 8.8% compared to a year earlier and the union barely avoided a recession (according to official numbers). All hopes in Europe rest on the possibility of a steeper drop in inflation and central bank interest rate cuts. As I have been saying since 2021, don’t get too excited about banks lowering rates. It’s not going to happen at the pace that investors want, it’s not going to bring back QE anytime soon and when they do cut rates CPI will immediately spike once again causing panic among consumers.

I suspect that, after an initial rate cut event and an inflation resurgence, central banks will return to tightening with even higher rates in 2025.

In the US, a net importer of goods rather than a primary exporter, consumer volume has been in steep decline. Due to inflation, Americans are buying less goods while paying more money. And this is how inflation skews economic data. Higher prices on goods make retail sales look great, but in reality people are simply paying a higher price for the same amount of products (or less products).

Consumer credit data shows a steep decline in debt spending; credit card delinquency is at all time highs, APR is at all time highs and debt growth has collapsed in the past couple of months. Considering that the American consumer is a primary driver of global exports, it makes sense that international trade is now plummeting. Consumers are broke. The covid stimulus party is officially over and inflation is dragging the market down.

The IMF has recently noted the signs of global slowdown but, as usual, they argue that a “soft landing” is imminent. In other words, they claim there will be no serious repercussions for the economy. They do mention one interesting caveat in their analysis – The danger of global conflicts “derailing” the supposed recovery.

War leads to rising protectionism, the IMF says, and protectionism is a big no-no. In a world economy based on forced interdependency this is partially true, but the bigger picture is being ignored. The world economy should be built on redundancy, not interdependency. Interdependency creates weakness and the potential for dangerous domino effects. This is a fact that globalists would never willingly admit to.

For now, it appears that the global slowdown will become undeniable in the next six months, either right before the US elections in November, or right after. Central banks have chosen to create this Catch-22 and they are, for whatever reason, stalling the big drop. My theory? They have a scapegoat (or scapegoats) in mind and they’re waiting for the right time to unleash the next chaotic event. Covid is gone, so they’re going to need a war, multiple wars, or political conflict in the west and in many other parts of the world as a distraction.

*  *  *

If you would like to support the work that Alt-Market does while also receiving content on advanced tactics for defeating the globalist agenda, subscribe to our exclusive newsletter The Wild Bunch Dispatch.  Learn more about it HERE.

US defense secretary Lloyd Austin confirmed while testifying before a congressional subcommittee on Wednesday that the Biden administration has paused an arms shipment to Israel, which reportedly includes large bombs and other ammunition being put on hold for transfer.

“We’ve been very clear … from the very beginning that Israel shouldn’t launch a major attack into Rafah without accounting for and protecting the civilians that are in that battlespace,” Austin told US lawmakers. “We’ve not made a final determination on how to proceed with that shipment [of weapons],” the Pentagon chief said.

Via Reuters

He added the caveat that the paused transfer in question remains separate from the supplemental aid package for Israel that was passed last month.

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations Gilad Erdan has called the move “very disappointing”. President Biden “can’t say he is our partner in the goal to destroy Hamas, while on the other hand delay the means meant to destroy Hamas,” Erdan said the same day as Austin’s testimony.

Austin did still emphasize, “My final comment is that we are absolutely committed to continuing to support Israel in its right to defend itself.”

Separately on Wednesday the State Department hinted that following the initial paused shipment, the US could extend the temporary ban to include more arms and ammo shipments.

Spokesman Matthew Miller says cited concerns over how Israel conducts itself in the Rafah operation. The White House has said it does not back an Israel ground offensive into the refugee-packed southern city.

“When you see the results of the campaign to date, you see too many Palestinians die. We have been clear for some time the results are unacceptable,” Miller told a press briefing. “We’ve paused one shipment.… We are reviewing other potential weapons systems. I’m not going to get into the underlying details here.”

Watching CQ Brown trying desperately not to get tricked into saying into a mic that he is pro the bombing of Hiroshima was not something I expected to see this morning https://t.co/Yj3ehHukyp

— Aaron Mehta (@AaronMehta) May 8, 2024

Meanwhile, the outspoken Iran hawk Sen. Lindsey Graham had this bizarre and highly theoretical exchange with Defense Secretary Austin as well as Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Charles Q. Brown Jr.:

GRAHAM: Would you have supported dropping the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki? General Brown, to end World War II?

BROWN JR: Well Senator, I think it is based on the situation —

GRAHAM: Well, we know I mean, it happened, we know. I’m not asking, they did it. Do you think that was disproportionate?

BROWN JR: It was —

GRAHAM: Do you, in hindsight, do you think that was the right decision for America to drop two atomic bombs on the Japanese cities in question?

BROWN JR: Well, I’ll tell you, it stopped the world war.

GRAHAM: Okay. Well, so. Do you agree, General Austin? If you’d been around, would you say drop them?

AUSTIN: I agree with the chairman here.

GRAHAM: I mean, if you were if we go back in time says, hey, we got two atomic bombs, should we drop them? What would you say?

AUSTIN: Well, you know, I think the leadership was interested in curtailing —

GRAHAM: What’s Israel interested in? Do you believe Iran really wants to kill all the Jews if they could? The Iranian regime. Do you believe Hamas is serious when they say we’ll keep doing it over and over again? Do you agree that they will if they can?

AUSTIN: I do.

GRAHAM: Okay. Alright. Do you believe that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization also bent on the destruction of the Jewish state?

AUSTIN: Hezbollah is a terrorist organization.

GRAHAM: Okay, so Israel’s been hit in the last few weeks by Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas dedicated to their destruction. And you’re telling me you’re going to tell them how to fight the war? And what they can and can’t use when everybody around them wants to kill all the Jews. And you’re telling me that if we withhold weapons in this fight — the existential fight for the life of the Jewish state — it won’t send the wrong signal? Do you still think it was a good idea, General Austin, to get out of Afghanistan?

AUSTIN: I support the president’s decision.

GRAHAM: Yeah, I think you do. I think it was a disastrous decision. If we stop weapons necessary to destroy the enemies of the State of Israel at a time of great peril, we will pay a price. This is obscene. It is absurd. Give Israel what they need to fight the war. They can’t afford to lose. This is Hiroshima and Nagasaki on steroids.

Is the Senator from South Carolina actually suggesting Israel might need to nuke the Gaza Strip? 

Authored by Charles Hugh Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

No wonder so many people devote themselves to curating an artificial digital representation of themselves that they reckon is worthy of recognition and status.

What does it take to “make it” in today’s economy? As described in Withdrawing from the Rat Race Is Going Global, the world has changed in fundamental ways that have made it much more difficult to “make it” into the ranks of the middle class, and even harder to claw one’s way into the higher reaches of the economic order, i.e. the top 10%.

In summary, developed economies have been stripped of secure, well-paid manual-labor work, the purchasing power of wages has declined, prices of assets such as homes have skyrocketed out of reach and the mass overproduction of elites (those with college diplomas and advanced degrees) has created a winner-take-all competitive pressure cooker with few winners and an abundance of also-rans.

In other words, the work-a-day world has become far more complex and far more demanding than it was two generations ago. It’s not just making enough to pay the bills that’s more demanding; the work is more demanding, as is everyday life, which now demands far more shadow work–work we do to manage life’s complexities that we’re not paid for. Having children is far more expensive and demanding, too, as the competition for upper-middle class slots now starts in Kindergarten.

Many individuals do not have the armor and weaponry needed to enter the arena and survive the competition. It’s easy to dismiss them as “lazy,” but that’s not the issue. It’s also easy to dismiss them as snowflakes, young people who have been shielded from life’s rougher edges by overprotective parents, leaving them ill-equipped for the slings and arrows of modern life.

But this isn’t the issue, either. The real issue is the social and economic demands now exceed the carrying capacity of many people. Where it was possible to find a secure low-level job that could support a household and find a place in society’s pecking order two generations ago with limited social / work skills, now it’s essentially impossible: low-level work is insecure and too poorly paid to support a household, and it is viewed as demeaning and unworthy of respect.

How do humans respond when they’re viewed as worthless and they feel hopeless? In the Hollywood script, they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, gather a discarded shield and sword off the blood-soaked sand of the arena and go out and kick some derriere. (“Take that, nepo scum!”)

Many people manage to do this and we applaud their grit and determination. But not every individual wins in this battle. Many pick up the shield and the sword and are immediately trampled. They make a realistic assessment that they can’t possibly reach the lofty goals demanded of them, and so they are effectively excluded from what is now considered “normal life.”

This comment on a Reddit thread speaks to the increasing demands of “normal life”:

I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but I can give some insight based on my own social withdrawal: modern life is overwhelming. It feels like there’s a lot that’s expected of you. In many ways modern life is a giant competition for wealth and status, but instead of competing just within your community, you have to compete with millions of people all around the world. It feels daunting, if not impossible. Why compete in a contest you know you can’t win? It’s pointless, it’s a waste of time and energy. I feel very much like, “well, what’s the point?”

So they drop out of the competition. Maybe they take a part-time gig job, maybe they move back home to take care of a parent or grandparent, or they become a recluse.

Hikikomori–hiki, to withdraw–komori, inside–is an extreme form of voluntary social isolation from society. The term originated in Japan but the abandonment of conforming to the demands of society is not limited to Japan. Withdrawing from the demands of what passes for “normal life” is not limited to extremes of seclusion; it is a spectrum of withdrawal that includes giving up on striving for upper-middle class membership (which goes by terms such as lying flat and let it rot) to minimizing engagement with the world in a variety of ways.

The medical professions have naturally sought to frame this voluntary seclusion as a psychiatric disorder, but it is not a disease or disorder, it is a psychological response to an impossible set of familial and social-economic demands in a social order that no longer offers a positive role, socially or economically, for the marginalized and those lacking what it takes to meet the increasing demands of an economy of surplus elites striving for the diminishing pool of jobs that provide both 1) a secure middle-class income and 2) a way of life that doesn’t strip the worker of everything but work.

This is not so much a mystifying disorder as an understanding that seclusion is viewed as the only available response left to social-economic exclusion.

In a hyper-globalized, hyper-financialized developed economy, there are no social or economic roles left for those who cannot enter the coliseum of “highly productive workers” and emerge victorious. Part-time precarious work is all that’s available to them, and it’s poorly paid and earns zero status or respect, so the impoverishment of those for whom this is best they can manage is both physical and psychological.

Trying to live up to the standards of “normal life” extracts more than they have to give in return for an awareness of inadequacy and demands more than they can give in return for the impossibility of meeting expectations in a social order in which ridicule, exclusion and harassment are normalized.

Unable to qualify for social approval and validation–winners must have high social skills and oversized ambitions, be willing to work insanely long hours and pass grueling all-or-nothing exams, then work insanely long hours to prove one’s social merit, marry and have children whose success in a competitive pressure cooker is a heavy responsibility–those who lack these traits either endure a quite realistic sense of the hopelessness of “succeeding” in a competition they are ill-equipped to survive, much less win, or withdraw from the hell of other people (recalling Sartre’s famous line in No Exit: Hell is other people.).

Those who are excluded have said the pain of loneliness is easier to bear than the pain of dealing with other people.

Where working class jobs in factories once offered security, community and a positive identity of being a productive, valued worker, now the physical-labor jobs are viewed as demeaning and those doing the work find their work isn’t validated or respected.

In previous generations, education, vehicles, healthcare and housing were all affordable to anyone with steady work who exhibited basic frugality in service of saving. A great many jobs offered security, community, a positive identity and a ladder of social mobility to lower-middle class stability that then served as a platform for one’s children to climb even higher.

Now working class jobs are characterized by insecurity and precariousness, a threadbare social circle of other workers and neighbors passing through and very little validation of being a contributing member of society.

No wonder so many people devote themselves to curating an artificial digital representation of themselves that they reckon is worthy of recognition and status, and perhaps even admiration and envy. The real world no longer offers much of an avenue for their real selves to receive what every human wants: to be recognized as an individual who contributes to the greater whole to the best of their ability and is thus worthy of self-respect and the respect of others.

I will have more to say about this striving for an artificial substitute for authentic recognition and identity in my next post.

*  *  *

Become a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

Subscribe to my Substack for free

It was all looking good for a second or two as ARM Holdings released earnings with top- and bottom-lines beating expectations…

*ARM HOLDINGS PLC 4Q TOTAL REV. $928M, EST. $880.4M

*ARM HOLDINGS PLC 4Q ADJ EPS 36C, EST. 30C

So good, so far, then the chip designer said that sales will be $875 million to $925 million in the June quarter (which compares favorably with an average analyst estimate of $868 million).

But then the hammer fell…

However, the company forecasts that for fiscal 2025, which ends next March, revenue will be $3.8 billion to $4.1 billion – while analysts’ estimates were for a total of $4.01 billion.

Three months ago, an upbeat forecast sent its shares soaring and helped turn the company into an AI darling on Wall Street, but ARM shares are trading down 10% after-hours on tonight’s report…

In an interview, CEO Rene Haas said Arm remains “very confident in the long-term growth.”

“A lot of the strategies we put in place a couple of years ago are all coming together,” he said.

Maybe so, but just not fast enough for investors.

Mixed bag today:

Macro (ugly wholesale sales print, implied gasoline demand at decade-lows ex-COVID, GDPNOW up at 4.18%?),

Micro (TRIP exposed as M&A premium evaporates exposing reality of tourism business, UBER hinting at consumer pain, SHOP signaled more consumer pain, AFRM cut revenues forecasts as BNPL schemes falter – more consumer pain, TSLA tumbled on DoJ probe of FSD),

Geopolitical (Rafah invasion begins).

But perhaps the most important thing was Fedspeak, which continues to lean hawkish with Collins saying:

“The recent upward surprises to activity and inflation suggest the likely need to keep policy at its current level until we have greater confidence that inflation is moving sustainably toward 2%,” Collins said Wednesday at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

“The recent data lead me to believe this will take more time than previously thought,” she said.

In a moderated conversation following her remarks, Collins added:

“I do think that holding in this restrictive range for longer will — in an orderly way in my baseline — would slow the economy.”

Artist’s impression of FedSpeak today…

Which pushed rate-cut expectations lower…

Source: Bloomberg

Treasury yields were up across the curve with the long-end underperforming (30Y +4bps, 2Y +1bps). Only the 2Y yield is higher on the week though…

Source: Bloomberg

Interestingly, The Dow managed to shrug this off and rose for the sixth straight day while Small Caps lagged The S&P and Nasdaq ended the day around unch…

The dollar continued to rebound off Friday’s payrolls plunge lows…

Source: Bloomberg

Despite the dollar trend higher, gold chopped around in a very narrow range today…

Source: Bloomberg

Bitcoin ETFs returned to net outflows yesterday (though very small)…

Source: Bloomberg

…and spot bitcoin prices drifted lower (thanks to another slam down overnight from the perp futures market)….

Source: Bloomberg

But today’s big winner was crude oil, with WTI surging back from below $77 to above $79 after a surprise crude draw and MidEast tensions (theoretically) hotting up again as Israel enters Rafah…

Source: Bloomberg

Crucially, this was the fourth day in a row that crude found support at its 100DMA…

Source: Bloomberg

Finally, don’t ‘Sell in May, and Go Away” this year, according to BofA’s technical analysts… because Presidential election years can see big summer rallies…

June-August is the second strongest 3-month period of the year for all years going back to 1928 with the SPX up 65% of the time on an average return of 3.2%.

In Presidential election years, the SPX is up 75% of the time from June-August on an average return of 7.3%.

Authored by Brent Hamacheck via American Greatness,

In my recently published book, Dissidently Speaking: Change the Words. Change the War: I use both logic and empiricism to prove (I do mean prove) that there is absolutely no such thing as “right wing-left wing” as we use the terms in this country.  They are nothing more than non-defined terms used to characterize and label people with whom we don’t agree.  I will go so far as to say that the terms are a socially acceptable form of hate speech.

When we say that “the left hates Donald Trump,” it isn’t just mistaken; it’s fallacious. 

Since there is no such thing as “left-right,” as we use the terms, there is no possible way for the “left” to hate Trump.

But he is hated by many, and there are three reasons why.

If you are a Trump supporter, there is some good news to be found in this article.  It will give you a way to potentially break through and change the minds of people in two of the three groups, and it will also help you to focus whatever hostile energy you need to dispense upon the third group, one that you cannot change and one that poses a threat to what some ignorantly label as our democracy but is more correctly understood as our republic.

Since people like acronyms, catchy abbreviations, and words that can be turned into hashtags, I will frame my breakdown of the three reasons people hate Donald Trump as the Triple S’s: Silly, Subconscious, and Sinister.

Let’s take them in order.

First are the “sillies.”  These are people who hate Trump purely because of his demeanor.  They don’t like the way he throws insults around, the way he has been caught on tape talking about women, or any of a number of other reasons that relate to personal attributes as opposed to matters of policy or his ability to govern.  I say this is silliness because we are not voting for a person; we are voting for the president. Many of the people in this group, when you ask them about Trump’s policies, agree with much or most of what he tried to do or wants to do as president.  The idea that they are putting personality above policy or principle is simply silly.

They are not asking Trump to do magic tricks and entertain the children at their five-year-old daughter’s birthday party.  If they like, they can ask Barack Obama to do that.  He seems congenial enough.  The real question is, would you rather have Obama’s smile and his socialist approach to governance, or would you rather have a somewhat caustic and abrasive person (Winston Churchill comes to mind) who tries to do what you think is better for the nation?

A quick note to say that I am making no attempt to endorse or criticize Donald Trump.  I am simply identifying why people hate him.  I am going to spend a moment on the term “hate” shortly.

The second group of folks with what gets called “Trump derangement syndrome” are those who hate the candidate-in-chief for reasons that are subconscious or subliminal. 

There are three main drivers of this subconscious hatred.  They are guilt, shame, and altruism.

Donald Trump is unapologetic in his love of country and his claims that America is exceptional and that the needs of our nation and its citizens must be placed first in any and all considerations involving domestic policy or foreign diplomacy.  This message resonates with at least half the nation, and the fire and brimstone with which he delivers it explains the energy and enthusiasm found at his rallies.  Every Trump appearance feels like the Beatles landing in America in 1964.

For a large number of people, however, while they are experiencing the rich bounty that is daily life in the United States, they know that not everyone within our borders enjoys it to the same extent they do, and even fewer do so outside of our borders.  They carry with them a feeling of guilt that they are doing so well, that their lives are so comfortable, and that they simply can’t support a person who runs around saying that America is great and Americans come first. To see Donald Trump aggressively touting such a message makes them feel ashamed.  Nobody likes feeling ashamed.

Guilt and shame then feed into one of, if not the most, destructive of all human thought patterns, which is that of altruism.  This is the notion that self-sacrifice is the highest form of virtue.  This abhorrent concept (often associated with Christianity, which is interesting insofar as the term and the concept were created 1800 years after Christ’s death and by an atheist at that) tears at the mind of many who find it difficult to spend their daily lives struggling with the notion that in order to be good they need to be willing to harm, or even destroy, themselves in the process.

Take a person who is already in inner conflict, feeling guilty, ashamed, and needing to sacrifice, and give them Donald Trump, who effectively screams “No! Don’t do that!” into their ears, and you can get an almost involuntary, subconscious, visceral internal revolt.  While voices inside their heads are screaming to be ashamed of America, Donald Trump is screaming to be proud of America from the outside.  They hate him for the conflict he brings into their lives.

These first two groups of Trump haters can be reached through constructive engagement, genuine questioning and listening, and the patient and persistent application of both. 

There is a third group of Trump haters who cannot be reached and with whom all must reckon. 

Those are the sinister ones—the ones who are not conflicted by Trump’s “America first” message but who are instead vehemently opposed to it.

These are the people who are rightly labeled as globalists—people who want America to recede into the middle of a heterogenous, global community, setting its strong nation-state aside and becoming no more significant in world affairs than are the nations of Chad, Azerbaijan, or Guyana.  “Lead from behind” is just one of the more coffee mug-ready ideas that they hold, all of which seek to have us become part of Orwell’s Oceania.

These people don’t want to confront China; they want to make money with it.  These people do not want to protect our borders; they want to open them so that we can water down our national identity.  These people don’t want us to be energy independent; they want to tilt at energy windmills by installing actual windmills and curry favor with the United Nations and the World Economic Forum (two decidedly anti-American and anti-Trump organizations).

This sinister group, hateful of the very thought of American supremacy, simply detests Donald Trump and knows that he has created an awakening among his followers as to their designs to rebuild an unleavened America.  They truly hate the man, and they consciously and irrationally want him off the stage.  How far will they go to give him the hook?  I will let you conjecture in the same manner as we are left to conjecture the veracity of results in the 2020 election or the assassination of JFK.

You cannot convert this third group, but you can’t ignore them either.  These folks who want world membership instead of leadership are not going away, and they are not going to recede into the shadows.  If you are a Trump supporter and if you like the whole concept of America first, then your best bet is to work with members of the first two groups of Trump-haters and strive for conversions.  Only with numbers can you control the threat from the “sinisters.”

I want to address why I am using the term “hate” (one my mother told me never to use).  I chose it not to defend it in any metaphysical sense but simply to pick a term that generally conveys intensity.  For the most part, the typical person opposed to Trump is not one with a pair of reading glasses on their nose, an opera playbill in their hand, and an affected English accent, claiming they have some subtle points of contention with the man’s positions.  The strength and intensity of his delivery create the same kind of equal and opposite reaction within those for whom it does not resonate.  It is Newtonian.

Perhaps, a bit twisted and imperfect in its logic, we can say that Donald Trump’s love of country generates feelings of hatred, love’s literary opposite, in response?

I have long been on record as predicting that Joe Biden will not be the man on the actual ballot come November.  It made perfect sense for the Democrats to run him for reelection so as to not turn his presidency into one of lame duck status two years into his first term.  That said, the current president clearly suffers from cognitive decline and cannot serve another four years.  I also believe he cannot actually beat Donald Trump in November, save for the intervention of some Herculean election tampering efforts.

If I am wrong and Biden is on the ballot in November, then Trump supporters have much less to fear from the Trump haters.  If, however, my prediction that he is replaced at the convention (my long-held fear is that Michelle Obama steps in; I see her as unbeatable) after stepping aside for “personal reasons” comes true, then reaching out to the first two categories of Trump haters becomes far more important.  You will need to flip some of them.  You will not be able to do it by going to Trump rallies and posting on your social media, where other Trump followers follow you.  You will need to meet them on their turf, on their platforms, and in their living rooms.  This will not be a home game for you.  You are going to have to go on the road and put on your away jersey.

I wish you strength, courage, and success.  While my own personal feelings about the former president are mixed, my strong opposition to the third group of his haters is clear and unwavering.  It needs to be a sort of political “Great Commission” to go out and make believers not out of all three nations of Trump haters, just the first two.

*  *  *

Brent Hamachek is the author of the recent Amazon top new release, Dissidently Speaking: Change the Words. Change the War.  The book is a commentary on the divisions all too common in today’s America. All proceeds from its sale go to support a not-for-profit dedicated to promoting constructive engagement between young people.

On one hand, the Atlanta Fed triumphantly blasted earlier today that Bidenomics is the greatest thing since sliced bread, helping push its Q2 GDP Nowcast to a whopping 4.2%, up from its latest estimate of 3.3%.

On the other hand, Biden’s own DOE – in its latest attempt to slam oil, gas and diesel prices because nothing will crush Biden’s re-election chances faster than an oil price spike in the summer – reported that demand for gasoline and diesel in the United States has plunged to its lowest seasonally since the onset of the COVID pandemic, “sparking concern that economic activity is now becoming stagnant as refining margins hit news lows not seen in months“, Reuters reported.

As shown in the chart below, monthly averages for the week ended May 3 show gasoline demand at 8.63 million barrels per day–a figure not seen since May 2020, at the start of the pandemic, based on EIA data.

Data also showed demand for distillates – the most accurate proxy for overall economic activity – plunged to 3.6 million bpd, which was also a seasonal low not hit since the pandemic. Additionally, for the first time in approximately three months, the 3-2-1 crack spread which serves as a barometer for refining markets, was trading under $26.50 per barrel on Wednesday, Reuters reports, for the lowest crack spread in three years.

Needless to say, this means someone is lying: either the US economy is shrinking, which bad for Biden,  or gasoline demand is far higher than reported, which is also bad for Biden. But since under the current fascist regime truth is a casualty to getting re-elected, we are being served a fake Potemkin village, one where growth is exploding as energy prices are tumbling, day after day and somehow people still believe this bullshit.

“The gasoline situation was going to be looked at by everybody and it definitely disappointed,” Mizuho analyst Robert Yawger told Reuters, adding that “If that’s indicative of the performance of the economy, that’s bad all around.”

The EIA inventory report showed U.S. distillates adding 600,000 barrels to inventory for the week ended May 3, with average production at 4.8 million barrels per day. Gasoline inventory also increased by 900,000 barrels for the week ended May 3, with production averaging 9.5 million barrels per day.

Crude oil prices lost more ground on Wednesday following the EIA’s weekly inventory report, which showed a draw of 1.4 million barrels for the week to May 3, but following a significant 7-million-barrel build from the previous week that put downward pressure on prices.

Back in March, when eyeing the tremendous rebound in the crypto space, we joked that creditors in Sam Bankman-Fried’s bankrupt exchange, FTX, would recover 200% of their claims.

FTX bankruptcy will be the first Chapter 11 where creditors recover 200% of their claims

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) March 2, 2024

Well, as so often happens in the “new abnormal”, it turns out that we were not joking, because according to the latest reorg plan filed by the bankrupt FTX on Tuesday, most – or roughly 98% of its creditors – would get back 118% of what they had on the FTX platform the day the company entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Amazingly, some creditors will recover as much as 142% of what they are owed. Claims will be repaid in cash within 60 days of court approval, although payouts are likely several months away, as FTX winds its way through the final stages of the bankruptcy case.

Under the plan, other non-governmental creditors would get back 100% of their claims plus up to 9% interest to compensate them “for the time value of their investments.” The arrangement is still subject to approval by the Delaware bankruptcy court overseeing the bankruptcy case.

As Coindesk reports, the proposed payouts are higher than earlier estimates from the FTX estate, which said in October it expected to pay back only 90% of customer funds which still was a hefty haul for a bankruptcy where most said recoveries would be virtually nil. In January, current FTX CEO John Jay Ray III revised that estimate, telling the court he expected to be able to pay customers back in full.

So how did FTX creditors – who typically receive just pennies on the dollar for their holdings – luck out so tremendously, and most of them will actually make money following the bankruptcy? Simple: as we hinted in March, FTX has benefited from a historic rally in cryptocurrencies including Solana, a token heavily backed by convicted fraudster and FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (in fact, some have wondered if the tremendous ascent of Solana – a B-grade token which traditionally crashes every few months, and is generally the laughing stock within the crytpo community – wasn’t another market manipulation meant to generated 100%+ recoveries). 

Other sources of value, including investments made by FTX and Alameda Research – such as its 8% stake in AI startup Anthropic, which was sold piecemeal to institutional investors for $884 million in March – have been liquidated to generate cash to pay back the claims.

“In any bankruptcy, this is just an unbelievable result,” said FTX Chief Executive Officer, John Ray, who took over the firm when it collapsed.

In a Tuesday press release, the FTX estate said it expects to have between $14.5 and $16.3 billion in cash available for distribution by the time a plan is approved by a Delaware bankruptcy court – the result of a year-and-a-half of scraping together the company’s scattered assets around the world and liquidating them.

“As previously disclosed, FTX.com had a massive shortfall at the time of the Chapter 11 filing in November 2022 – holding only 0.1% of the Bitcon and only 1.2% of the Ethereum customers believed it held,” the press release stated. “Accordingly, Debtors have not been able to benefit from the appreciation of these missing tokens during these Chapter 11 cases.”

FTX’s new reorganization plan would also settle a host of claims from regulators and government agencies, including the IRS and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

The IRS agreed to resolve its $24 billion in claims in return for a $200 million cash payment and a $685 million subordinated claim that will only be paid out after all creditors and other governmental entities.

The CFTC and other unnamed governmental claimants agreed to subordinate their claims as long as FTX users and investors were paid in full with interest. There are also plans for a special fund created to make “supplemental restitution” to certain customers and creditors, though the details of this agreement have not been finalized, according to the press release.

A hearing to discuss the proposed plan is scheduled for June.

Former FTX CEO and convicted fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried previously attempted to use the estate’s ability to pay back customers in full as evidence that the collapse of his exchange had “zero” harm to its customers. Before his sentencing in March, Bankman-Fried’s lawyers argued that their client should receive a light sentence, in part because customers would get all their money back.

Ironically, if it hadn’t been for the Terra-Luna “stablecoin” implosion exactly two years ago which triggered a liquidation cascade across the crypto universe including a 50% plunge in bitcoin in one month in May and June 2022, not only would FTX still be viable, but SBF would be a free man and also one of the world’s richest people.

Ray, along with dozens of FTX creditors, wrote to the court arguing that the estate’s ability to claw together enough to money pay back his victims – the result of “tens of thousands of hours … spent digging through the rubble of Mr. Bankman-Fried’s sprawling criminal enterprise to unearth every possible dollar, token or other asset” – doesn’t mean his conduct wasn’t criminal.

Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison. He plans to appeal his sentence and conviction. In retrospect, considering that those who had money in his bankrupt exchange got as much as a 42% return, he may well end up with a reduced sentence.

By Russell Clark, author of the Capital Flows and Asset Market substack

Japan and Treasuries

My interest in Japan dates from 1991 when I was fresh faced high school exchange student in Kobe. There are no prizes for finding me in the above photo. I was the only “foreigner” in the school, and would go days without seeing anyone else that looked like me or even speaking English. I managed to combine my knowledge and experience in Japan with my other love, economics. I don’t think its too much of an exaggeration to say I owe my career and wealth through studying the Japan experience carefully and then applying those lessons to the rest of the world.

One of the most fascinating things about Japanese, economically speaking, is that almost its entire foreign reserves are made up of US treasuries, with almost no gold. As the right hand side column below shows, the share of gold as foreign exchange reserves is highest for the “old world”, while new powers such as China, Japan, Taiwan and Saudi Arabia have relatively low shares.

In absolute terms, China and Japan are by far the largest holders of foreign exchange reserves.

While China has larger foreign reserves than Japan now, Japan basically “invented” the idea of sovereign bonds as foreign exchange reserves. During the gold standard days, if a country like the US wanted to consume more than it produced, it would need to transfer gold overseas. With limited gold supply, this limited consumption. Moving to a treasury based financial system essentially removed this constraint. The only issue is whether other governments would accept treasuries or not.

Why did Japan buy treasuries? Well when the bubble economy burst in the early 1990s, the BOJ cut rates to near zero, but the Yen did not collapse as expected.

In fact in the first stages of BOJ interest rates cuts, the Yen actually rallied. The failure of monetary policy to work as it should led the Ministry of Finance to intervene to try and help weaken the Yen, and official buying of US dollar assets took off.

In pro-labor terms, when a government is pro-capital it wants to devalue to reduce the wages of its workers. This creates a trade surplus, which should cause the currency to appreciate, but if the government wants to keep the exchange rate competitive (i.e. keep real wages low), then it needs to buy more and more treasuries. A pro-labor government is happy to see its currency appreciate, and hence does not build foreign currency reserves. What is odd recently is that even as the BOJ remains extremely tardy in its monetary policy response, the Ministry of Finance in Japan has started using foreign reserves to “strengthen” the Yen. As the Economist points out, Japan is currently intervening in the currency market to try and strengthen the Yen.

We don’t know the cost of the foreign exchange intervention at the moment [ZHwe do, it was $59BN], but as can be seen above, Japanese foreign exchange reserves have not been rebuilt since the last intervention in 2022. Japan also does not run the structural trade surplus that it did from 1980 to 2010.

With falling foreign exchange reserves, trade deficit, and the likely increase in defence spending that the Russian-Ukrainian war implies, BOJ policy looks increasingly wrong. Markets seem to agree, with 10 year JGB yields at 13 year highs.

With either a Biden or Trump presidency in 2025, the chances of an austerity driven fiscal policy or a change in trade policy looks unlikely to me. The Japanese may well be caught in a doom loop, where they need to sell more foreign reserves to prop up the currency, which cause US yields to rise, which causes the Yen to weaken further and so on.

Until and unless the BOJ becomes more aggressive, Treasuries look like to have a systematic buyer turn into a systematic seller. China is likely a seller of treasuries and buyer of gold for political and strategic reasons, and Japan is a seller of treasuries for economic reasons. I am still baffled to why retail investors prefer treasuries to gold.

Japan was the key to understanding why treasuries did so well form 1980 to 2020. I think it is now the key to understanding why treasuries are going to do poorly from 2020 onwards.