AI-Generated image by Grok: US VP JD Vance, and future German Chancellor Friedrich Merz.
As the Donald J. Trump’s administration shocks the world with its America First agenda, a rejection of all Globalist thesis and a firm commitment for peace, his top advisers are going round and reinforcing these policies and principles all over the world.
A shinny example is Vice President JD Vance, who has tackled Foreign Policy matters head on, both in his speeches and interviews.
It’s still reverberating around the geopolitical world his speech in the Munich Security Conference on February 14th, where he said: “The threat that I worry most about vis-à-vis Europe is not Russia, not China, it’s not any other external actor. What I worry about is the threat from within—the retreat of Europe from some of its most fundamental values, values shared with the United States of America.”
Vance claimed free speech is ‘in retreat’ across Europe, but alerted against the catastrophe of the EU Unchecked Mass Migration Policies: “Of all the pressing challenges… there is nothing more urgent than mass migration… No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants.”
Vance has often spoken about Germany; a country ha has great affinity with.
In his Munich Speech, he urged Germany to drop the political ‘firewall’ against the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), and he met AfD leader Alice Weidel post-speech.
Vance made a fiery CPAC Speech on February 20th where he has a few words about his Teutonic friends: “Germany’s entire defense is subsidized by the American taxpayer… Do you think the American taxpayer is going to stand for that if you get thrown in jail in Germany for posting a mean tweet?”
Today (15) on Fox News, Vance returned to his warnings: ‘If Germany takes in millions more incompatible migrants, it’ll destroy itself. America can’t save it’.
Vance sees Europe, and Germany in particular, as undermining democracy via free-speech curbs and migration policies, while depending too much on U.S. support.
Watch: JD Vance says Germany ‘kiIIs itself’ by letting in millions of fake asylum seekers ‘from countries that are totally culturally incompatible’.
JD Vance says Germany "kiIIs itself" by letting in millions of fake asylum seekers “from countries that are totally culturally incompatible." JD Vance is always very clear and precise. He is worth more than all corrupt EU politicians put together. pic.twitter.com/iAn9utqrVo
It was an attack outside the central police station in Cannes, where several police officers had been targeted in 2021. A 21-year-old man, who according to our information has been under OQTF ( obligation to leave French territory) since November 24, 2024, attempted to attack a police crew at around 11am on Saturday.
The person armed with a knife attacked the National Police officers stationed outside the town’s police station in the Maritime Alps. The police then used a stun gun to subdue and arrest him. No officers were injured in the attack (…).
According to our information, the man, a Moroccan, had been arrested earlier in the week after he had kicked off the rear-view mirror of a city police car. He was released and summoned at a later date.
The man shouted ‘Allah Akbar’ at the time of the offence and continued to utter these words loudly in his cell, the source added. There were no injuries in this case. The prefect of the Alpes-Maritimes department went to the scene of the crime. (…)
A knife attack on police officers took place at the same location in November 2021. The attacker, 40-year-old Algerian Lakhdar B., was neutralised by shots fired by the police. A terrorist trail had been ruled out in this case. The judiciary still has to decide whether or not the suspect can be held criminally liable due to his mental condition. The decision is expected on March 27. (…)
The book came with a teaching guide that included one classroom activity in which children had to write to their local MPs to express how much refugees “enrich our countries”USBOURNE PUBLISHING
School children in Wales have been taught to plot illegal migration routes from Syria to the UK during class.
Students at St John Lloyd School in Llanelli attended lessons where they were urged to plot land and sea journeys across Europe.
Pupils were awarded either bronze, silver or gold grades if they found routes in which “all controlled borders are avoided”.
To earn gold, a student must “plan a route from Syria to the UK,” ensuring that “controlled borders are avoided using land and sea”.
To receive a bronze grade, they must ensure that “all controlled borders are avoided”.
It is understood that teachers were using resources from the platform Google Classroom.
The material has been removed from the library of school resources, while Carmarthenshire council has launched an investigation to “look into the matter”.
Speaking to The Telegraph, psychotherapist James Essess, who initially highlighted the lessons, said: “Increasingly, woke and often anti-British propaganda continues to be snuck in through the back door in schools.”
“Instead of simply teaching students how to read maps, they appear to do so under the guise of helping illegal immigrants enter the United Kingdom.”
He added: “Given the widespread concerns across the country regarding illegal migration, I imagine most parents would be up in arms at the thought of such ideological indoctrination in their children’s schools.”
It comes amid concerns of how schoolchildren are being taught about migration.
Last year, Usbourne Publishing released a children’s book for those aged seven and over titled Lift the Flap: Questions and Answers About Refugees, which told readers that “we all have roots in other countries”.
The book came with a teaching guide that included one classroom activity in which children had to write to their local MPs to express how much refugees “enrich our countries”.
In addition, the Labour-run Welsh Government has vowed to create an “Anti-Racist Wales” by 2030, with all public bodies called on to play a part in addressing discrimination.
The directive has required organisations and museums to educate pupils in the “right historic narrative” that recognises “historical injustices”, while requiring teaching material at museums and other attractions to “tell stories through the lens of black, Asian and minority”.
Marine Le Pen has slammed the possibility of being declared ineligible to run in France’s 2027 presidential election.
“If I’m banned from standing, it will be profoundly undemocratic,” the Rassemblement National (RN) leader declared on March 13, warning that such a ruling would strip the French people of their right to choose their future President.
In two weeks, a Paris judge will rule on Le Pen’s eligibility to run in France’s 2027 presidential election: a decision that could change the French political landscape two years ahead of the presidential race.
At the heart of the case is the long-running investigation into the alleged misuse of EU funds for RN parliamentary assistants.
Prosecutors are seeking a five-year prison sentence for Le Pen, including two years of jail time and five years of ineligibility with “provisional execution.”
An ineligibility sentence with provisional execution would be applied immediately despite any appeal that the defendant may file.
An ineligibility verdict is mandatory in the event of conviction for embezzlement of public funds.
However, the request from the prosecutors for ‘immediate effect’ is unusual.
This would prevent Marine Le Pen from standing for election, either in the legislative elections in the event of a dissolution of the French parliament or in the presidential election of 2027.
France’s Constitutional Council will have to decide on the constitutionality of such a request.
Mayotte politician Rachadi Saindou has contested a ruling on his ineligibility with ‘provisional execution’ before the Constitutional Council via a complaint filed in the Council of State. The Council ruling, which is expected over the next couple of weeks, could affect Marine Le Pen’s verdict.
If the Constitutional Council rules in favour of Saindou’s challenge, this could push the Parisian judge to drop the prosecutor’s request for immediate ineligibility against Le Pen.
The Constitutional Council has until April 3 to give its opinion. But it could do so before 31 March, the day of Marine Le Pen’s verdict.
Despite the legal threat, Marine Le Pen remains a dominant force in the upcoming election. Although the presidential race is still two years away, polling from December 2024 placed her at the top, with a strong chance of reaching the second round.
With the judgment looming, the French veteran insists she is “extremely calm” about the court’s decision.
“I’m a fighter,” she said, “and I’ve learned since childhood that the legal battle waged against you is an integral part of the political battle.”
Le Pen also referenced Romania’s recent presidential controversy, where nationalist politician Călin Georgescu was blocked from running by authorities.
“I am extremely concerned about what is happening in Romania,” she said.
“Both there [in Romania] and in France, there are people who believe that if the ballot box doesn’t deliver the ‘right’ result, they must find a way to manipulate the system until it does.”
On today’s #NCFNewspeak, NCF Director Peter Whittle, Senior Fellows Dr. Philip Kiszely and Rafe Heydel-Mankoo and Amy Gallagher of Stand up to Woke discuss:
Will Reform deliver on the issues of key concern to its core base?
Shocking statistics reveal the truth about crime rates of certain nationalities in the UK
Shrove Tuesday was marked in London with another farmers’ rally in Whitehall, the fourth in four months. Farmers flipped pancakes and tried to put on a brave face, but a survey released the same day revealed that more than half of UK farms expect to go out of business within the next ten years.
The protests are in response to Labour’s announcement last October that the current 100% relief from inheritance tax for farmers will be restricted to the first £1 million of combined agricultural and business property. Above that, it will be rated at 20%. Although the tactics employed by the Labour government differ from the brutalities of the Soviet regime, the ideological goal driving the farm tax remains identical: the eradication of private ownership.
The measure is deeply unpopular, both with farmers and the public at large, prompting ministers to justify the cash grab as crucial for keeping the NHS afloat. Yet government figures indicate that the measure is only expected to raise £500 million a year for the treasury—equivalent to about 20 hours of NHS spending. So why do it?
Farmers have their own theories. Tim, a farmer from Wiltshire, told GBNews: “It’s an ideological issue—[Labour] is targeting ownership. They’re targeting not just agricultural property relief (APR) but also business property relief (BPR). They’re targeting anyone who wants to have the freedom to do business and to be incentivised to do that.”
Tim is absolutely right.
In the days leading up to last October’s Autumn Budget, Labour ministers were asked to share their definition of a working person. Labour’s manifesto had promised they would “not increase taxes on working people,” but this raised an obvious question: who exactly were “working people?”
A working person is someone who “goes out and earns their living, usually paid in a sort of monthly cheque,” Prime Minister Keir Starmer told Sky News. When asked whether he would include people who gain an income from shares or assets (as farmers do), he replied “Well, they wouldn’t come within my definition.”
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said they were “strivers who graft,” although apparently, that didn’t include people who graft hard enough to start their own business; her budget included a tax rise on employers’ National Insurance contributions. Reeves confirmed this didn’t fall under her definition of a tax on working people.
When asked by BBC journalist Laura Kuenssberg “Why are people who run businesses not working people?” Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson dodged the question seven times, although she did offer a definition: “A working person is someone who derives their main income from going out to work”.
Was Phillipson a working person, Kuenssberg asked, given that as a cabinet minister Phillipson earns a salary in excess of £160,000? Phillipson nodded. “My income derives from my job”, she replied.
The median farm household income in England was £17,800 in 2021/22; for full-time employees, it was £33,000. “Working people” isn’t a “definition of wages,” Labour minister Pat McFadden explained.
The ministers’ inability to define a working person was largely treated as a joke at the time, given that it seemed nonsensical, but it is no laughing matter. The distinction being drawn here is indeed ideological: it is between the proletarian and the kulak classes.
‘Kulak’ is a Russian word meaning ‘fist’. It was also the label given by the Communists to those peasants who, following the abolition of serfdom in 1861, had striven and grafted enough to own land and employ workers. Officially the term was reserved for anyone owning more than eight acres of land; in reality owning any asset, even one cow, was enough to earn someone the label.
Russia’s economy was historically rooted in small-scale agriculture. As the more successful land-owners in their locale, the kulaks not only epitomised capitalistic enterprise, they also tended to be pillars of their communities. They would lend money, provide mortgages, run the local administrative affairs. All of this was anathema to the Communists, who wanted to transform Russia’s economy from small-scale and localised to large-scale and collectivised. For this to happen farming had to be collectivised, and that meant rooting out the kulak class.
In 1927, heavy taxes and restrictions were imposed upon the kulaks. When that failed to break them, the Communists simply started seizing the land. By late 1929, a plan to “liquidate the kulaks as a class” was underway. In the years 1930–31 some 100,000 kulaks were shot dead. Ten million were sent by cattle truck to remote areas, of which three million died en route.
“My great-grandfather was dekulakised because he’d installed a wooden floor in the house,” recalled Elena Lanher, talking to Radio Liberty. “He never reached Solovki prison camp, but died on the way.”
By the summer of 1931, the whole of the Ukrainian steppe had been collectivised. Some 40% of the nation’s cattle and 65% of the sheep were slaughtered by the peasants, who would rather kill their animals than hand them over. The inevitable result was famine. Between 1930 and 1933 an estimated 5.7–8.7 million people starved to death across the Soviet empire. Ukraine alone saw between 3.5 and 5 million starve in what became known as the Holodomor—‘murder by hunger’.
Yet, chillingly, the atrocities were hailed by the Communists as a resounding success, a blow by the workers against “activists, engaged in counter-revolutionary activities.” That narrative was to continue throughout the Soviet era. Anyone who disagreed with the Communist Party must, by definition, be a counter-revolutionary. In fact, only 44% of those arrested under the dekulakisation program were peasant farmers. The rest were clergymen, tradesmen, former Czarist civil servants, teachers, and others deemed part of the “intelligentsia”. Protesting the arrest of your farmer neighbour could result in death or deportation.
In modern Britain, as in Russia, kulaks are farmers and small business owners, but, as JD Vance pointed out in Munich, they can also be Christians engaged in silent prayer. It’s up to us all to rally at the next farmers’ march.
The new bearded Syrian dictator had declared “diversity is our strength,” a phrase that came out of Western academic departments, and he had repeated it to European foreign ministers (including Italy’s Tajani, France’s Séjourné, and Germany’s Baerbock), to the UN secretary general, to the Hague prosecutor, to the BBC director, to the spin doctor, and to other gullible Westerners.
Like the “inclusive Taliban,” the jihadists had figured out how to sell themselves to us multicultural idiots.
And so it ended: thousands of innocent people butchered because they were Alawis, Christians and others.
Everything was going great in Syria.
The pompous Antonio Guterres had met the new bearded dictator, Ahmed al Sharaa, alias Al Julani, on March 4.
Four days later, hell.
Hundreds of corpses in the streets and summary executions. At least a thousand dead, including women and children. Entire families exterminated. Alawites, Christians, Druze: no one is spared from the Islamic axe.
“Europe must make its voice heard loud and clear regarding the mass murder of Alawite and Christian civilians in Syria”, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar told Luxembourg’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Xavier Bettel, who was visiting Jerusalem.
Everything has been seen before, even if history, which is a teacher, never has students.
January 20, 1976, Damour, Lebanon. Terrorists from the Palestine Liberation Organization arrive in the predominantly Christian village: 582 civilians dead, all Maronite Christians. “It was an apocalypse,” testified Mansour Labaky, a Maronite Christian priest who survived the massacre. “They were coming, thousands and thousands, shouting ‘Allahu Akbar.’ And they were slaughtering everyone in their path: men, women and children.”
We Westerners are tourists in the heart of darkness: we know nothing and we learn nothing.
There are dozens of videos and testimonies on social media of mass roundups, summary executions of unarmed civilians and looting.
“Alhamdulillah”, they say after massacring civilians. The mainstream media is silent. The UN…nothing.
When Israel defends itself from cutthroats, global indignation.
When entire Syrian villages are erased, only silence.
In January, the jihadists of Damascus were visited by the Foreign Ministers of France and Germany. Then the Hague prosecutor, Karim Khan, arrived in Damascus. Then the EU suspended sanctions against Syria. Everything was going great: Sharia and Jihad were welcomed at the “Palace.”
Next to the jihadists in chief, the international director of the BBC, Jeremy Bowen, all smiles, like a child with his older brother.
The Foreign Minister of Spain also enters the scene, the country most aligned against Israel in the war in Gaza against Hamas.
“I arrive in Damascus, a country full of hope and optimism for a brighter future,” wrote EU Commissioner for Equality Hadja Lahbib on January 17. “I am here to ensure that these people receive the urgent help they need.” In January, the EU wrote a check for €235 million for Damascus.
Also in Damascus is Amy Pope, director of the UN Office for Migration. Also there was Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s foolish spin doctor.
A few days later, the religious massacres begin.
Now both the Druze and the Alawites are asking Israel to protect them from the cutthroats. The Alawites who live in Israel in Ghajar have never experienced a day of terror in their history. And Druze and Circassians are entering Israel in search of shelter.
Israel immediately deployed its forces to Syria after the jihadists attacked Damascus to protect the Druze minority in the southwest (many members of this religious community live in Israel and serve in its army). Then Israel destroyed much of the Syrian army’s arsenal, including chemical weapons and long-range missile depots, to prevent all these weapons from falling into the hands of the jihadists. If Israel had not done this, we would probably be talking about a much larger massacre in Syria by now. But instead of receiving thank-you notes, Israel is pilloried for “violating Syria’s sovereignty.”
In the world of the UN, the European Union, the Hague prosecutor, BBC journalists, human rights NGOs, sheep are led to the slaughter, democracies are accused of terrorism and terrorists of “resistance”. In the real Middle East, only a sword stands between a terrorist and a civilian.
In the Middle East, where jihadists reign demonic, the only way to survive is to have military strength and the moral courage to face the barbarians. Thank God that Israel has both. The only other option is to be massacred by butchers like Hamas in Gaza and Al Qaeda in Syria.
Unlike my fellow journalists, I have never deluded myself that, after the military dictatorship, Islamic democracy could flourish. Why should what we see be confined to Syria and Gaza? Answer: It won’t be. One day you will see the same images in Europe. I hope that I will not have to republish this one day, adding: “I warned you.”
The Romanian Government has stated it will step up its efforts to “combat illegal content online”.
The news on March 14 came ahead of contentious presidential elections following the annulled ballot of November last year due to claims, considered unsubstantiated in Romanian media, of Russian interference.
Ivan Bogdan, minister of economy, research, innovation and digitalisation, announced firm measures against online manipulation, stressing that Romania already used three types of advanced software to detect “false content”.
He said Romania applied strict European legislation and did not tolerate disinformation online.
Bogdan also pointed out there were mechanisms implemented at the global, European and national level to combat disinformation and manipulative content.
In a press release on March 13, education minister Daniel David said: “Freedom of expression can stand as long as it does not promote illegal content, as long as it does not attack human dignity, as long as it does not represent bullying.”
David also shared a guide on Combatting Illegal Content Online for teachers, parents, pupils, students “so that they understand what rights they have and how they can notice, for example, online content that is illegal and should be removed”.
This included incitement to hatred based on criteria including the level of education or social category, glorifying totalitarian regimes or denying their crimes, distributing false or misleading information about public health, elections, social crises, economic/banking crises to induce panic or influence public opinion.
David stressed: “Technology itself, including social media, is not a good or bad thing.”
He said freedom of expression was important “but in a democracy there are limits”.
“Likewise, we must have those limits on social networks, as we have in the physical world, nothing more.
“We don’t need to bureaucratise and become obsessive about control, but we also cannot accept that everything is permitted. At that point, we are no longer a society, we are no longer a democracy, we are a state and we are rather an anarchic group,” he said.
🇷🇴Online censorship in Romania goes into effect
The same people who have called Georgescu's supporters "uneducated extremist idiots" and called for their arrest/m#rder will now be removing content at their discretion
On March 11, the government together with TikTok and Facebook announced “a partnership” to fight disinformation, focusing on quickly removing content.
On March 27, officials will conduct a test run simulating potential electoral scenarios to evaluate rapid intervention capabilities.
Although the measures reportedly would serve to protect citizens and the maintenance of a safe and transparent online environment, critics noted there was a major risk of abuse and censorship.
Romania pushed to address so-called illegal content, hate speech and manipulated information more aggressively after approving a bill in late February that introduced stricter regulations on social media platforms and online content providers.
While aligned with the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA), Romania’s legislation went further in its restrictions.
Key features of the bill were speedy illicit content removal, with material deemed to be inciting violence, hate speech or disinformation on major national-interest topics to be removed within 15 minutes of publication, something which was not required under the DSA.
During this period, platforms would be expected to use algorithms, potentially AI-driven, to analyse and classify content.
For accounts registered or active in Romania, platforms must adjust algorithms to ensure “potentially harmful content”, broadly defined to include incitement to hatred, dangerous disinformation, or manipulation, did not reach more than 150 users.
Platforms would be barred from promoting such “potentially harmful content” linked to Romanian accounts.
Institutions including the Permanent Electoral Authority, the National Audiovisual Council, the Romanian Intelligence Service and even the Ministry of Defence will have the power to directly request the deletion of posts or the blocking of users’ access to them.
If State institutions validated more than 30 per cent of user reports of illegal or harmful content on a platform within 30 days of the law’s enactment, the provider would face heavy fines.
Additionally, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) failing to block designated “harmful” sites could face fines ranging from 10,000 to 50,000 lei (approximately €2,000 to €10,000).
The bill allowed authorities, including the National Audiovisual Council (CNA) and the National Authority for Management and Regulation in Communications (ANCOM), to order content removal or site blocking without prior independent judicial review in certain cases.
This meant that once content was blocked, affected users must take legal action to restore their posts — a lengthy court procedure that would likely continue until the original message’s relevance and impact had effectively disappeared.
Critics warned that with such a wide range of State institutions being able to request the direct removal of posts, there were strong concerns of possible political use or even abuse, especially regarding the elections.
They also noted the lack of clear, transparent and well-defined criteria on what constituted criticism, irony or contrary opinions.
The law was drafted and proposed in late February, with rapid movement through Romania’s legislative process.
It had gained traction despite concerns over foreign interference in the annulled 2024 presidential election. That was particularly linked to populist candidate Călin Georgescu’s TikTok success, which Romanian intelligence attributed to possible Russian influence.
Lawyers from CMS Law Now, a leading international law firm with 79 offices in more than 40 countries and more than 5,000 lawyers worldwide, warned it would be a challenge for providers required to implement mechanisms to detect and categorise potentially harmful content and remove identified illegal content within 15 minutes of publication.
They said that if other countries did not adopt similar rules, providers would have to either apply these stricter measures universally or develop separate mechanisms to identify and categorise content posted by and for users in Romania.
“While we understand the need for effective mechanisms to combat illegal content, we believe that the urgency imposed by this proposal, the strong reliance on AI, and the broad definition of ‘potentially harmful content’ could lead to errors and potentially infringe on freedom of expression,” they concluded.
In colonized Europe, Ramadan isn’t just for Muslims. The new population generously shares its culture with the natives, even as it displaces them, not only in Italy, but in Germany as well.
A letter from the Zuckmayer School in the Neukölln district of Berlin has caused displeasure among parents. Not only were the seventh-graders invited to take part in the Islamic fast-breaking (iftar), but attendance was also compulsory.
In Austria, woke educrats are not required to Islamize native kids:
More and more young children – some as young as primary school age – are abstaining from eating and drinking during lessons. … Vienna primary school unionist Thomas Krebs warned of the consequences: ‘Without sufficient hydration, physical education is hardly possible. In addition, many children suffer from poor concentration, hypoglycaemia and exhaustion – some literally fall over.’
Krebs says pupils pressure their peers to fast. Potentially outnumbered infidels could be in for a beating on the playground if they don’t go along.
At the so-called ‘Iftar of Friendship’, schoolchildren were brought in to deal with the Islamic fasting month of Ramadan. ‘So while Muslim traditions are being promoted and integrated into the everyday lives of schoolchildren, we have been experiencing a worrying development in South Tyrol for years: out of a misguided sense of tolerance, traditional Christian festivals and celebrations – such as the St. Martin parade, St. Nicholas celebrations and Christmas parties – are increasingly being cancelled or watered down in kindergartens and schools,’ criticised Roland Stauder, Chairman of the Freedom Party, in a press release.
If Europeans can’t defend their own culture now, it will be extirpated quickly when inpouring and rapidly reproducing Muslims achieve a majority, just as cultures like Egypt’s were lost throughout the Midde East as Islam expanded.
Political correctness has now invaded even Florence’s iconic square, Piazza della Signoria, once home to Michelangelo’s magnificent David. Italian outlet Il Giornale reports that as of today, an almost four-metre-high statue of gilded bronze depicting a black girl will tower over the square. The statue, titled Time Unfolding, is the work of British sculptor Thomas J Price, and will remain on the Renaissance square until September as part of the ‘Thomas J Price in Florence’ project.
Woke delirium in Florence where a statue of a black girl was installed in Piazza della Signoria to contrast the “Renaissance space devoted to male power” of Donatello's David, to “reflect on inclusivity” because “the ideal of classical beauty is a cage”.https://t.co/YNmXaTK0QV
The reason behind the choice of the wonderful Italian square to display the somewhat bizarre work of art is that Piazza della Signoria “is a space devoted to male power,” which should be challenged and counterbalanced by a female figure. The issue with the other sculptures standing on the square, such as Donatello’s David, Benvenuto Cellini’s Perseus, and Baccio Bandinelli’s Hercules and Cacus, is apparently not only that they all represent males, but that all those men are also white.
Activism obviously does not care for the fact that the figures immortalised by the statues (historical and mythological) are white by default and not by some patriarchal, toxicly masculine scheming: the indigenous people of ancient Rome and Greece happen to be white.
But that does not count when it comes to “a higher purpose” and ideological considerations. According to the artist, the square needed a statue capable of “asking questions about the social, aesthetic and political hierarchies that guide our lives, ” as he put it in an interview with Italian liberal paper La Repubblica. According to Price, “the ideal of classical beauty is a model, but also a cage that still exists, so we internalize a value system that does not put a black woman at the centre of a square.”
As Il Giornale points out, the whole reasoning is fundamentally flawed. Not only does it insist on the mistaken approach of viewing values and ideals of the past through the contemporary lens of wokeness, but it also relativises the concept of beauty. Not to mention, the paper adds, that in classical antiquity there are numerous sculptures dedicated to women both in Greco-Roman and Christian art.
Price, a black man himself, has acquired some fame for his large-scale figurative sculptures and who, according to Ocula magazine, “combines Western sculptural traditions and contemporary materials to challenge the pervasive problems of the underrepresentation and misconception of Black people in the art world and in wider society.” He, however, does not seem to have many original ideas, apart from his woke activism, considering that he keeps exhibiting the exact same type of work wherever he is invited to do so. Back in 2023, he had created a statue called Moments Contained, which was exhibited outside the Central Station of Rotterdam also depicting a black woman, while in 2020 in London, he had exhibited the same black woman statue holding a cell phone in her hand.
Il Giornale notes that Price’s artwork is also on display at the Museo Novecento in Florence as part of the project that aims to “reflect on inclusiveness, climate change and new forms of sustainability.” According to a post advertising the exhibit on the social media channel of the museum, Price’s statue in Piazza della Signoria “challenges the traditional narratives of power and representation, creating a surprising contrast with the historical masterpieces that surround it.”
De gustibus non est disputandum, that is, “in matters of taste, there can be no disputes,” as the Latin maxim goes. Price’s art may or may not be of value, or to the liking of many. However, it is somewhat disconcerting that the leadership of the Florence municipality decided to erect the statue (albeit, mercifully, only temporarily) in one of the most beautiful town squares in the world. Shoving the progressive piece of art down the throats of its own residents and the large number of tourists who visit the beautiful Italian town not to be taught lessons in critical race theory and decolonization is nothing but an act of aggression.
