#liberalism gives you dementia

[oh-great-authoress]

Hey bougie, what’s “Young at Heart” about? Tell me all about it, okay booger.

Oh hi, Mom!!

Guys, this is literally my mom—everyone say hi!!!

👋👋👋👋

Okay, so I mentioned on the blog a while back that I loved “Top Gun: Maverick”, and you know me, Nay (Tagalog slang for “Mom”, for those who didn’t see the post where I mention this)—I can’t let a good movie or show go by without reading the fanfic, I’m practically incapable of it, and Mav and Bradley’s father/son relationship is PRIME arable fanfic land.

So I immediately hit AO3.

And I was blessed with the goodness that is the works of PurpleArrowzandLeather.

The Mavdad feels are just so strong in their works, it’s perfection.

Then they came out with a story called “Your Memory Lives On My Heart”.

And I just—I love this story so much.

So, “Your Memory” is a future fic set roughly twenty-five years after the events of TG:M, and in this story, Bradley, now a private contractor after retiring from the Navy, comes back from a job and helping Phoenix with her grandkids, to a disheartening phone call.

Having made the painful decision a couple of years ago to place Mav in an assisted living home due to the drastic breakdown of his adopted father’s body, Mav’s personal care nurses tell Bradley they have reason to believe that the 80-year-old naval aviator has entered the first stages of dementia.

Luckily, Mav’s memory isn’t going, much to Bradley’s relief, and the older aviator was not in fact, entering the first stages of dementia, he was just missing his son.

The story ends with the two pilots settling down for Bradley’s story time, when they are interrupted by Iceman’s son, now the COMPACFLT, and he says, “Damn you, Pete Fucking Mitchell! Why the hell do I have a report on my desk about a ‘charming old man’ with an impossibly ‘legitimate ID’ schmoozing the security guards on my airbase to let him up in an F-35?!”

I’m sure you know me well enough by now to know that I was absolutely cackling at the end of this story, Nay.

Then I looked in the comments, and there was a comment that ended with, “But LBR, Hangman TOTALLY helped him.”

From there, I couldn’t stop the muse.

Here’s an excerpt, from near the beginning of the story.

Disclaimer: this story is still not finished, and the final product may look different from this excerpt.

It had been forty-four days since Bradley had last visited him, and he could even give the hours and the minutes since then too, but he wasn’t in the mood to think about that much.

While Mav was in the midst of his musing, the doors to the lounge hall opened, and footsteps sounded down the corridor, familiar, despite the carpet muffling the sound.

A smile pulled on Mav’s lips just as he heard the familiar Texas-accented drawl say, “Heya, Pops.”

His smile shifted to a full-on grin as he looked up at the smirking face of his former student, Captain Jake “Hangman” Seresin.

Age had liberally streaked Jake’s hair a similar shade of gray as Mav’s own—though a touch lighter—with a few areas stubbornly holding out blond, and while the younger man’s eyes were still as green as ever, they were now framed by rimless glasses and crow’s feet at the corners.

The only thing age hadn’t changed was the confident and larger-than-life attitude Jake had always had.

(Well, that wasn’t exactly the truth—the uranium mission had made him less, as Phoenix would say it, “assholeish”, and he knew the younger aviator could now confidently say that he never again left another wingman from that day on—but that was a change effected over twenty years ago, so it didn’t exactly count.)

Jake was wearing his own be-patched bomber jacket (though it didn’t have quite as many as Mav’s own) over his khakis.

He must’ve come from base, where he served as an instructor at Top Gun.

Jake technically could have retired around the same time Bradley did, but he still had a few good years in the cockpit left in him, and the Navy knew it, so they posted him as a full-time instructor, carrying on the proud tradition of terrorizing Top Gun students.

Mav would be lying if he said he wasn’t a little envious, but he had reluctantly learned his lesson—he’d probably never step foot within a Naval Air Station again, much less within sight of a plane, but he pushed that thought away—Jake didn’t deserve that.

He was proud of the kid, like he was proud of all his Daggers—they were all damn good pilots and WSOs—the Navy’s best.

#thanks for playing nay!!! #fanfiction writer and proud #ask game #ask games #ask nadia #fanfiction #fanfic #top gun: maverick #top gun fanfic #top gun fanfiction #pete maverick mitchell #jake hangman seresin

[bllsbailey]

Need More Proof Biden Was Drugged for the State of the Union? Here It Is.

A great deal hinged on Joe Biden's performance during Thursday evening's State of the Union address. The White House knew more than anything that Biden had to dispel concerns regarding his age and cognitive decline. Naturally, the mainstream media did its part to help shore up this narrative affirming Biden's presidential competence. They wound up choosing the same entry from the thesaurus to characterize his delivery: "fiery." 

I'm sure it was just a coincidence.

But it didn't work for those of us who saw and heard Biden's loud and angry delivery, punctuated by constant slurring and slip-ups. One expert says that Biden's performance featured the telltale signs of being medicated.

Dr. Carole Lieberman, a forensic psychiatrist specializing in elderly dementia patients, pointed out that Biden's increased speed and volume during the address, contrary to his usual slow and stumbling demeanor, could be indicative of stimulant usage, potentially Adderall or another amphetamine. 

“[Adderall]’s given to focus someone’s attention so if you give it to someone who is not focused and give it to them ahead of a big event like the State of the Union, it will improve their focus,” Lieberman told the Washington Times. “But it’s treating the symptoms rather than boosting the brain and it’s addictive so it’s dangerous.”

As compelling and convincing as Lieberman's theory is, there's actually more evidence Biden was not his usual self during the State of the Union.

I previously pointed to Biden's brief encounter with reporters on the tarmac at Joint Base Andrews, where he had curiously become his trademark low-energy, glitchy self. His explanation for his use of the word "illegals" to describe an illegal immigrant—which irked many in his party—was, to say the least, unimpressive.

But even more indicative that something had changed in Biden was his campaign speech in Philadelphia, Penn., on Friday, which was virtually a carbon copy of his State of the Union speech, yet it was a disaster.

Related: Was Biden Drugged for the State of the Union? One Expert Thinks So.

At one point in the speech, he declared, "Pennsylvania, I have a message for you: send me to Congress!" 

Fact check: He's running for president, not Congress.

When Biden hit his favorite topic, the Capitol riot, he managed to botch that too. "Last night [at] the U.S. Capitol—the same building where our freedoms came under assault on July the 6th!"

Ask yourself how it's possible that the same man who has been obsessing over the Capitol riot for three years and is making it a key issue of his campaign could possibly get the date wrong when bringing it up in his campaign speech.

Another cringeworthy moment was when Biden, who attempted to tout his fiscal responsibility, boasted,  "We added more to the national debt than any president in his term in all of history!"

Regardless of whether the statement is technically true or not, it's obviously not what he meant to say. I guarantee you those words were not what the teleprompter read.

Nor was this gem, when Biden, likely going off script, said that almost every world leader has told him, "You can't win again."

Polls do show this is technically right, but again, let's not pretend this is actually what Biden meant to say.

And then there was the moment he forgot what the Federal Reserve is called.

Does this show a man who is well? Ask yourself what caused such a dramatic change in delivery less than 24 hours prior. Something was clearly different. 

It's funny because so much hinged on his performance at the State of the Union that many people forgot that Biden still has eight months of campaigning to make it through. One night of being "fiery" won't change the public's opinion that he's too old and senile to be president. The man who showed up on Friday is the man who is going to show up on the campaign trail and at official White House events. 

But the liberal media is still hoping they can convince the public that the drugged-up Biden is the real Biden. That's why we need strong conservative outlets to thrive, especially as we get closer to the 2024 election. By becoming a VIP member, you’ll be directly supporting our hard-hitting journalism and commentary and giving us the tools we need to fight back against the censors who don't want the truth exposed.

[faustocosgrove]

and on the twelth day of reviewmas I, Fausto, give to thee:

one of 12 instances of elder abuse

11 yawns

my 10 remaining brain cells after this shitty movie jfc

9 instances this show reminded me of a better show

an 80s cult movie

7 lgbt main characters in an incredibly queer manga like holy shit

6 ye olde government agents

5/5 stars best movie of the decade easily. might be the best movie of all time

4 scantily clad teenaged girls (fbi open up! meme)

the 3rd time i read the same book about lawns maybe?

2 high school animes

and a ninja book

…from a guy who still thinks about the naruto series in the year 2024

corrective measures

part way through this movie the person i was watching it with asked “is this a remake of cool hand luke but with super powers?” and the very next line out of the evil warden was “what we have here is fucking failure to fucking communicate”

um, other than that it wasn’t very good. probably the best performance was done by the people doing the fake news segments. the special effects were good and cheesy, but it was very…. post production. like a lot of the actors you could tell were just told to go “blargh!” and then fake fight and their super powers were going to be edited in later and like they weren’t told what said super powers would be.

i suppose there was a bit of commentary about power and corruption… but only in the corporate promotional world. there’s also a wee bit of commentary of prison reform, but only in the neo liberal approved “people with misdemeanors shouldn’t be locked up alongside murderers” kind of way. and a wee bit of commentary on how cops are probably psychologically fucked up, but the only one that gets explored is the asian lady cop, not the white guys.

also, the black lady taking over as the warden doesn’t feel right. i mean the entire premise of a black woman working very hard to become a prison warden doesn’t feel right. i mean i’m pretty sure it’s racist but i’m not really sure why? maybe it’s just a hollow version of the asian cop lady thing where the hard ass cop who is a piece of shit is neither white nor a man, so clearly these people aren’t as bad as if they were white men, so the audience will think they’re a good guy. like i think we’re supposed to think that the prison won’t be torturing the inmates anymore because a black woman is in charge. and like, kamala harris is the proof that having a black woman in charge doesn’t end the need for prison abolition.

it’s one of the 12 movies bruce willis did in 2022, only to retire from film making in 2023 due to dementia. honestly, it shows. i truly wonder why he was acting these last few years. i mean, i checked his wikipedia page to remember what medical condition he was retiring from and it states that in 2021 for one of the films he was in his role was reduced and his lines abreviated and filming had to be done in one day. and yet for some reason, the poor guy was in 12 movies throughout 2022 and as of retiring in 2023 there are still 11 films that he was in that haven’t come out yet. methinks the family did a wee bit of elder abuse.

#fausto reviews things #corrective measures #bruce willis

[the-hem]

"The Worm Man." From the Maha Upanishad, the Exploration of the Mysteries of the Atman.

IV-88-106. I shall tell you the means of curing mental ills – giving up whatever object is attractive, one attains liberation. Pity that worm of a man who cannot do this giving up which is absolutely good and dependent on oneself.

The auspicious path cannot be got without subduing the mind which is giving up desires and which can be achieved by one’s own effort.

When the mind is cut by the weapon of non-projection, then is achieved (realized) the Brahman, omnipresent and tranquil.

Hold yourself, un-excited, released from thought of worldly existence, having great wisdom – the swallowed (controlled) mind is the place of knowledge. Resorting to great effort, making the mind non-mind, meditating in the heart, with the edge of the wheel of consciousness.

Kill the mind without hesitation; your (internal) enemies will not bind you. ‘I am he, this is mine’, the mind is only so much – this is cut down by the knife of non-projection.

The mind is blown away only by the wind of non-projection, like the bank of clouds in the autumn sky. Let the winds of deluge blow, let the oceans become one (to destroy the world), let all the twelve suns blaze; the mind is not affected.

You remain intent upon that state of the empire of truth which can only be non-projection and which gives all success.

Nowhere is the mind seen to be without fickleness – it is the nature of mind, just as heat is that of fire. This power of pulsation existing as mind – know this to be the power which is the ostentatious world.

The mind without wavering is said to be Amrita. The same is said to be liberation in the Shastraic doctrine.

This wavering which is another name for ignorance – destroy this with reflection. Sinless one, be free from projections (vikalpas) attaining that position with which the mind becomes united by means of human effort.

Hence, resorting to (human) effort, possessing (i.e. Controlling) the mind with the mind, be form and free from anxiety, in the place without grief. Only the mind can control the mind firmly – who can control a king except another king ?

 For those grasped by the crocodile of desire and fallen into the ocean of worldly life and carried away (tossed about) by the whirlpools, only the mind is the life-boat. Break the mind, with the mind, the rope, uplift yourself from worldly life – which cannot be crossed by another.

There is no doubt about it, we have to tell ourselves no, as much as possible on the outside if meditation, contact with God on the inside is going to have its desired effects.

It is a struggle to see through delusion, most of us are the products of lifetimes of party politics, bad news reports, and religions, but unless every human being on this world embraces what is really happening, struggles of a different sort altogether are on their way.

Independence from all propaganda, to see God's Graces on one's own, never to surrender again to the embrace of the dementia of other human beings is the calling of all faiths.

[anyasmcm]

October 2nd-10th research

I was really bored on Friday and decided to do an online puzzle. As I was completing the puzzle, I was reminded of my childhood visits to Canada to visit my grandmother. She suffered from dementia, and my childhood was spent watching her progressively decline: it started with forgetting to use soap when washing dishes or not putting things in the fridge, to her not knowing who her own children were and only remembering her siblings. My mom, brother, and I would do puzzles with her, and it was the only activity my brother and I could sit down and do with her where she was entirely in the moment. I then began thinking about puzzles as literal connections (connecting one piece to another) but also as conversational connections. My grandma's next door neighbor, Mr. Cheeseman (at least that is what my brother and I called him) would offer us puzzles to do with our grandma, as he had an extensive collection. I really enjoy conversational aids such as movies, games, and activities because they allow people to connect on a surface level by having the same interactions/experiences. This allows for conversation to flow easier, if you hit an awkward moment, you still have something to do with the other person that doesn't make the situation awkward. I then began thinking about how this could relate to my Capstone. At my Capstone advisor meeting, Jeff told me that I should try and do more performance pieces, since I expressed interest in pieces such as Marina Abramovic's "The Artist is Present". I would like to do a performative piece where I simply do puzzles with other people and allow the conversation to flow.

On Saturday, I watched the film "The House Bunny". This 2008 rom-com is the male gaze manifested into a film, but the comedy is stupid but also very perceptive. The main character, Shelley, views women as commodities simply because she was an orphan as a child and the only love she has received was from Hue Hefner after he welcomed her into his Playboy mansion. Her character, despite appearing flat, is incredibly dynamic. What does a woman become if she exists in a hyper sexualized world? How can women use sexuality to their advantage? Can women be sexually attractive to men while being intelligent? What is sexual empowerment? I have been thinking a lot about the role of women in society also because I read "The Great Gatsby" and "The Sun Also Rises" for my American Literature class. I also watched "A Clockwork Orange" for my Director as Auteur class. All of these works display women as commodities and sexual objects, but the most liberating work out of the 4 of them is the one that blatantly (no literally) has a woman call another woman a commodity to her face. I'm not sure how this relates to my current line of thinking, but in a lot of these works, backstory is essential to understanding women. In "A Clockwork Orange", women have little to no backstory. The only (not even backstory) depth we receive is through a mourning husband's words about how his wife killed herself after she was raped by the main character. Women are viewed as objects until there is a backstory that humanizes them. In "The House Bunny", it is the backstory I mentioned above. In "The Great Gatsby", it is Daisy's unhappy marriage to Tom that gives her just a little bit more depth, but she is still a relatively flat character (except to Gatsby). In "The Sun Also Rises", Brett's inability to stick with one man (despite being married) is seen as (potentially) excusable because her husband would force her, every night, to sleep on the floor with him by POINTING A LOADED GUN AT HER. It is almost as if trauma plays a crucial part in humanizing women, specifically in fiction. This extends outside of the world of fiction, but women are CONSTANTLY seen as a commodity UNTIL there is something that humanizes them. Questions like "how many people have you slept with?" Or "are you a virgin?" Require straight answers that commodify women. However, answering those questions by providing backstory; "I have slept with 20 men because I became a sex worker to make a living" or "I am a virgin because I am catholic and I believe in saving myself for marriage", women become humanized but ALSO make themselves vulnerable to whoever is asking the question. I could talk on and on about this, but all of this makes me wonder what place women have in the world. If we ignore questions about our sexuality, the asker could get butthurt and think we are prudes, without any realization that they are completely out of line asking questions like that. If we answer questions, we risk becoming a commodity and having a value attached to our heads. If we try to explain ourselves, we are humanized and vulnerable, which can be a dangerous situation given who you are talking to.

I created a sketch as a reaction to a lot of my thoughts after reading the various books and watching "The House Bunny".

Can you prevent sexualization and what does that look like? In Islam, Muslim women will cover their hair or face with a Hijab, Niqab, or Burqa to follow religious principles. Face coverings like masks were also used during COVID to prevent the spread of the disease. Helmets are worn for protection but they too also conceal parts of the face from other's view. Even in Mountain in the Sea, abglanz, conceal the wearer's face and also alters their voice to ensure that things like interrogations are completely expressionless. All of this has lead me to think about: how does concealing ones presence prevent sexualization? Does it?

[jeanssloan]

Gentle Wave CBD Gummies [2023 SCAM EXPOSED] Gentle Wave CBD Gummies Review Do Not Try Until You Read This!

Gentle Wave CBD Gummies perceive the improvement of psychological well-being as well as actual wellbeing by inciting the degrees of stress and lightening the gamble component of ECS(Endocannabinoid framework) going haywire because of low CBD receptors. These Cannabinoid receptors assume vital part in the administration of stress and nervousness problem which leaves with just a single restricted question which is pressure help is for the most part about fixing your body from inside and quieting your psyche from outside.

Anyway there are a lot of regular advantages that have been presented alongside Gentle Wave CBD Gummies Reviews or Cannabidiol the excursion of flawlessness and keeping your body ideal at its absolute best speed. ECS(Endocannabinoid Framework) resolve bodies clock the executives expecting better job at its imperative working.

Gentle Wave CBD Gummies are CBD and hemp removes from the Marijuana Sativa plants, liberated from every one of the inebriations of hurtful components and blended in with other regular fixings to assist you with dealing with any of your wellbeing problems like throbs, psychological well-being issues, sleep deprivation, and aggravation.

Gentle Wave CBD Gummies are CBD and hemp removes from the Weed Sativa plants, liberated from every one of the inebriations of hurtful components and blended in with other normal fixings to assist you with dealing with any of your wellbeing problems like throbs, emotional well-being issues, a sleeping disorder, and irritation.

The utilization of normal and natural fixings which are simply liberated from any hurtful synthetic substances and poisons in them gives a superior and further developed method for treating the underlying driver of all physiological, mental, and neurological capabilities.

At the point when we are finding the genuine restorative properties of Gentle Wave CBD Gummies or cannabidal that has been separated from the hemp plants known as a family center of marijuana sativa. This is truly disputable on the grounds that the guideline of marijuana has forever been a colossal discussion around FDA(Food and Medication Organization) as well as free purposes for restorative purposes. In this way, it's truly essential to reevaluate the CBD properties to involve it as a pressure easing supplement.

Cannabidiol (CBD): Known for its potential aggravation easing impacts, CBD is the fundamental part in CBD edibles. It associates with the body's endocannabinoid framework, which controls irritation, torment, and other physiological cycles.

Curcumin, a substance in turmeric with mitigating and pain relieving properties, is available in turmeric. It could diminish the aggravation and irritation welcomed on by various infections.

Ginger: For a really long time, individuals have used ginger for its restorative advantages, which incorporate torment easing. It contains gingerol, which has pain relieving and calming characteristics, making it an important part for CBD confections planned to treat torment.

The Gentle Wave CBD Gummies are lighted and function admirably to advance neurotransmission in the client. The focal sensory system works productively and adds to all the more likely mind capabilities. The cannabinoids present in the eating routine permit the client to accomplish better joint wellbeing alongside expanded adaptability. You don't have joint inflammation, constant torment, hurts, headaches or some other issue. With rested emotional well-being you get better rest designs. Gentle Wave CBD Gummies Reviews safeguards against wellbeing illnesses like epilepsy, dementia and Alzheimer's infection.

Cannabidiol, at times known as CBD, is a normally happening substance in the marijuana plant. It is notable for having helpful potential and has been well-informed for what it means for general prosperity. The endocannabinoid arrangement of the body, which is vital in controlling a few physiological capabilities, is impacted by CBD. GentleWave CBD Gummies might give different potential benefits by encouraging homeostasis and harmony inside the body, including unwinding, stress decrease, better rest, and backing for joint and muscle wellbeing.

Influence GentleWave CBD Gummies utilizes rigid quality confirmation methodology all through the creation line. Each bunch of CBD separate is put through broad testing by free labs to guarantee its intensity, immaculateness, and absence of contaminations. Each Effect Gentle Wave CBD Gummies Reviews gives a steady and trustworthy CBD experience in view of this obligation to quality, empowering shoppers to embrace the expected benefits of CBD with certainty.

Gentle Wave CBD Gummies Reviews are intended to further develop execution and act as a wellness treatment. It likewise further develops life quality and experience while helping the body's energy recuperation. GentleWave CBD Gummies are made with natural fixings like hemp and CBD. Nursery Exploration Unadulterated CBD is protected, viable, and sans gluten for individuals, all things considered.

#GentleWaveCBDGummies

[anthonybialy]

Mister Not Very Nice Guy

The president has too much influence, as seen by the quantity and intensity of rude twerps these days.  Unpleasantness is even more rampant than in normal stupid human times.  Everything is supposed to be the opposite in one of those perpetually confusing Democratic moments.  Everyone should feel blissful, what with all of our needs are being addressed.  You get all the free cash you can pocket, and yet you still don’t thank the guy who stuffed the greeting card.

The notion that Joe Biden is a nice guy is as bogus as Bidenomics.  An entirely phony term suckers the willing as everyone who didn’t fall for a mortifying shtick suffers.  Take a break from his personality and regrettable performance to focus on his corruption.

An allegedly kindly grandpa isn’t my kind of grandpa.  That’s especially the case when he can’t account for all of them.  Math is tricky for the incumbent.  Have you seen the debt?  The papa’s quantity of grandkids is like liberal meddling: it doesn’t add up.

Perceptively decent people have known he was going to suck at being president based on decades of counterproductive training.  Biden has obviously been a sleaze for as long as he’s mangled every last issue.  The saddest cultists fell for it just like they do his risible boasts of unabashed progress.

A scumbag is swell if you believe the same journalists who helpfully note inflation is less worse than at this point last year.  Reality is all about image to those who don’t possess identities.  This president really is the perfect liberal.  Putting his ideology into practice to warn is the one nice thing he does.

Biden is committed to the bit.  Get through the rest of this term by noting the wholesale misery that follows him implementing his dreams discredits what he believes.  Results are despised by statist disciples who tire from ceaseless cognitive dissonance.  Getting what he wants leads to nobody getting much of anything.

Biden’s ninth decade isn’t the first where he’s disagreeable.  He can’t blame dementia even if he remembered.  Abhorrence from this particular fossil is nothing new.  The leader of what was once the free world didn’t evolve as he aged, which is fine if you start off smart and decent.  A cheating middling law student turned into a corrupt supply chain-breaking president.

Consistency over time is a drawback for bastards.  The executive hasn’t grown as a person even as he’s ascended to yet another wholly undeserved office.  Biden proved the Peter principle about half a century ago.  A person born while World War II’s result was still in doubt is not mellower and certainly not wiser well into this century.

Misinterpreting every aspect of existence is bound to spur crankiness.  It’s no wonder Biden is such a horse’s ass.  A disagreeable disposition organically results from being wrong about everything from the moment he entered alleged public service.  President Sunshine is precisely incorrect about every domestic and international policy, but he’s on point everywhere else.

Thank heavens he’s a jerk: we wouldn’t want coping with his consequences to get tricky.  His routine outbursts have not aided anyone who’s requested bills in lieu of online financial shifting in the hopes the paper might be worth burning.  Observation runs counter to rather dubious assertions that we’re dealing with a swell fellow.

Utter failure makes it easier to loathe the perpetrator.  It’s not like Biden’s an insufferable fiend who gets things done or exhibits a big identity with wild mood swings: the ceaselessly irritable leader is only a taskmaster when it comes to making money worthless.

Biden gives hope to everyone claiming to be what they aren’t.  An altruistic inflation-fighter just happens to be the Bizarro version.  Make-believe time should be limited to Dungeons & Dragons.  Biden’s minions inhabiting the fantasy realm they created to escape the drudgery he imposes show that intense Democratic gaming really does affect one’s perception of reality.

Biden’s values are expressed personally.  It’s not a compliment even though he’d take it as such, presuming he understood all the words.  A shove-based philosophy reflects his nature.  The progressive propensity for announcing something is happening because that’s what they believe is supposed to occur hasn’t yet worked.  It’s the closest they come to a good idea.

That goofball is packed with fascinating quirks.  Did you know Biden likes ice cream?  He’s one of those types who thinks it tastes good.  Enjoying the same frosty dessert every other human ever does is the most interesting thing about the embodiment of churlishness.  The price per pint will spike before you reach the registers.  Like calories, wallets are empty.

This unfortunate term’s nicest part is feeling unbridled animosity toward someone who deserves it.  Victims don’t have to feel conflicted about cussing out the prototypical politician.  We’ll never face ambivalence about a decent chap who couldn’t quite get bread to be affordable or trains to stay on tracks.

This presidency has been as disgraceful as Biden’s personality,  A nasty buffoon offers none of the benefits associated with soulless ruthlessness.  The presidency is a success otherwise.  Character reflects performance, which is why he’s so rotten at both.

[stephenjaymorrisblog]

We Are All Time Travelers

Stephen Jay Morris

2/19/2023

©Scientific Morality

When I look back, I am bemused and amused about all of the societal fads I’ve witnessed, and even participated in. I refer to those that range from “The Twist” dance fad in 1962, to “Disco” in the late 70s. Oh, let’s not forget “Glam Metal” of the 80s.

So, what about now? At the age of 68 going on 69, what do I think? How do I feel? I don’t want to use a Coprophiliac, contemporary slang term, but so far, 2023 has been a real shit show! Never mind Los Angeles Lakers’ power forward, LeBron James, recently breaking Kareem Abdul Jamar's all-time shooting record, and a bacteria-fighting vaccine on the horizon to help the nation’s honey bees. Oh, no! The focus, instead, is on how many people got shot today, or who was the latest victim of police abuse.

And then, there’s my favorite shit show: the conservative movement. The so-called Liberal news media is giving this full coverage. Wait! Wait! What?? If they are on the so-called Left, why would they do that? Because, as the old saying goes, “If it bleeds, it leads!” Translation: People love negative news AND it brings in money. Lots of it. However, this is not my topic today.

I write about “The Space-Time Continuum,” as prescribed by Dr. Albert Einstein. We live in a three-dimensional existence, however, time is part of the 4th dimension. Is there a 5th dimension? Maybe. The Folk Rock band, the Byrds, had a song called, “5th Dimension,” in 1966, and there was a singing group in the 60s called, “The 5th Dimension.”

So, what is the 5th dimension anyway? Don’t really know; go ask the late OsKar Klein. Uh, don’t do that; he’s dead. Maybe he wrote something about it. Maybe it has something to do with the Einstein’s equation, E=MC2. I always thought that the 5th dimension was a place you go to, such as when you take a hallucinogenic like LSD. But, I am not talking about that today, either.

We are all time travelers, from birth to death. We are fixed in a particular time and place. Hundreds of years from now, people will wonder what it was like living during your time. Plus, there is the ultimate question: “Why?” That’s when metaphysics comes into play. Alternatively, there is religion, which says simply that you exist to serve God. Then there is the Greek philosophy of solipsism, which means, only you exist and everybody else is an illusion. If that doesn’t tickle your fancy, there is always Existentialism, which adherents conclude that “Life has no meaning and you are here merely by happenstance.” As an Agnostic, I just don’t know what is true and what isn’t true. Agnosticism is the zenith of objectivity. That’s my take.

So, what about this time travel stuff?

Can you revisit the past? Yes, you can—through hypnosis. It has been proven that one can go back in time through hypnosis. You mind is like a tape machine that never shuts off. Everything that you ever experienced is stored in your memory. Unfortunately, some people lose their memory because of diseases like Alzheimer's. That is one reason I got into the habit of writing down my past on paper; in case I develop an elderly disease like dementia.

How about venturing into the future? Maybe. It could be true that time travel has already been invented. For example, in 3023 AD, invisibility may have been created, so that right now, invisible time travelers from the future are staring at you while you sit on the toilet. Don’t be dismissive about my theories. People have reported seeing ghosts in their homes. Maybe what they saw were time travelers.

I highly doubt that I will be remembered in the future. If not, I won’t care. Not only will I be dead, but so will my ego. I would like to time travel to witness my family tree, but I am afraid to. I know that my ancestors were idiotic peasants. According to my dad, my great, great grandfather, Semore Moicheck, was a butcher in Russia who was killed by a bull while he was trying to slaughter it. So, why would I want to encounter my loser family from the past?

I am not happy living in these times. I know that the world is getting better and better, such as with the advent of technological advances and medical science breakthroughs. But—with the morons who are dragging it down with their religious and political idiocy, it’s so fucking pathetic that it makes me sick! I am convinced that there is no “good vs. evil.” It’s really about the sane vs. the insane, and the intelligent vs. the dumb.

On second thought, I prefer to be alive in the present, as opposed to the future or the past. By not seeing the future, I won’t ruin the element of surprise. And, by not experiencing the past, I will save myself from shame. I do wish, though, that I could send the present day idiots back to the Stone Age, where they belong!

So, as for me and time travel? I am happy being right where I am.

#stephenjaymorris #poets on tumblr #science fiction #time travel #high fantasy #timothy leary

[yeonchi]

The Victorian state election happened yesterday and Matthew Guy has conceded to Daniel Andrews. Congratulations, Victorians. Despite the negative press covfefe, you reelected an abusive dictator who kept the state in lockdown for 262 days, only cares about getting his own way and labelled his opponents “Nazis”.

Like with the federal election in May, this was neither an unexpected nor an entirely ideal scenario. Unlike that election however, I did have an ideal scenario which was the Liberal Party getting at least a minority government, however they have shown themselves to be very weak opposition, particularly in terms of standing up against the vaccine mandates. Given what happened in the federal election and the two-party system that forms the state of politics in Australia today, a lot of people put their faith in Matthew Guy because he was their only hope of voting out Daniel Andrews, but it clearly wasn’t enough.

There are numerous reasons why this election turned out the way it did, but I’ll focus on what I believe is the main one. In 2018, Daniel Andrews won because people cared more about infrastructure than youth crime in Dandenong. In 2022, Daniel Andrews won because people don’t understand freedom, or rather, they don’t understand why the “freedom fighters” see freedom as something important because they’ve lived in freedom for so long that they don’t know what it’s like to not have it. Sure, it can be said that the “freedom fighters” themselves don’t understand freedom given their actions over the past couple of years, but in the end, who really understands freedom - the mainstream population who got vaccinated for their own benefit (over 94% of over-16s in Victoria double vaccinated and 69% triple vaccinated as of the time of writing) or because they were entitled enough to believe that people are obliged to give back to society or do things for their community (edit to add: at least in the face of vaccines that weren’t as effective as people expected them to be), or the “freedom fighters” who protest lockdowns and vaccine mandates even after they ended as a punitive measure to punish Daniel Andrews and the people who supported him?

At the same time, I can also argue that people don’t understand what the Nazis were really like back in WWII. By this point, most people who have lived under the Nazis first-hand are either dying or getting dementia (I’m sorry to say) and the stories being told through generations are likely being twisted as the times go on. People who criticised “freedom fighters” for comparing lockdowns and vaccine mandates to the Holocaust are supporting Andrews when he said that the Liberal Party “preferenced Nazis”. It’s like they don’t know that Nazism and the Holocaust didn’t just happen overnight.

The Legislative Council didn’t do so well either, as David Limbrick and the Liberal Democrats didn’t end up being elected (nor did Adem Somyurek), although a One Nation candidate did get elected in Northern Victoria. I don’t know much about the other minor parties, but from the result, it has confirmed to me that people are incapable of waking up. Out of the pandemic bill four only Fiona Patton of the Reason Party and Samantha Ratnam of the Greens got reelected in Northern Metro, but that was to be expected tbh.

UPDATE - 20 December 2022: David Limbrick and Adem Somyurek did end up getting elected while Andy Meddick, Fiona Patten and Rod Barton were voted out. Samantha Ratnam is still in as expected. Admittedly, this was one outcome we were hoping for but it wasn’t enough in the end.

Regardless of the result of this election, it is a certainty that Daniel Andrews’ legacy in Victoria will never be forgotten. People had a chance to wake up and realise that the cookers were right, but in the end, they showed that they are blind sheep with Stockholm syndrome (someone also called it Melbourne syndrome lol) and no fundamental understanding of freedom, so they deserve everything they get. I look forward to seeing communities getting destroyed by the Big Build and seeing how transport improves as a result of it. And let me tell you, it’ll be ironic when people who oppose the taking down of statues call for Andrews’ statue (when he reaches 3000 days in office) to be taken down. To all the people who expected a change in this election, I’m sorry that things turned out the way they did. Anyway, back to your irregularly scheduled content on this Tumblr.

[ultra-maha-us]

Today More Than Ever Education is Important

Inside our great grandparents' time, a senior school knowledge was considered sufficient, but days past are over. Nowadays, a university degree is just a aim that an raising amount of people are seeking and it makes sense. The work industry is more complex and aggressive than ever. A person with a wide range of job abilities has the very best chance of landing the most popular positions.

Obviously, an knowledge delivers much more benefits than only financial success. A well-rounded knowledge stimulates considering abilities that improve our lives. Training makes people more conscious so that individuals can better understand our earth and value different cultures. It escalates our assurance to handle life's challenges. Also, it may be engaging; understanding more by what interests you can include pleasure to your daily life despite your age. Besides, knowledge stimulates balanced head function.

The Important to Economic Accomplishment

Based on the U.S. Census Office, a person with a bachelor's degree can expect to generate on average $2.1 million throughout their functioning living, while people Kosmetik selber machen with just a senior school diploma can foresee getting $1.2 million throughout their functioning life. This essential huge difference in getting possible is predicted to broaden much more in coming years, as more careers necessitate some university knowledge, if not really a degree. People who have a master's degree can anticipate to generate $2.5 million throughout their lifetime, while those with a doctorate can anticipate getting $3.4 million and those with a professional degree can foresee getting $4.4 million.

College graduates are also less apt to be unemployed than those with less education. The requirement for college-educated workers can be expected to remain high. In 2006, the U.S. Office of Job Statistics predicted that involving the years 2004 and 2014, 55 million careers will undoubtedly be stuffed by entry-level workers. An projected 13.9 million of these careers will undoubtedly be stuffed by college-educated workers. The Office of Job Statistics also anticipates that jobs for college-educated personnel increase at a faster speed than jobs for non-college grads.

Planning for Life

Additional getting possible is not the only part drawing equally traditional and non-traditional (adult) students to university in big numbers. College levels in virtually any major progress to better discipline and increased aim placing abilities, and university levels that give attention to numerous liberal arts courses improve a student's particular development.

College-educated individuals are more likely to attain the dialectic amount of reasoning. As an example, they could evaluate several sides of an argument and devise a plausible blend of these ideas. College grads have an even more affordable see of living and of social associations than those who are unable to evaluate such scenarios. This may progress to an improved ability to get along side peers.

Keep the Head in Shape

There's also evidence that shows that knowledge advantages the brain's physical health. Studies have unveiled that very intelligent individuals are less likely to develop different types of dementia, especially Alzheimer's disease. The inspiration behind these statements continues to be unverified, but scientists do notice that interesting often in emotional task, such as understanding new projects, can vastly improve ageing adults' memories. For all older people, time for university for enjoyment has brought pleasure for their wonderful years.

[xtruss]

“Why are we doing this?” Miklós Szánthó, an organizer of CPAC Hungary, said. “We are doing this to make the liberals’ nightmare true.”Illustration by Tyler Comrie

ORBÁN: A New Boak Bollocks on the Block! Does Hungary Offer a Glimpse of Our Authoritarian Future?

American conservatives recently hosted their flagship conference in Hungary, a country that experts call an autocracy. Its leader, Viktor Orbán, provides a potential model of what a Trump after Trump might look like.

— By Andrew Marantz June 27, 2022 | Letter from Budapest | July 4, 2022 Issue

The Republican Party hasn’t adopted a new platform since 2016, so if you want to know what its most influential figures are trying to achieve—what, exactly, they have in mind when they talk about an America finally made great again—you’ll need to look elsewhere for clues. You could listen to Donald Trump, the Party’s de-facto standard-bearer, except that nobody seems to have a handle on what his policy goals are, not even Donald Trump. You could listen to the main aspirants to his throne, such as Governor Ron DeSantis, of Florida, but this would reveal less about what they’re for than about what they’re against: overeducated élites, apart from themselves and their allies; “wokeness,” whatever they’re taking that to mean at the moment; the overzealous wielding of government power, unless their side is doing the wielding. Besides, one person can tell you only so much. A more efficient way to gauge the current mood of the Party is to spend a weekend at the Conservative Political Action Conference, better known as cpac.

On a Friday in February, I arrived at the Rosen Shingle Creek resort, in Orlando. It was a temperate afternoon, and the Party faithful were spending it indoors, in the air-conditioning. I walked into a rotunda with potted palm trees and chaotically patterned carpeting. Shabbat services were about to begin, and a minyan of young men, give or take, roamed around in maga-themed yarmulkes. The cpac dress code was big-tent: pants suits, sweatsuits, bow ties, bolos—anything, pretty much, except for an N95. A merch kiosk near the entrance sold Nancy Pelosi toilet paper, gold-sequinned purses shaped like handguns, and Trump 2024 T-shirts in every size and color. Even the staircases were sponsored—one by Fox News and another by Gettr, a social-media platform founded by Trump-campaign alumni. If you aligned yourself with it at just the right vantage, you could parse Gettr’s slogan, “Making Social Media Fun Again!” Otherwise, it looked like red-white-and-blue gibberish.

Political rallies are for red-meat applause lines; think-tank conferences are for more measured policy discussions. The American Conservative Union, the group that organizes cpac, tries to have it both ways. On Saturday, I spent a while in the main ballroom, watching a panel called “Put Him to Bed, Lock Her Up and Send Her to the Border.” “Him” referred to Joe Biden, “the hair-sniffing dementia patient in the White House”; the first “her,” of course, was Hillary Clinton; the second was Kamala Harris, who was lambasted as both an “empty pants suit” and a wily “Cersei Lannister.” That afternoon, Trump arrived, hosted a V.I.P. gathering featuring a spread of Big Macs under heat lamps, and took the stage, giving a ninety-minute stump speech to an ecstatic crowd, all but confirming his intention to run for President again.

The policy discussions were mainly tucked away upstairs, in conference rooms with a tiny fraction of the foot traffic. One panel, on European populism, was called “More Brexits?” The moderator, an American named James Carafano, introduced the first speaker: Miklós Szánthó, the director of a Hungarian think tank called the Center for Fundamental Rights. (According to Átlátszó, an investigative-journalism outlet in Hungary, the Center for Fundamental Rights is secretly funded by the Hungarian government.) “He’s a real European,” Carafano, a foreign-policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said. “I know that because I saw him in Europe!”

For decades, at conferences like cpac, international exchanges were mostly assumed to flow in one direction: Americans exporting their largesse, and their ideology, to the rest of the world. At the first cpac, in 1974, the keynote speaker, Governor Ronald Reagan, gave a rousing address about soldiers who had shed their “American-melting-pot blood in every corner of the world, usually in defense of someone’s freedom.” In recent years, as the future of the Republican Party has seemed increasingly up for grabs, American conservatives have shown more willingness to look abroad for ideas that they might want to try out back home.

Szánthó, a stout man with a smartly tailored suit and a waxed mustache, began by quibbling with the panel’s title. “There will be no so-called Huxit,” he said, despite his country’s disagreements with “the deep state of Brussels.” Szánthó lives in Hungary, but he spoke fluent Fox News-inflected English. “When it comes to border protection, when it comes to the Jewish-Christian heritage of the Continent and of the European Union, or when it comes to gender ideology,” he continued, the Hungarians, nearly alone among citizens of Western nations, “step up for conservative values.”

Hungary has a population comparable to Michigan’s and a G.D.P. close to that of Arkansas, but, in the imagination of the American right, it punches far above its weight. Viktor Orbán, the Prime Minister since 2010, is now the longest-serving head of state in the European Union, and one of the most fiercely nativist and traditionalist. Starting in 2013, he made a political foil out of George Soros, the Jewish financier who was born in Hungary but hasn’t lived there in decades, exploiting the trope of Soros as a nefarious international puppet master. During the refugee crisis of 2015, Orbán built a militarized fence along Hungary’s southern border, and, in defiance of both E.U. law and the Geneva Conventions, expelled almost all asylum seekers from the country. Relative to other European nations, Hungary hadn’t experienced a big influx of migrants. (Out-migration is actually more common.) But the refugees, most of them from Syria or other parts of the Middle East, were an effective political scapegoat—one that Orbán continues to flog, along with academics, “globalists,” the Roma, and, more recently, queer and trans people. Last year, Hungary passed a law banning sex education involving L.G.B.T.Q. topics in schools. Nine months later, in Florida, DeSantis signed a similar law, known as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. DeSantis’s press secretary, talking about the inspiration for the law, reportedly said, “We were watching the Hungarians.”

Experts have described Orbán as a new-school despot, a soft autocrat, an anocrat, and a reactionary populist. Kim Lane Scheppele, a professor of international affairs at Princeton, has referred to him as “the ultimate twenty-first-century dictator.” Some prominent American conservatives want nothing to do with him; but more have taken his side, pointing to Hungary as a potential model for America’s future. That afternoon, on the cpac main stage, Dan Schneider, the executive director of the American Conservative Union, singled out Orbán for praise: “If you cannot protect your own borders, if you cannot protect your own sovereignty, none of the other rights can be protected. That’s what the Prime Minister of Hungary understands.” The house lights dimmed and a sort of political trailer played, set to melodramatic music. “For over a millennium, to be Hungarian meant to sail the rough seas of history,” a narrator intoned over a horror-movie-style montage: Mongol invaders, migrant caravans, a glowering George Soros, drag-queen story time.

The lights came up, and Szánthó walked to the lectern, waving stiffly. “Hungary has fought wars, suffered unthinkable oppression, to gain and regain our liberty,” he said. In the current war, he went on, the enemy was “woke totalitarianism,” personified by George Soros (he paused for boos); the hero was “one of the true champions of liberty, a man you know well, Prime Minister Viktor Orbán” (a generous round of applause). He praised “President Trump” and tried to initiate a cheer of “Let’s go Brandon,” a substitute for “Fuck Joe Biden” used by right-wing culture warriors who spend too much time on the Internet. He quoted the old chestnut “Hard times create strong men,” although, the way he said it, it sounded like “strongmen.” And he invited the audience to join him at the next cpac conference, the first to be hosted on European soil: cpac Hungary.

“You do not have to have emergency powers or a military coup for democracy to wither,” Aziz Huq, a constitutional-law professor at the University of Chicago, told me. “Most recent cases of backsliding, Hungary being a classic example, have occurred through legal means.” Orbán runs for reëlection every four years. In theory, there is a chance that he could lose. In practice, he has so thoroughly rigged the system that his grip on power is virtually assured. The political-science term for this is “competitive authoritarianism.” Most scholarly books about democratic backsliding (“The New Despotism,” “Democracy Rules,” “How Democracies Die”) cite Hungary, along with Brazil and Turkey, as countries that were consolidated democracies, for a while, before they started turning back the clock.

Szánthó mentioned “Jewish-Christian heritage,” but there aren’t many practicing Jews left in Hungary. Orbán, in his speeches, often uses the phrase “Christian democracy,” which he portrays as under continual existential threat. Given that the vast majority of Hungarians, apparently including Orbán, do not attend church regularly, it seems plausible that his audience hears the word “Christian,” at least in part, as code for something else. “If we manage to uphold our country’s ethnic homogeneity and its cultural uniformity,” he said in 2017, “Hungary will be the kind of place that will be able to show other, more developed countries what they lost.” His constant theme is that only he can preserve Hungary for the (non-Muslim, ethnically Magyar) Hungarians—about as close as any European head of state will come to an explicit rejection of ethnic pluralism in favor of state-sanctioned white nationalism. For many of his American admirers, this seems to be a core element of his appeal. Lauren Stokes, a professor of European history at Northwestern University, told me, “The offer Orbán is making to global conservatives is: I alone can save you from the ravages of Islamization and totalitarian progressivism—and, in the face of all that, who has time for checks and balances and rules?”

In recent years, Orbán or institutions affiliated with his government have hosted, among others, Mike Pence, the former Vice-President; new-media agitators including Steve Bannon, Dennis Prager, and Milo Yiannopoulos; and Jeff Sessions, the former Attorney General, who told a Hungarian newspaper that, in the struggle to “return to our Christian roots based on reason and law, which have made Western civilization great . . . the Hungarians have a solid stand.” In his hilltop office with an imposing two-story library, Orbán has met with conservative figures including Patrick Deneen and Jordan Peterson. “If these people think the extreme left is hijacking American society in dangerous ways, then, yes, I agree,” the conservative writer Andrew Sullivan told me. “But to go from that to ‘Let’s embrace this authoritarian leader in this backwater European country, and maybe try out a version of that model with our own charismatic leader back home’—I mean, that leap is just weird, and frankly stupid.”

In Orlando, I followed the energy of the crowd to media row, where Sebastian Gorka, a bellicose conspiracy barker with a Vandyke beard, was doing a live broadcast of his radio show, “America First.” In the nineties and early two-thousands, Gorka was a Hungarian politician and government adviser; in 2017, he served as a counterterrorism adviser in the Trump Administration, focussing on “radical Islamist ideology.” (He did not have the credentials that most comparable appointees have held; he had, however, worn a medal from the Order of Vitéz, a Hungarian military society historically associated with the Nazis.) “What would you like to hear from tomorrow’s speech by the President?” he asked Representatives Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene. (He meant, of course, Trump, whom he generally referred to as “my former boss.”) Greene replied, “I want to hear him say that his entire policy, his entire agenda, is for our country, our country only, and the rest of the world can frankly go to hell.” Gorka, who was born in London to Hungarian parents, said, “I like that menu.” He dismissed Gaetz and Greene and introduced his next “big-ticket guest”: Kyle Rittenhouse. Later, I ran into Gorka, who was now wearing a tuxedo, and asked him for an interview. He declined. (To be specific, he shouted, “Go to hell, scumbag,” and “You’re smoking crack.”)

I saw him the next day in the V.I.P. lounge, near a spread that was both lavish and pedestrian: silver, scalloped carafes of coffee with Starbucks to-go cups; a tureen of lukewarm fettuccine Alfredo. (My press pass did not technically allow me access to the V.I.P. lounge, but cpac, as it turned out, did not have very tight border security.) A graffiti-style portrait of Trump hugging and kissing an American flag, just auctioned off for more than twelve thousand dollars, was propped against a cardboard box and a pile of plastic wrap, waiting to be shipped to the lucky winner. J. D. Vance, a former anti-Trump venture capitalist who had rebranded himself as a pro-Trump salt-of-the-earth Senate candidate, chatted with Eric Bolling, a news anchor who left Fox News amid allegations of sexual harassment, which he denied, and was later hired by Newsmax. The pro-Brexit politician Nigel Farage waited in the buffet line next to Devin Nunes, a former member of Congress who now runs Trump’s struggling media company. Father Frank Pavone, a Catholic priest wearing his clerical collar, chatted with Todd Starnes, a pundit whose Fox News contract wasn’t renewed after he appeared to endorse the view that Democrats may worship Moloch, the Canaanite god associated with child sacrifice. “The networking here is amazing!” Pavone said.

In the hallway, I shook hands with Szánthó and Schneider, the two lead organizers of cpac Hungary, and told them that I planned to fly to Budapest to cover it. “You will be welcome,” Szánthó said. “Please just send an e-mail.” One of the speakers on the European-populism panel had been Raymond Ibrahim, an independent scholar from California who contributes to a variety of right-wing outlets, usually to argue that Islam is a global scourge. “The word ‘multiculturalism,’ it sounds nice, but what is exactly the culture?” he said during the panel. “Things like polygamy . . . or killing the apostate . . . these are the culture of Islam.” Ibrahim exchanged phone numbers with Gorka, and they later started texting, as Ibrahim told me, “mostly about Islam, and about how Hungary’s fighting back.” A few days after the conference, Gorka, on his show, interviewed the chairman of the A.C.U., who plugged cpac Hungary. “It’s no longer about policies,” Gorka said, paraphrasing something another conservative leader had told him at cpac. “Now, as a movement, we have to take back the Republic, and we have to take back our civilization.”

Igot to Budapest on May 16th, the day Viktor Orbán was sworn in for his fourth consecutive term as Prime Minister. “Congratulations to him,” a Hungarian journalist named Gábor Miklósi said. “What an achievement.” This was sarcasm—a dark, dense form of sarcasm, polished from years of use.

We were having a beer at a “ruin bar” in what is still known as the Jewish district, a neighborhood that the Nazis turned into a ghetto in 1944. (In the course of two months, with the collaboration of the Hungarian government, the Nazis deported nearly half a million Jews from this ghetto to Auschwitz; others were later lined up on the banks of the Danube and shot.) Miklósi—slightly stooped, perennially tired—is an editor at 444, one of the few independent news outlets left in Hungary. “He controls most of the national papers, most of the radio and TV stations, all the local papers in the countryside,” Miklósi said. “He doesn’t do it in obvious ways—he does it slowly, by putting his cronies in charge, or by subtly making life difficult for his critics. But eventually he gets what he wants.” The “he,” of course, was Orbán, who is, like all despots, his country’s default antecedent, the implied subject of virtually every sentence.

From the nineteen-fifties through the nineteen-eighties, during the period when Hungary was within the Soviet sphere of influence, Moscow allowed it a bit more latitude than other Eastern Bloc countries, a unique mixture of subjection and relative exemption that came to be known as Goulash Communism. As the Iron Curtain began to lift, Orbán emerged as a leader of the youth resistance, giving impassioned speeches against totalitarianism; in 1989, he went to Oxford to study political philosophy, on George Soros’s dime. During his first term as Prime Minister, starting in 1998, Orbán, who still identified as a liberal democrat, vowed to build up the country’s civic infrastructure. President Bill Clinton hosted him at the White House, extolling Orbán’s “youthful and vigorous and progressive leadership.” Then, in 2002, Orbán lost a reëlection campaign to a Socialist coalition and, according to the biographer József Debreczeni, resolved to return to power and change “the rules of the game” so that he would never lose again.

He enlisted Arthur Finkelstein, a political consultant from Brooklyn who had worked to elect Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, and Ronald Reagan, among others. “Try to polarize the election around that issue which cuts best in your direction, i.e., drugs, crime, race,” Finkelstein wrote in a 1970 memo to the Nixon White House. In 1996, Finkelstein put this principle to work on behalf of Benjamin Netanyahu, a candidate for Prime Minister of Israel who was then about twenty points down in the polls, and who started alleging that his opponent, Shimon Peres, planned to divide Jerusalem. This was a lie, but it stuck, and Netanyahu won. In 2008, Netanyahu introduced Finkelstein to his friend Orbán; Finkelstein became so indispensable that Orbán reportedly came to refer to him, dotingly, as Finkie. One of Finkelstein’s protégés later told the Swiss journalist Hannes Grassegger, “Arthur always said that you did not fight against the Nazis but against Adolf Hitler.” Orbán had been running against globalism, multiculturalism, bureaucracy in Brussels. These were abstractions. By 2013, Finkelstein had an epiphany: the face of the enemy should be George Soros.

After Orbán returned to power, his rhetoric grew more sharply nativist, laden with Islamophobic and anti-Semitic dog whistles: “We are fighting an enemy that is different from us. Not open but hiding; not straightforward but crafty; not honest but base; not national but international; does not believe in working but speculates with money.” In 2018, several parties to the left of Orbán’s, and even a couple of neo-Fascist parties to his right, ran separate candidates for Prime Minister, splitting the opposition vote. “After that, the common narrative was that next time all we had to do was unite behind one opposition candidate, and we would definitely win,” Szilárd Pap, a left-wing writer, told me. “Well, we did unite the next time, and we lost even worse.” In Budapest, I met plenty of Hungarians who openly railed against their government. One was Péter Márki-Zay, the opposition candidate in the most recent election. Márki-Zay continues to accuse Orbán of corruption and mendacity, and he doesn’t seem worried that his sushi will be poisoned with polonium. The regime’s defenders see this relative freedom as evidence that all the talk of autocracy is reckless alarmism. Its critics see it as evidence of a cost-benefit decision: certain egregious breaches are not worth the trouble, at least for now.

“Orbán has managed to preserve the appearance of formal democracy, as long as you don’t look too closely,” Anna Grzymala-Busse, the director of the Europe Center at Stanford, told me. Since 2010, most of Hungary’s civic institutions—the courts, the universities, the systems for administering elections—have come to occupy a gray area. They haven’t been eradicated; instead, they’ve been patiently debilitated, delegitimatized, hollowed out. There are still judges who wear robes, but if Orbán finds their decisions too onerous he can appeal to friendlier courts. There are still a few independent universities, but the most prestigious one—Central European University, which was founded by Soros—has been pushed out of the country, and many of the public universities have been put under the control of oligarchs and other loyalists. There are still elections, yet international observers consider them “free but not fair”: radically gerrymandered, flush with undisclosed infusions of dark money. The system that Orbán has built during the past twelve years, a combination of freedom and subjugation not exactly like that of any other government in the world, could be called Goulash Authoritarianism. Scheppele contends that Orbán has pulled this off not by breaking laws but by ingeniously manipulating them, in what she calls a “constitutional coup.” She added, “He’s very smart and methodical. First, he changes the laws to give himself permission to do what he wants, and then he does it.”

On the day I arrived, Orbán delivered a forty-five-minute speech in a gilded neo-Gothic chamber of the Hungarian Parliament Building, warning that Europe was entering “an age of danger,” and that Hungary, “the last Christian conservative bastion of the Western world,” was one of the only nations prepared to weather it. He predicted that, given the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, and an incipient energy crisis, “migration toward rich countries will intensify with tectonic force.” If other Western nations continued to implement “waves of suicidal policy,” such as lax border control, the result would be “the great European population-replacement program, which seeks to replace the missing European Christian children with migrants, with adults arriving from other civilizations”—a clear reference to the racist talking point known as the great replacement theory. A few years ago, this idea was propounded most visibly by white-power extremists such as the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik (or, more recently, the shooter in Buffalo). It’s now routinely parroted by the Fox News host Tucker Carlson, many leading Republican politicians, and, in Hungary, the head of state.

In 2010, Fidesz, Orbán’s party, won more than two-thirds of the seats in Parliament, above the threshold required to amend the constitution. Within a year, it had made a dozen amendments; when these didn’t provide enough latitude, it threw out that constitution and wrote another one. In 2022, Fidesz won a supermajority once again. I asked Miklósi whether the next four years of Orbán’s reign would be different from the last. “It always gets worse,” he said. This time, he wasn’t being sarcastic.

Of all the Anglophone Orbán apologists, surely the most genial, and arguably the most influential, is a British journalist named John O’Sullivan, who turned eighty in April. When William F. Buckley retired as the editor of National Review, in the eighties, O’Sullivan took over. During Margaret Thatcher’s third term as Prime Minister, he was one of her top advisers; after she left office, he helped her write her memoirs. “Mrs. T. would take us on these lovely trips to various places—a manor in the South of England, a villa in the Bahamas—and we would talk over breakfast about some episode in her life, and then we’d each go off and write,” he recalled. “It was great fun.”

O’Sullivan had invited me to lunch at an Italian bistro near his apartment in Budapest. (He still fancies himself a classical liberal, at least insofar as “I’m always up for a good chat, even one that may involve disagreement.”) He is known for knowing everyone, and he drops names with an equanimous smile, describing people on a spectrum from “a good friend” to “a friend” to “an ex-friend.” He wore a pin-striped suit and a tie from Liberty, the London clothier once favored by Oscar Wilde. Even in this, O’Sullivan can’t help but out-conservative the conservatives: “I prefer the older patterns, I confess, most of which they’ve now discontinued.”

In 2008, O’Sullivan moved to Prague to help run Radio Free Europe; in 2013, two Hungarian friends, a “well-known modernist poet” and a “former teacher of Orbán’s,” hired him to start a conservative think tank. O’Sullivan and his wife, Melissa, have lived in Budapest ever since. “You really must meet Melissa,” he told me. “She’s an American—a proper American, from Alabama.” A friend of the couple’s told me, “Melissa is much more naturally Trumpy, in terms of her sympathies. John gets the Trump phenomenon intellectually, but he finds Trump too fickle and sort of gross.” Orbán—a family man and an articulate lawyer who purports to set aside one workday a week exclusively for reading—is more to O’Sullivan’s taste.

His think tank is called the Danube Institute. It is funded entirely by a foundation that is funded entirely by the Hungarian government. This foundation sponsors international conferences and three handsomely designed periodicals, all in English: European Conservative, Hungarian Review, and Hungarian Conservative. In 2015, O’Sullivan, dismayed by the anti-Orbán consensus among Western journalists and academics (“They all seem to be making the case for the prosecution, don’t they?”), put together an essay collection of his own in which he wrote that “the death of liberal democracy in Hungary has been greatly exaggerated.” After all, O’Sullivan and other apologists often argue, Orbán has a popular mandate. Rather than delegating gay rights, the handling of asylum claims, and other matters of domestic policy to international bodies—with their adherence to such abstractions as “the rule of law”—isn’t it arguably more democratic to simply put them to a vote?

Even as the Hungarian constitution has been dismantled, O’Sullivan, Pangloss of the post-Soviet bloc, has continued to insist that Orbán is still basically a liberal democrat, if you squint. The problem with this sanguine view is that it has been repeatedly refuted, even by Orbán. “The new state that we are building in Hungary is an illiberal state,” he declared in 2014. O’Sullivan told me that, as soon as he heard this, “the first thing I said to myself was ‘I’m sure that isn’t really what he meant.’ A few weeks later, when I saw him for lunch at the Prime Minister’s office, I told him straight out, ‘You’re going to regret saying that.’ And, actually, I don’t know that he has.” At times, Orbán seems to mean “illiberal” in the partisan sense, as in owning the libs; often, he seems to mean it more sweepingly, expressing skepticism about a wide range of individual liberties. It’s true, as the Orbánists like to point out, that Hungary is not the most repressive country in the world. China, Iran, Venezuela, North Korea—all are, by many measures, less free. But then there are no major political factions trying to make the United States more like North Korea.

During his first few years in Budapest, O’Sullivan had trouble generating interest in the Hungarian model of conservatism. “I went wherever I could—the Anglosphere Society, in New York, Grover Norquist’s Wednesday Club, in Washington,” he said. “The usual response was a yawn, basically. Until Brexit, and then Trump—and then, suddenly, people were open to radically different ideas.” In 2020, the Danube Institute started hosting fellows—writers and scholars from abroad who were invited to Budapest for a few weeks or months, given a stipend and a comfortable apartment, and asked to work on articles or books that might help the cause. “We couldn’t predict exactly what would come of it,” O’Sullivan said. “You just put the billiard balls on the table, you know, and wait to see where they end up.”

The most dynamic billiard ball turned out to be Rod Dreher, a prolific American author who became a Danube Institute fellow in 2021. Dreher has long been a conservative and a Christian, but, within those traditions, he has experienced a number of mini-conversions. In a 2006 book, “Crunchy Cons,” Dreher, then a kind of hipster exile from the Deep South, posited that conservatives ought to wear some of their cultural markers more lightly—that Republicans can shop at farmers’ markets, too. In “The Benedict Option,” in 2017, he argued that conservative Christians had already lost so many decisive political battles (same-sex marriage, abortion) that they should arrange a “strategic withdrawal” from the public sphere, building localist communities rather than contesting for national power. After his Danube Institute fellowship, though, he retreated from his retreatism: actually, conservatives could win real power, and Hungary could show the way. “Orbán was so unafraid, so unapologetic about using his political power to push back on the liberal élites in business and media and culture,” Dreher told me. “It was so inspiring: this is what a vigorous conservative government can do if it’s serious about stemming this horrible global tide of wokeness.” By the time Orbán ran for reëlection earlier this year, Dreher had completed his transition from aspiring ascetic to partisan booster. “Mood here at Fidesz HQ is increasingly cheerful,” he tweeted on Election Night. “ ‘Lights out, libs!’ say Hungarian voters.”

One April day in 2021, while Dreher was strolling through Budapest, he texted Tucker Carlson. “We text all the time, whenever I see something he might want to mention on his show, or just something he might find interesting,” Dreher told me. Carlson knew what the Western media said about Orbán, but Dreher encouraged him to ignore it and come see for himself. “If somebody has all the right enemies, if the liberal establishment is obsessed with treating them as a hate object, then it’s natural for a right-populist like me or Tucker to react by going, Huh, maybe there’s something interesting there,” Dreher said. Carlson told Dreher that he had already thought about visiting, but that he’d been encountering some bureaucratic hurdles with the Hungarian Embassy. A few days later, Dreher met Balázs Orbán—not related to Viktor, but one of his closest advisers. (Many Hungarians I spoke to described him as a sort of Karl Rove figure.) “I tried to convince Balázs that Tucker was somebody who could be trusted,” Dreher recalled. He offered personal assurances that, on the big questions, Tucker and Orbán were in alignment. By the summer, the red tape had cleared. (Carlson declined to comment.)

On August 5th, Carlson anchored his show from a rooftop in central Budapest. Behind his left shoulder was an ornate stone façade, bathed in sunlight, and, beyond it, a bank of looming storm clouds. “Good evening and welcome to ‘Tucker Carlson Tonight,’ ” he said. “Of the nearly two hundred different countries on the face of the earth, precisely one of them has an elected leader who publicly identifies as a Western-style conservative. His name is Viktor Orbán.” Carlson was spending the week in Budapest, delivering each day’s American headline news in his selectively apoplectic style. “Representative democracy—it’s been our system for nearly two hundred and fifty years,” he said in one night’s lead segment. “Apparently, it’s now over.” The ostensible cause of the death of American democracy was a temporary eviction moratorium enacted by the Centers for Disease Control. The next night, Carlson aired an obsequious one-on-one interview with Orbán—fifteen minutes without a single challenging question, and certainly no warnings about the potential death of Hungarian democracy.

Carlson’s work vacation got a lot of press. Dreher defended him (“Tucker in Budapest: Blowing People’s Minds”); Andrew Sullivan lambasted him (“The Price of Tucker Carlson’s Soul: Going Cheap for a Corrupt, Fashy Kleptocrat”). Online sleuths followed the money. The Hungarian Embassy in Washington has had contracts with Connie Mack IV, a Republican former representative from Florida, and David Reaboi, a bodybuilder and former Andrew Breitbart protégé who touts his skills in “national security & political warfare.” In 2019, the Embassy paid two hundred and thirteen thousand dollars to Policy Impact Communications, a D.C.-based P.R. firm staffed by well-connected lobbyists. One of its board members is Dick Carlson—the director of the Voice of America under Ronald Reagan, the Ambassador to the Seychelles under George H. W. Bush, and, as it happens, Tucker’s father.

By the standards of sponsored diplomacy, though, a six-figure contract is hardly unusual. (In 2018, the government of Saudi Arabia paid American lobbyists more than thirty-eight million dollars.) Normally, six figures might buy you a full-page ad in the Financial Times, say, or help your ambassador secure a speaking slot at an obscure thought-leader conference; it’s presumably not enough to get your head of state a long softball interview on one of the most popular shows on American TV. The payments surely don’t hurt, but it seems that Carlson, Dreher, and O’Sullivan are true believers, exuding the contrarian thrill of forbidden knowledge. When I was in Budapest, Dreher, seven time zones away and in the midst of a messy divorce, texted me assiduously, including before 5 a.m. his time, trying to steer my story. “I really do care about Hungary, and I want to help you do a good job,” he wrote. “God knows it’s not paradise, but it’s important to understand Hungary as it is.” That’s the sort of P.R. that money can’t buy.

In some ways, Orbán conducts himself like any other strongman. He built a big soccer stadium in his small home town, and he loves to go there to watch the games. In the mid-two-thousands, Lőrinc Mészáros, one of Orbán’s childhood friends, was a pipe fitter receiving welfare checks; shortly after Orbán returned to power, in 2010, Mészáros became the richest person in Hungary. This year, when Márki-Zay ran as the opposition candidate, he was given five minutes on TV to make his case to the voters, and the rest of the allotted time went to Orbán.

But, unlike Putin-style autocrats, Orbán is often keen to maintain plausible deniability. “He’ll use such obscure methods that it might take months to figure out what he’s done,” Scheppele, the Princeton professor, told me. In 2010, Orbán established a relatively small antiterror police unit. Bit by bit, in disparate clauses buried in unrelated laws, he increased its budget and removed checks on its power. “I was reading Article 61 of a bill on public waterworks, literally, and I came across a line that said, Oh, by the way, the antiterror unit now gets to collect personal information on all water-utility customers, which basically means everyone in the country, without notifying them,” Scheppele went on. She contends that the unit now functions, essentially, as Orbán’s secret police. “His claim is always ‘Everything I’m doing is legal’—well, of course it is, because you made it legal,” she said. The goal, as the scholar John Keane puts it in his book “The New Despotism,” is a kind of bureaucratic gaslighting: the ability to insist that what everyone knows is happening is not in fact happening.

I was experiencing a tiny microcosm of this while trying to register for cpac Hungary. I had sent an e-mail, as instructed—then another, then another. Each time, I encountered a new bureaucratic hurdle: wait a week, call this phone number, try this link. The organizers maintained that the event would be open to the press. “We are fighting for everyone’s right to speak,” Balázs Orbán, who was scheduled to appear at the conference, said in a radio interview. A few days later, I met him at a café where jaunty, self-help-y aphorisms had been written on each table in sidewalk chalk. (“Take others’ opinions lightly—very lightly,” our table read.) I asked him about the government’s suppression of same-sex marriage and gay adoption. “If the state is pushing for the policy where the marriage is only between a man and a woman, and seventy per cent of the people want this, it’s not tyranny of the majority,” he said. The popularity is beside the point, I argued, if the policy is a violation of human rights. “According to my understanding, it’s not,” he said. When our conversation was done, he asked me to pose with him for a photo. I mentioned that I was having trouble getting into cpac and asked if he would put in a good word with the organizers. His response, which I had to admit was quite clever, was that, as a government official, it would be improper for him to intervene.

Dreher assured me that there must be some innocent mixup. When I met O’Sullivan at his office, he agreed: “I’m sure it’s merely an oversight.” I told him that I had been in touch with journalists from the Guardian, Rolling Stone, Vice, and a range of independent Hungarian publications, none of whom had heard back from the cpac organizers. A few hours later, all our requests were formally denied, and Vice published a piece titled “CPAC Just Decided to Not Let Any US Journalists Inside.” In the American context, this sort of thing—for example, the Pennsylvania gubernatorial candidate Doug Mastriano banning press from a campaign rally—is still rare enough to raise eyebrows. In Hungary, it has become so commonplace that some reporters didn’t even bother applying to cpac. “They’ll be very polite, and then at the last minute they’ll tell you, ‘We’re so sorry, space constraints,’ ” another journalist told me. (When I sent an e-mail to the government’s International Communications Office, asking to fact-check the relevant claims in this piece, the official response read, in part, “We appreciate the possibility you offered us, however, we do not wish to participate in the validation process of leftist-liberal propaganda.”)

When I was about to leave O’Sullivan’s office, he asked whether he would see me again that night, at the cpac welcome reception. At this point, I couldn’t tell whether I was being elaborately trolled. “I didn’t get an invitation, but I’d love to go if I can,” I said. “Where will it be?”

One of his staffers helpfully piped up: “Some hotel near the Elisabeth Bridge. The Paris something or other?”

On my way out, Googling frantically on my phone, I found a five-star hotel fitting this description: the Párizsi Udvar. I went back to my room (in a perfectly nice, decidedly not-five-star hotel) and grabbed a sports coat and a notebook. A few minutes later, I was standing outside the entrance to the Párizsi Udvar, not sure what to do next. “Event?” a white-gloved doorman asked. “Event? Event?” I nodded, and he ushered me inside.

The hotel’s courtyard, a former shopping arcade covered with a vast stained-glass dome, was one of the most opulent interiors I’ve ever seen. There were marble columns, floors of intricate Moorish tilework, and glass display cases stocked with jeroboams of fancy champagne. (In the 2011 film version of “Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy,” an M.I.6 agent is double-crossed by a Hungarian general, shot, and captured by Soviet spies. The scene was filmed in the courtyard of the Párizsi Udvar.) About two hundred people were there, holding drinks and sampling Hungarian-American-fusion finger food. I ran into O’Sullivan (“Ah, good, you made it!”) and spotted Rick Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, who was due to appear on a panel with Eduardo Bolsonaro, the son of the Brazilian autocrat (and a scheduled speaker at the following American Conservative Union conference, cpac Brazil). Candace Owens, the YouTube culture warrior and the author of “Blackout: How Black America Can Make Its Second Escape from the Democrat Plantation,” leaned against the bar, visibly pregnant, as a crush of admirers lined up to shake her hand. (Her husband, George Farmer, the C.E.O. of the social network Parler, stood next to her, looking down at his phone.) I’d heard that, while Owens was in town, Viktor Orbán had requested a closed-door meeting with her and a few others in his book-lined office, to discuss culture and politics. Owens later confirmed, in a cpac promotional video, that she’d met with Orbán for about two hours: “It was really amazing. He’s so on it.”

Miklós Szánthó appeared on a dais, holding a microphone, and quieted the crowd. “Why are we doing this?” he said. “We are doing this to make the liberals’ nightmare true.” He addressed the Americans in the room: “We do hope that you can learn from us the political mind-set how to be a successful conservative, as we also learn from you, and from Ronald Reagan. As he put it so many years ago, ‘We win, they lose.’ That is what the Hungarian right has done.”

Dan Schneider, the executive director of the A.C.U., told me that he was especially excited for cpac Israel, coming up this July, in Tel Aviv. (I didn’t know it at the time, but another speaker in Budapest would be an old political ally of Orbán’s, Zsolt Bayer, a notorious Hungarian talk-show host who has used racist epithets for Black people, has referred to Roma people as “animals” who must be “stamped out,” and has argued that the widespread anti-Semitism in twentieth-century Hungary was “understandable.”) I also met Mark Krikorian, a severe immigration restrictionist whose American nonprofit, the Center for Immigration Studies, has been classified by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. “I can’t get a speaking gig at an American cpac to save my life, but I fly four thousand miles over here and I’m welcomed with open arms,” Krikorian told me. I asked him if he was worried about being, as O’Sullivan had put it, “tarred with the brush of Orbánism.” “What are they gonna do, call me an ultra-hate group?” Krikorian said. “Fuck them!”

After an hour or so, Schneider pulled me aside. “I haven’t eaten dinner yet,” he said. “You wanna get out of here?” We strolled aimlessly, eventually stopping at an upscale bistro in a picturesque square. I ordered the venison goulash; Schneider picked something called the Hungarian Rhapsody. He kept his phone next to his water glass, occasionally tapping out a text. Though he never said so outright, it seemed clear that he had the personal cell numbers of several Republican senators, perhaps a Supreme Court Justice or two, and presumably at least one ex- and potentially future President.

“So what do you make of the Hungary thing, really?” he had asked me earlier. I tried to answer honestly but also diplomatically. “Clearly,” I began, “there are issues with the way Orbán wields state power.”

“Wields state power! ” Schneider said, spitting the words back in my face. “You make it sound so nefarious!” I brought up Hungary’s not entirely independent judiciary. “Oh, so he appoints judges he likes,” Schneider said, rolling his eyes. “Is that so different from what we do?” He meant to normalize Orbán’s behavior, but I couldn’t help interpreting it the other way around: the brazen opportunism of the Republican Party—for example, refusing to give a hearing to the opposition’s judicial nominees, then ramming through its own, in obvious violation of precedent and basic fairness—did seem undeniably Orbánesque. He called himself “a classical liberal,” adding, “You can’t secure individual liberty unless you secure national sovereignty first.” I made the obvious rejoinder that Orbán, for one, clearly does not consider himself a classical liberal. “Well, maybe I just haven’t read enough about it,” Schneider said.

At dinner, he was midsentence when a man approached us and, without a word, grabbed Schneider’s phone from the table and ran off. Before I could process what was happening, Schneider, a former track athlete, was already in pursuit. He slipped and fell, then got up and kept running, following the thief around a corner. By the time I caught up with them, Schneider had tackled the man and recovered his phone. We walked back to our table. “I think I broke a rib,” Schneider said. “And I definitely scuffed my shoes, which were not cheap.” The man followed a few yards behind us, shouting expletives, at one point even brandishing a brick. Eventually, the police came and took him away. “I’m so sorry,” our waiter told us, in English, when we were seated again, catching our breath. “Nothing like that ever happens here. I am sure that this man was not really a Hungarian.”

There was no single moment when the democratic backsliding began in Hungary. There were no shots fired, no tanks in the streets. “Orbán doesn’t need to kill us, he doesn’t need to jail us,” Tibor Dessewffy, a sociology professor at Eötvös Loránd University, told me. “He just keeps narrowing the space of public life. It’s what’s happening in your country, too—the frog isn’t boiling yet, but the water is getting hotter.” He acknowledged that the U.S. has safeguards that Hungary does not: the two-party system, which might forestall a slide into perennial single-party rule; the American Constitution, which is far more difficult to amend. Still, it wasn’t hard for him to imagine Americans a decade hence being, in some respects, roughly where the Hungarians are today. “I’m sorry to tell you, I’m your worst nightmare,” Dessewffy said, with a wry smile. As worst nightmares went, I had to admit, it didn’t seem so bad at first glance. He was sitting in a placid garden, enjoying a lemonade, wearing cargo shorts. “This is maybe the strangest part,” he said. “Even my parents, who lived under Stalin, still drank lemonade, still went swimming in the lake on a hot day, still fell in love. In the nightmare scenario, you still have a life, even if you feel somewhat guilty about it.”

Lee Drutman, a political scientist at Johns Hopkins, tweeted last year, “Anybody serious about commenting on the state of US democracy should start reading more about Hungary.” In other words, not only can it happen here but, if you look at certain metrics, it’s already started happening. Republicans may not be able to rewrite the Constitution, but they can exploit existing loopholes, replace state election officials with Party loyalists, submit alternative slates of electors, and pack federal courts with sympathetic judges. Representation in Hungary has grown less proportional in recent years, thanks to gerrymandering and other tweaks to the electoral rules. In April, Fidesz got fifty-four per cent of the vote but won eighty-three per cent of the districts. “At that level of malapportionment, you’d be hard pressed to find a good-faith political scientist who would call that country a true democracy,” Drutman told me. “The trends in the U.S. are going very quickly in the same direction. It’s completely possible that the Republican Party could control the House, the Senate, and the White House in 2025, despite losing the popular vote in every case. Is that a democracy?”

In 2018, Steve Bannon, after he was fired from the Trump Administration, went on a kind of European tour, giving paid talks and meeting with nationalist allies across the Continent. In May, he stopped in Budapest. One of his hosts there was the XXI Century Institute, a think tank with close ties to the Orbán administration. “I can tell, Viktor Orbán triggers ’em like Trump,” Bannon said onstage, flashing a rare smile. “He was Trump before Trump.” After his speech, he joined his hosts for a dinner cruise on the Danube. (The cruise was captured in unreleased footage from the documentary “The Brink.” Bannon’s spokesperson stopped responding to requests for comment.) On board, Bannon met Miklós Szánthó, sipping a beer and watching the sun set, who mentioned that he ran a “conservative, center-right think tank” that opposed “N.G.O.s financed by the Open Society network.”

“Oh, my God, Soros!” Bannon said. “You guys beat him up badly here.” Szánthó accepted the praise with a stoic grin. Bannon went on, “We love to take lessons from you guys in the U.S.”

In 2018, “Trump before Trump” was the highest compliment that Bannon could think to pay Orbán. In 2022, many on the American right are trying to anticipate what a Trump after Trump might look like. Orbán provides one potential answer. Even Trump’s putative allies will admit, in private, that he was a lazy, feckless leader. They wanted an Augustus; they got a Caligula. In theory, Trump was amenable to dismantling the administrative state, to pushing norms and institutions beyond their breaking points, even to reaping the benefits of a full autocratic breakthrough. But, instead of laying out long-term strategies to wrest control of key levers of power, he tweeted, and watched TV, and whined on the phone about how his tin-pot insurrection schemes weren’t coming to fruition. What would happen if the Republican Party were led by an American Orbán, someone with the patience to envision a semi-authoritarian future and the diligence and the ruthlessness to achieve it?

In 2018, Patrick Deneen’s book “Why Liberalism Failed” was admired by David Brooks and Barack Obama. Last year, Deneen founded a hard-right Substack called the Postliberal Order, on which he argued that right-wing populists had not gone nearly far enough—that American conservatism should abandon its “defensive crouch.” One of his co-authors wrote a post from Budapest, offering an example of how this could work in practice: “It’s clear that Hungarian conservatism is not defensive.” J. D. Vance has voiced admiration for Orbán’s pro-natalist family policies, adding, “Why can’t we do that here?” Rod Dreher told me, “Seeing what Vance is saying, and what Ron DeSantis is actually doing in Florida, the concept of American Orbánism starts to make sense. I don’t want to overstate what they’ll be able to accomplish, given the constitutional impediments and all, but DeSantis is already using the power of the state to push back against woke capitalism, against the crazy gender stuff.” According to Dreher, what the Republican Party needs is “a leader with Orbán’s vision—someone who can build on what Trumpism accomplished, without the egomania and the inattention to policy, and who is not afraid to step on the liberals’ toes.”

In common parlance, the opposite of “liberal” is “conservative.” In political-science terms, illiberalism means something more radical: a challenge to the very rules of the game. There are many valid critiques of liberalism, from the left and the right, but Orbán’s admirers have trouble articulating how they could install a post-liberal American state without breaking a few eggs (civil rights, fair elections, possibly the democratic experiment itself). “The central insight of twentieth-century conservatism is that you work within the liberal order—limited government, free movement of capital, all of that—even when it’s frustrating,” Andrew Sullivan said.“If you just give away the game and try to seize as much power as possible, then what you’re doing is no longer conservative, and, in my view, you’re making a grave, historic mistake.” Lauren Stokes, the Northwestern historian, is a leftist with her own radical critiques of liberalism; nonetheless, she, too, thinks that the right-wing post-liberals are playing with fire. “By hitching themselves to someone who has put himself forward as a post-liberal intellectual, I think American conservatives are starting to give themselves permission to discard liberal norms,” Stokes told me. “When a Hungarian court does something Orbán doesn’t like—something too pro-queer, too pro-immigrant—he can just say, ‘This court is an enemy of the people, I don’t have to listen to it.’ I think Republicans are setting themselves up to adopt a similar logic: if the system gives me a result I don’t like, I don’t have to abide by it.”

On the morning after the reception, I arrived at the building where cpac Hungary was being held—a glass-covered, humpbacked protuberance known as the Whale. Orbán was due to speak in thirty minutes. I walked up to an outdoor media-registration desk, where a Center for Fundamental Rights employee named Dóra confirmed that I would not be allowed to enter. “I have to get back to work now,” she said, although there was no one else in line. She called over a security guard, who stood in front of me, blocking my view of the entrance, and demanded that I go “outside.” I made the argument that we were already outside. Within five minutes, he was threatening to call the police. (The Center for Fundamental Rights later declined to comment on specific claims in this piece, writing, “Unfortunately there is a lot of fake news in the article.”)

I texted Rod Dreher, who seemed to think that his allies were making a tactical mistake: surely, antagonizing journalists would make the coverage worse. He and Melissa O’Sullivan scrambled to find attendees willing to pop out between sessions and talk to me. I spoke with a friend of Dreher’s, an urbane descendant of Hungarian aristocrats and a study in cultivated neutrality: “I am a businessperson, so I believe in the win-win-win, which means that no one is on the wrong side, ever, you see? No one is the Devil, even the Devil.” Later, I talked to another friend of Dreher’s, who, after chatting for a few minutes, said, “I’ve got one of these badges. Why don’t you put it on, try to walk in, and see what happens?”

It was calmer than I’d expected inside the Whale. cpac Orlando had been a manic circus of lib-triggering commotion; cpac Hungary was less flashy, more focussed. Young volunteers wearing business suits passed out policy papers printed on thick stock. “He’s made it in again!” John O’Sullivan said, smiling and clapping me on the shoulder. Schneider, who had spent much of our dinner disclaiming the most wild-eyed, conspiratorial members of his coalition, was now chatting with Jack Posobiec, who has made a career out of promoting election disinformation, child-groomer memes, and other bits of corrosive propaganda.

The speaker onstage was Gavin Wax, the twenty-seven-year-old president of the New York Young Republican Club. (For most of the twentieth century, the club endorsed liberal Republicans, but, after an internal coup in 2019, it endorsed both Trump and Orbán for reëlection.) There were about a hundred people in the audience, most of them listening to Wax through live translation on clunky plastic headsets. “Hungary has frequently become a target because it is a shining example of how easily the globalist agenda can be repelled,” Wax said. “We demand nothing short of an American Orbánism. We accept nothing less than total victory!” From the outside, the Whale had looked vast, airy, translucent. Inside the main hall, there were various camera setups and artificial-lighting rigs but not a crack of sunlight.

Tucker Carlson recorded a message from his home studio in Maine. “I can’t believe you’re in Budapest and I am not,” he said. “You know why you can tell it’s a wonderful country? Because the people who have turned our country into a much less good place are hysterical when you point it out.” Trump also sent a greeting by video: “Viktor Orbán, he’s a great leader, a great gentleman, and he just had a very big election result. I was very honored to have endorsed him. A little unusual endorsement, usually I’m looking at the fifty states, but here we went a little bit astray.” During his keynote address, Orbán said, “President Trump has undeniable merits, but nevertheless he was not reëlected in 2020.” Fidesz, by contrast, “did not resign ourselves to our minority status. We played to win.”

In 2002, when Orbán lost his first reëlection campaign, he left office, but neither he nor his followers ever really accepted the result. “The homeland cannot be in opposition,” he said—in other words, he was still the legitimate representative of the Hungarian people, and no election result could change that. Trump, of course, has been perseverating on a similar theme for the past year and a half, and he, too, has a cultural movement, a media ecosystem, and a political party that will echo it. At cpac Orlando, most of the speakers ritually invoked the shibboleth that Trump had actually won the 2020 election, despite all evidence. Several attendees told me that, if the Republicans had any backbone, they would win back the House in 2022, amass as much power as possible at the state level, and then do whatever it took to deliver the Presidency back to the Party in 2024. A free but not fair election, captured partisan courts, the institutions of democracy limping along in hollowed-out form—these seemed like telltale signs of early-stage Goulash Authoritarianism. Now here the Americans were, studying at Orbán’s knee.

Trump may run in 2024, and he may win, fairly or unfairly. What worried me most, sitting in the belly of the Whale, was not the person of Donald Trump but a Republican Party that resembled Orbán’s party, Fidesz, more by the month—increasingly comfortable with naked power grabs, with treating all political opposition as fundamentally illegitimate, with assuming that any checks on its dominance were mere inconveniences to be bypassed by any quasi-legalistic means. “There are many things that the Americans here want to learn from the Hungarians,” Balázs Orbán had told me. “We’re going to keep our heritage for ourselves, our Christian heritage, our ethnic heritage . . . that’s what I think they want to say but they can’t say, and so they point to someone who can say it. If they want us to play that role, we are fine with that.” After I got back to the U.S., I spoke to Dreher, who mentioned that he was thinking about moving from Louisiana to Budapest, where he had been offered a job with the Danube Institute. “I really like the Hungarian people, and I think it could be useful to build a network of Christians and intellectuals who are thinking about the future,” he said. “We in the West still have so much to learn.” ♦

— Published in the print edition of the July 4, 2022, The New Yorker Issue, with the headline “The Illiberal Order.”

[blakelywintersfield]

As a victim of gun violence myself, I will be keeping my guns, thanks. Fear mongering? Maybe a little bit the fact is politicians absolutely “hell yes I want to take your AR15, your AK47”. They’ve said it often and loudly that they would like you to be disarmed. If you feel no one in your home is mentally stable enough for a gun, great, but you have zero right to tell others they should do the same.

1. If you're a victim of gun violence then the NRA gives absolutely NO fucks about you. You're not a victim of gun violence in their eyes, you're a victim of a criminal who happened to have a gun. Calling it "gun violence" is liberal propaganda to blame the gun, instead of the person. The gun didn't create the violence, the person did. That's their shitbrained logic and that's how they would respond to you if you told them (without disclosing if you're a gun owner or not) "I was a victim of gun violence." Because just like your dumb ass, they're not responsible gun owners, they're reactionary gun owners, and if you're reactionary as opposed to rational, you shouldn't have dangerous weapons, and your "you can't tell me what to do" 5-year-old attitude towards that would not hold up in a myriad of other scenarios. By your logic, suspending the driver's license of an elderly individual with dementia is unconstitutional. Not allowing someone with chronic seizures to drive is unconstitutional. Not allowing people to sell food without meeting safety and sanitation standards is unconstitutional. "You can't tell me what to do 'cause muh freedumb" isn't a fucking part of the constitution, you're just a chronic nationalist boot deep-throater whose mommy told him that the world owed him everything.

2. Where did I say guns should be taken away from you, or anyone else in my tags. Where? Here, I'll post the fucking screenshot of it and you can highlight it:

Please show me where I said "people should have their guns taken away" you reactionary cowardly fuck. I'll wait.

3. Politicians stating "no one needs a stockpile of AK47s" is not synonymous with "we want to take your guns". Gun buy-back programs that are VOLUNTARY are not the same as threatening to "take your guns". What benefit would you, as one person, gain from owning 5 semi-automatic weapons in the argument of "self-defense"? Are you going to wield one in each hand, one with each foot, and one with the mouth you can't seem to fucking shut? Do you think any of these weapons would protect you against government militia (which is what the second amendment is FOR, for one, and which the NRA does NOT condone if it's conservative sanctioned militia takeover) breaking into your property with a force of 10 people in bulletproof gear and military-grade weapons that could probably blow your fucking empty head off your body in one shot? Or do you like owning all of these shiny scary-looking toys for intimidation, thinking it'll protect you from future violence, like a fucking Halloween house made to scare away children? If that's your reasoning, then you definitely need therapy because that's textbook maladaptive coping with trauma -- I'd know because I have my own array of self-defense weapons that I got in response to my traumatic event, including a knife that could fatally gut an adult man with one stab. That's not a reasonable response to trauma!! But at least I can admit it! Your pisswad ass on the other hand can't, and views anyone saying "the NRA is a shit organization that doesn't support responsible gun ownership or the responsibility of gun owners and their actions, and is essentially a domestic terrorist grooming organization" as an attack on you as an individual, because you can't stomach the idea that maybe, just fucking maybe, you may be on that list of people who shouldn't have a gun because you're too mentally fucked up to be trusted with something like that, like people who are chronically suicidal (in other words, the MAJORITY OF GUN RELATED DEATHS), people with psychotic tendencies that can lead to hurting themselves or others (not because people with psychosis are "scary evil people", but because those moments of psychosis literally keep a person from making rational observations and decisions, and these individuals are already advised to have possible harmful tools locked up or just not in the house for their own safety), people like incels that believe if their entitlement is denied that they have the right to murder, etc. Honestly, you do sound like someone who shouldn't have guns, because your unstable ass probably read up to the second tag and skimmed the rest in a blind rage before sending an ask two days after I made that post, and seemed to conveniently miss the end:

What's your reasoning for the NRA keeping silent about responsible black gun owners being gunned down by police because the cops know they're legally registered gun owners (Jason Washington, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, whom the NRA defended being murdered by police while pulled over for a traffic violation, in his car with his wife and CHILD, and verbally informed the cop like a responsible gun owner that he had a conceal and carry permit, and was reaching for his wallet in plain view of his family and the fucking pig)? What's your reasoning behind them callously dismissing police violence against black people who are unarmed or have a history of supporting gun control (Botham Jean, Clementa Pinckney, fucking JAMES SHAW JR., WHO STOPPED A MASS SHOOTING WHILE UNARMED HIMSELF), as though that makes it their fault they were murdered, injured, or otherwise victimized? What's your reasoning behind them only piping up about "muh guns" whenever politicians say "there's a gun problem" after the 29th public shooting that month, but not tackling the issue of gun control disproportionately impacting people of color while letting crazy little white kids run loose with a multitude of firearms? What's your reasoning behind them siding with idiot fascist Trump's temper tantrum over the NFL's protests on police violence -- something they, once again, consistently respond to with "they should've been armed" if the black person wasn't, and give complete fucking radio static to if the black person was armed (even if legally armed)? They're so against gun control, but never seem to care when it affects black and brown people -- only when Jack Incelson, age 16, who posts on 4chan about how he wants to cut women's heads off and fuck their dead bodies, is at risk of not being allowed to keep his AR15. If people of color are killed while armed, it's justified because "they had a gun"; if people of color are killed while unarmed, it's their fault because "they should've had a gun" -- this is something the NRA is notorious for, because they don't give a flying fuck about people who should have the right to arm themselves.

4. On that point: I fully support the Socialist Rifle Association, even as someone who does not want to own guns -- because, as stated in the post you're shitting your diaper over -- I support organizations that vouch for responsible gun owners. The SRA holds irresponsible gun owners accountable. They actually support people's right to bear arms to defend themselves against tyrannical government forces. They are active in disaster aid, in environmental defense, in protecting people of color. I do not like guns but I 100% support the SRA, because they fight for people who do need to arm themselves to have that right, and I support that sentiment. I believe people of color should be able to arm themselves. I believe queer people should be able to arm themselves. I believe poor people should be able to arm themselves. But the NRA doesn't actively fight for any of those groups' rights -- the SRA does.

But you know what the SRA doesn't do? Send out unsolicited letters begging lower-middle-class white people for money so they can "fight the gun-hating liberals" from "taking away our guns n freedumb" and offering "i <3 guns" bumper stickers and shit in return. They don't view any political party as their friend because they know that Republicans and Democrats alike do not actually want you to be able to defend yourself against the government. They don't send fear-mongering letters full of hyperbolic bullshit to scare people into thinking that Biden or Obama or whatever Democrat is in the office is going to break into your house with police, beat your wife and children, and steal your guns while cackling maniacally over you as you sob "why mister president? why would you do this to your loyal and patriotic citizens?" The SRA opposes gun control laws that unfairly target demographics that are at the highest risk of police violence. The NRA does not, and, in fact, has a very heavily documented history of siding with conservatism, including making statements about things that don't even involve guns -- stating that American men are being turned into "second-rate women", outcried banning anti-queer discrimination and compared the ban to slavery, made a call to imprison people protesting against Trump's Cabinet picks, called the Women's March anti-American. These are all recent you shithead, so you must be purposely ignoring all of this to feel justified in defending this domestic terrorist organization, or you're probably a self-victimizing white man who can't handle being told no. Or maybe both. I don't know and I don't fucking care.

Don't fucking message me again. Unfollow me if you were previously following me and haven't already. Get some fucking therapy instead of crawling through strangers' blogs trying to find a reason to justify your irrational anger at them. And while you're at it, do me a huge favor, you cowardly fucking cunt: go to your nearest sex shop, buy 5 gallons of lube, pour them over your guns, and shove each and every one of them, fully loaded, up your ass. That way you can keep a close eye on them since your head is obviously already lodged up there.

Alternatively, you can eat shit and die.

#welcome to the bpd space my empathy is at 0 for you and i would experience a heavenly degree of schadenfreude from watching you suffer #where did you think this was gonna go you dumb cunt? what did you think you'd accomplish? #what about my blog says ''i'm a friendly space for neo-conservative sacks of shit''? #the last tl;dr point of my byf literally says don't follow if you're republican/conservative #and you can pretend you're not all you want but if you see people condemning the nra while stating they support gun organizations that #stand for responsible gun ownership and your reaction is to send an angry ''fuk u deez er MUH GUNS U CANT TAKEEM FRUM ME'' you are reacting #the same way conservatives do. supporting people's rights to arm themselves does not mean you can't condemn shitty organizations like the #nra and in fact refusing to makes you an irresponsible gun owner in itself because you refuse to acknowledge organizations that mow down #people who need to arm themselves so that YOU can. #you don't care about people's rights you just don't want to be told no. like a fucking toddler. #anyways gonna tag some stuff for possible blacklists #violence against women #police brutality #racism #graphic descriptions of violence #long post #can't think of anything else y'all can lmk if there was something i missed

[letterboxdisdown]

I'm Thinking of Ending Things (2020)

02/01/2022

Dir. Charlie Kaufman

First movie of the year!

I would say I'm a big Kaufman fan, my favorite movie is Synechdoche; New York. And I've been meaning to watch this but I remember there being a smear campaign when it first came out but I don't remember what for? Upon watch, I don't really see anything controversial to it.

As of writing, I am indifferent towards this one. It's not too sad for a Kaufman and overall I'm pretty meh about it. Maybe it's my philistine talking but I really don't get this movie. I understand at the end of the day this is all the janitor's machinations and it tackles his regret, which leads ultimately to his demise. Reading the book's synopsis clears up generally what happens in the film, but I do appreciate the film's decision to leave it on a more unclear note than the book. I personally don't want to interpret this movie more than it offers.

I like the dinner scene when the viewer starts to pick up "not everything is as it seems". The minute changes to the young woman's wardrobe to the bandage on the father's forehead crescendoing to the parents' drastic flip-flop in age did throw me for a loop and it was a lot of fun.

On the flipside, I've heard Kaufman has been called pretentious and upon Googling the dialogue, I do see this one to be pretentious. Most of the dialogue, especially at the end, are actually excerpts taken from Jake's hobbies and readings. But as a casual I didn't catch any of that, so yeah whatever that comes off as snobbish. I do appreciate that it does add to the dementia/hallucination more, but I'm a dumdum I don't wanna look stuff up after.

Overall, it's a cool little movie about regret and existential dread. I like Kaufman and this one fits very nicely on his catalog. I don't think I'm ready to give this one a numerical rating as it's a bit heady, but I promise future movies will have a firmer score.

Rating: indifferent

EDIT: ok so I read the book and Kaufman was very liberal in this adaptation. He mostly adapts the general plot but most of the dialogue is original. In my opinion, he should have adapted the ending; the movie is too ambiguous, especially if it adapted the "there is only one question left to answer" monologue. I don't think the movie ever says what that question was so it was a little confusing (the question is "what are you waiting for?"). Too pretentious I'm changing the score to 6/10

#charlie kaufman #2020 #it's not boring so it's good #I'm Thinking of Ending Things #meh

[remindsolutioningredients]

Remind Solution Natural ⚠️ Where To Buy ⚠️ Safe and Effective A Scam?

What is Remind Solution?

 Remind Solution is depicted as a high level intellectual enhancer supplement sold only online through RemindSolution.com.

 The enhancement professes to give clients a more honed mind, more clear reasoning, and careful attention utilizing regular fixings. Simply take one case of Remind Solution every day to help perception multiplely.

 Like other nootropic supplements sold online today, Remind Solution contains a mix of nutrients, minerals, plant concentrates, and spices. The biggest fixings in Remind Solution are St. John's wort, L-glutamine, and phosphatidylserine.

 A portion of the fixings in Remind Solution flood your body with cell reinforcements, making it simpler for your mind to work. Different fixings support blood and oxygen stream to the mind, improving concentration and intellectual energy.

 Each jug of Remind Solution contains 30 cases. The maker prescribes taking one to two containers each day to help comprehension. A portion of the fixings work quickly, conveying benefits when today. Different fixings work over a significant stretch, conveying intellectual advantages later on.

 How Does Remind Solution Work?

 Remind Solution utilizes a mix of nutrients, minerals, plant concentrates, and nature-determined equations to target mind wellbeing.

 Here's the manner by which the producers of Remind Solution clarify the equation and its belongings:

 "ReMind is a characteristic enhancement containing amazing cell reinforcements that help support expanding your concentration and detoxify your body."

 Remind Solution contains fixings like St. John's wort and vinpocetine, for instance, which could have cancer prevention agent impacts inside the mind. Studies show these fixings could uphold aggravation inside the cerebrum, making it simpler for your mind to work regularly.

 Remind Solution additionally contains fixings like L-glutamine that help blood stream to the cerebrum. L-glutamine is an amino corrosive connected to blood stream, protein amalgamation, and different impacts all through the body. The L-glutamine in Remind Solution could help concentration and consideration by conveying more supplements and oxygen to the cerebrum.

 Different fixings in Remind Solution incorporate home grown concentrates like Ginkgo Biloba. Utilized for quite a long time in customary Chinese medication, Ginkgo Biloba has been displayed to help insight, memory arrangement, and different impacts when taken day by day.

 Generally, Remind Solution is said to work also to other nootropic supplements sold online today. A portion of the advantages related with making Remind Solution might include:

 Further develop memory

 Get more clear reasoning

 Further develop concentration and energy

 Further develop mind wellbeing and discernment

 Get a more keen psyche and careful attention

 The creators of Remind Solution prescribe taking one container one to two times each day, ideally with dinners.

 What's in store After Taking Remind Solution

 As indicated by the creators of Remind Solution, you might encounter the entirety of the accompanying impacts in the wake of taking the enhancement interestingly:

 Expanded Focus and Attention: Remind Solution professes to upgrade temperament, center, and solid maturing inside your mind, expanding your concentration and consideration.

 Battle Stress and Anxiety: Some of the fixings in Remind Solution are delegated adaptogens, which implies they assist your body with guarding itself against stress and tension. The fixings in Remind Solution can purportedly advance uneasiness and stress support, assisting your body with guarding itself.

 As indicated by the producer, quiet the Mind: The adaptogens and different fixings in Remind Solution could likewise assist with quieting the brain. The organization asserts the equation can "permit you to just be you" by boosting temperament and quieting the psyche.

 Individuals Also Read: Review the Top Brain Boosters of 2021

 Safe: The producers of Remind Solution guarantee the enhancement is protected to take since it's liberated from anti-infection agents, gluten, and hereditarily altered fixings. The enhancement is likewise produced in a FDA-enrolled office. Notwithstanding, the organization alerts that St. John's wort could cause incidental effects when taken in enormous portions. That is the reason they prescribe conversing with your PCP and adhering to the prescribed measurement guidelines to stay away from entanglements with Remind Solution.

 New and Natural Ingredients: The producers of Remind Solution guarantee to have utilized "the freshest and best regular fixings accessible" while defining the enhancement.

 The organization asserts that individuals of any age have encountered benefits in the wake of taking Remind Solution. The organization guarantees that it has done something amazing for people in their 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s, and 70s.

 Remind Solution Ingredients

 Remind Solution contains the absolute most famous intellectual help fixings accessible today, including conspicuous names like Bacopa monnieri remove and lesser-realized mixtures like St. John's wort.

 Here is a short outline of every fixing in Remind Solution and how it seems to function:

 St. John's Wort: St. John's wort is a plant that fills in nature. It's been utilized for quite a long time for emotional well-being and wellbeing. In Europe, some clinical experts even recommend St. John's wort for misery, and studies have approved St. John's wort's consequences for sadness and other disposition problems. St. John's wort contains dynamic fixings like hyperforin connected to its intellectual advantages.

 L-Glutamine: Glutamine is an amino corrosive. Like other amino acids, glutamine is pivotal for blending protein in the human body. Your body produces glutamine all alone. You can likewise get glutamine from food. Numerous competitors take L-glutamine enhancements to invigorate the body and brain before the athletic presentation. L-glutamine can likewise be found in intellectual enhancements and nootropics.

 Phosphatidylserine: Phosphatidylserine is a greasy substance created in the body. It covers and secures each cell in the body. It likewise assumes a part in coagulating capacity. It's fundamental for the legitimate working of nerve cells inside the mind, and it could assist with communicating messages between nerve cells in your cerebrum. Today, phosphatidylserine is most popular for its impacts on discernment, which is the reason it's found in numerous nootropic supplements and intellectual guides sold on the web.

 Bacopa Monnieri: Bacopa monnieri extricate has been connected to cognizance upgrading impacts in different examinations, including worked on engine learning and memory. It's been customarily utilized in Ayurvedic medication for quite a long time for generally wellbeing and health. Today, studies have shown that plant concentrate can uphold mind work, center, stress, tension, and different parts of intellectual wellbeing. A few examinations have connected bacopa monnieri to anticancer properties, irritation, circulatory strain, and different impacts.

 Ginkgo Biloba: Ginkgo biloba, otherwise called maidenhair, is a tree local for China. The tree remove has been utilized for centuries for medication, and it's famous in customary Chinese medication. Today, concentrates on show that ginkgo Biloba could affect comprehension by further developing blood stream to the cerebrum. That is additionally why the substance seems to soothe circulatory issues, including vascular dementia and leg torment. Ginkgo biloba comes from one of the most established living tree species. A few researchers even accept ginkgo Biloba is the main enduring individual from an antiquated request of plants, which is the reason it's been known as a living fossil.

 Different Ingredients: Remind Solution likewise contains N-acetyl L-carnitine (NALC or NAC), vinpocetine, and Huperzine A, which can all be found in other nootropic supplements for their effects on insight, memory, cerebrum work, and different parts of mental health.

 Remind Solution Ingredients Label

 The producers of Remind Solution distribute the full rundown of fixings and measurements forthright, making it simple to contrast the enhancement with other nootropics sold online today – and to logical investigations.

 In general, Remind Solution contains a lot of well known nootropic fixings, including fixings that have been demonstrated to work in different examinations. In any case, the doses are shockingly powerless given the exorbitant cost of the enhancement.

 The full rundown of fixings in Remind Solution incorporates:

 250mg of St. John's wort

 150mg of L-glutamine

 125mg of phosphatidylserine

 120mg of Bacopa monnieri separate

 50mg of ginkgo Biloba

 50mg of N-acetyl L-carnitine

 2mg of vinpocetine

 10mcg of Huperzine-A

  Logical Evidence for Remind Solution

 The Remind Solution deals page highlights 40+ references supporting the fixings inside Remind Solution. Generally, the enhancement contains a lot of demonstrated nootropic fixings, including fixings connected to intellectual advantages in different examinations. Be that as it may, a significant number of the dosages appear lower than the portions utilized in contending enhancements and studies.

 The greatest fixing in Remind Solution is St. John's wort, a plant extricate utilized for quite a long time for wellbeing and health purposes. Today, numerous nootropic supplements use St. John's wort for its implied intellectual impacts. In this 2016 audit, specialists investigated 35 examinations and presumed that St. John's wort diminished gentle to direct wretchedness manifestations in excess of a fake treatment. A few examinations discovered St. John's wort had comparable viability to remedy antidepressants. 

                                 (EXCEPTIONAL DISCOUNT PROMO)

#Remind Solution #Remind Solution reviews #Remind Solution price #remind solution benefits #Remind Solution Natural