The UK in a nutshell.
But without the riots. Yet.
The ugly truth about France and some of the other European countries currently in turmoil - and which none of the politicians want to admit because it'd be political suicide - is that you can't solve the problem by going after immigrants (as the right asserts) or the rich (as the left asserts), but you could solve it by going after the old.
One extraordinary statistic for you: people over 60 in France, a quarter of the population, own 60% of France's wealth, non-financial and financial (ofce.fr/pdf/revue/2025/3-192…).
And here is another crazy statistic:
that same quarter of the population, those above 60, receive nearly two-thirds of all social spending by the French government (previssima.fr/actualite/prot…) - which is famously among the highest in the world (France's government spending is an insane 57.3% of GDP).
Last statistic: they make up about 40% of voters because they're a third of registered voters (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/266…), and they turn out far more than anyone else (franceinfo.fr/elections/sond…).
Put our 3 statistics together and there's almost a bit of an apartheid situation here: the old own most of the country's wealth, collect most of the social spending and have the political power to keep it that way.
Which makes them a de-facto rentier class, living off assets and transfers paid for by younger generations.
And, of course, at the risk of stating a truism, the future is built by the young. Yet France keeps effectively taking money away from them to give it to those whose working lives are already behind them - and need the money far less since they already own the country's wealth.
What about inheritance, I hear you ask? That's the funniest/saddest aspect: given that life expectancy has kept rising, the French now inherit a home at 54 on average. The most common case is someone in their 80s leaving it to heirs in their 50s, in effect the very old transferring wealth to the about-to-be old (insee.fr/fr/statistiques/fic…).
You can add this to our earlier apartheid statement: on top of all the rest, even when the old finally let go of their wealth, it stays within their own "camp".
That's my personal situation, incidentally: I'm 42, my father is 71 and he is starting to look at ways to pass things on to me and my siblings, when our professional lives are already well settled, so it'll arrive when it changes things the least, which is pretty much the French system in a nutshell.
Now, I get that there'd be some unfairness in going after them: they paid into the system their entire working lives, playing by the rules of a social contract that told them if they paid up they'd collect at the end. Changing the rules now means breaking that promise, which is admittedly unfair.
But there's no magic wealth tree in any society: you can only take it where it is. That's the way most major societal transformations end up happening. They're often triggered by a catastrophic event (the so-called "four horsemen": mass-mobilisation war, revolution, state collapse, plague) BUT what really drives change is a transfer: wealth gets pried from the privileged class who've been sitting on it and handed to those who'll build what comes next.
So, in theory and in an ideal world, you can do without the catastrophic event and directly proceed with the transfer...
The fact that in France, and elsewhere in Europe, it's the youth protesting is probably no coincidence - even though they don't frame it as a generational fight. And even though, cruel irony, the left politicians many of them march behind promise to bring the retirement age back to 60 (lcp.fr/actualites/legislativ…), which would make the situation even worse.
Let's say they understand intuitively that the system is stacked against them, even if they haven't yet figured out how. And politicians are obviously doing what politicians do, meaning pandering to the people who actually vote, while pointing the young towards easier - and politically convenient - scapegoats.
To be clear I'm not saying it's the only problem in France, VERY far from it. I'm also not saying that all old people in France live a lavish lifestyle at the expense of younger generations: there are also plenty of very poor retirees who, if anything, would deserve more.
What I am saying is that it's probably the biggest elephant in the room: everyone can see it, nobody dares mention it - no politician, from any side, wants to run on cutting grandma's pension - and it makes every other problem harder to fix.
Matthew Pencharz retweeted
Other countries might be defined by blood, territory or language. America has always been creedal, an ideal of liberty turned into a state.
Its critics back-handedly recognise as much. The reason that anti-Americanism is a force in world affairs (unlike anti-Algerianism or anti-Armenianism or anti-Albanianism) is that America’s enemies acknowledge that it stands for something. That something is the package represented by personal autonomy, limited government, constitutional rule, regular elections and private enterprise – in a word, freedom.
A bias towards freedom has, until now, characterised US foreign policy. A people habituated to liberty immediately saw what was wrong with Nazism and Communism.
Which is why current US foreign policy is so shocking to pro-Americans.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is one of those rare occasions when we can clearly identify the aggressor. Vladimir Putin sought to annex a neighbour that offered him no threat – a neighbour that had given up its nuclear weapons in return for a promise that its sovereignty would be respected within its existing borders. Who guaranteed that promise? Britain, the United States and (never forget) Russia.
Donald Trump is backing a belligerent dictatorship against a beleaguered democracy. Putin is the one leader he never disparages. He threatens annexation against Denmark, muses about handing away British territory, wages economic war on Canada. But not Russia. Never Russia.
Now Trump is buying diesel from Russia, potash from Belarus, minerals from China – all because he doesn’t want to buy them from Canada, which has stood at America’s side in war after war.
American friends, can you not see what this is doing, not just to America’s standing, but to the free world which your fathers have built since 1941? Trump is bringing down the international system from which the US has been the chief beneficiary. And for what? To drink liberal tears? God help us.
Matthew Pencharz retweeted
This is exactly right by @VictoriaPeckham
Took 10 trains this week Mon-Fri. 30% were on time.
One just disappeared @TLRailUK
Not exactly a reliable service @nationalrailenq , @Railways_GB
Delay Repay has become a reliable second income source.
.@thameswater water leak at end of Leander Road with Josephine Ave SW2 Looks like at site of former repair.
Leak has become much worse.
Any plan to fix @thameswater ?
How many houses’ following of hosepipe ban’s water saving has gone down the drain?
Hi @lambeth_council - fly tipping on Appach Rd SW2. Have reported, ref: 572466
Please collect before it metastasises.
Thanks!
Hello @thameswater Water main burst on St Matthew’s Rd SW2.
Outside St Matthew’s Estate Tenants’ Hall SW2 1NH
More flytipping just off Josephine Ave, this time on Appach Road SW2 @lambeth_council - have made report ref: 561494. Thanks!
More fly-tipping just off Josephine Ave on Appach Road SW2 @lambeth_council
Hello @lambeth_council end of Leander Road with Josephine Ave rapidly becoming flytipping site.
Have reported.
Thanks @lambeth_council for taking away the flytip. However, this is how it looks now. Quite a bit of littering left behind.
Thanks
Matthew Pencharz retweeted
There is only one “change” that will work for Burnham. A genuine, relentless focus on growth.
Two decades without earnings growth. That’s why electorate is fed up.
Only growth will repair contract between generations and allow social ills to be tackled
thetimes.com/article/f5b0402…
Matthew Pencharz retweeted
"End the Zionist Occupation of Britain" on the far right
"Globalise the Intifada" on the far left
If the horseshoe fits...
Matthew Pencharz retweeted
There is a claim that keeps circulating, presented as sophisticated analysis: antisemitic violence is caused by Israel’s actions. If Israel behaved differently, Jewish communities around the world would somehow be safer. This argument is not analysis. It is a moral inversion. And it collapses the moment you apply it consistently.
When China imprisons Uyghurs, does anyone warn Muslim communities in Paris to expect attacks? When Russia invaded Ukraine, did anyone tell Russian restaurants to brace for violence? No. Never. The causal chain between a government’s actions and violence against a diaspora is only ever constructed for Jews. Every other minority is extended the basic moral courtesy of being treated as individuals rather than proxies.
Now look at what the data actually shows. The SPCJ, which tracks antisemitic incidents in France in coordination with the Interior Ministry, has documented a consistent and damning pattern: it is antisemitic violence that inspires more antisemitic violence, not Israeli policy. After Mohamed Merah murdered Jewish children at point-blank range at the Ozar Hatorah school in Toulouse in 2012, antisemitic acts surged by 200%. There was no Gaza operation. No Israeli military action. The massacre of Jews in France produced more attacks on Jews in France.
The same logic held after the Hypercacher attack in January 2015: antisemitic acts increased by nearly 300%. Massacres of Jews do not shock antisemites into restraint. They embolden them. They signal impunity. They normalize hatred. And everyone in a position of responsibility knows it.
Which brings us to October 7. From the day of the Hamas attack, antisemitic acts in France increased by over 1,000%. A daily average of approximately 25 antisemitic acts was recorded in the 30 days that followed, reaching nearly 40 on some days. In the three months after the attack, the number of antisemitic acts equaled those recorded over the previous three years combined.
And here is another detail that makes the “Israel causes antisemitism” argument impossible to sustain: the spike began on October 7 itself, the very day of the attack. Israel had not yet responded. Not a single soldier had entered Gaza. Interior Minister Darmanin sent an urgent message to prefects that same day asking them to immediately reinforce protection of Jewish community sites. Synagogues. Schools. Community centers. By October 10, 10,000 police officers had been deployed to protect 500 Jewish sites across the country.
Before any Israeli response existed, the French government already knew that Jewish communities needed protecting. Not because of what Israel was about to do. Because of what had just been done to Jews.
Antisemitic violence has one cause. Antisemitism.
Let us hope and pray this isn’t the case.
Replying to @IndyVoices
The golden age of Jewish life is over – antisemitism is here to stay | Ben Judah (@b_judah) independent.co.uk/voices/gol…





















