Illustration by Tracy Worrall

4 min read3 hr

Lessons in political science. This week: tribal politics

Advertisement

Ten years, huh? Turns out time really does fly when you’re having fun. There is no more fun way to mark – celebrate? commiserate? (delete as applicable) – the 10th anniversary of the Brexit referendum than by reading Sara Hobolt and James Tilley’s excellent new book, Tribal Politics: How Brexit Divided Britain. It’s a model of social science, packed with data, yet clearly written, and enlivened by a string of digs at the wackier side of the last decade: terrible Brexit novels, conspiracy theories about pencils at polling stations, that Cambridge economist who turned up for a departmental meeting naked – with “Brexit Leaves Britain Naked” written across her breasts – and much more.

The book charts how the process of Brexit – both the referendum and the years of joy that followed – created two distinct political tribes in Britain. These tribes did not exist in any meaningful form prior to 2016, yet the referendum forced people to pick a side, even people who might previously have been relatively lukewarm one way or the other, and then what we might euphemistically call the lack of plain sailing thereafter helped reinforce those identities, creating ingroups (us: clever, honest, open-minded) and outgroups (them: selfish, hypocritical, closed-minded).

Advertisement

For most of the period since the referendum, more people saw themselves as remainers or leavers than supporters of all the political parties combined. And while the extent of this identity has dipped a little recently, its intensity has not. To quote the example the authors give: while most Lib Dem supporters say their identity is “not very important” to them (you can insert your own joke here), those who see themselves as remainers and leavers say that identity is “very important”. Even 10 years on, majorities of remainers and leavers still say “we” when talking about their side.

We often think that Americans are politically divided, but discrimination by one Brexit tribe against the other is as, or more, widespread than partisan discrimination by Democrats and Republicans. Almost all of this is pretty symmetrical, by the way. Although there are some differences – remainers being slightly worse than leavers – these are outweighed by the similarities. For the most part, your lot are just as bad as their lot.

From a 200-plus-page data-heavy book, containing 30 tables and over 40 graphs, it’s difficult to pull out individual highlights, but if I have a favourite graph – and I am the sort of person to have a favourite graph – then it is Figure 7.5, which tracks people’s attitudes on the state of the economy. The beauty with this one is that it reports the attitudes held by the same people both before and after the referendum. From it, we know that back in 2014, 2015 and 2016 those individuals who went on to become leavers and remainers felt almost identically about how well the economy was doing. Yet as soon as the referendum result was announced, a gap opened up, largely as a result of remainers suddenly thinking everything was going to pot, and that gap has persisted since. The same thing is even true when people were talking about their own finances; after the referendum, remainers suddenly felt personally poorer, while leavers felt richer, even though at that point nothing very much had changed either way. Partisanship is, as the saying goes, a hell of a drug.

A new paper in Political Behavior finds a similar pattern in the US with Tesla. Pre-2024, there was relatively little difference between the way Democrats and Republicans saw the car. Yet after Elon Musk threw in his lot with Donald Trump in 2024, and then led Doge, views began to diverge across different criteria: likelihood to buy, perceptions of quality, reputation, whether there was a buzz about it, and so on. The cars didn’t change, but how Americans saw them did, in ways that were overwhelmingly driven by their party loyalties. 

Advertisement

Further reading: S Hobolt and J Tilley, Tribal Politics: How Brexit Divided Britain (2026); K Endres et al, Tesla Takedown: Brand Politicization and Partisan Consumerism in the Trump Era, Political Behavior (2026)

Source link

Long before we knew her for the likes of Mamma Mia!, Mank and The Dropout, Amanda Seyfried found international fame playing Karen in the 2004 teen comedy Mean Girls, and witnessed her co-star Lindsay Lohan’s struggles in the industry up close.

Opening up about her friendship with Lindsay in a new British GQ interview, Amanda recalled how, although they were the same age when they appeared together in the Tina Fey-penned movie, the level of attention they received was nowhere near equal.

“[I] wasn’t working at that level,” she said. “The spotlight was on her, no matter what she did.”

Amanda said she saw in real time how Lindsay went from being Hollywood’s hottest star to having the tabloids praying for her downfall.

Advertisement

Michael Gibson/Paramount/Kobal/Shutterstock

“The outsized bashing is ugly,” said Amanda. “It’s like, a fear of mine. I would not want to be spotlit for being infamous in any way.”

During the same GQ article, Lindsay spoke fondly of the Oscar nominee, opening up about their continued friendship.

“We’ve stayed close because there’s genuine trust and respect between us,” the Freaky Friday actor claimed. “What started as shared experience has grown into a meaningful friendship over time.

“Now we talk more about life, motherhood and our families. She’s always someone I can rely on. That consistency is rare and something I really cherish.”

Advertisement

Although Amanda may have been mostly unscathed from the press during the era of paparazzi upskirting starlets and tabloids plotting the downfall of young women, it wasn’t because she didn’t go out clubbing.

“Did I find myself at Val Kilmer’s house one night at 1am with [Mean Girls co-stars] Daniel Franzese and Jonathan Bennett? Did I find myself there with them in the pool? I was 18 and I had just moved to LA and we had gone to a screening of Reefer Madness. I was at Val Kilmer’s house – I don’t even remember meeting him, but I was at his house,” she recalled about her “ridiculous” 20s.

On the red carpet of the 2024 Mean Girls musical adaptation, Lindsay also sang the praises of her 2004 co-stars Amanda and Lacey Chabert, who played Gretchen Wieners.

“I love Amanda and she’s done so well with her career,” Lindsay said. “She’s such a great actress and Lacey as well. We’re good friends and that’s what matters most.”

Source link

Rihanna Kelver, a transgender woman in Wyoming, is facing felony charges for pulling a weapon to defend herself after being subject to homophobic and transphobic slurs. Slate magazine reported that Kelver was about to end a work shift when several men on the street began yelling slurs at her. Then:

Moments later, according to court testimony and surveillance footage, the man shoved Kelver to the ground hard enough to injure her tailbone.

Kelver responded by drawing a pistol from her bag, chambering a round, and pointing the weapon at the man who had pushed her. She kept the safety on and never fired. The man and his companions retreated.

However, the man who shoved Kelver and began the confrontation has not been charged. But, Kelver is now facing charges of aggravated assault and possession of a deadly weapon with unlawful intent. If found guilty, she could face up to 15 years in prison.

For a nation as heavily invested in stand-your-ground as the US, Rihanna’s fight in court has become one that shows the systemic homophobia and transphobia in the justice system.

Kelver and ‘stand your ground’

Kelve’s arrest seemingly contradicts the Wyoming “Stand your ground” law, permitting an individual the right to defend themselves. In spite of the evidence presented, the man who assaulted her, (referred to as Durham) hasn’t faced a single charge. Kelver has had to leave her job due to her charges and faces an arraignment on the 24th of June 2026.

Many LGBTQ+ news and advocacy platforms have reported on her case, highlighting the unfairness and hypocrisy of the situation. They point out the irony that in a nation so proud of it’s citizen’s ability to arm themselves, the moment a trans person uses it against bigotry, it is criminalized. As Slate concluded:

Kelver’s experience also fits a long and troubling history of transgender people being punished for their acts of survival.

Kelver’s case can be used as a clear example of the double standards applied to queer and specifically trans people in the justice system. And for the queer community it’s seen as evidence of how queer people are not protected by the law to the same standards as others.

The system is not broken

Kelver’s arrest is not a new phenomenon but instead just the latest in a repeated history of LGBTQ+ individuals being punished for defending themselves. In 2014 CeCe McDonald was arrested and almost faced 40 years in prison after defending herself against a group of white people screaming racist and transphobic remarks and then physically assaulting her. In 2011 Ky Peterson was arrested and convicted for murdering his rapist and was only released after 9 years of imprisonment. These two examples are also notable because they involved Black trans people. The US justice system is not only queerphobic and transphobic, but deeply racist and anti-Black.  There is a fundamental ideology within the justice system itself to not only punish marginalized individuals for protecting themselves, but actively working to criminalize those same communities.

Activist Peter Gelderloos wrote on Truthout:

When transgender or queer people defend themselves from such violence, the law usually steps in to pick up where the vigilantes left off… White people who attack people of color who are crossing borders or transgressing “socially accepted” ways of behavior are defending their “selves” as those selves exist within society (and there is no other kind of self). Heterosexual people and cis-gendered people are defending those white heteronormative persons’ sense of self.

Despite LGBTQ+ people and people of colour being far more vulnerable to violent acts of hate, we are routinely punished for defending ourselves. And that is by design.

This is due to these systems of ‘justice’ being built out of the very systems that perpetuate our communities marginalization. Institutionalized ‘justice’ becomes a means of preserving a white supremacist and queerphobic hierarchy. When most self-defense laws were formed amongst Western countries, they wasn’t made with the majority of the population in mind. Like many laws, they were made to benefit a small privileged group, whilst purposely criminalising minorities for defending themselves from attack.

This is the system working as intended.

The death of rainbow capitalism

The arrest of Rihanna Kelver and the perpetuation of queer and marginalized injustice adds to a growing sentiment within the queer community. As we reach the middle of Pride month, many in the community have pointed out a noticeable decrease in the typical corporate advertising and promoting. Whereas before, companies would share posts, change logos and create merchandise, it has been replaced by rather abrupt silence.

Corporations tendencies during pride were referred to as “rainbow capitalism”, and was commonly met with annoyance by the queer community. It was generally understood that these gestures weren’t actual indicators of support but a means to seem progressive in order to drive more profits. However whilst the dramatic absence of rainbow capitalism is celebrated by some, it is seen as a grim indicator by others.

Cases like Kelver’s and lack of corporate support during pride, for some in the community isn’t just an indicator of progressive stagnation but in fact a regression. Capitalism may not indicate morality but it can reflect our culture. And with the many recent events happening across the world, it is clear for queer communities that there is a resurgence in far-right ideology. Rolling back queer rights is rapidly gaining popularity.

Pride is resistance

Of course, none of this is to argue that corporations should engage in pinkwashing during pride month. Instead, the death of rainbow capitalism is a sign that neoliberal capitalism has found that it is no longer necessary to pay lip service to queer rights. That, in turn, can be explained by the vicious bigotry from both the UK and US administrations who have normalised the creeping rise of transphobia.

Despite Pride this year possibly highlighting the ways culture has started to regress, it also represents our perseverance as a community. The reason Pride month exists today is due to the fighting and resistance of our queer forebears. Just as Rihanna Kelver herself is still fighting the legal battle for her right to protect herself, we as community must keep fighting and uplifting each other against this bigoted system.

Featured image via Getty/Heather Diehl

By Olaitan Mos-Shogbamimu

Source link

Source link

Elon Musk — the seig-heiling owner of X — has become the world’s first trillionaire. As we’ll explain, he’s achieved this by leveraging his power, influence and shamelessness to prove that capitalism is every bit as rotten as we said it is.

However, if you ask one of the many thoughtless establishment journalists out there how he became so wealthy, they’ll tell you ‘Elon gets lots of money because he makes rockets good‘.

Amid all the predictable seething jealousy and bitter resentment to this news, I’d like to congratulate @elonmusk on an astounding achievement. He’s got there by being the most driven, creative, hard-working and ambitious business genius in history. Salut, Elon! pic.twitter.com/MmrygoJfwc

— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 13, 2026

Advertisement

In turn, we’d like to congratulate Piers Morgan for fitting Musk’s entire boot in his mouth.

He got here by being the most hard-working suck-up in the entire Western media.

Salut, Piers! 

Musk games the market

First, we should explain how Elon Musk became a trillionaire.

Musk’s wealth just exploded because he’s taken SpaceX from a private company to a public one. By SpaceX, we mean the three companies that make up SpaceX, which are:

• SpaceX: The intergalactic company famous for its exploding rockets (what they call “rapid unscheduled disassemblies“)
• StarLink: The satellite internet company
• Grok AI: The AI model which is mostly localised to X (and which notoriously spent several weeks producing revenge porn and child sexual abuse material before government’s demanded Musk stop it)

Of the three companies:

• SpaceX is not profitable.
• StarLink is profitable.
• Grok AI is really not profitable.

SpaceX could be profitable in the future, as long as we keep finding new reasons to send thousands of rockets into space. StarLink could remain profitable, but the market for satellite internet is limited to customers who:

• Can’t access broadband
• Can pay for fancy satellite internet

Grok AI will probably never be profitable. OpenAI and Anthropic are both doing better than Grok, and it looks like they have no realistic path towards profitability either. The problem is AI costs so much to run that when you charge companies an honest price (instead of subsidising the cost with billionaire investor money) they abandon the product.

NEW: Uber is reportedly capping employee use of AI vibe-coding tools at $1,500 per month after blowing through its AI budget.

— Polymarket (@Polymarket) June 2, 2026

Musk and his company losses

Right, so SpaceX is not what you’d call a profitable company. In fact, it made a $4.9 billion loss last year. But despite this, when it went public, it achieved a valuation of $2 trillion.

This is the largest Initial Public Offering (IPO) of all time. On paper, it means SpaceX is more valuable than most companies which actually make money. If you’re confused that isn’t because you’re not getting it; it’s because it doesn’t make sense. It also gets worse.

To be fair to Musk, he does have a plan to make his company profitable, and that plan is data centres in space. The problem is that these data centres would almost certainly be more expensive than the terrestrial ones. They may also be physically impossible to build at scale.

Think physics before you believe in the SpaceX lies. Each data center averages 10 million pounds of servers, imagine halling multiple data centers into space.
Data centers use millions of gallons of water for cooling. Vacuum of space is terrible for cooling. https://t.co/8Hy3shaby1 pic.twitter.com/tsQQAjvkDk

— MrsDoubtFire (@MrsDoubtFireSF) June 12, 2026

Who could have guessed it would be less cost-effective to build something in space? Good lord.

And this isn’t the first time Musk has promised the impossible. There’s a site that tracks his broken promises called elonmusk.today. Examples include:

• 1,645 days since Elon Musk said he would take carbon out of the air and use it for rocket fuel
• 1,939 days since Elon Musk promised Starlink customers their speed would double by the end of 2021
• 2,166 days since Elon Musk said that people who get brain surgery from him could pay for it with augmented brain powers
• 2,327 days since Elon Musk advised consumers that Teslas can safely function as a boat for short periods of time
• 2,611 days since Elon Musk said there will be a million fully autonomous Tesla robotaxis in a year
• 2,714 days since Elon Musk said the new Roadster will use rocket technology that will allow it to fly
• 2,824 days since Elon Musk said SpaceX would probably build a base on Mars by 2028

Why does Musk make such wild claims? Almost certainly because doing so draws attention away from the fact that his companies have been mostly unprofitable, and because the pie-in-the-sky promises cause the value of his companies to rise.

How does this keep happening?

As you can see, it’s both quantifiable and widely understood that Musk’s companies are valued way above their actual — you know — value.

So why do investors keep falling for it?

Simply incredible. Elon has mastered the art of creating valuable companies that don’t actually make money. https://t.co/HYJrHduvoJ

— D (@_Unknown_D_) June 12, 2026

There are two things to bear in mind: the first is why wouldn’t they keep falling for it? In the short term, their stocks become more valuable. In the long term, well, nobody is thinking about the long term.

The other thing to be aware of is that a lot of this stuff is now algorithmic.

For example, the Chosun Daily reported:

Algorithmic trading programs that use automated pre-set trading instructions to execute orders have recently been blamed for the sharp fluctuations in global stock markets. While algorithmic trading programs offer the advantage of buying and selling assets without human intervention, they also have the drawback of triggering massive sell-offs whenever the set conditions are met, increasing market volatility.

This works in the opposite direction too. What this means is that when Musk promises the world’s first self-driving flying car, the algorithms auto-buy Tesla stock. As Chosun Daily added:

Investment bank Goldman Sachs estimated that algorithmic trading accounted for about 60% to 70% of all trades in the U.S. in 2016. Experts believe this figure has now risen to 70% to 80%.

We may not live in the Matrix, but we definitely live in a matrix.

Client media

Now that we’ve explained what the establishment media is mostly ignoring, we can gawp at some of the wretched client journalists who are defending Musk’s ‘success’.

Andrew Neil led the charge on this front, asking “What difference does it make?” if one man’s wealth is higher than the GDP of most countries.

This is one case where the public can see with their own eyes that this shit sucks. They don’t have to be told the Nazi zillionaire is bad for them and for the species, and no amount of behaving like a cunt on the internet is going to change that. pic.twitter.com/DGBXf48zpF

— Flying_Rodent (@flying_rodent) June 13, 2026

Imagine the worst person you know, and then imagine that they had more money to play around with than Israel spends in a year. Obviously, this would not end well.

And we’ve  seen what Musk uses his wealth to achieve.

The influence campaign didn’t stop there either, as the Canary reported, and many pointed out:

With his inordinate wealth he is bolstering the far right in my country – who support austerity politics, tax cuts for the wealthy, oppose public investment, brexit and aims to deport people which will cause major disturbances to our public services.

This directly affects my… https://t.co/PCL9l9yP0k

— JimmyTheGiant (@jimthegiant) June 12, 2026

Advertisement

He used his wealth to buy a whole ass social media platform to start a race war https://t.co/14l8nI5MDI

— NJ (@NoJusticeMTG) June 12, 2026

Musk also uses X to boost his ideological bedfellows (which include Nazis).

It is however the only social media that pays politicians and journalists based on whether they agree with his reactionary views, not whether people like their content. Sometimes tens of thousands of dollars. Unaccounted. https://t.co/o7AsW8gCTV

— Alonso Gurmendi (@Alonso_GD) June 13, 2026

Human haemorrhoid, Neil, also did the meme:

Of course Andrew is now doing the meme pic.twitter.com/Ew4ulxgdJH

— NFT Hibou (@NFT_Hibou) June 13, 2026

Columnist and ex-prime minister, Boris Johnson, got in on the action too.

'Ego-driven lust' drives capitalism says Boris Johnson, who knows zilch about business, never understood it as a journalist, as a Mayor or as PM. He is simply wrong – in media ego sometimes does come first; BUT in business school, in boardrooms, in rooms where it happens, ego is… pic.twitter.com/oINZ7VwCGr

— David Yelland (@davidyelland) June 13, 2026

This is fine, if you’re idea of success is a series of obscenely overvalued companies that rely on government handouts while failing to deliver on most of their promises.

It’s not for nothing that Chinese electric vehicles are now more advanced and cheaper than Teslas. Those companies also benefit from state money, but said money is directed into research and development — not into inflating the ego of the world’s most insecure nerd.

Julia Hartley-Brewer had this to say:

Why don't you set up a business making rockets, electric cars and AI, Lewis? It's obviously so easy to do, anyone can do it. https://t.co/7XRtcHT5lB

— Julia Hartley-Brewer (@JuliaHB1) June 12, 2026

Advertisement

The problem? Musk has never designed or built any of his products. He just profited from those who did.

This literally shows workers doing all the work lol https://t.co/VsnzAA9ZmK

— polen (@polen_ball) June 14, 2026

Advertisement

We also don’t have to go back that far to see an example of space travel being pursued for the sake of exploration over ego.

“Bernie, your socialism would never allow a SpaceX to be built.”

Hey Bill, who got man to the moon? Was it the government or the private sector? https://t.co/mrBYaXZ4vC

Advertisement

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) June 13, 2026

Okay, so the space race did happen to boost America’s ego, but you get the point.

Perhaps the worst defence was this:

Elon literally owns this site, so every time he uses it, with his 240m followers, he is working. https://t.co/I2qelyZ8L7

— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) June 13, 2026

The great IPO swindle

There’s another way Musk has used his great wealth to disadvantage the broader public that we’ve not covered yet.

SpaceX isn’t just being listed on various stock exchanges; it’s being fast-tracked. What this means is that various stock-buying schemes like 401(k) retirement plans will automatically buy SpaceX stock.

Usually, a company has to be publicly available for a year to demonstrate its value is legitimate. SpaceX, however, will wait a mere five days in some instances.

SHOCKER: S&P 500 will NOT fast track SpaceX. So it will take AT LEAST a year, probably more. This is wild considering every other big boy index is 5-15 days. This could create significant return dispersion bt 'passive' indexes. Choose wisely. https://t.co/EG7R5IfX0u

— Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) June 4, 2026

Advertisement

In other words, Musk has used his influence to ensure as many ordinary people as possible buy shares in his unprofitable business. If the business remains unprofitable, these same ordinary people who will lose out.

Top to bottom misery

The other thing to note about Musk having so much money is that it doesn’t even make him happy.

Hasan Piker noted:

Elon Musk is a fucking failure and yet in spite of his failures, because he happened to be at the right place at the right time, he has failed upwards with his endless wealth. He’s a horrible person, an unbelievably insecure person, and yet he’s the richest person on the planet. We know he doesn’t fucking work hard because he Tweets all the goddamn time.

We live in a society that is based on wealth accumulation, and yet the man who’s accumulated more than anyone is the most miserable person on the planet.

Maybe it’s time to rethink this capitalism malarkey?

Featured image via Spencer Platt/ Hoda Davaine / Hollie Adams/ Getty Images

By Willem Moore

Source link

Source link

Source link

On 14 June, the US celebrated its 250th anniversary with a UFC match organised by Donald Trump/ While this was a notably high-energy event, it clearly wasn’t high-energy-enough for Sleepy Don:

BREAKING: DONALD TRUMP HAS FALLEN ASLEEP AT HIS 80TH BIRTHDAY UFC FREEDOM 250 EVENT. pic.twitter.com/Q7hdbDWQOW

— CALL TO ACTIVISM (@CalltoActivism) June 15, 2026

Trump corruption celebration

This is how the America 250 event described itself:

On July 4, 2026, our nation will commemorate and celebrate the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The journey toward this historic milestone is an opportunity to pause and reflect on our nation’s past, honor the contributions of all Americans, and look ahead toward the future we want to create for the next generation and beyond.

As you’ll see, there wasn’t much ‘honourable reflection’ going on.

America 250 was a real ‘who’s who’ of ‘who’s in Trump’s rolodex’:

This isn't a celebration of America 250. This is corruption on full display on the White House lawn:

Trump owns shares in both UFC and Paramount

UFC CEO Dana White donated $1 million to a pro-Trump super PAC

One of the event's sponsors donated $35 million to MAGA, Inc. https://t.co/HBDtmfRDXD

— Andy Kim (@AndyKimNJ) June 15, 2026

Over the past few days, Americans have been posting pictures of the Anniversary preparations in disbelief:

This morning at the White House… pic.twitter.com/Sj2gWF63zM

— Molly Ploofkins (@Mollyploofkins) June 13, 2026

On the one hand, Donald Trump has definitely pushed what’s considered to be ‘normal’ presidential behaviour:

One day I hope MAGA supporters can ADMIT if Barack Hussien Obama had done anything remotely close to this, we’d still be hearing about it today pic.twitter.com/IbEyLGGGtP

— Chef Anthony Thomas (@ChefAnthonyDC) June 13, 2026

On the other, this circus is more in keeping with how the rest of the world views America.

The US is a violent and vulgar nation that gets off on its own displays of power. Speaking of which:

They have turned the Lincoln Memorial into white fucking trash https://t.co/jWOyjRGkHW

— Jamie Bonkiewicz (@JamieBonkiewicz) June 13, 2026

Goodness gracious, imagine an act of violence being committed in the United States of America!? Well I never, etc.

At the event itself, Trump and UFC CEO Dana White walked out of the Oval Office as part of their big entrance:

this is so white trash i'm sorry https://t.co/NV5oz38BB3

— Keith Edwards (@keithedwards) June 15, 2026

Trump already looked exhausted at this point. This isn’t that surprising, of course, because Trump is a very old man, and he holds what should be one of the most stressful jobs in the world. The fact that he’s awake for even part of the day is impressive.

None of this is to compliment to him, by the way. Really, we’re arguing that America should stop simply electing the oldest man who’s willing to run.

Crypto Land

The event itself included advertisements for Trump’s crypto coin:

The President of the United States is promoting his own crypto coin at a UFC fight being held in front of the White House. That is a real sentence. What are we doing. https://t.co/rHjut2wVks

— 𝓔𝓶 ♡ (@emkenobi) June 15, 2026

If you’re considering investing in Trump Coin, we suggest you consult with a financial adviser:

The TRUMP meme coin generated about $616 million for the Trump family, while buyers lost more than $700 million, according to Reuters' estimates.

The coin has dropped 97% from its January 2025 peak

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) June 14, 2026

Surprise! https://t.co/2qBAw5tMQ0

— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) June 14, 2026

Of course, if you fought at the event, you didn’t really have a choice:

The official broadcast for Trump's UFC fight announces that fighters will be paid in crypto from the Trump family's crypto company pic.twitter.com/IB8r1sxWyt

— FactPost (@factpostnews) June 15, 2026

If you’re feeling sorry for the fighters, be aware that you shouldn’t feel sorry for all of them:

OMG. A fighter just declared “Michelle Obama is a man” on the White House lawn as Joe Rogan chuckles.

Tonight is a DISGRACE to our country, not a celebration. pic.twitter.com/VdtMtA5UKa

— CALL TO ACTIVISM (@CalltoActivism) June 15, 2026

Here’s the same guy a day beforehand stumbling around drunk and spitting up on himself:

This disgusting, ugly sub-human had the audacity to call Michelle Obama a man at the UFC Freedom 250 shit fest. pic.twitter.com/4wNaKVB3G4

— ᗰᗩƳᖇᗩ (@LePapillonBlu2) June 15, 2026

You ready to start chanting “USA! USA!” yet?

Donald Trump wasn’t the only Trump generating controversy, anyway. His son Eric was exposed by a UFC fighter for asking if any of the fights were ‘rigged’:

BREAKING: Eric Trump BUSTED for trying to rig a UFC bet at the White House over DMs pic.twitter.com/Ba7PWgH2NQ

— Right Wing Cope (@RightWingCope) June 14, 2026

Imagine having so much going for you and still relying on skullduggery to get ahead.

This is America

Americans need to understand something: the US isn’t a nation of violence and scammery because Trump is president – it’s the reverse. He is not the poison itself but the poison being drawn to the surface. And although you can vote him out in 2028, you’re only going to end up with someone far, far worse if you don’t address the underlying disparity which allows men like Trump to thrive.

Featured image via Pool (Getty Images)

By Willem Moore

Source link

New defence secretary Dan Jarvis leaves 10 Downing Street.

Source link

On Monday 15 June, the Spycops inquiry resumes and campaigners will be looking for answers. Tranche 3 Phase 3 of the Undercover Policing Inquiry (UCPI) is beginning. And it’ll be a crucial stage in the investigation into the Metropolitan police’s Special Demonstration Squad (SDS).

The Inquiry has heard evidence from former undercover officers and many of those whose groups, campaigns and personal lives they infiltrated. It’s now turning its attention to the senior officers and government departments who authorised, supervised and oversaw these operations.

For many of those affected, this phase goes to the heart of the Inquiry. The key question is no longer what spycops did. It’s who knew? Who approved? Who benefited from the intelligence on political campaigners and community organisations? And who helped conceal the truth?

Over the coming weeks the Inquiry will hear evidence from SDS managers, senior Special Branch officers and former Met leaders, including former commissioner Paul Condon.

Witnesses will be questioned about how undercover political policing was managed, what information was passed up the chain of command and why these operations were allowed to happen at all.

A spokesperson for the Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance said:

For years the public were told that undercover policing targeted serious criminals and threats to public safety. The evidence heard by this Inquiry has exposed a very different reality. Secret political policing units infiltrated environmental groups, anti-racist organisations, trade unions, anti-war movements and community organisations.

Officers stole the identities of dead children, formed deceptive intimate relationships, infiltrated grieving families seeking justice and gathered intelligence on thousands of people engaged in legitimate political activity.

This phase is about accountability. Who authorised these deployments and how the public and the courts were repeatedly misled about the true nature of these operations. Senior managers and commanders must finally explain how they allowed this system of political policing to continue for decades.

Spycops must come clean

A spokesperson for Police Spies Out of Lives said:

SDS managers can begin to restore public trust by giving open and honest evidence to the Inquiry. Most former officers have refused to do that, deepening the harm to those who were spied on. So far, there has been no real remorse for the abuses they enabled and oversaw.

Evidence so far has demonstrated that these operations weren’t just isolated misconduct by a few rogue officers. Instead, the Inquiry has revealed a system of abusive political policing which senior officers and government officials knew about and supported.

In his 2023 Interim Report, Spycops Inquiry chair John Mitting concluded that the SDS should have come to a rapid end in the early 1970s.

These hearings begin at a time when surveillance powers are once again expanding.

On 8 June, the government announced it was demanding Apple and Google to introduce what amounts to AI spyware able to monitor users’ messages and photos directly on smartphones and tablets, threatening legislation if the global tech giants do not comply.

Additionally the government launched PoliceAI, a national programme to accelerate the deployment of AI throughout policing in England and Wales.

These moves require urgent and robust democratic scrutiny.

A spokesperson for the Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance said:

The central lesson of the Spycops scandal is that surveillance powers are rarely used only for the purposes originally claimed.

At a time when AI is being embedded throughout policing and ministers are demanding monitoring technology be built into personal devices, the public should remember the lessons of Britain’s political policing scandal.

The history being examined by this Inquiry is not simply about the past. It is a warning for the future.

Inquiry hearings begin on Monday 15 June and will continue throughout the summer.

A timetable of those due to give evidence is here.

Sessions are open to the public and will take place at the IDRC, St Paul’s Square, London EC4Y 1EU. Or you can follow live proceedings on YouTube (broadcast with a 15 minute delay for security reasons).

Featured image via Peter Macdiarmid / Getty Images

By The Canary

Source link