📈 Joining our investment platform is a valuable opportunity for potential returns. If you are new to our team, rest assured that our experienced professionals are available to guide and support you every step of the way.

💥 We provide comprehensive guidance throughout the trading process, ensuring a smooth experience for all participants.

💰 Start your successful investment journey with us today and take advantage of promising opportunities for higher profits.

📌 Our approach is simple and user-friendly, making it easy for you to navigate the investment landscape.

📩 For more information or to join our platform, please feel free to send me a message.
https://news.1rj.ru/str/DataRepublicanofficial

https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1959998325400518749?t=ztgGPJKqSBZGzBEHLx8adQ&s=19
The data on the website is real. Their argument basically comes down to "it's out of context because too many nonprofits are entangled and nobody can truly say what USAID is financing."

x.com/DataRepublican…

The UK is bound to ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) signed 1950. Notably, Article 3's ban on torture or degrading treatment has been broadly interpreted to mean no deportation at all if the refugee is at risk of this in their home country.

⚖️✈️ The bottom line

Once someone sets foot on UK soil, the system is stacked towards settlement.

Deportation from the UK is not simple. Even when they want to remove someone, it runs into hard legal walls (non-refoulement, ECAT trafficking protections, ECHR Article 3) and practical barriers (no travel documents, hostile origin states, lack of flights, limited detention space).

At the same time, there are incentives to keep people in: councils receive funding, local authorities get resettlement tariffs, and refugees move straight onto mainstream benefits and housing.

https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/1960669154719228084?t=8gVB40lQ3gmSZB0nn1OnFw&s=19
One of the things I've noticed is that international law and commerce are tightly coupled and always has been.

I think us Americans tend to treat them separately. Like free trade is a libertarian ideal and international law is more of a big-government ideal.

But they aren't. More international trade, more crushing international regulations. The US just has unusual leverage because it's a hegemony.

🧵 THREAD: The worldview of George Soros, the self-styled Messiah who reshaped the modern age

He once admitted:
"If truth be known, I carried some rather potent messianic fantasies with me from childhood… But when I had made my way in the world I wanted to indulge my fantasies to the extent that I could afford."

And indulge them he did.

I’ve written many threads about Soros, but never one that lays out his ideology in full, why his money carried more weight than Rockefeller or Bezos, why his methods proved uniquely disruptive.

Soros’s time is running short. But the system he engineered, the ripple effects of his philosophy, will outlive him by generations.

The question isn’t whether we agree with him. It’s whether we’re willing to study his playbook... and use the same tools ourselves.

Stay with me as I pull this thread together.

Reflexivity is all about finding and squeezing contradictions.

The Soviet Union demanded total purity, and total adherence to its views. To carry that out, it required a total monopoly over the media.

That in itself created a "contradiction" waiting to be exploited: people continued to support Communism under the yoke of gulags and starvation, but only as long as they could not see the reality of their situation contrasted with much more prosperous countries.

So, Soros' extreme left-wing tyranny of globalism is the institutional outcome of Popper, just as Leninist one-party states were the institutional outcome of Marx.

Even though Popper and Communism were opposing ideologies!

Nor am I saying what Soros did in USSR was bad.

There's a reason I keep saying that nobody is totally good or totally evil.

Some people are taking this thread to mean that I am saying pluralism is bad -- NO.

I try to not to project religion into governance, but I believe Christianity justifies pluralism as an inherent feature of godly governance.

Paul wrote in Romans 7:18: "For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out."

And again in Philippians 3:12: "Not that I have already obtained this or am already perfect, but I press on to make it my own, because Christ Jesus has made me his own."

We will remain sinful creatures, until our death. As Jeremiah 17:9 says: "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it?"

What this implies is: Objective truth exists, but no human has the ability to interpret and pass down truth perfectly.

The difference between globalism and the United States of America is that globalism's epistemological foundation is pluralism above all.

The United States, by contrast, created its epistemological foundation on natural rights.

Both imply pluralism, but have very different implications as to how governance is done.