There are lots of funny Mbappe/Mao memes coming from Chinese twitter. But non-Chinese will have difficulty understanding some, even with a correct translation. This is actually one area that a LLM does incredibly well in - it's cosmopolitan. It ingests enough books from major languages that it can basically serve as a "native" guide to every culture. Gemini in particular has been able to explain Chinese political jokes since mid 2025 or so (other models generally failed - I tested them extensively with one of my own jokes). But by 2026 nearly every frontier model can explain Chinese political jokes. Here I even give Gemini 4.0 a *translated* text and it was still able to figure out what the joke was.

here I have some very long posts, statistically debunking 3 viral claims of fraud in Brazil's elections. serious people can read/contribute.

Westoids who sing the virtues of China's education system should note that their teenagers undergo multiple years of psychological torture like what you see in the video below. (the exception being the ultra-rich kids who go to international schools) The teens in the video are, in fact, the more fortunate teens in their school. Their parents have to go the extra length to do this for them. Most don't. You should be nicer to the angry, bitter Chinese people you see on the Internet, because they were likely traumatized by a childhood like this.

Blanchard and Zucman are two of the most conceited pieces of shit in American academia. They have spent the last 20 years establishing, through blatant ethnic nepotism I have personally witnessed, a network of French economists working in American universities. Which is not because they like America; they all continue to refer to themselves as French, never as "Americans", and if you have a conversation with them, they'll regularly tell you how much they despise this country and its people. These "French-American" economists are here to avoid paying the taxes of France, because they don't want to give €30,000/yr of their income to the French government, which is fiscally in more desperate straits than any jurisdiction in the U.S. Not only that, it was their policy advice (or lack thereof) to the successive French governments since 2000 which have led their country into the fiscal and societal trainwreck that we are seeing today. Barely five years ago, Blanchard headed a commission of economists which identified the most pressing challenges to the French economy as "climate change" and "economic inequalities", which of course demand more taxes and more debt. Apart from having provided a miniscule amount of pushback to French socialists on labor market policy, Blanchard has been content with letting his own country fall into fiscal collapse under the weight of one of the most absurd welfare-regulatory regimes in the world. Not even wanting to comment on their country which is burning down right now, these smug French economists are now asking why Americans seem to have different views than theirs. They never once consider that the Americans' "backwards" economic beliefs may, in part, explain the diverging incomes between the U.S. and France which they are personally taking advantage of. Most American centi-billionaires have developed, through personal experiences and professional advice, an intimate knowledge of charitable causes. Zuckerberg is one of the most prolific contributors to education in the world, constantly revising his targets to promote actual improvements in educational outcomes (unlike the Californian government). Brin is among the most generous contributors to medical research in the world, having personally spent years identifying the most pressing needs of the medical community. Brin and Page have also effectively implemented a wealth tax against Google itself (giving 1% of stock, and 1% of profits per year, to philanthropy). The "French-Americans" who have uprooted their own lives to live in a country they hate to avoid paying taxes, suggests that the American billionaires should simply hand this money to their government instead of evidence-based philanthropy. Not only that, but these French leeches will take it to the public platform to condemn and insult the centi-billionaires, who have contributed a thousand times more, in effort and resources, to helping the global poor than they have ever done. The most pathetic part is that it's clear Olivier Blanchard was discussing all this earnestly. It took him mere hours to reconsider his position after encountering such mundane criticisms as "Have you considered that the government would not spend this money as effectively as private initiatives?" He now goes back to equivocating about "elasticities" (though he would never bother to look at any empirical research on philanthropy, because that does not interest him.) That Blanchard's position collapses to basic online feedback shows a much deeper rot within the economics profession: Never once in his professional life has this oracle of retarded advice been challenged by his cowardly colleagues, who "just want to do economics and don't care about the politics". The result is that certain academics have spent their lives advocating for idiotic, radical positions which they have not reasoned through in a way that even an American hicklib who has never attended college is capable of doing. Newsom, whose political future depends on the farmers of Iowa, is desperately trying to stop the wealth tax. He might not understand the pitfalls of government wealth appropriation, but the farmers of Iowa do. And thus America, whose political system ensures that it must pay attention to the "un-educated" rural voters of the midwest more than its entire professoriate, continues to outperform France in every economic metric.