Featured Essays Superman Superman and the Question of Race Kal-El, Clark Kent, identity, and acceptance. By James Davis Nicoll | Published on March 26, 2025 Action Comics #1 cover art by Joe Shuster Comment 0 Share New Share Action Comics #1 cover art by Joe Shuster Someone once quipped “Superman is a fantasy comic book about a powerful straight white man who is nice.” Which is pretty funny and also probably correct about some versions of Superman. There are other versions, though. Guess which I want to talk about? One could argue that Superman (or at least some versions) isn’t white. He’s not even human. He’s an alien from the planet Krypton. His marvelous powers derive from that fact. OK, I hear some of you say, but he looks exactly like a white guy1 and everyone treats him or at least his persona Clark Kent as white. How is that not being white2? It might be useful, if one were a member of a deprecated non-white ethnic minority, if it were possible to present oneself as white. News flash: it is possible and people have done this frequently enough that there’s an accepted word for it. Perhaps several words. One is “passing.” Historical examples abound. Some who have opted to pass have done this so effectively that their descendants had no idea that their ancestors had been considered non-white. Pre-Crisis Superman is more like someone consciously passing for a white American better than he is like someone who believes he is one by default. He reserves his birth name, Kal-El, for use by family and close friends. The public knows him by an adopted stage name. To his co-workers, he uses the unremarkable (in an American context) Clark Kent. If you were to ask his co-workers what religion Clark Kent is, they might guess Lutheran or Methodist or some other sort of Protestant. None of them would suggest the correct answer, “Raoist,” because that’s not a detail Kal-El shares with co-workers. Additionally, because he possesses abilities no standard model human has, from super-strength to invulnerability to super-senses, Kal-El has to be continually on guard lest he accidentally reveal he is Kryptonian by, say, casually lifting a truck out of his way3. Not only is Kal-El an alien but in many continuities, he is an undocumented alien, having been rocketed to Earth as a baby. He never passed through any formal immigration process. Now, the border policies in place when the 1938 version of Superman would have landed on Earth were considerably less stringent than they are now, but they did exist and Kal-El was in violation of many of them4. Later versions of Superman broke the law to an even greater extent. Having arrived as a child on Earth, Kal-El has done his best to assimilate into and be a constructive member of the dominant culture5. He not only embraces his adopted nation’s values; he uses his unique abilities to exemplify them. This is in no way unusual for immigrants, although the manner in which Kal-El pursues this goal is unusual. However, his public faces (Clark Kent, and to an extent Superman) are different from the Kryptonian one would encounter in the Fortress of Solitude. Kal-El is a true blue American! And he’s also a Kryptonian born and bred, who finds it prudent to be judicious about how he presents himself to his fellow Americans. It’s probably not entirely coincidental that Superman was created by two Jews6, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, who were both sons of immigrants (and Shuster was an immigrant himself, having moved from Toronto to Cleveland at a young age), in a time when prejudice against immigrants was on the rise, when antisemitism was rife7 and most white Americans did not question the numerus clausus policies then in place. Their creation, Kal-El, can be an inspiration to Americans, celebrated across the nation… as long he first circumvents reflexive white American xenophobia by convincing them he is one of them.[end-mark] It’s pretty weird that most Kryptonians look just like white Americans. It’s probably due to something the Guardians of the Universe did. Most of the weird stuff in the DC Universe seems to because of the Oans, one way or another. Of course, if Kal-El had been purple and be-tentacled, Siegel and Schuster couldn’t have told the stories about him that they wanted to. ︎Who is and who isn’t white varies considerably by era. Ben Franklin, for example, dismissed the “swarthy Swedes” as very definitely not white. Within living memory, Italians weren’t considered white. Given this, it’s most reasonable to assume white means what we point to when we say it. And I am not pointing at any Kryptonians just now. ︎Interestingly, the old Superman radio show, Kal-El is a lot more casual about using his powers while in his Clark Kent persona than in his comic book version. In the “Clan of the Fiery Cross” serial, Kent thinks nothing of leaping through a window to save a boy from certain death. The show seems to think speed and blatant gaslighting can preserve Superman’s secret ID, but it is hard to believe his co-workers don’t know Superman and Clark Kent are the same man. It is fortunate that infant Kal-El was found by the Kents. If Superman had landed in front of William Joseph Simmons, “Clan of the Fiery Cross” would have played out quite differently. ︎If you want to be depressed, read this article on Paddington’s legal status in Britain. ︎Since Crisis on Infinite Earths, the assimilated immigrant passing aspect of Superman seems to have been largely transferred to his colleague J’onn “The Martian Manhunter” J’onzz. Post-Crisis Kal-El was decanted on Earth, with no personal experience as a child of Krypton. J’onn J’onzz arrived on Earth as an adult, is very much a Martian, and while he can pass as a white American, this is a conscious choice to better blend in with humans, if only because his human colleagues are in habit of keeping the corpses of dead aliens as trophies. Also, J’onn isn’t particularly enamored with the US. ︎I should point out there are parallels between Superman and Moses but also significant differences. Moses, for example, while raised as an Egyptian royal, rejoined the Jews to led them out of Egypt, whereas Kal-El remains on Earth with the humans. Yeah, yeah, Krypton blew up. There were an astonishing number of Kryptonian survivors. ︎In the context of institutionalized antisemitism, Lois Lane’s incessant “Yeah, you claim to be a white guy from Kansas and you look like a white guy from Kansas, but what are you, really?” takes on an entirely different tone. ︎The post Superman and the Question of Race appeared first on Reactor.

Last month, President Trump issued an executive order that might prove to be one of the most significant actions ever taken by any administration to protect Americans’ Second Amendment rights. Among other things, the order instructs Attorney General Pam Bondi to thoroughly review all existing executive branch policies and regulations involving firearms to identify and eliminate any that are “designed to curtail the clear right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.”  The order also called for a review of all legal positions taken by the federal government in ongoing Second Amendment-related litigation, to ensure that such positions are consistent with safeguarding the right to keep and bear arms. President Trump is right to insist that the federal government’s policies get out of the way of lawful gun owners who’d like to exercise their constitutional rights and protect themselves and others from criminal violence—something they successfully do far more often than many people realize. Almost every major study has found that Americans use their firearms in self-defense between 500,000 and 3 million times annually, according to the most recent report on the subject by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 2021, a professor at the Georgetown McDonough School of Business conducted the most comprehensive study ever on the issue, and concluded that roughly 1.6 million defensive gun uses occur in the United States every year. For this reason, The Daily Signal publishes a monthly article highlighting some of the previous month’s many news stories on defensive gun use that you may have missed—or that might not have made it to the national spotlight in the first place. (Read accounts from past months and years here.) The examples below represent only a small portion of the news stories on defensive gun use during crimes that we found in February. You may explore more by using The Heritage Foundation’s interactive Defensive Gun Use Database. Feb. 2, St. Louis, Missouri: Police say that a resident of a four-unit apartment building kicked in the door of the unit above his own, prompting the upstairs neighbor to grab a rifle and fatally shoot the intruder in self-defense.  Feb. 4, Texarkana, Arkansas: A 15-year-old boy walked into a terminal for private jets at a regional airport, pointed a rifle at a staff member, and demanded access to a plane. When the staff member went into a back office, the armed teen “forcefully pushed open a door leading out to the airfield,” where an armed pilot confronted him, ordered him to the ground, and disarmed him. The airport’s director praised the unnamed pilot’s heroic actions and ability to “remain[] calm despite being openly threatened.” Feb. 5, San Antonio, Texas: Employees at a beauty salon credited an armed customer with saving lives after a gunman with a lengthy criminal record rushed into the business and demanded “money and cell phones” from everyone inside. The gunman grew increasingly agitated over a perceived lack of loot from his victims and pistol-whipped a customer who, unbeknownst to him, had fortuitously “delayed” his haircut that day in order to retrieve a handgun from his home. That customer quickly drew his weapon and fatally shot the gunman.  Feb. 10, Pensacola, Florida: A legally-armed woman shot and wounded a man who police say stalked her using social media, followed her to the hotel where she worked, cornered her in a laundry room, and assaulted her. This allegedly wasn’t the first time the man had shown up at the woman’s place of employment. He was arrested and charged with a slew of offenses, including battery, stalking, and drug possession.  Feb. 11, Orangeburg, South Carolina: Police say that a woman returned home from a 14-hour work shift to find her house in a state of “disarray,” which caused an argument between her and her adult son, who also lived there. The son became “very irate” and poured gasoline around the home while threatening to burn it down with his mom inside. He started a fire in the laundry room, but his mom and a third person were able to put it out. When the son attempted to set the house ablaze a second time, his mom drew a handgun, threatened to shoot him in self-defense, and held him at gunpoint until police arrived. He’s now charged with attempted murder and second-degree arson. Feb. 15, Manchester, Kentucky: Two intruders forced their way into a home with the intention of stealing firearms from a safe. A juvenile resident heard the break-in, saw that the intruders were armed, and retrieved his father’s handgun. He then fatally shot both intruders before escaping through a bedroom window.   Feb. 17, Crozet, Virginia: Just twenty seconds after a rifle-wielding gunman opened fire on shoppers outside of a grocery store, an off-duty federal officer intervened, bringing the rampage to a swift end by using his personal weapon to fatally shoot the gunman. While two victims unfortunately died in the shooting, local officials told reporters that “there’s no doubt the casualty count could have been much higher” had the off-duty agent not “selflessly placed themselves [sic] in harm’s way to stop the gunman and prevent further loss of life.”  Feb. 20, Clinton Township, Michigan: When a would-be robber entered a donut shop and demanded cash from the register at gunpoint, one employee responded by drawing his own firearm and shooting the robber. The robber was wounded and fled, but crashed his getaway vehicle at a nearby gas station and ultimately succumbed to his injuries. No one else inside the store was injured. The next day, “a steady stream of customers” showed up to the store to show their support for the employee, with many hailing him as a “hero.” Feb. 23, Grand Junction, Colorado: Police say that a burglar broke into a church, shattering the front door and firing shots at a person living inside before fleeing. A short time later, the same suspect broke into a nearby home and again shot at a resident. This time, however, the resident was also armed and returned fire until the suspect fled. Police eventually located and arrested the suspect, who now faces nearly two dozen criminal charges.  Feb. 25, Kennewick, Washington: A teenager crawled through the drive-thru window of a coffee shop and brandished a gun at the barista while stealing money from the register. The barista initially backed away, but after the teen continued moving towards her, she drew her own legally owned firearm and demanded that the teen leave—something he only did after she fired a round at him. Police eventually arrested the teen, whom they believe may have been connected to another robbery in the area, as well.  Feb. 27, Miami Beach, Florida: Armed with a handgun and flashlight, a bathrobe-clad homeowner confronted an intruder who broke into his home and set off alarms. The intruder fled once he realized the homeowner was armed, succeeding in stealing nothing more than a few yogurts from the family fridge. Police arrested the suspect after a short manhunt.  These examples highlight the importance of the right to keep and bear arms, and demonstrate the many ways lawful gun owners help “maintain the security of a free state.” The Trump administration is correct to recognize that, when it comes to lawful armed self-defense, the people are often best served when the government simply gets out of the way.    The post Defensive Gun Uses Show Trump Order on 2A Is a Step in the Right Direction appeared first on The Daily Signal.

U.S. inflation fell last month, with core prices at their lowest level in four years. It’s a harbinger for future price drops to come, thanks to planned spending cuts and tax reforms that will drop inflation further.  Inflation will also likely decline thanks to President Donald Trump’s herculean deregulation efforts. The White House estimates that already since the start of the second Trump administration, Americans are saving $180 billion in regulatory costs—$2,100 for a family of four. In 2024, the Biden administration set an all-time record by publishing 107,262 pages of final rules, proposed rules, and other public notices in the Federal Register that have the force of law. The Trump White House estimates that during its four years, the Biden administration added more than $1.8 trillion, or $21,090 per family of four, in new regulatory costs, far surpassing any other administration. The Trump administration estimates that 72% of that Biden regulatory burden ($1.3 trillion or $15,457 per family of four) came from rules at the Environmental Protection Agency. Under the Biden regime, the EPA slapped on several draconian Green New Deal measures. Even after the flurry of initial executive orders from Trump after his inauguration, this month, Zeldin announced even greater regulatory reforms, which the White House is calling the “biggest deregulatory action in U.S. history.” The Institute for Energy Research noted this would entail reviewing 31 of the costliest regulations EPA regulators imposed—with the intent of reversing them. These regulations include backdoor electric vehicle mandates, the greenhouse gas endangerment finding, the Clean Power Plan, the social cost of carbon, and the mercury and air toxicity standards. Other Trump executive orders also have the potential to reduce inflation by repealing regulations that choked or outright banned energy production and the mining of critical minerals. In addition to unleashing American energy, the Trump administration also suspended enforcement of invasive, burdensome reporting requirements that saddled small businesses with unnecessary red tape. The National Federation of Independent Business, a group of nearly 300,000 small and independent business owners, heralded this move, saying it “greatly appreciates President Trump’s strong support in this important effort to protect America’s small business owners from what he correctly labeled an ‘outrageous and invasive’ Beneficial Ownership Information (BOI) reporting requirement.” This reporting requirement created burdensome paperwork (e.g. documentation filings about a business’ ownership structure required by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network at the Treasury Department) without much proven public benefit, yet failure to file could have resulted in fines up to $10,000 or more and possible jail time. Trump’s Small Business Administration also implemented a series of reforms to put American citizens first—including requiring citizenship verification on loan applications and relocating offices out of so-called “sanctuary cities.” As agency heads work with the Department of Government Efficiency to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, they should not be halted by any future needless government shutdown. A whopping 75% of Americans support the Trump deregulatory, cost-cutting agenda. They want Democrats to join that mission. The regulatory red tape added during the Biden administration alone would have cost each American family nearly $50,000 over 10 years, according to a Committee to Unleash Prosperity report by Trump economist Casey Mulligan, a University of Chicago professor. But under executive orders from Trump, these burdensome regulations are beginning to halt. Trump’s key changes to lower inflation through deregulation and increased energy production—in addition to his plans for spending and tax cuts—offer a more prosperous future for American families. Carrie Sheffield is a senior policy analyst for the Center for Economic Opportunity at Independent Women’s Forum. We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.  The post Trump’s Economic Agenda Reduces Inflation by Reversing Biden Regulations appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Three of President Donald Trump’s Cabinet members defended the administration’s conduct at a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Wednesday, shortly after a follow-up report from The Atlantic showing messages related to a military attack on Houthis in Yemen that were inadvertently sent to its editor-in-chief. Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard and CIA Director John Ratcliffe both rejected Democrats’ claims that the Signal chat’s exposures constituted a leak of classified information. At the end of her opening statement, Gabbard acknowledged the unfortunate nature of the leak. “It was a mistake that a reporter was inadvertently added to a Signal chat with high-level national security principals having a policy discussion about imminent strikes against the Houthis and the effects of the strike,” said Gabbard, who added that National Security Adviser Mike Waltz had taken responsibility and was investigating the incident. .@DNIGabbard: "I want to address, briefly, the Signal chat issue… As the President and National Security Advisor stated, no classified information was shared. There were no sources, methods, locations or war plans that were shared." pic.twitter.com/thuE1aKs49— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 26, 2025 However, Gabbard also rejected the idea that classified material was transmitted. “The conversation was candid and sensitive, but as the president’s national security adviser stated, no classified information was shared. There were no sources, methods, locations, or war plans that were shared,” she said. Much of the hearing became a back-and-forth between Gabbard and Democrat members of Congress over whether Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s message laying out the time frame for the attack on Houthis in Yemen should be considered classified information. When Rep. Jim Himes, D-Conn., questioned Gabbard on whether the exposed messages would be classified under her own standards as DNI, Gabbard replied that Hegseth’s standards for classification are his prerogative. “Ultimately, the secretary of defense holds the authority to classify or declassify,” she said. Ratcliffe also pushed back against The Atlantic’s reporting, accusing its Editor-in-Chief Jeffrey Goldberg of deliberate falsehoods and exaggerations. .@CIADirector: "My answers haven't changed. I used an appropriate channel to communicate sensitive information. It was permissible to do so … and at the end of the day, what is most important is that the mission was a remarkable success." pic.twitter.com/Mas5YKrz5a— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) March 26, 2025 “Those messages were revealed today and revealed that I did not transmit classified information and that the reporter, who I don’t know, I think intentionally intended it to indicate that,” said Ratcliffe. “That reporter also indicated that I had released the name of an undercover CIA operative in that Signal chat. In fact, I had released the name of my chief of staff, who is not operating undercover. That was deliberately false and misleading.” Ratcliffe concluded by categorically rejecting all claims that he had acted improperly. “I used an appropriate channel to communicate sensitive information. It was permissible to do so. I didn’t transfer any classified information. And at the end of the day, what is most important is that the mission was a remarkable success. … Because that’s what did happen, not what possibly could have happened.” The post Gabbard Rejects Claims of Classified Info Leak on Signal Chat appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The judge who ordered that flights carrying suspected Tren de Aragua gangbangers to El Salvador must return to the U.S. was assigned a lawsuit against Trump administration national security officials regarding a Signal chat. A far-left government watchdog is suing Trump administration national security personnel for discussing the forthcoming strike on the Houthis in a Signal chat, the subject of a torrent of news reporting this week. District Judge James Boasberg, an Obama appointee, was randomly assigned to the case. American Oversight, a non-partisan watchdog which routinely opposes Republicans, is saying national security adviser Mike Waltz and other personnel violated the Federal Records Act by using the encrypted messaging app Signal to discuss attack plans. This comes after the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg, broke a story saying Waltz added him to a group chat called “Houthi PC small group” on March 15 that included Vice President JD Vance, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, chief of staff Susie Wiles, and other officials. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on X that no war plans or classified material had been discussed. In a Biden-era document, the federal office in charge of ensuring cybersecurity cited the use of encrypted messaging app Signal as a “best practice” for “highly targeted” government officials. Boasberg, a 2011 appointee of then-President Barack Obama to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, issued a restraining order against Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act of 1789 to deport alleged Tren de Aragua gang members. JUST IN: Judge James Boasberg has been assigned to the Signalgate lawsuit. pic.twitter.com/nrLv9EQNyO— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) March 26, 2025 Boasberg barred the Trump administration from deporting “all non-citizens who are subject to the [Alien Enemies Act] proclamation” for at least 14 days. “I think there’s clearly irreparable harm here given that these folks will be deported and many – or the vast majority – to prison or back to Venezuela where they face persecution or worse,” he said. The 238 illegal immigrants on the deportation flights were members of designated terrorist organizations Tren de Aragua and MS-13, according to the Trump administration. Prominent Republicans in Congress are calling for the impeachment of Democrat-appointed judges amid a slew of injunctions against President Donald Trump’s executive actions. I’ll be filing Articles of Impeachment against activist judge James Boasberg this week. pic.twitter.com/kh4vfooS2A— Congressman Brandon Gill (@RepBrandonGill) March 16, 2025 American Oversight, the group bringing the lawsuit, is also suing President Donald Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency and has attacked several Trump cabinet nominees, including FBI Director Kash Patel, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, and Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins. The watchdog launched an investigation in January into “the national rise in legislation targeting gender-affirming care as part of its larger investigation into attacks on LGBTQ+ rights.” This included several public records requests from Texas officials about Texas’ ban on “minors’ access to gender-affirming care,” a euphemism for irreversible transgender medical interventions for children. On March 24, American Oversight announced an investigation into Republican Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey’s contacts with “far-right anti-abortion rights groups” including Missouri Right to Life, Project Veritas, and The Heritage Foundation. American Oversight did not respond to The Daily Signal’s request for comment. The post Judge Who Ruled Against Deportations of Venezuelan Terrorists Assigned Signal Case appeared first on The Daily Signal.

On heels of the testimony of several leaders of the U.S. intelligence agencies, The Atlantic released additional screenshots from the Signal group chat that was composed of high-ranking Trump administration national security officials and accidentally also included The Atlantic’s editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg. “It’s no surprise hoax-peddlers at the Atlantic have already abandoned their ‘war plans’ claim,” posted Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell. “These additional Signal chat messages confirm there were no classified materials or war plans shared. The Secretary was merely updating the group on a plan that was underway & had already been briefed through official channels.” “The American people see through the Atlantic’s pathetic attempts to distract from President Trump’s national security agenda,” he added. STATEMENT:It’s no surprise hoax-peddlers at the Atlantic have already abandoned their “war plans” claim. These additional Signal chat messages confirm there were no classified materials or war plans shared. The Secretary was merely updating the group on a plan that was… pic.twitter.com/FDGgUwbLD5— Sean Parnell (@SeanParnellUSA) March 26, 2025 The Atlantic said it was in the “public interest” to publish more messages from the chat. “There is a clear public interest in disclosing the sort of information that Trump advisers included in nonsecure communications channels, especially because senior administration figures are attempting to downplay the significance of the messages that were shared,” wrote Jeffrey Goldberg and Shane Harris. National Security Advisor Mike Waltz posted on X Wednesday that no locations or sources or methods had been shared on the chat.  No locations.No sources & methods.NO WAR PLANS.Foreign partners had already been notified that strikes were imminent.BOTTOM LINE: President Trump is protecting America and our interests.— Mike Waltz (@MikeWaltz47) March 26, 2025 “That is the real story here. We had Houthi terrorists firing at American naval ships and commercial vessels in the Red Sea,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told Fox News host Jesse Watters.  Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said in a statement, “I continue to support all members of President Donald Trump’s national security team. Lessons learned.” I continue to support all members of President @realDonaldTrump's national security team. My statement?? pic.twitter.com/rA6DOTXzos— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) March 26, 2025 Yesterday, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, and FBI Director Kash Patel testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee. The open hearing was about worldwide threats. The intelligence chiefs discussed the recently published 2025 Annual Threat Assessment, which is the annual report on threats to American security compiled by the U.S. intelligence community.  Ratcliffe said that his communications in the chat “were entirely permissible and lawful and did not include classified information.” The recently released texts support his point about his texts. Gabbard went further, arguing that, “there was no classified material that was shared [in the Signal group chat].” The group chat is currently being reviewed by the National Security Council. The Trump officials discussed the impact on trade and security depending on when they timed the attack. Vice President JD Vance also expressed loathing at having to rescue the Europeans from the Houthi attacks on global trade.“I just hate bailing Europe out again,” he said, noting that the U.S. should minimize the risk to Saudi oil facilities. Vance has been critical of the European leaders in public.  Hegseth concurred, writing, “I fully share your loathing of European free-loading. It’s PATHETIC.”In the chat, Hegseth also said the times of when the U.S. was going to strike the Houthis in the group chat. “Godspeed to our Warriors,” the defense secretary remarked at the end of the chat that outlined the strike timeline. “I will say a prayer for victory,” Vance replied. Later Waltz provided an update about a likely killed Houthi leader.  The post ‘Hoax-Peddlers’: Pentagon Spokesman Attacks Atlantic After More Signal Chat Messages Released appeared first on The Daily Signal.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. Rumble is stepping deeper into the decentralized economy. The video platform, long pitched as a free-speech alternative to YouTube, is planning to launch the Rumble Wallet — a new payment system designed to help creators monetize directly, bypassing traditional ad networks. It runs on Tether’s USDT, the largest stablecoin in the world. Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski announced the launch on X, saying the wallet will “work better than most advertisers.” Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino cheered the move, calling it “a wallet for the people.” “We expect this to bring direct value to the crypto community on our platform and facilitate meaningful high-value partnerships with crypto exchanges,” Pavlovski said on this week’s earnings call. The CEO added that the wallet will be accepting and paying out in USD Tether, Tether Gold, and Bitcoin. This collaboration isn’t coming out of nowhere. Tether dropped $775 million into Rumble in late 2024 — part of a strategic pivot into platforms aligned with its values: free speech and financial sovereignty. Ardoino said as much at the time, positioning Tether as more than a financial player; a cultural one. Rumble, meanwhile, has been stacking Bitcoin with plans to invest up to $20 million total as part of a long-term treasury strategy. With the launch of its wallet and deep crypto backing, Rumble is betting hard on a future where creators get paid directly, platforms align with principles, and Big Tech is no longer the gatekeeper. The Rumble Wallet could mark a significant shift in how independent creators earn a living online. By integrating USDT, Rumble not only offers global, censorship-resistant payments but also positions itself as a serious player in the alternative tech ecosystem. Unlike traditional ad revenue models — which often rely on opaque algorithms and advertiser pressure — this wallet gives creators instant access to their funds, with minimal friction and maximum control. Critics of legacy platforms like YouTube have long pointed to demonetization, deplatforming, and vague content guidelines as barriers to open expression. With Tether in its corner, Rumble appears ready to challenge that model head-on, pitching itself as a safe haven for creators who feel squeezed out of mainstream digital spaces. If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Rumble To Launch USDT-Powered Wallet Backed by Tether to Revolutionize Creator Monetization and Challenge Big Tech appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The Metropolitan (London) Police have announced they are switching from using CCTV cameras attached to police vans (therefore conspicuous), to installing a permanent live facial recognition (LFR) network in Croydon, south London – specifically in North End and London Road. With this job set to be complete in June or July, the cameras will go on building or street posts, capturing images of faces of everyone walking past them, as the police search for suspected criminals. These images are compared to those in existing databases. The London police promise that this type of personal data will not be retained if there is no match, and that the cameras will be operational when “officers are deployed on the ground ready to respond to alerts.” And they assert that the technology they are now using produces fewer errors stemming from racial bias, compared to other types of facial recognition. The Croydon deployment appears to be a test for the eventual city-wide installment of permanent LFR cameras, which the police say is necessary to better fight crime. The development has been slammed by privacy campaigners, but welcomed by the likes of Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp, a Conservative, who not only dismissed those concerns, saying there are no legitimate reasons for them but went as far as to suggest that people critical of LFR “don’t want criminals to be arrested.” Former UK Biometrics & Surveillance Camera Commissioner Professor Fraser Sampson is one of those who have warned about the technology’s shortcomings but also the nature of the way police operate, mentioning in an article earlier this month that people are “finding themselves on a (facial recognition) ‘watchlist’ without having a police record.” That suddenly makes the automatic deletion of faces of those not on a watchlist much less reassuring. “There are people in England and Wales – several million by recent estimates – who were once arrested but were never proceeded with – some have found their way onto live FRT (facial recognition technology) watchlists,” Sampson writes. Civil liberties group Big Brother Watch continues to be a vocal critic of LFR deployments, referring to the news from the Metropolitan Police as proof of a “steady slide into a dystopian nightmare” that is happening without proper oversight or legislative safeguards. Big Brother Watch Interim Director Rebecca Vincent also remarked that a recent “failed” trial in Cardiff during a sporting event resulted in the police scanning “more than 160,000 faces” – but in “zero arrests.” If you're tired of censorship and dystopian threats against civil liberties, subscribe to Reclaim The Net. The post Big Brother Finds a New Home in South London appeared first on Reclaim The Net.

In Tricksy Los Angeles, 'Expedited' Doesn't Mean What They Want You to Think It Means

Trump Approval Skyrocketing, But So Is Democrat Engagement