America's Champagne Revolutionaries: The DSA's Violent Theater, California's Power Play, and China's Green Energy Checkmate

The American Bolsheviks: Trump as Czar and the Socialist Democratic Revolution

Since we've had the "No-King" marches, examining history and current developments suggests a better analogy would be calling Trump a Czar and the protesters Bolsheviks, ideologically identical with the Socialist Democrats. Vladimir Lenin, head of the Bolsheviks—a faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP)—led the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 , which marked a split between radical socialist revolutionaries (Bolsheviks) and more moderate socialist democrats (Mensheviks), reshaping Russia into a one-party communist state under Lenin's leadership.

The provisional government was overthrown as Bolsheviks used Red Guards to dissolve the government and take control of Petrograd, establishing one-party rule. The Bolsheviks rebranded as the Communist Party and banned other parties, including the Mensheviks. At the foundation of this ideology stood Marx's Communist Manifesto : Revolutionary change through which Marx believed capitalism would inevitably be replaced by socialism and eventually communism through class revolution.

Or perhaps it's a midlife crisis. According to researchers at American University who track protest movements, whose findings were first reported by Axios, the typical D.C. attendee was an educated white woman in her 40s who learned about the demonstration through friends or social media. Most likely, US citizens need not fear—the Bolsheviks will be limited to some rough spots, mostly paid for by Communist elites. The DSA will do well in cities like Portland, Oregon; Seattle, Washington; half a dozen wealthy California cities; and Chicago. Democrats running those places have long tolerated violence both from ordinary criminals they refuse to jail and from black-clad protesters who claim to know everything about an economy but have never held a job. Both the protesters and violent criminals are vital to the governing efforts of socialists, serving as the movement's shock troops, given that the DSA's governing philosophy is anarcho-tyranny.

California's Power Consolidation and the Gerrymandering Game

California just voted on Prop 50—in other words, the majority of Democrats followed their leader to design a totalitarian system. With a supermajority already in place in the California Assembly and transferring the currently 52 Congress delegates (43 to 9) to 48 to 4, this assists potential President Newsom to start ruling with a supermajority—otherwise his move doesn't make sense. No other Democratic candidate has asked for any such measure, with Newsom blaming President Trump for gerrymandering , a term as old as the world, but no one is actually changing the law for it other than California. Perhaps it wasn't a needed move by President Trump, but the game is on. Perhaps a final Socialism versus Tsarism, as the left claims, but expect the French Laundry to survive one way or the other for $400 a plate—a real socialist construct and retreat.

With Nancy Pelosi retiring—pardon me, not seeking reelection—how many of the over-70 crowd will take the high road and follow? At least on the Democrats' side, a whopping 56 could potentially be removed by a Bernie Sanders, Mamdani, Soros Jr. protégé, and about 30 from the Republican side. If Gen Z votes half of it to the left, with the current ultra-progressives, that could bring the House to 100. Imagine Mamdani or AOC running Tesla or the US Military—solar panels, EV cars only, tiny houses and food, pick your own. All land is your land—that's progress. And Nancy becomes a professional stock broker.

The Green Energy Illusion: China's Strategic Dominance vs. American Wishful Thinking

With solar on each house or HOA block and wind farms to harness sustainable energy, are those advocates really supporting sustainability? Under the assumption that there's always wind and always sun, or that you have storage capacity holding about 50% of annual needs, it might just work. However, all these studies showing costs will come down over time—like the Affordable Care Act—ignore that once these installations need replacement due to wear and tear, or in the case of storage, insufficiency, expect replacement costs to be fairly substantial. What about non-recyclable components—poisonous or radioactive? Which one is better to explain to kids?

China, the leader in green technology —perhaps only to fuel exports in hardware—operates strategically with natural resources, coal, and newest nuclear technologies, and compared to a US map , fairly consistently. The center of the clean energy transition is now in China—and that reality is shaping pricing, trade and investment strategies worldwide. Apart from advancement in SMR deployment, China also demonstrates its capacity for building fourth-generation nuclear reactors.

While the US talks about Joe Biden and AOC's Green New Deal , it really has no clear pathway but throwing money at an idea, driven by the political motivation that we'll all drown in the foreseeable future—a thought Bill Gates no longer shares—rather than clear priorities. Look what the green euphoria did for Germany: energy prices make it non-competitive. And Ireland has the highest energy prices in Europe, with cloud storage centers providing no relief in sight. Ultimately, it's global competitiveness versus all green, and the storage options.

Here's the US solar panel distribution and average sunny days in the US and China, below China's solar net. Here's a link to a Chinese interactive map showing all power resources, and here's the US equivalent . Government versus private investment is the deciding factor—or is it political in nature? How does the US feel about nuclear , potentially the most sustainable future?