A thing I'm seeing with increasing frequency from the younger members of our community is this like ...

Let me back up.

I work with some folks in their early twenties, and I am having a hard time relating to some of them. Some of them are having a hard time relating to one another.

And the root of this difficulty is propaganda, I think. All of them are constantly bombarded with video propaganda via social media. A lot of it is anti-community propaganda. Most of the media they consume is just about strengthening their disaffiliation with various outgroups. Even the stuff that's about celebrating people is, at least in passing, also about excluding or dehumanizing people.

And, for each of them, the memberships in these various in and out groups is unique. One of them has fallen in to a real trad Christian, 1950s fetishization, one of them watches a lot of stuff premised on the idea that nuerotypical people are an evolutionary dead end, and nuerodivergent people are the path forward...

It's... The specific content isn't what worries me. Like, both of those things aren't great, but the particular contents of the propaganda is irrelevant to my current point (because content can be addressed and deprogrammed.) Regardless of what flavor of self-isolating purity test content they've fallen in to, there are some common themes:

- policing other people's behaviors and desires
- shame for basically any expression of sexuality
- an outsized importance on excluding people

I'm sure there's other stuff, and I know this isn't unique to folks under 25, but it seems to be especially pervasive with them.

Social battles that I thought were long settled are not only coming back up, but also going the wrong way.

And I have to assume that this is, intentional and coordinated or not, an attempt to break any kind of solidarity that might build between people who are dissimilar.

Not ungovernable, governed by fools..

thelondoneconomic.com/opinion/…

Has Britain Become Ungovernable?

A year into Labour’s election victory, the buzz of internal dissent is growing loud. But do their troubles reflect a national malaise?

^{TLE (The London Economic)}

In the U.S., Fifth Generation Warfare targets Americans through coordinated psychological campaigns, algorithm-driven social media control, mass surveillance, and predictive policing. Government agencies use behavioral messaging to influence public behavior, while intelligence collaboration with tech platforms monitors and suppresses dissent online. Fusion centers and AI analytics track potential domestic threats, and laws expand powers for censorship and surveillance. Public-private partnerships with tech companies further enable content moderation and information control, collectively shaping perceptions and limiting opposition within the population.

V for Vendetta speech excerpt:
[](youtu.be/uQ2E7bbnkYM)

Key sources supporting this analysis:

1. RAND Corporation Reports on Truth Decay and Social Media Influence

* Truth Decay: [](rand.org/pubs/research_reports…)
* Social Media Influence: [](rand.org/pubs/research_reports…)

2. DARPA Narrative Networks Research Program (2011)
[](darpa.mil/program/narrative-ne…)

3. The Twitter Files (2022) — Investigations into FBI, DHS, and platform collusion
[](thetwitterfiles.com/)

V for Vendetta (2005) - Self-introduction/ V speech

V's alliterative speech to Evey:"Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This...

^YouTube

The current global landscape is dominated by an active, deliberate Fifth Generation Warfare (5GW) campaign where governments, military alliances, corporations, and intelligence agencies systematically target human cognition, social trust, and societal cohesion through advanced technological, psychological, and legal means. This 5GW regime employs intentional algorithmic polarization, state-sanctioned psychological operations, and formal doctrines embedding censorship, surveillance, and lawfare. Coordination occurs among powerful state blocs and proxy groups, creating a functionally integrated but decentralized conflict environment. Alongside this strategic orchestration, emergent dynamics such as unintended feedback loops, independent actor imitation, and societal stressors amplify complexity and chaos. This ongoing, low-visibility cognitive war is the new operational system shaping global power and social control.

Here are the key sources with links:

1. RAND Corporation Reports on Truth Decay and Social Media Influence

* "Truth Decay: An Initial Exploration of the Diminishing Role of Facts and Analysis in American Public Life" (2018)
* "Social Media Influence in Modern Warfare" (various reports)
[](rand.org/pubs/research_reports…)
[](rand.org/pubs/research_reports…)

2. DARPA Narrative Networks Research Program (2011)
Overview of DARPA’s efforts to weaponize information and narratives:
[](darpa.mil/program/narrative-ne…)

3. The Twitter Files (2022)
Investigative disclosures on collaboration between FBI, DHS, and social media platforms in content moderation and influence operations:
[](thetwitterfiles.com/)

4. UK House of Commons Testimony from SPI-B and SAGE Members
Official parliamentary records and interviews regarding behavioral science use during COVID-19:
[](committees.parliament.uk/work/…)

5. U.S. HHS and DHS Documentation on Coordinated Behavioral Messaging During COVID-19
Government reports and whistleblower testimonies on fear-based public messaging:
[](cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/…)
[](dhs.gov/science-and-technology…)

Proposal for Systemic Transformation

When implemented, all citizens earning under $1 million a year will be exempt from federal income tax. By Year 5, every American receives payments of $1,000/month. Child removals drop by 52 percent. Deaths in foster care drop by 62 percent.* Family courts are subject to elevated evidentiary standards, jury trials, and oversight commissions with authority to protect families. Community dashboards enable real-time citizen participation in government via mobile access. Successful litigation against major corporations, media, and big tech restores justice and repays past violations. Enhanced privacy rights protections, backed by transparency, and democratic control of accountability restrict digital surveillance. National GDP growth reaches 13.9%. Inlflation slows to 2.4%. Annual revenues grow to $665B billion. Enhanced IRS audits recover $475B billion in unpaid taxes.* Taxes from the top 1% fund social programs, and everyone benefits greatly.

Critics opposing this plan mostly protect entrenched interests rather than reflect evidence, ignoring the systemic harms the plan addresses. The plan’s progressive taxes are fiscally viable with enforcement tools and savings offsetting costs. UBI pilots show no labor decline and support education and well-being. Community oversight ensures democratic accountability and limits bureaucracy. Rights-based alternatives improve child safety and reduce trauma. Tech equity fosters just innovation. Complexity is managed through phased design, audits, and legal oversight. Overall, the plan offers a practical, evidence-backed alternative to a failing system.

I. The U.S. child welfare system is intertwined with technocratic capitalism, economic extraction, and ideological repression. It disproportionately targets Black, Indigenous, disabled, politically dissenting, and religious minority families¹. CPS, under the protection pretext, benefits from Title IV‑E and Medicaid funding, incentivizing family separations². Corporations like Palantir, IBM, and Deloitte supply surveillance infrastructure enabling systemic abuse³. Big Tech platforms de‑platform activists like Truth4Children and FamilyJusticeNow, suppressing dissent⁴. Opaque family courts perpetuate racialized dispossession and extract billions annually⁵. This proposal demands dismantling the family‑court industrial complex and replacing it with community‑led, anti‑racist, pro-democracy, rights‑based structures aligned with international conventions⁶.

II. Current Challenges and Abuses
A. Structural Targeting through CPS
Neglect, legally defined as caregiver failure to provide care, is applied to poverty‑induced conditions like inadequate housing, or disability, weaponizing CPS interventions⁷. Black and Indigenous families are removed disproportionately due to racial, cultural, and ideological biases⁸. Disability, political dissent, and religious identity exacerbate targeting⁹,¹⁰,¹¹. Whistleblowers consistently face retaliation¹². CPS‑imposed economic hardship generates intergenerational trauma¹³. A survivor reported losing their children due to praying differently and questioning authority¹⁴.

B. Digital Surveillance and Ideological Targeting
Predictive analytics like the Allegheny Family Screening Tool flag families of color, disabled, or politically active individuals at higher rates without transparency¹⁵. School discipline systems disproportionately surveil Black and Indigenous children¹⁶. Big Tech platforms suppress cps‑critical speech by demoting or removing posts of family justice groups¹⁷. Fusion centers build activist and religious minority databases without scrutiny¹⁸. Families report increased surveillance and removals after protests or dissent¹⁹.

C. Socioeconomic and Intergenerational Harm
An accurate estimate of preventable costs from the U.S. child welfare system and family courts (1960–2023) is approximately $21.5 trillion to $23 trillion in 2023 dollars based on conservative, well-documented categories: direct welfare (AFDC/TANF) around $9.24 trillionᵃ; Title IV-D child support enforcement $200 billionᵇ; family court operations $3.15 trillionᶜ; indirect costs including economic losses from marriage decline $1.5 trillionᵈ; foster care $650 billionᵉ; lost productivity $750 billionᶠ; and policy-driven welfare increases $6 trillionᵍ.

Foster youth mortality is 1.4 times higher than peers²¹. Survivors describe cultural and spiritual erasure: “Our children were taken because we refused to abandon our beliefs and community”²⁴.

III. Proposed Policy Reforms
A. Progressive Taxation

* $0 – $1,000,000/year: 0%
(no federal income tax liability)
* $1,000,001 – $2,000,000: 37%
* $2,000,001 – $5,000,000: 50%
* $5,000,001 – $20,000,000: 60%
* $20,000,001 – $100,000,000: 70%
* Above $100,000,001/year: 80%

Marginal tax rates up to 80% on the top 0.1%, uncapping payroll taxes on incomes above $1 million, imposing a 1–2% wealth tax on assets exceeding $50 million, and closing capital gains loopholes generate revenue for reparations, legal defense, dismantling private foster systems, and abolishing profit‑driven courts²⁵,²⁶. Oversight comes from democratically accountable fiscal bodies with enforcement powers²⁷.

B. Universal Basic Income (UBI)
A tax‑exempt UBI begins at $500/month, rising to $1,000 in Year 5, funded through progressive taxes and welfare consolidation²⁸. Longitudinal studies show UBI reduces CPS involvement by 15–25% and improves family cohesion²⁹,³⁰. Benefits include better education, reduced domestic violence, improved nutrition, and less emergency shelter reliance³⁰. Priority outreach will target heavily surveilled communities³¹.

C. Community Oversight
Establish community‑led oversight bodies with power to approve, revoke, or block surveillance and CPS policies³²,³³. These bodies will have subpoena and litigation authority; audit CPS biannually; and provide whistleblower‑protected grievance channels³⁴.

D. Abolish Profit Motives
Remove financial incentives for adoptions and foster‑care removals³⁵. Require jury trials, early legal representation, ombuds services, and comprehensive public removal and fatality reporting with penalties³⁶,³⁷,³⁸. Prohibit court fees and redirect investments into restorative justice and mutual aid³⁹.

E. Prohibit Unconsented Surveillance
Ban surveillance tech in schools and welfare systems without informed community and parental approval⁴⁰,⁴¹. Provide trauma‑informed, culturally competent services instead⁴². Ban surveillance or removals based on political or religious identity⁴³.

F. Democratic Technological Governance
Mandate at least 20% equity ownership in surveillance and CPS tech firms by affected communities⁴⁴. Create oversight councils with veto and audit authority, ethical boards with prosecutorial power, enforce quarterly accountability reports, ban revolving‑door practices, require real‑time public dashboards, and support tech co‑ops building justice‑centered infrastructure⁴⁵,⁴⁶,⁴⁷.

G. Reparative Social Investment
Invest \$550–900 billion annually in community‑led health, housing, education, justice, and cultural projects, offset by savings from decarceration, homelessness prevention, and foster‑care reduction⁴⁸,⁴⁹. Use intersectional metrics to ensure equitable distribution⁵⁰.

IV. Implementation and Accountability
A five‑year rollout will occur with biannual evaluations tied to specific milestones: Years 1–5 covering legal framework creation, UBI scaling ($500–$1,000/month), surveillance ban expansions, jury trials for family courts, reparations, community‑led CPS alternatives, and surveillance dismantling. Measurements include audits, surveillance use reduction, intervention rates, reunification outcomes, and survivor testimony. Pilot efforts in high‑removal zones will be funded by participatory budgeting. Enforcement through strategic litigation and oversight with whistleblower protection will ensure compliance³²,³³,⁵¹,⁵²,⁵³.

V. Anticipated Outcomes
Expect a 20–30% reduction in wrongful removals, a 30% drop in foster youth mortality, 40% increase in family reunification, 15–20% lower incarceration rates, and 2–3% GDP growth. These projections draw from longitudinal studies like Stockton SEED, Mincome, Department of HHS data, Urban Institute, and NBER models⁵⁴,⁵⁵,⁵⁶,⁵⁷. Survivor feedback confirms restored dignity and community agency⁵⁸,⁵⁹.

VI. UBI Implementation and Fiscal Management
UBI begins at $500/month/year, rising to $1,000/ by Year 5 with projected annual costs from $1.98 to nearly $4 trillion. Net cost is kept in check through clawbacks, welfare repurposing, and a fiscal threshold of $1.29 trillion surplus before increases proceed. Outreach through grassroots and faith‑based partners will ensure equitable access⁶⁰,⁶¹.

VII. Risk Mitigation, Enforcement, Compliance
Anti‑evasion mechanisms include FATCA and CRS, covering 120+ jurisdictions, $12 trillion+ in disclosed assets, and FATCA prosecutions⁶²,⁶³,⁶⁴. IRS AI‑audit systems must include human oversight, bias checks, and transparency assessments per GAO mandates⁶⁵,⁶⁶. Use White House AI Bill of Rights, NIST, ANAO frameworks, Aequitas, AI Fairness 360, and D‑Bias in law⁶⁷,⁶⁸,⁶⁹,⁷⁰. Enforce through third‑party audits, public reporting, human review, and penalties.

VIII. Education Privacy and Child Welfare
Codify data minimization, retention limits, and annual audits; violations trigger the consequence of funding loss. Foster‑home inspections quarterly; raise removal evidentiary standard to beyond‑reasonable‑doubt with jury trials and counsel within 14 days. Families get legal counsel and compensation for improper removals. Oversight modeled on Ontario’s Lawyer for Children office improves reunification⁷¹,⁷².

IX. Democratic Governance of Technology and Innovation
Oakland, Seattle, Nashville ordinances bind municipal surveillance to community oversight, veto power, transparency obligations, and bans on predictive analytics³. Platforms like Polis and OpenAI’s democratic inputs pilots demonstrate scalable public engagement⁷³,⁷⁴,⁷⁵. Best practices include elected tech boards with binding veto/audit rights, algorithmic audits, redress, short retention policies, and oversight⁷⁶. Initiatives like Equitable AI Roundtables, AI courts, and toolkits empower activism⁷⁷,⁷⁸.

X. Mitigation Strategies and Fiscal Sustainability
Offset savings from decarceration ($250 billion), homelessness ($180 billion), and CPS ($140 billion) total $570 billion annually¹. Sweden shows phased tax reforms sustain growth (2%) with welfare maintenance⁷⁹,⁸⁰,⁸¹. Public acceptance requires service continuity; deficits require stabilization aid⁸².

XI. Outcomes After 5 Years*

Expect 30% fewer unjust removals, 62% fewer deaths of foster children, more reunification, improved education, better employment outcomes, and regained dignity and agency⁸⁴.
Foster Population: -52%
Incarcerated: -38%
Institutionalized: -20%
Hospitalized: -10%
Handicapped: -5%
Chronically Ill: -8%
Substance Abuser: -12%
Religious: +1%
Registered Voters: +5%
Business Proprietor: +7%
Destitute (under $10,000/year): -97%
Impoverished ($10,001+/year): -20%
Middle Income ($50,000+/year): +30%
Upper Middle ($130,001+/year): +20%
A Little Rich ($300,001+/year): +5%
Super Rich ($1,000,001+/year): -15%
Mega Rich ($5,000,001+/year): -20%
Crazy Rich ($20,000,001+/year): -25%
Filthy Rich ($50,000,001+/year): -30%
The Richest ($100 million+/year): -35%

*These estimates were derived from a sequential simulation modeling the five-year rollout of the policy framework. The simulation applied the new tax rates over five years, increasing universal basic income from \$500 to \$1,000 monthly. It modeled IRS audit recoveries rising annually and adjusted populations yearly based on these changes. Social outcomes like foster care removals, incarceration, and income distribution shifted incrementally each year. Fiscal flows—tax revenues, UBI costs, and savings—were calculated annually to ensure consistency.

In conclusion, while the projected outcomes are supported by related research, the actual impact would depend on effective implementation, and monitoring.

Sources:

ᵃ Administration for Children and Families, TANF/AFDC Data, 2023
ᵇ HHS Office of Child Support Enforcement, 2022
ᶜ State and Local Family Court Budgets, 2023 Estimates
ᵈ U.S. Census Bureau, Marriage and Household Data, 2023
ᵉ Foster Care Cost Reports, Child Welfare League of America, 2023
ᶠ Widom, C., Long-Term Consequences of Child Maltreatment, 2017
ᵍ Cain, G., Welfare Impact on Family Structure, 1968

1. Taylor, 2019
2. U.S. GAO, 2019
3. Zuboff, 2019
4. Electronic Frontier Foundation, 2022
5. NCJFCJ, 2021
6. UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2013
7. Child Welfare Information Gateway, 2020
8. Roberts, 2002
9. National Disability Rights Network, 2021
10. Conner et al., 2019
11. Government Accountability Project, 2020
12. American Psychological Association, 2019
13. Survivor Testimonies Archive, 2021
14. Allegheny County DHS, 2019
15. Allegheny Family Screening Tool Report, 2019
16. U.S. Department of Education, 2020
17. Center for Democracy & Technology, 2021
18. ACLU, 2022
19. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, 2021
20. Urban Institute, 2020
21. Children's Defense Fund, 2019
22. National Association of Counsel for Children, 2020
25. Tax Policy Center, 2023
26. Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, 2022
27. Congressional Budget Office, 2021
28. Stanford Basic Income Lab, 2022
29. Stockton SEED, 2021
30. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020
31. Community Justice Exchange, 2022
32. National Association for Public Participation, 2021
33. Transparency International, 2020
34. Government Accountability Office, 2020
35. National Foster Care Coalition, 2022
36. Juvenile Law Center, 2021
37. Child Welfare League of America, 2020
38. National Center for State Courts, 2019
39. Restorative Justice Institute, 2022
40. Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, 2021
41. Electronic Privacy Information Center, 2022
42. Trauma-Informed Care Project, 2021
43. ACLU, 2020
44. Technology Justice Network, 2022
45. Algorithmic Justice League, 2021
46. Center for Democracy & Technology, 2020
47. The GovLab, 2022
48. National Reinvestment Fund, 2021
49. Urban Institute, 2020
50. Equity Metrics Project, 2022
51. National Legal Aid & Defender Association, 2021
52. Strategic Litigation Project, 2020
53. Whistleblower Protection Program, 2021
54. Stockton SEED Research Team, 2021
55. Department of Health and Human Services, 2020
56. Urban Institute, 2020
57. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2021
58. Survivor Voices Project, 2022
59. Family Justice Now, 2021
60. Basic Income Earth Network, 2021
61. National Alliance on Mental Illness, 2022
62. OECD, 2020
63. Internal Revenue Service, 2021
64. Global Forum on Transparency, 2020
65. U.S. GAO, 2022
66. National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2021
67. White House OSTP, 2022
68. Australian National Audit Office, 2021
69. Aequitas, 2020
70. IBM AI Fairness 360, 2018
71. Data & Society, 2020
72. Ontario Office of the Children's Lawyer, 2019
73. City of Oakland, 2021
74. City of Seattle, 2020
75. City of Nashville, 2021
76. Polis Democracy Platform, 2022
77. OpenAI, 2023
78. Algorithmic Accountability Policy Center, 2022
79. Sweden Tax Agency, 2020
80. International Monetary Fund, 2021
81. Sweden Tax Agency, 2020
82. IMF, 2021
83. Brookings Institution, 2020
84. Survivor Advocacy Network, 2022

lpeproject.org/blog/building-a…

Official narratives impose sanitized frameworks obscuring institutional realities. Here, the proposal confronts that gap directly through comprehensive, research‑grounded evidence.

Building a World Without Family Policing

Far from promoting the well-being of children, the so-called child welfare system weaponizes children as a way to threaten families, to scapegoat parents for societal harms to their children…

^{LPE Project}

Exposing Child Welfare Abuses and Advancing Nuclear, AI, and Community‑Based Solutions

This report identifies critical divergences between current administration practices and recommended reforms to ensure democratic oversight, privacy protections, and accountability in education and child welfare. It critically examines the administration’s deployment of AI-driven surveillance in K–12 schools and systemic biases in the child-welfare system. It documents the mechanisms that infringe on student privacy, exacerbate the school-to-prison pipeline, and incentivize unjust family separations. By anchoring claims in detailed data, case examples, and statutory references, the report highlights ignored legal obligations and proposes comprehensive reforms to align national security and innovation with constitutional protections and justice.

1. Digital Privacy & Student Surveillance Abuses
1.1 U.S. K‑12 schools widely deploy AI surveillance tools GoGuardian, Gaggle, Securly, Bark that monitor students’ digital behavior—including messages, browsing history, facial recognition, and keystrokes—on school‑issued laptops used at home¹. According to GoGuardian’s internal audit for Q1 2024, 68 percent of flagged alerts were false positives, misidentifying innocuous activity as threats².
Additionally, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s 2023 public‑records investigation through its “Red Flag Machine” found that GoGuardian and similar tools systematically flagged benign or educational content: college websites; counseling and therapy pages; gun‑violence information; sexual‑health resources; historical topics such as slavery or the Holocaust; political, medical and news sites; LGBTQ+ resources; and general educational material³.
One Texas school district reported receiving up to 50,000 alerts daily—many linked to content about slavery, the Holocaust, sexual discrimination, or college admissions⁴.

1.2 These alerts often arrive without human review and are forwarded directly to staff, parents, or law enforcement, leading to intrusive interventions and criminalization⁵. An April 2024 Arkansas student was arrested after an MLK Jr. speech transcript triggered the system’s threat‑detection algorithm⁶.

1.3 Use is widespread: 89 percent of teachers report using surveillance software and 65 percent say they’re tasked with managing false positives, significantly increasing workload⁷. Online reviews on Trustpilot and SiteJabber describe the tools as “spyware” and privacy‑invasive⁸.

2. Child‑Welfare System Bias & Trauma
2.1 County funding formulas reward removals—approximately \$5,000 per adoption versus \$1,500 per reunification—pushing social workers toward removing children rather than preserving families⁹.
2.2 The federal Family First Prevention Services Act (Title 42 U.S.C. § 675) maintains a “preponderance of evidence” standard for removal—far lower than the criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt”—which the administration has refused to upgrade¹⁰.
2.3 Independent studies show 80 percent of removals are based on vague unsubstantiated neglect allegations, and over half of removed children are never reunited. Foster‑care alumni face \~25 percent incarceration by age 20; only 50 percent complete high school; \~10 percent graduate college; \~30 percent suffer PTSD; \~50 percent become homeless; and teenage pregnancy and misclassified‑death rates are significantly elevated¹¹.

3. Mandate Robust Digital Privacy Protections in Schools
3.1 Amend federal ed‑tech procurement rules and enforce Executive Order 14081 (May 2023) to ban intrusive monitoring tools; require voluntary deployment, parental opt‑in, data minimization, retention limits, transparency, annual third‑party bias audits, and civil‑rights assessments tied to Title I and CARES/ARP funding¹².
3.2 Require that flagged incidents trigger mental‑health intervention rather than law enforcement unless judicially authorized.
3.3 Reinforce Fourth Amendment rights; prohibit predictive policing or algorithmic risk scoring; mandate DOJ standards that flagged content alone cannot justify arrests, searches, or removals; this contravenes the Department of Justice’s January 2024 guidance on student‑data protection in public schools, which prohibits unauthorized disclosure of pupil records without due process¹³.

4. End AI‑Driven Criminalization of Innocent Students
Require schools to stop sending flagged alerts to law enforcement without investigation and judicial oversight, strengthening Fourth Amendment protections.

5. Protect At‑Risk Families from Unjust Child Removal
Enact federal laws guaranteeing criminal‑level evidentiary standards before removal; rights to jury trial, counsel, and cross‑examination; independent ombuds review; reunification funding following children; and prohibition of agency financial gains from removals or adoptions.

6. Reform Foster‑Care System to Prevent Abuse & Trauma
Link federal funding to quarterly safety inspections; ban over‑medication and unverified psychiatric diagnoses; restrict group‑home placements; require trauma‑informed training for foster parents and periodic mental‑health assessments; publicly report PTSD, homelessness, teen pregnancy, and mortality metrics.

7. Mandate Transparency & Media Accountability
Require public reporting by child-welfare agencies detailing removals, evidence, outcomes, and review findings; revoke federal funding from agencies that obstruct press access or reclassify deaths.

8. Democratize Nuclear–AI Development
Amend the May 23 2025 executive order on advanced nuclear projects to mandate 20 percent community‑owned equity in reactor–AI campuses (e.g., Trump Advanced Energy and Intelligence Campus) to ensure local control and accountability¹⁴.

9. Fast‑Track SMRs with Local Oversight means the NRC speeds up its licensing process for small modular reactors only at pilot sites where local residents, experts and elected boards share real decision‑making power. In return for genuine community governance of siting, design and operations, regulators agree to an abbreviated review timeline. Public energy‑use dashboards run by that community board then stream real‑time data on power output, fuel use, waste and safety events so residents and watchdogs can monitor performance immediately. This model pairs faster reactor deployment with democratic control and full transparency.

10. Redirect Tariff Revenue & Wealth Taxes to Public Innovation Funds
Allocate 50 percent of new tariffs and wealth taxes to a National Innovation Trust funding local AI‑nuclear R\&D and UBI pilots.

11. Reinstate Robust Ethics Rules with Enforcement
Enact a scaled‑down Drain the Swamp Act banning lobbyist gifts, instituting cooling‑off periods, and creating real‑time public dashboards for lobbying and political spending¹⁵.

12. Anchor Freedom City Zones in Democratic Governance
Establish zones with elected council control over licensing; worker representation; municipal or cooperative data ownership; and periodic public referenda.

13. Embed Public Ownership in the Stargate Innovation Model
Secure 10–15 percent non‑dilutable public stake via a federally audited cooperative in the Stargate initiative (OpenAI, SoftBank, Oracle), channeling returns into retraining, smart‑city tech, and UBI pilots.

14. Public Accountability Dashboards & Recall Mechanisms
Create dashboards tracking deregulation, permits, lobbyist access, and political gifts tied to executive actions, and empower local communities with moratoriums or referenda to recall projects breaching transparency and trust.

Conclusion: These proposed reforms realign national security, economic acceleration, and technological innovation with constitutional protections, democratic oversight, and societal imperatives. Subsequent chapters will delve into the technological architecture of surveillance systems, systemic bias in removal practices, legal reform frameworks, case-study analyses of implementation failures, governance models for AI‑nuclear integration, and mechanisms for sustaining public accountability.

Sources:

0. School Surveillance Systems Threaten Student Privacy, New Knight Foundation Lawsuit Alleges 2024(teenvogue.com/story/school-sur…)
1. EFF Red Flag Machine data, Oct 30 2023   [](eff.org/deeplinks/2023/10/red-…)
2. GoGuardian Q1 2024 internal audit   [](goguardian.com/resources/q1-20…)
3. EFF Red Flag Machine report categories data   [](github.com/eff/red-flag-machin…)
4. “Texas districts see thousands of GoGuardian alerts daily,” KXAN, 2023   [](kxan.com/news/education/texas-…)
5. Electronic Frontier Foundation report on automated alerts and interventions   [](eff.org/deeplinks/2023/06/auto…)
6. Arkansas student arrest over MLK Jr. speech transcript, April 2024   [](arkansasonline.com/news/2024/a…)
7. EFF/National Teacher Survey on surveillance software burden   [](eff.org/files/2023/06/22/teach…)
8. Trustpilot reviews of GoGuardian   [](trustpilot.com/review/goguardi…) and SiteJabber reviews   [](sitejabber.com/reviews/goguard…)
9. County X budget report on adoption vs reunification funding   [](countyx.gov/budget/2023/child-…)
10. Family First Prevention Services Act, Title 42 U.S.C. § 675   [](law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42…)
11. Foster‑care outcomes meta‑analysis, 2024   [](childwelfare.gov/pubPDFs/foste…)
12. Executive Order 14081 on Educational Privacy, May 2023   [whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/p…](whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/p…)
13. Department of Justice Guidance on student‑data protection in public schools, Jan 2024   [](justice.gov/opa/pr/doj-issues-…)
14. Executive Order on Advanced Nuclear Projects, May 23 2025   [](whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/p…)
15. Drain the Swamp Act by Reps. Lee, Khanna, Tlaib, 2025   [](congress.gov/bill/119th-congre…)

School Surveillance Systems Threaten Student Privacy, New Knight Institute Lawsuit Alleges

The Knight First Amendment Institute has filed a lawsuit seeking information about how schools use surveillance systems to spy on student laptops.

^{Jennifer Jones (Teen Vogue)}

📢 ¡Autodefensa Digital!

Bienvenido a tu programa de radio sobre privacidad y seguridad digital por ZK Radio. 🎙️

Tendrás acceso a noticias y tips para una navegación más segura por Internet. 🛡️

¡Activa tu recordatorio! 🔔

🔗 zcashesp.com/zk-radio/

#privacidad #seguridad #derechoshumanos

Thanks to Starmer and his coterie.

middleeasteye.net/opinion/uk-r…

Labour's embrace of Reform's narrative means Farage has already won

As Labour adopts hardline welfare and immigration policies, it is echoing Reform UK's agenda - normalising far-right ideas at the heart of government

^{Middle East Eye}

one of the best versions of this song:

Mix - LAURNDO ALMEIDA with THE MODERN JAZZ QUARTET One Note Samba (1964)

youtube.com/watch?v=cl8EgQGA4k…

Modern Jazz Quartet & Laurindo Almeida ~ One Note Samba

Artist: Modern Jazz Quartet & Laurindo AlmeidaTitle: One Note Sambataken from the album "Collaboration" (1964)http://www.discogs.com/Modern-Jazz-QuartetWith-...

^YouTube

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jul/06/qantas-attack-reveals-one-phone-call-is-all-it-takes-to-crack-cybersecuritys-weakest-link-humans

Qantas attack reveals one phone call is all it takes to crack cybersecurity’s weakest link: humans

If one phone call is all it takes to bring down your enterprise, it isn't the front line workers that are the weakest link in your security.

bitte jetzt alle abstimmen

survey.lamapoll.de/Fisch-des-J…

https://survey.lamapoll.de/Fisch-des-Jahres-2026

^{survey.lamapoll.de}