There was one result from last week’s elections that, as you may remember, actually seemed like a tiny sliver of good news. And it came, of all places, from the city of Minneapolis — otherwise known as Little Mogadishu, otherwise known as the single worst place in the world to spend a fake $20 bill. Despite concerns that a Muslim socialist from Somalia named Omar Fateh would win the mayor’s race, ultimately, Fateh was defeated. The incumbent Democrat, Jacob Frey, emerged victorious by around 8,000 votes.
Frey, of course, is a weasel and a terrible politician. He’s most famous for genuflecting and pretending to cry before George Floyd’s golden casket. But Frey, for all his many obvious faults, was not the worst-case scenario. There were a small number of very bad ideas he opposed, believe it or not. Omar Fateh, on the other hand, would have been the Zohran Mamdani of Minneapolis. He wanted rent control. He wanted to dismantle the police department. And above all, he wanted to loot the treasury for the benefit of a hostile foreign country. And although it was a close race, Fateh lost. It was an apparent sign that Minneapolis, at least, wasn’t quite as far gone as New York. The election indicated that maybe socialism and Somali interests aren’t as popular in Minneapolis as we thought. So that was the good news — or so it seemed.
Both photos by Stephen Maturen/Getty Images.
But it turns out that — in a convoluted way — foreign influence, mass migration and tribalism may indeed have led to the defeat of Omar Fateh, who would have been the first Muslim and Somali mayor of Minneapolis. That’s because Somalis are divided into various clans, many of which are openly hostile to one another. So even though there are something like 80,000 Somalis in Minneapolis, many of them may not have voted for Omar Fateh, because he didn’t belong to their clan. And in a race that was decided by 8,000 votes, that’s potentially very significant.
This is one post I saw on social media explaining the phenomenon, and how it might have impacted the race on Tuesday.
A significant number of Somalians in Minneapolis didn’t vote for ethnic Somali Mayoral candidate Omar Fateh due to Fateh being part of the Daarood clan rather than the Hawiye. These deep-seated clan wars allowed Mayor Jacob Frey to rally key community leaders from the Hawiye clan to hold off a challenge from Fateh. Representative Ilhan Omar, who endorsed Fateh and is part of the Daarood clan, is reportedly the next target of Hawiye community leaders as they are emboldened by their proxy victory over the Daarood in the Mayoral election, she will possibly face a primary challenge on tribal grounds.
This is one of those posts that, admittedly, seems a little on-the-nose. It sounds a lot like something a Right-winger would come up with, as a way of parodying the state of play in Minneapolis politics. And I’ll acknowledge that there’s no polling or mainstream source that I could find to back this up. Of course, that’s not surprising, because no mainstream news organization or pollster has ever bothered to ask Somalis in Minnesota about their clan membership and how it might affect their vote. But still, there’s no hard evidence.
That said, over the past couple of days, a man named Drew Pavlou has collected a few social media reactions from small Somali accounts that support this theory.
Pavlou reports:
There is an emerging consensus on Somali TikTok and Twitter that inter-clan conflict sunk Omar Fateh’s mayoral campaign in Minneapolis. A significant number of Somalis apparently voted against him due to his Somali clan.
At a minimum, this is definitely a phenomenon that the so-called Somali community in Minneapolis is talking about at the moment.
Here’s one more example.
Credit: @queenarraweelo/X.com
“Very embarrassing that some Somalis voted for a Cadaan over a Somali brother, qabyaalad is now poisoning western politics.”
As best I can tell, a “Cadaan” is a white person, not a Star Wars character. And “qabyaalad” refers to Somalia’s system of “clan-based identity” and loyalty. So this person is lamenting the fact that, instead of voting for the Somali candidate (Omar Fateh), Somalis voted for Jacob Frey because they didn’t like Omar Fateh’s clan identity.
And here’s a few more posts along those lines, from YouTube. These people are referring to Jacob Frey’s campaign strategy.
Credit: YouTube.com
“This guy is taking advantage of tribal politics. We are too easy. … This guy understands how to divide our people.”
And then there’s a few more quotes in Somali that I ran through Google translator, but Google had no idea what they were saying, either.
And then there’s this TikTok video, which makes the point about as clearly as you possibly can. Watch:
@zehn.ali Imagine losing a Somali mayor… because of qabiil. 😳 Minneapolis just had an election that shook the whole Somali community.Omar Fateh Somali, Muslim, qualified almost made history.But instead of unity… we split.He looked to his left and watched his own people support his opponent. They even gave him a Somali name: “Yaquub Frey.” And he was given a Somali tribe! As if he was more Somali than Omar. Even Ilhan Omar spoke up. She said she was embarrassed. “We left Somalia to escape qabiil and now we brought it to Minnesota. We came here to be one Somali. Now we’re dividing over tribes” in front of Americans who don’t even know what qabiil means. And when it was over, The educated Somali diaspora on TikTok said it best: “We talk about representation… but we lost because we couldn’t represent each other. #somalitiktok #minnesota #omarfateh #somalidiaspora #minneapolis
♬ Bell Sound/Temple/Gone/About 10 minutes(846892) – yulu-ism project
Credit: @sehn.ali/TikTok/com
If these clips are accurate — and they appear to be — then there’s a very good chance that American elections are now being decided based on tribal blood feuds in Africa. How long until voters have to declare their clan affiliation, instead of their party affiliation? Is this what our ancestors had in mind?
If you’ve never read them, it’s worth taking a look at the Federalist Papers, or George Washington’s Farewell Address. The Founders didn’t just warn about the influence of political factions. They also specifically warned about the influence of foreign “attachments and intrigues” that cause people to become “bitter” and “hostile to Republican liberty.”
Well, here’s what that looks like in practice. Foreign attachments are now dictating the outcome of major elections, from New York to Minneapolis. And it’s only a matter of time before these foreign loyalties lead to open racial warfare and total dysfunction, just like they have in Somalia.
Among other things, especially since it’s almost Veterans Day, it’s important to point out what a grave betrayal this is. Over the past year or so, various commentators have floated the idea that maybe we lost World War II, in the long term. As the theory goes — yes, we defeated the Axis Powers, saved the West, and so on. But it was a temporary victory. Instead of fighting us on the battlefield, the enemies of Western civilization have spent the better part of the last century simply walking in through our front door. And now they’re all here. And as a result, the argument goes, many of those sacrifices — hundreds of thousands of casualties — were made in vain.
In response, it’s become fashionable to decry these commentators as members of the so-called “woke right.” It’s certainly easy to dismiss their claims for various reasons, and many people have done so. But it becomes a lot harder to dismiss these arguments when you listen to the words of actual veterans of World War II — many of whom are now stating, in sum and substance, that the war wasn’t worth it. We didn’t actually win. We’re losing everything they fought for. They’re taking a look around the country, and the West in general, and recoiling in abject disgust.
Here’s one example:
It’s not the same. pic.twitter.com/PROZZA57TU
— Serf (@TheRoyalSerf) November 7, 2025
Credit: @RoyalSerf/X.com
This has become a pretty big genre of footage online. Many veterans of World War II are saying the same thing, one after another.
You may have seen this clip by now, from “Good Morning Britain.” It’s truly a very difficult piece of footage to watch. It features British World War II Veteran Alec Penstone, who’s 100 years old. He served in the Royal Navy during the D‑Day invasion. Watch:
‘What we fought for was our freedom, even now [the country] is worse than it was when I fought for it,’ says 100-year-old World War II Veteran Alec Penstone. pic.twitter.com/M9HSsS5sIW
— Good Morning Britain (@GMB) November 7, 2025
Credit: @GMB/X.com
It’s hard enough to listen to what Alec Penstone is saying. He fought in some of the most pivotal battles of World War II. Many of his friends died in the war. And now he looks around Britain and he sees a country that’s been completely conquered. When Alec Penstone was in his 20s and 30s and 40s, Britain didn’t have more than a million Africans. They barely had any African migrants at all. Britain was full of British people. And they didn’t arrest people for exercising their free speech rights, nor did they mutilate children in the name of gender ideology. It was a cohesive, wealthy, sane, British country. And all of that’s changed.
And yet somehow, even after hearing all of this from Alec Penstone himself, the female host manages to make the clip even worse. She’s talking to the man like she’s a kindergarten teacher and he’s a 4-year-old upset because he misses his mommy. She basically cuts him off, in the most patronizing tone imaginable, before he can elaborate on why, exactly, the country has gone to hell.
But there’s nothing particularly controversial about what he said, even in Britain. It’s now the prevailing sentiment in the country that Britain’s culture has been subverted and destroyed by open borders. This is from The Daily Mail:
Research from King’s College London and pollsters at Ipsos found that eight in ten said they felt the nation was divided — up five percentage points from two years ago and ten points from 2020. And half of the public said Britain’s ‘culture’ was changing too fast. But most strikingly, the findings found that national pride across all age groups also plummeted, with less than half (46 per cent) saying they were ‘proud’ of their country – down ten points from 2020.
Why might that be? The anchorwoman’s co-host, a man named Adil Ray, probably has some ideas as to why the West has fallen, and why no one feels any “national pride” anymore. Even though he’s a British TV host, Adil Ray recently had some thoughts about the mayoral election in New York. And here’s what he wrote earlier this month.
Some say Mamdani may implement Sharia Law. He might. The heart of Sharia is social justice, welfare, fairness, charity and cohesion. Most Muslim countries operate a hybrid of Sharia & civil law, are slowly reforming and abandoning unethical practices despite the west’s portrayal.
Yes, those are the words of a TV host who just pretended to be shocked — absolutely shocked — that a World War II veteran was unhappy with the state of Britain and how it’s changed for the worse. He’s openly endorsing sharia law, saying it’s not so bad. And he kept his job after this. He was allowed to interview this veteran, and act completely clueless about what Alec Penstone was getting at. “What do you mean by that,” he asked incredulously. He openly represents exactly what Mr. Penstone was talking about. He is the problem, along with his cohost.
Of course, they act like they don’t understand what he’s talking about, but everyone knows. The man fought for his country. Today he looks around and sees that it has surrendered itself to a third-world invasion. Men like him — white men who built his country — are demonized and scapegoated, again and again. And while lawless migrants rape and kill in the streets, the government focuses its energies on arresting people who say insulting things about transgenders on the internet. That’s what he means. That’s what he sees in his final years. He gave everything to the cause of preserving western civilization. Now the thing that he fought to preserve is slipping away. It was sacrificed on the altar of multiculturalism. It was surrendered by smiley, patronizing liberals shouting slogans like “Diversity is our strength.”
He fought for his country, for England. Today England is gone. Of course he thinks it wasn’t worth it. And the really awful truth is that — as difficult as it may be to admit, and as much as the sing-songy anchorwoman doesn’t want him to say it — he just may be right. But that’s ultimately up to us to decide. Will we pull western civilization back from the brink, or let it die? The choice, ultimately, is ours.
