In this wide-ranging edition of “Victor Davis Hanson: In His Own Words,” guest host Jack Fowler sits down with Elizabeth Spalding, chairman of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, to confront the forgotten truths of communism’s deadly legacy. From Hollywood’s willful blindness to the rise of socialism at home, Spalding explains why communism and socialism share the same DNA—and why freedom still needs defending. Subscribe to Victor Davis Hanson’s own YouTube channel to watch past episodes. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post ‘We Were Anti-Nazi, but Not Anti-Communist’: Hollywood’s ‘Come to Jesus’ Moment That Never Was appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Serious crises in oil-producing countries are pushing markets to finally price in geopolitical risk. As of Jan. 21, West Texas Intermediate crude is over $60 per barrel, reflecting only the faintest acknowledgement of unrest in Iran despite weeks of escalating protests, estimates of 3,000 to 20,000 people dead, and a complete internet blackout. Recognizing geopolitical risk cannot come soon enough. Amid continued violence and uncertainty in Iran, Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine, and Russia’s export of crude oil to China, acknowledgement of market risk is long overdue. It should refocus investment where the rule of law, freedom, and transparency prevail: right here at home. The United States must continue to invest and maintain U.S. oil and gas production to improve energy security for the United States and its allies. Complacency risks American energy dominance, economic and national security, and geopolitical leverage. For those who have been paying attention to geopolitics–a focus of the American Energy Institute and PetroNerds—these global realities are unsurprising. The stock market and the oil market have largely ignored geopolitical risk over the past year. An extreme lack of attention to geopolitics, plus an abundant crude supply, much of which is coming from the sanctioned nations of Russia, Iran, and Venezuela, have resulted in downside bets on oil prices.  Global players shaping risk in oil markets are intertwined and working with each other, supplying weapons and trading illicit and sanctioned crude, moved by Russia’s shadow fleet, helping to distort market signals and transparency.  From Russia’s war in Ukraine to escalating tensions in Asia, and ongoing uncertainty in Iran and Venezuela—there is no shortage of risk. This month alone, the United States captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro, a man and nation with significant ties to China and Russia. The same weekend, North Korea launched test missiles and China ratcheted up drills around Taiwan. Iran, a regime that has long fomented regional chaos with its oil money, began using extreme force to quell nationwide protests, instituting internet blackouts to prevent outsiders from seeing the true carnage on the ground.  Each of these events should have added risk to the market and led to rising oil prices, especially given that Russia, Iran, and Venezuela are major oil producing countries, producing roughly 15 mbd (million barrels per day) combined.  However, the U.S.is the largest oil producer in the world, producing nearly 14 mbd of crude oil. A modest rise in oil prices should be welcomed in the U.S. as it would promote stability and investment in U.S. shale. Investing in U.S. shale provides economic growth, jobs, export revenue, and American energy dominance. It also reinforces energy security at home and abroad, supplanting unstable foreign production from nations like Iran. Moreover, the U.S. consumer can handle modestly higher oil prices, which would support both the U.S. oil patch and the broader American economy, given that the U.S. is the largest crude oil producer and exporter in the world.  As the global leader in oil, natural gas production and oil exports—producing as much oil as Russia and Iran combined—the U.S. has an obligation to continue to lead in energy.  Geopolitical instability and inhumane and illicit crude oil coming from sanctioned nations makes U.S. oil production and continued investment in U.S. oil that much more critical. U.S. crude oil production is produced under the rule of law with transparent production and transportation data. In contrast, Russia and Iran conceal how much oil they produce and sell their crude oil at extreme discounts to China.  Last weekend, I watched the Newcastle refinery in Wyoming transform local Rockies crude into products that power lives across the country, a reminder that energy is the foundation of modern life, economic stability, and national security. Continued global unrest should be a clarion call to the energy market and investors to focus on production and investment in the U.S., where the rule of law, free markets, and efficiencies in the U.S. shale patch drive not only returns and profitability but U.S. energy security and global energy security. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The United States Must Maintain Oil Investment Amid Global Instability appeared first on The Daily Signal.

“Dry January” is almost over—the annual reset when people swear off alcohol for a month, whether for health, discipline, curiosity, or recovery.  While some are opting to detox from alcohol during the month of January, something bigger is happening beneath the surface: An entire generation is quietly walking away from alcohol altogether.  A 2025 Gallup poll found that only 50% of young adults ages 18-34 reported they drink—down from 72% two decades prior. And yet, alcohol still sits at the center of modern social life—networking events, happy hours, girls’ nights out, and dating culture. If you don’t drink, you’re expected to explain yourself.  In a culture that normalizes constant consumption, slipping into sipping habitually can be like a frog in slowly boiling water; you don’t notice the danger until alcohol starts stealing your clarity, your relationships, your peace, and eventually your purpose.  Ericka Andersen knows this song and dance all too well. She joins this week’s “Problematic Women” to make the case for sobriety in a culture so hellbent against it.   Andersen, the author of “Freely Sober: Rethinking Alcohol Through the Lens of Faith,” shares the story of her personal relationship with alcohol and how she leaned not only on facts, but also on her faith, to find her way out.  The post Why the Next Generation Is Ditching Alcohol appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Taxpayers can expect “substantial refunds” due to tax cuts in President Donald Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” Treasury Secretary Counselor Joseph Lavorgna said. The bill’s provisions included no taxes on overtime pay, no taxes on tips, and reduced Social Security taxes. “We think there could be substantial refunds coming,” Lavorgna, counselor to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, told The Daily Signal. “I’ve seen some private sector estimates that are well over a hundred billion dollars, so when people file their taxes, they’re gonna get substantial monies back.” “That’s gonna help rejuvenate the economy,” he said. Internal Revenue Service data shows that the average refund in 2025 was $2,939. Refunds this year could be as much as 30% more than last year, according to some economists. Lavorgna advised Americans to change their withholding allowance so that they can keep that extra money. “They also want to change their withholding so they can get their money in 2026 and not have to wait for another refund to come in 2027,” he said, adding that people should talk to their tax adviser to make sure they can fully benefit from the refunds. The refunds will particularly impact “those hardworking Americans that get paid overtime,” Lavorgna said, or those working in the service industry who are earning commission from tips. “It could be waiters, waitresses, bartenders, other service type providers,” he said. “It could be YouTubers, podcasters, the gig economy type of workers that receive tips.” “The numbers are gonna be sizable,” he continued, “and we wanna make sure people get their money and then adjust their withholding, as I said, to make sure they get the full amount in 2026.” The post ‘Substantial Refunds’ Coming to Taxpayers Soon, Senior Treasury Official Says appeared first on The Daily Signal.

In a wide?ranging interview with The Daily Signal, CNN legal analyst and author Elliot Williams revisits one of the most polarizing criminal cases in modern American history—the 1984 New York City subway shooting involving Bernhard Goetz. Williams documents the story in his new book, “Five Bullets: The Story of Bernie Goetz, New York’s Explosive ’80s, and the Subway Vigilante Trial That Divided the Nation,” which was published this month. The book examines how Goetz, widely dubbed the “subway vigilante,” shot four black teenagers on a New York City subway train. One victim was left paralyzed and brain?damaged. The incident ignited fierce national debates over crime, race, gun rights, media bias, and vigilantism—arguments that still resonate decades later. Williams, a former Justice Department and Immigration and Customs Enforcement attorney, said the case drew his attention because of the many issues that endure today. “Goetz’s story is remarkable in that it ties together so many issues—particularly ones I’ve thought about in some way or another for my entire career: race, crime, media bias, and violence,” he told The Daily Signal. A City on Edge Williams places the shooting in the broader context of New York City in the 1980s, a period marked by soaring crime rates, fiscal instability, and a pervasive sense of fear. “Pretty much the main headlines in a newspaper today are about fights between law enforcement and people in cities,” Williams noted, “but just take a step back and think about the homicide rate—2,000 people a year, roughly at that point.” By comparison, he said, present-day New York City sees roughly a quarter of that number annually. Crime, graffiti, and urban decay dominated public perception in the 1980s, reinforced by cultural depictions of a city in crisis. Against that backdrop, Goetz’s actions struck a deep nerve. “A lot of people felt, ‘This guy finally did what needed to be done because the police can’t keep us safe,’” Williams said. “The incident just touched a lot of people and really sort of polarized the city.” What Happened on the Train Williams carefully distinguishes between what is known and what remains disputed about the shooting. “What we know for a fact,” he said, “ is there’s a downtown two express train. One of the guys approached [Goetz] and either asked for money or demanded money. To this day, no one has said definitively which of the two it was.” Goetz, who was carrying an unlicensed revolver, fired on all four teenagers. Afterward, he fled to New Hampshire before turning himself in to authorities. Despite the incident, Goetz was embraced by many New Yorkers as a symbol of resistance to crime. Media, Fear, and Narrative Williams emphasized the role media—especially tabloids—played in shaping public reaction. He pointed specifically to the New York Post, which had recently been acquired by Rupert Murdoch, and its emphasis on sensational coverage. “When people are scared, they turn to the news, get more scared, and turn to the news again,” Williams said. In an era before cable news and social media, tabloid headlines dominated public consciousness, reinforcing a sense of fear that shaped how the case was understood. Despite a recorded statement in which Goetz said he wanted to hurt the teenagers as much as possible, he was acquitted of all felony charges. “The defense took a  gamble,” Williams said, describing the decision to play the confession for the jury. “They thought that if we can play this for the jury and have them get a sense of the fear that he felt, we can actually probably get a couple of them to vote to acquit.” The strategy worked. Political Implications Williams’ book also explores how the case became a springboard for several prominent political figures, including Rudy Giuliani and Al Sharpton, who were both in their early 40s at the time. “They were ambitious,” Williams said. “They wanted to build names for themselves—and they did.” The case also elevated Curtis Sliwa and the Guardian Angels and provided the National Rifle Association with a potent public symbol. “He was as perfect a face, at least on paper, for the NRA’s new mission as anybody else could have been,” Williams said, though the organization later distanced itself from Goetz personally. Williams noted that New York City’s gun laws at the time were far stricter than those in surrounding areas, a disparity the NRA sought to frame as a civil rights issue. An Unrepentant Man Williams also interviewed Goetz himself, an encounter he described as unsettling. “He’s unrepentant,” Williams said. “It was never, ‘This is a tragedy.’ It was, ‘Those guys needed to be shot … I don’t care if that kid’s paralyzed.’” Williams said he expected at least some reflection. “Anytime someone’s paralyzed and brain-damaged, it’s kind of a tragedy,” he said. “And there’s just none of that from him.” Williams said the case remains a mirror for American anxieties about crime, race, self?defense, and trust in institutions. “I thought maybe this would be good to revisit in 2026,” he said, “and just see how ripe the subject matter still is for us today.” As debates over public safety, media narratives, and gun rights continue to dominate national discourse, “Five Bullets” offers a reminder that many of today’s fiercest political arguments were forged underground—on a subway train in a city gripped by fear. The post 40 Years After the Subway Vigilante Case, Its Cultural Impact Endures appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Alex Barbir arrived to smoke rising from burned homes in the Nigerian village of Zike. More than 50 Christians were killed in an attack on the community the night before. “As soon as we were driving into the village … you can feel the tension of the atmosphere,” Barbir said. Fulani militants are reported to have been behind the attack on the Zike community in North-Central Nigeria in April 2025. The scene, according to Barbir, was like nothing he had ever witnessed, with “a mass grave of 50 or 60 people just thrown in the dirt in a hole.” These places of devastation, of persecution, are the exact locations Barbir runs toward. As the founder of Building Zion, 28-year-old Barbir seeks out the places “in the fire” where others “really just don’t go.” He brings a message of hope through the Gospel of Jesus Christ, rebuilds homes and churches that have been destroyed, or even builds new schools for communities. One week after first visiting Zike, Barbir returned with supplies to rebuild about 18 of the homes and structures that were destroyed in the attack. A man stands by a burned home after the attack on the Zike community in North-Central Nigeria in April 2025. (Alex Barbir) Damage in the Zike community immediately after the attack. (Alex Barbir) The same structures rebuilt and repaired after the attack. (Alex Barbir) Building a home from the ground up in Nigeria costs about $1,200 to $1,300, according to Barbir. It is estimated that more than 50,000 Christians have been killed in Nigeria since 2009, and about 7,000 during the first half of 2025 alone. Boko Haram and the Islamic State have historically carried out many of the attacks on Christians, but more recently, Fulani militias, an ethnic group in Northern Nigeria, have also begun attacking Christian communities in the African nation. The scale of the persecution and genocide has drawn international attention, leading President Donald Trump to designate Nigeria a Country of Particular Concern last year. Alex Barbir (center) prays with Nigerians in the Zike community after the attack last April. (Barbir) Barbir, a Georgia native and graduate of Liberty University, had a desire to serve the Lord and others through mission work since his time in college. He figured it would be something he did later in life when finances and plans were more “put together.” But, feeling challenged to take a leap of faith, he founded the ministry in 2023. “The primary mission is, one, to reach the unreached with the Gospel, but two, to be able to bring hope to the persecuted church, and we specifically use construction to do that,” he explained. Since launching, Barbir has worked in about half a dozen nations, including Sudan, Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. And despite not having a construction background, Building Zion constructed about 70 homes in 2025. “I kind of just learned along the way,” the ministry founder said, adding that he works alongside local residents on each project. Barbir has already returned to Nigeria this year, where multiple projects to build schools and churches are underway. He plans to travel to Burma and Sudan later this year while also overseeing building projects in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The work of Building Zion, a name meant to depict the organization’s Biblical foundation and practical approach to serving others, is supported through donations from individuals and churches. For anyone who would consider supporting the work of Building Zion, Barbir asked that they pray for the work of the ministry, consider giving a financial gift to support the building projects, or even join the group in the field as they construct buildings and minister to persecuted Christians or those who have never heard the name of Jesus. The post Running Into the ‘Fire’: How One Man Brings Hope to Persecuted Christians in Nigeria appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Conservatives could look at today’s incredibly fractured media environment and wonder why anyone would need to worry about the elite media, considering their trust numbers are in the basement (except among liberals) and their audiences keep eroding. But just breathe the media air any day, and what we used to call the “dominant media” still dominates in setting the political agenda—in determining what everyone talks about. There was an old maxim that the media can’t tell you what to think, but they’ll tell you what to think about. This again came to mind when MS NOW host Nicolle Wallace interviewed Oliver Darcy, whose current business is energetically trying to reinforce the ideological rigor of the leftist press. Wallace told Darcy, “I still think that story selection is the most power we have, what you decide to shine a light on, especially now in the second Trump term.” Right now, that dominant story is the allegedly heroic resistance in Minneapolis to federal attempts to enforce the immigration laws. The daily narrative is that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are murdering innocent protesters in the streets. It’s not just choosing the subject. It’s the tone and tenor of the coverage. When it’s 93% negative against ICE on the evening newscasts, it’s a combination of time and tone intended to transform public opinion. The media’s pollsters will announce that President Donald Trump’s approval rating on immigration is slipping. They do polls to see if their journalism is having the intended political effect. Trump sent ICE into Minneapolis after it became apparent there was massive welfare fraud, and federal prosecutors convicted dozens of Somalis. That story was not selected for national distribution for months and months, and when it surfaced, they buried it again under the ICE story. Negative angles against the local Democrats—most especially the hot takes of Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey—are disparaged. Right after Wallace touted the media’s power of story selection, she also raised the power of language—“maybe the second most important thing, how we talk about them.” Reporters platform Democrats and leftists, blurring the terms of the moment, calling illegal immigrants “our neighbors,” our “immigrant community,” and describing opposition to deportation as “keeping people safe.” Deportation equals “terrorizing” Minneapolis. The elitist media reject the language of Team Trump—calling the protesters “left-wing agitators” and deeming it hate speech. But Walz can call ICE “Trump’s personal Gestapo” and Frey can tell ICE to “get the f— out of Minneapolis,” and that isn’t treated as regrettable or hateful or inaccurate. Instead, TV hosts helped Frey talk about how all the left-wing agitation is “about love.” When you spit in the face of ICE and call them something like “mother-couplers” and kick out their taillights, feel the love. Wallace used her language powers to describe Alex Pretti (who did all these things) as a “nonviolent bystander.” When an ex-Trump aide blamed Walz and Frey for creating the rhetorical environment for shooting deaths, CNN host Jake Tapper accused him of hating the First Amendment: “You have more of a problem with that than you have with people killing American citizens.” That’s using your language aggressively. We know what liberal journalists would like to call this kind of journalism: “shared facts.” As in, conservatives can’t accept facts that everyone should accept, that everyone supposedly used to accept when there was a much weaker conservative media. ICE personnel are Nazis, and their unglued opponents are angelic. Accept it, or you spread “misinformation.” This kind of arrogance still needs to be exposed and resisted. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.  The post The Elitist Media Still Impose a Dominant Partisan Narrative appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Before Minneapolis became a national flashpoint, before the protests and the nightly footage of chaos, something far more consequential was already underway: a sweeping fraud scandal involving billions of taxpayer dollars.  Federal investigators were digging into large-scale abuse of public programs, raising serious questions about who allowed it, how long it went on, and where the money went. These were not isolated mistakes or paperwork errors. They were allegations of systemic fraud involving federal funds and activity that crossed jurisdictions, the kind of case that requires federal investigation.  Because the alleged misconduct involved federal dollars and potential criminal networks operating across state lines, federal law enforcement had a responsibility to step in. That work was already in motion when events on the ground began to escalate.  Two people lost their lives during confrontations with federal officers. Those deaths were tragic, and ongoing investigations will determine exactly what occurred in those moments. But they do not erase the larger reality: Minnesota remains in the middle of a massive fraud investigation that has not been resolved and should not be abandoned.   What has been lost in the aftermath is focus. Chaos—much of which is highly organized, paid for, and planned—has clouded the fraud and corruption.  Recent polling shows Americans clearly reject chaos—blocked streets, threats, and disorder—and support the rule of law. The chaos in Minneapolis has clouded rather than clarified the truth.  And the havoc began because of billions in fraud. The scale of that fraud matters.   About 65% of Minnesotans say government fraud is “somewhat” or “very” widespread, according to polling conducted in July 2025, months before explosive allegations blew up on social media and all over the news in January.   Billions are still unaccounted for. Multiple federal investigations are ongoing. Serious questions about oversight, accountability, and failures of state systems have yet to be fully answered.   Federal law enforcement officers—sworn professionals tasked with enforcing laws passed by Congress—stepped in. Their mission does not change because it becomes uncomfortable or politically inconvenient.  “America First” policies are most effective when federal and local authorities are allowed to work together. We must expand lawful cooperation mechanisms like the 287(g) Program, which allows trained state and local officers to work directly with federal authorities on immigration enforcement. The Department of Homeland Security has massively expanded 287(g) agreements in President Donald Trump’s second term, but unfortunately, many state sanctuary policies prevent more agreements from being signed.  The consequences of those sanctuary policies couldn’t be clearer. Compare Minnesota mayhem to the Florida framework. In Florida, a 287(g) partnership and joint federal and local operation led to more than 10,000 arrests in just eight months, the largest joint immigration enforcement operation in Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s history.  When state and local governments choose not to cooperate with federal authorities, investigations become harder, risks increase, and outcomes worsen for everyone involved, as we have witnessed in Minneapolis. Federal officers are forced to operate with less support, less information, and fewer options, conditions that increase volatility rather than reduce it. But when local and federal law enforcement coordinate together, they can operate more efficiently and communities stay safer—by reducing disorder and by focusing on illegal immigrants involved in crimes.  Minnesota can and must handle two realities at once: restoring order in the streets and continuing to pursue accountability in one of the largest fraud scandals in the state’s history. The latter cannot be allowed to fade into the background simply because the moment has grown more volatile.  The fraud did not disappear. The questions did not go away. Accountability is still owed to Minnesotans.  We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.  The post Minnesota’s Fraud Crisis Didn’t Go Away. It Just Got Harder to See.   appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The widespread fraud from Minnesota’s Feeding Our Future children’s lunch assistance program, coupled with the fraudulent health care centers exposed by Nick Shirley in December, has captured the full attention of congressional Republicans in recent weeks. “I understand the outrage taxpayers r feeling about massive fraud in gov programs in Minnesota and other states, while honest hardworking families are struggling to buy groceries or pay for childcare,” Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote on X. Since the fraud first surfaced last year, senators ranging from Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., as well as House members like Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., have unveiled efforts to identify and reform fraudulent welfare assistance programs. These measures, as stated by Rachel Sheffield, a research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, in an interview with The Daily Signal, “could help ensure that the U.S. welfare system is safeguarded against fraud,” and provide “greater federal oversight” over the programs. “We’ve known for some time that programs defrauded in Minnesota were lacking proper scrutiny,” Sheffield added. “What happened in Minnesota unfortunately proved that in a massive way.” ‘Americans Are Being Robbed’ Angered by the Feeding Our Future scandal, Fine and Paul introduced legislation that would stop the allocation of tax dollars to noncitizens enrolled in welfare programs. “Americans are being robbed,” Fine claimed. Fine’s recently introduced bill, the No Welfare for Non-Citizens Act, would “prohibit aliens from receiving federal public benefits.” Fine also noted that the bill could curb the Congressional Budget Office’s projection that $177 billion will be administered to noncitizens from 2024 to 2034. “[Lawful noncitizens and illegal immigrants are] getting free handouts at the expense of American taxpayers,” which he called “insane” and “immoral.” In the Senate, Paul introduced the End Welfare For Non-Citizens Act, which would “end the appropriation of taxpayer-funded benefits” by cutting off and reforming programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and other federal benefits, subsidies, or services to refugees, asylees, or immigrants present in the United States without legal status. “Washington shouldn’t run the welfare state on autopilot while the national debt soars past $38T,” Paul wrote on X on Friday. “If we want a sustainable safety net and responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars, this bill is a must-pass,” he added in a previous statement. Fine and Paul did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. Emergency Taskforce As chairman of the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions, Cassidy announced on Monday that he will spearhead a task force alongside Sens. Ashley Moody, R-Fla.; Jon Husted, R-Ohio; Roger Marshall, R-Kan.; Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla.; Tim Scott, R-S.C.; and Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., to hold those who abuse federal assistance accountable. The task force will comprise three subgroups, which will identify fraud in health, education, or labor and pensions assistance programs. “Our tax dollars are supposed to help American families, not line the pockets of fraudsters,” Cassidy told Fox News Digital. “[We] are committed to rooting out this fraud and ensuring Americans’ tax dollars are used responsibly.” The members of the task force did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. $5.16 Billion in Refugee Assistance On Tuesday, Paul introduced an amendment to a “minibus” funding bill that would prevent $5 billion from being administered to the existing refugee welfare system. I’ve filed an amendment to stop over $5 billion in taxpayer-funded welfare for refugees hidden in the minibus bill. If it fails, your money funds cash benefits, healthcare, daycare, and job programs. The amendment is germane and can pass by a simple majority—if Republicans stay… pic.twitter.com/7ziahzpI35— Rand Paul (@RandPaul) January 27, 2026 “Billions were ripped off from taxpayers through the refugee system. Washington’s response is to quietly send more money,” Paul wrote on X on Wednesday. “My amendment says no. Investigate the fraud, fix the abuse, then talk about funding.” The amendment, however, failed in the Senate on Friday. The post Congress Places Minnesota’s Rampant Fraud Center Stage appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Chinese leader Xi Jinping has unleashed yet another seismic purge in the People’s Liberation Army, removing two of its highest-ranking commanders: Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission Gen. Zhang Youxia and CMC member Gen. Liu Zhenli. Announced in late January 2026, this move has reduced the once seven-member CMC—China’s supreme military authority—to just two: Xi himself as chairman and the remaining vice chairman, Gen. Zhang Shengmin. Since seizing power in 2012, Xi has justified wave after wave of dismissals under the banner of “anti-corruption.” Early purges were widely seen as tools to eliminate rivals and consolidate control. After abolishing presidential term limits in 2018, many assumed the storm had passed. Instead, it has intensified, now targeting those Xi himself elevated—especially in the military. Mao Zedong’s famous dictum that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” underscores the PLA’s centrality to Chinese Communist Party rule. The CMC oversees all branches of the armed forces, and the party’s general secretary has always doubled as its chairman to guarantee loyalty. For generals, the vice chairmanship represents the pinnacle of a career. Unlike Mao or Deng Xiaoping, who fought the revolutionary war, Xi has no military combat experience. This outsider status has fueled persistent insecurity, particularly the fear of a coup. Between March 2023 and now, Xi has dismissed more than 20 senior generals, including two former defense ministers and multiple CMC vice chairmen—all on corruption charges. Zhang Youxia’s recent fall is especially striking. A “princeling” like Xi (son of a revolutionary general), he enjoyed decades of close ties and was long considered untouchable. As the PLA’s highest-ranking uniformed officer and a key Xi ally, Zhang helped enforce loyalty and suppress dissent. Zhang’s purge, alongside Liu’s, signals that no one is safe—not even the most trusted. The PLA Daily, the military’s official outlet, accused that Zhang and Liu had “seriously betrayed the trust and expectations of the party central committee and the CMC,” and had “fostered political and corruption problems that undermined the party’s leadership.” But the official announcement hasn’t prevented numerous rumors and speculations surrounding Zhang’s downfall, and even the Wall Street Journal has entered the fray, alleging Zhang leaked information about China’s nuclear weapons to the U.S. and accepted bribes for personnel decisions. However, I find the WSJ’s claims dubious at best. As the highest-ranking general, Zhang already possesses significant wealth and stands at the apex of a power structure. Why would he jeopardize everything he has for a bit more money? Another prevailing rumor suggests that Zhang was against invading Taiwan, leading Xi to replace him with a general more inclined toward aggression. However, those who spread such narratives fail to grasp a fundamental truth: In a system where the party commands the gun, no general can defy an order to attack Taiwan—disobedience would mean instant destruction. Only Xi knows the actual reason for Zhang’s downfall. Speculating or spreading baseless rumors is unproductive. Nevertheless, without delving into Xi’s motivations, two clear implications arise from this latest incident. First, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan is highly unlikely before summer 2026—and possibly well beyond. The PLA is in profound disarray. Officers who rose under Zhang now face uncertainty; self-preservation trumps operational boldness. Replacing leaders is one thing, but rebuilding trust and cohesion across ranks takes time. Soldiers won’t risk their lives for commanders who could vanish tomorrow. Xi, ever calculating, must recognize that launching a complex amphibious assault amid internal fear and distrust would court disaster. Taiwan thus gains precious breathing room. Yet it lives on borrowed time. Xi has repeatedly vowed “reunification” in his lifetime, and the PLA’s centennial on Aug. 1, 2027, looms as a symbolic deadline for decisive action—whether through blockade, coercion, or war. Only a dramatic external shift (e.g., regime change in a key energy supplier like Iran via U.S. action) might force delay. Second, Xi’s relentless purges reveal a stark truth: Despite ruling over 1.4 billion people, he may be the loneliest figure in Zhongnanhai (a compound where the most senior CCP leaders live). Absolute power breeds absolute isolation. The more he amasses control, the deeper his paranoia grows, eroding trust in everyone around him. Those who are close to Xi may come to a troubling realization: a dictator will abandon all human connections—love and friendship included—in the ruthless pursuit of absolute power. In such an environment, flattery and obedience become essential for survival. Honest advice on military readiness, economic challenges, or strategic mistakes has become too risky. No one dares to challenge him, even as he moves toward potential disaster. They will not pull him back from the edge; in fact, they may quietly hope that he stumbles. History offers a chilling parallel in the death of Josef Stalin. On the night of Feb. 28, 1953, Stalin collapsed from a stroke but lay unattended for hours. His guards, terrified after years of purges, hesitated to check on him. When they finally entered his room the following evening, he was on the floor, soaked in urine, paralyzed yet alive. Many of Russia’s best doctors had been executed or exiled due to Stalin’s purges. Stalin’s inner circle, including the notorious secret police chief Lavrentiy Beria, reportedly stalled in calling for medical help, terrified of being the next victims of a purge if Stalin survived. Ultimately, after five days of agony, Stalin succumbed on March 5, a grim testament to the toxic fear he instilled in everyone around him. Nature’s justice is merciless: The tyrant who trusts no one and is willing to attack everyone else will eventually be abandoned by all when he needs them most. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal. The post The Loneliest Man in Zhongnanhai: Xi Jinping’s Purges and the Price of Absolute Power appeared first on The Daily Signal.