What if Artificial General Intelligence means that we can produce huge amounts of energy with no carbon emissions? There would then no longer need to be a debate about Net Zero Madness, or North Sea Oil. No longer an incentive for me to spread misinformation about climate change. Racial conflict could be rendered irrelevant by instant genetic engineering (half the population is a shade of green blue, everyone has an IQ of 200). Food could become super-abundant, as could most earthen pleasures (what if the sex-robots obviate inceldom?) A more extreme version of the long 1990s. Like playing Minecraft on creative mode, forever.

For a polemicist this seems like a very dull world in which to live. Indeed I am reminded of a childhood visit to what was then known as Currys (before it was merged with PC World). I asked my mother if we would ever have replicators like in Star Trek (which can print next to infinite food/clothing etc from energy), to which she said she would risk her life smashing it up if such a tool was to exist. Where is the competition if there are no constraints? Why bother to do anything at all? And in the present, the very stupidest thing you could do if we are about to enter hyper-abundance is write millions of words expressing soon-to-be archaic bigotries. What if the cybernetic meadows are to be watered with our blood? It would be like having some inkling that the British army is beginning to mobilise against Russia and writing longer and longer pro-Putin screeds in response (without fleeing the country).

I suppose this is why I am emotionally drawn to Orlowski’s well evidenced case that Artificial Intelligence is a scam and that the bubble is soon to burst. One need only skim through reports into the uptake of medical AI tools in the NHS to understand that this is not becoming the panacea which saves the various tentacles of the Welfare State from An Ageing Population. Nonetheless we cannot universally wave away the ‘lived experience’ of many professionals who say that they are preparing themselves for a lifetime of unemployment after seeing what the latest models are capable of, and it is difficult to see how any other outcome could be achieved politically. In my ideal world different nation states would agree that AI should be capable of removing women’s clothing from photographs and it would be left at that, but no doubt the Chinese will secretly keep driving towards Han supremacy to avenge all of the bleaching.

On the other side of the AI ledger is the life of Demis Hassabis. Hassabis is a deeply admirable individual, a child genius born to a down-at-heel family in North London, Hassabis bought a ZX Spectrum and learned how to code whilst becoming a chess champion. He went from Grammar school to Cambridge – but before he went onto further education spent a year working for a gaming studio called Bullfrod Productions.

Peter Molyneux is to the video games industry what Marco Pierre White is to Television cooks, anybody who has done anything revolutionary in the last twenty years in gaming has passed through one of his companies. Media Molecule, the studio which created LittleBigPlanet was founded by employees from Lionhead (a rebrand of Bullfrog). Steve Jackson, who co-founded the Games Workshop also passed through Bullfrog. But the most successful of his proteges is undoubtedly Demis Hassabis. Hassabis first when to Bullfrog around the age of fifteen to start work on programming artificial intelligence for the game Populous II. Hassabis was sixteen when he co-lead, with Molyneux, on Bullfrog’s production of Theme Park. Theme Park was a simulator which presaged many of the construction games you may be more familiar with like Rollercoaster Tycoon introducing mechanics like happiness and pricing through machine learning.

After completing University Hassabis returned Lionhead is most famous for the Fable game series (now being remade by Playground), which was an enjoyably chummy medieval RPG, but its groundbreaking title came earlier, in 2001 with the release of black & White.

black & White was a God game (where the player is a deity controlling villagers), it’s innovation was to introduce something called the Creature – an animal which would grow throughout the game - whom the player would raise from birth. Hassabis built the Creature to develop from how the player interacted with through reinforcement learning, responding to praise and punishment (actions like being slapped) to eventually synthesise its own actions and moral alignment. The Creature was able to internalise lessons (e.g eating villagers will lead to a slap) and apply it to other situations (setting fires), the Creature would therefore learn over time how to avoid displeasing you. A system which is similar to the training of modern Large Language Models (Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback) and in a sense how they operate at consumer products (learning how to please and avoid displeasing users).

Read more

Late August in the Mediterranean, and a 30 minute coach ride east of Malta International Airport, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, is waiting for a car…

Chapter 2

And wait he very much did (“So sorry poppet totally snowed under here - send location and ill get someone to pick you up.”) It’s 41 degrees today and by the time Alli’s purple Fiat 500 made an appearance, all the blood in Starmer’s head had turned to builder’s tea. He’d lost the strength for the usual ‘Oh no, honestly - don’t’ when the driver moved to haul his luggage into the boot, and cut a beeline for the air-con - opting for the passenger seat, inexplicably.

Read more

Read more

✨Everything happens for a reason✨

The gravest of theological thinkers have heard this statement and thought, well, what can I say to refute this? ‘Checkmate, mate’. Anything else would be refuting the…

Read more

The Conservative Party is not just a collection of comedy butlers and closeted fetishists. True it might be that the last brain cells left CCHQ sometime before 7/7 but the Party maintains extensive l…

Read more

The British Monarchy is entering a vulnerable phase akin to the early 1990s. Ipsos polling from the start of the year shows that only 37% of British people now think we would be worse off if we abolished the monarchy, numbers we last saw in the mid 1990s (in 1992 it fell to 37%). By comparison in 2012 in the lead-up to the Diamond Jubilee this figure was 67%.

This fall has been driven as it was in the 1990s by exposure of the Royal family’s venal degeneracy. In the 2020s this has been caused by Andrew’s hanky panky and his mother’s decision to cover for him. In the early 1990s it was Royal philandering. 1992, the annus horribilis, was the year that Diana published a book discussing Charles’s with Camilla Parker-Boles. Andrew was separated from his Wife after the tabloids published photographs of her having an affair. To top it all off Windsor Castle itself suffered a fire which destroyed 115 rooms and burned the Queen’s private chapel.

During the 1990s it was received wisdom amongst most columnists and politicians was that the Monarchy would not survive the death of the Queen, that institution would die with her. A month before the 1997 election the Marxist writer Tom Nairn (of the Nairn-Anderson thesis) called Elizabeth ‘little more than an accusing spectre’ and said that ‘the game really is over’. In 2002 YouGov found that only one in two people believed that the Monarchy would survive until 2022. A Guardian leader from 2000 read:

We declare our hand: we hope that in time we will move - by democratic consensus - to become a republic. We are gradualists: we accept that it will not happen tomorrow. Let the Queen remain Queen for as long as she lives, or she wishes, or she remains able. But in the meantime there should be a long, vigorous and grown-up debate - both inside and outside parliament - as to who, or what, should succeed her.

1992 was also the year that the BBC filmed and produced To Play The King, the second part of the House of Cards trilogy, releasing it a year later. The show, adapted from the Michael Dobbs book series, shows a staunchly right-wing Conservative Prime Minister, Francis Urquhart clashing with a thinly-veiled Charles, who has become King after the death of his mother in middle age. Charles wants to reverse Thatcherism and in particular cuts to welfare and makes public interventions attacking Urquhart’s ‘hard-right’ policies’, despite a broad consensus that the policies are working to make the country wealthier.

Charles covertly works with opposition leaders to frustrate the government. He is helped by the House of Lords and significant sections of the media, and makes a series of Burnham-esque speeches about Hope and the need for the nation to come together. He is shown to be thick and insolent, relying on the direction of a West Indian lady advisor who he later has an affair with. She says that she enjoys her position because it gives her an opportunity to expand the rights and entitlements of commonwealth citizens.

After several Royal provocations Urquhart concludes that he must call an election. The series has a happy ending. Though Charles scores some early victories Urquhart uses leaks and other skulduggery to destroy him. After winning there is a delicious final confrontation where Urquhart tells Charles that he is a stupid person whose opinions will be of no interest to anybody once he is no longer Monarch. Charles is forced to abdicate and so the crown goes to William, creating a malleable boy-king.

There is much that we as Republicans can learn from this show before a sympathetic government is installed. Urquhart reaches out to Diana once it is clear that an election must be called, could Kate, who has been treated dreadfully by William, be similarly co-opted? Urquhart weaponises the sexual degeneracy of the Royal Family behind closed doors to weaken Charles. If the rumours about the rubbery pipes and bottoms are true what could be done with this? How much capital be yielded from giving oxygen to claims about the family which are aired in the American press and never reported on in Britain? What could be achieved by holding an inquiry into the connections between Mountbatten and Kincora boy’s home?

Read more

The controversial Serbian military leader and politician, Ratko Mladic, passed away this week; Mladic was known for his maverick statements which earned him the ire of the ‘Woke’ Left and the Ethnona…

Read more

When the Thick of It was made in the early 00’s, it was considered a statement for politicians to go without a tie. In 2026 it is only Estate Agents it is very rare to see workers under thirty-five wearing a tie with their shirt and blazer unless it is some sort of special occasion. Wearing a full suit in 2026 in Britain makes you look like TheReportOfTheWeek. It is surely not long now before the tie is thought of as we now think of cravats or powdered wigs.

Ties and suits have become much cheaper in the past fifty years, as has healthy food (the 70s diet of angel delight and TV dinners was horrific) but British people have never looked fatter or worse dressed. More civilised countries have avoided following this trend. In China cheap high calorie junk food is everywhere but almost all adults are still thin. In Japan, the salarymen are still so strict about wearing suits that the government has to plead with them to dress down in the summer months to reduce the use of air conditioning. Despite the liberating force of the washing machine and the female participation in the labour force is below 20% in wealthy Gulf States such as Saudia Arabia (in Britain it is now more than 70%, and spiralling further every year).

Go to any of these places and you will quickly see why, shame is used relentlessly to maintain standards. Serptenza, one of many yang guîzi rightly expelled from the People’s most noble Republic for making subversive YouTube videos advertising his sex life in China complained constantly that random Chinese would come up to him and call him fat.

Fat shaming is the secret ingredient. There is a minimum expectation for how citizens will present themselves to other people, a boundary which also existed in Britain in the 1960s and 70s, which is why people would take diet pills and starve themselves instead of accepting morbid obesity (outside of a tiny fringe), and also why they would wear ties and skirts instead of formless hoodies and tracksuits whilst out and about in public.

Many tedious essays have been written about the collapse of reading because of the hate algorithms with little international context. J’accuse has already discussed how China has maintained a literary culture while being exposed to the dastardly mobile phones, but we need look no further than France to see that it is possible for the internet and literacy to co-exist. In France, in 2025, 350 million books were sold, almost twice as many as were sold in the UK (adjusted for population), and almost three times that of the US. 45% of French people report reading every day (barely a quarter in Britain do). Le Monde had a higher print circulation (533,794) in 2024 than it did in 2010 (319,022), by comparison the Financial Times has fallen by over two thirds during the same period (390,315 to 109,995).

Subscribe now

Read more

There is no American Left, and precious little of an international left, outside the Democratic Party. Whatever ideas blossom for a season in America are but stage props and lighting equipment to cre…

Read more

Following the Arday affair there has been a predictable eruption of navel gazing and self-praise by the legacy media, the pages of which have been smothered in think pieces about how important a free…

Read more

One of the few parts of my worldview which has changed in adulthood is my view of British colonialism. As a teenager, like most teenagers, I liked the idea of painting the map red with beskirted sold…

Read more

Read more

Reform’s decision sack Tim Montgomerie means that there is now a political vehicle which will not consent to be governed according to the whims of the Westminster lobby, which has a vested commercial…

Read more

Greetings to you all,

You have probably, like me, been glued to the screens of Netflix in rapt attention by Richard Gervais’s new T.V programme, Ally Cats.

We all know what Nigel Farage says, he says ‘…

Read more

“That a man who no longer wishes to live for himself must go on living merely as a machine for others to use is an extravagant demand”

I have often thought about what I will do when the web of lies finally collapses and I am hounded by the national press for weeks. I like to think, though I may be wrong, that having two children as Arday did would be enough of an incentive to keep clinging on to life. But I can also understand why somebody in his situation would reach the logical conclusion that suicide is the right option.

Without the ability to dupe other people Arday had nothing. He had no academic ability, hence the plagiarism and his decision to use an LLM to write his resignation statement for the Good Law Project. Without his talent for brazen lying Arday would probably have kept a series of jobs doing charity work for troubled yoofs in his corner of South-East Lewisham. Because Arday was born in the right time with the right skin colour he was able to take advantage of deliberately credulous academics and the infrastructure of anti-white racial animus in academia and the media. Using this he was able to instead draw a salary probably approaching six figures along with all of the other material benefits in kind that having a professorship at Cambridge gives you.

But more importantly for Arday it also allowed him to create a prestigious version of himself. He was not just in it for the money. If he was, post exposure, he could had hung on in there like Anna Delvey and enjoyed a Netflix adaptation, vast book sales and some level notoriety in the press for years. Arday had a desperate need for other people to think that he was an impressive person. Many of his more absurd stories such as him having an epileptic fit whilst running his twentieth marathon in a row seem to have been improvised ad-hoc during interviews where he, in the spur of the moment, felt he needed to up the ante. He had to be in the spotlight and he had to shine whilst there.

I do not have sympathy for Jason Arday, because I believe he reached his decision rationally. He was not a ‘victim’ of either the press or Cambridge University. No institution should have a ‘duty of care’ for any adult, not least a forty something. Arday should be rescued from this condescension and understood on his own terms. He killed himself because he knew that once he had been exposed as a fabulist there was no way of going back to the old life that he enjoyed, as a social mobility success story in the face of racial oppression enjoying a coveted academic position in a prestigious University.

The decision to kill himself was probably made final when Cambridge eventually relented and announced that they would investigate his academic work. Not only was the jig up, but suicide provided an opportunity to recover some of the reputational damage. He no doubt believed that his act would make it more difficult for journalists to continue pressuring Cambridge over their hiring decisions and that it would become politically incorrect to talk about his fabulism. That by ‘breaking cover’ in this way he would encourage many ‘neutral voices’ to emerge from the woodwork and start saying how dreadful it was that Arday had been exposed and that now it was time to reflect (and maybe finally implement Leveson). It was one final act of politically motivated narcissism in a life defined by it.

Subscribe now

Read more

The year is 2031.

Reform has a majority of three hundred seats. Nigel Farage is Prime Minister. The author of this post has been given a peerage in the House of Lords as Lord [withheld] of Crimea, and…

Read more

A short story by the Marquis

Late August in the Mediterranean; quiet sterility of a hotel pool, cruel shadelessness of a palm tree; the cicadas in full chorus, and the cacti shedding the last of their…

Read more

Kemi Badenoch’s mother is the cousin of Yemi Osinbajo. This makes Kemi Badenoch his first cousin once removed. Osinbajo served as the vice president of Nigeria between 2015 and 2023.

In March of this …

Read more

A Reminder

That people who subscribe to, repost, like or otherwise engage with anti-Meritocratic content on this website, as on xdotcom, shall be blocked from this substack.

Read more

Something striking about Burnham’s supposed popularity is that it is always assumed that he is appealing to somebody else. Somebody off-screen. That there exists a constituency of northerners who are…

Read more