A heads up that the ink for reference 13 doesn't seem to be working. I was curious about that study because I wanted to know: are these killings all or mostly all verifiable hate crimes per se? (i.e. were these individuals murdered because they were trans, or were a significant proportion of them murdered for other reasons, e.g. random muggings, car jackings etc.) Also, is the total number cited higher than the per capita rate for other demographics? (even if it's lower, however, this might still be consistent with a higher murder rate when corrected for the recorded frequency of these victims being in situations, like being outside, that are typical of most murders in the general population. e.g. if trans people were mostly killed at home and this goes against the national average, this would be evidence that they were being targeted for being trans) I'm not saying that the study was flawed or that anything I'm suggesting is or is not necessarily true, only that it's good to know these things to be certain that the category being invoked, anti-trans hate, is the culprit, and to be able to counter anti trans propagandists who would seek to downplay the violence or its significance.
I fixed it in the sources section. Thanks for pointing it out.
This is the relevant section if you want ctrl+f it:
---
"MOST VICTIMS ARE YOUNGER
Age was known for 97.3% of all victims since 2013 (n=326). In the 11 years of tracking, the age of transgender and gender non-conforming victims of fatal violence ranged from 16 to 66 years at the time of their death, with an average age of approximately 30 years old.
Among those with known age, over three in four (76.4%; n=249) victims were under the age of 35, including a little under one in ten (9.5%; n=31) who were under the age of 21. Eleven of them were minors under the age of 18."
I’d also add Native Americans to the first section — this land wasn’t empty. I do think more people are becoming aware of the scourge of neoliberalism. Unfortunately the majority of politicians still run away from any real critique of the system.
I was a bit on the fence about adding Native Americans, not because they don't matter but because their fit in the system isn't as much a matter of being perpetually trapped in an extraction system. That doesn't mean they were in a better position (being nearly wiped out). But I do agree that not mentioning them at all can give the wrong impression that they weren't casualties of the system as it developed.
"Fascism is corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power". Benito Mussolini
Historically societal extraction systems are not unique to contemporary history Feudalism was full on extraction and monarchies grew out of those systems Even religions like the Papacy are an extraction system Fascist governments run by Hitler and Mussolini knew the extraction system well and exploited it to wage their wars for inequality
What’s unique about the current acceleration of the extraction system in the US is the fiat currency economic system created by Nixon taking the dollar off a gold standard in 1971 This has led to escalation of extraction with all its manifestations which Lukium has covered For more on fiat currency and its ides of March 2026 predictable collapse see MacleodFinance substack channel
Although one should not be surprised about this collapse as these extraction systems have historically disintegrated by Revolutions eg French 1790’s, Boshevik 1910’s, roaring 1920’s leading to FDR’s New Deal and a flourishing prosperous middle class, there is hope that 2026 will be the end of the current extraction system and be replaced by an "FDR transition with the hope of a New Beginning" meaning an adoption of a metallic standard as defined by the Constitution Article One
It should be pointed out for the sake of accuracy that the "corporatism" that Mussolini alluded to in that quote was not in the same sense of "corporations" as we would understand them (companies with CEOs and boards of directors maximizing profits for stockholders), but in the sense of a governing structure that unifies various institutions, including guilds, trade unions etc. and coordinates and regiments their activities towards a certain goal. But it turns out to be true that fascism DOES cater to and largely rely on corporations in the more widely understood sense, as Lukium shows in this series and "Uncovering MAGA". Correct me if I'm wrong about Mussolini's quote, anyone.
Quick caveat: this is a one-axis sketch meant to show a trend (how much economic power is insulated from democratic control), not a full political map. A multi-axis chart would capture important differences this flattens.
On “corporatism”: when Mussolini used that term, he wasn’t talking about modern shareholder corporations in the narrow “CEO/board/profit-maximization” sense. He meant a corporative structure—state-organized “corporations” of sectors (employers, unions, guilds, professions) coordinated under the regime.
In Unmasking MAGA (and generally), I’m using “corporatism” to describe a direction of movement along a spectrum—toward tighter state–private firm fusion—where democratic control erodes and ordinary people lose leverage. That drift can take two forms: the state subordinating firms (Mussolini’s theory) or firms capturing the state (more common in the U.S. today). Different route, similar destination: disciplined labor, protected capital, and hollowed-out democracy.
So to your point specifically, Luis: “companies with CEOs and boards maximizing profits for stockholders” is one configuration on that spectrum. Mussolini’s corporatism is a different configuration further along the fusion axis—more formalized state–firm integration, with the state explicitly steering the arrangement. My argument is that, absent countervailing democratic constraints (labor power, antitrust, public financing, strong institutions, etc.), shareholder capitalism tends to drift toward tighter state–private entanglement over time—so you can have “CEO/board/shareholder-profit” corporations in the 1970s and still have them today, yet be further along the fusion axis now because the underlying degree of capture/entanglement has intensified. That drift can land either in a more openly state-directed corporatist model, or in the contemporary U.S. pattern: firms capturing the state.
A heads up that the ink for reference 13 doesn't seem to be working. I was curious about that study because I wanted to know: are these killings all or mostly all verifiable hate crimes per se? (i.e. were these individuals murdered because they were trans, or were a significant proportion of them murdered for other reasons, e.g. random muggings, car jackings etc.) Also, is the total number cited higher than the per capita rate for other demographics? (even if it's lower, however, this might still be consistent with a higher murder rate when corrected for the recorded frequency of these victims being in situations, like being outside, that are typical of most murders in the general population. e.g. if trans people were mostly killed at home and this goes against the national average, this would be evidence that they were being targeted for being trans) I'm not saying that the study was flawed or that anything I'm suggesting is or is not necessarily true, only that it's good to know these things to be certain that the category being invoked, anti-trans hate, is the culprit, and to be able to counter anti trans propagandists who would seek to downplay the violence or its significance.
Odd, looking at it, might have a typo. Thanks for the heads up
It looks like the HRC site has recently changed their website structure but didn't setup a redirect. The original URL was:
https://www.hrc.org/resources/fatal-violence-against-the-transgender-and-gender-non-conforming-community-in-2023
It is now:
https://reports.hrc.org/an-epidemic-of-violence-2023
I fixed it in the sources section. Thanks for pointing it out.
This is the relevant section if you want ctrl+f it:
---
"MOST VICTIMS ARE YOUNGER
Age was known for 97.3% of all victims since 2013 (n=326). In the 11 years of tracking, the age of transgender and gender non-conforming victims of fatal violence ranged from 16 to 66 years at the time of their death, with an average age of approximately 30 years old.
Among those with known age, over three in four (76.4%; n=249) victims were under the age of 35, including a little under one in ten (9.5%; n=31) who were under the age of 21. Eleven of them were minors under the age of 18."
---
Thom Hartmann’s newsletter today talks about another aspect of the extraction economy — we never own anything anymore, we rent it.
I’d also add Native Americans to the first section — this land wasn’t empty. I do think more people are becoming aware of the scourge of neoliberalism. Unfortunately the majority of politicians still run away from any real critique of the system.
Added into the section. Thanks for the comment!
Totally fair, will do.
I was a bit on the fence about adding Native Americans, not because they don't matter but because their fit in the system isn't as much a matter of being perpetually trapped in an extraction system. That doesn't mean they were in a better position (being nearly wiped out). But I do agree that not mentioning them at all can give the wrong impression that they weren't casualties of the system as it developed.
"Fascism is corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power". Benito Mussolini
Historically societal extraction systems are not unique to contemporary history Feudalism was full on extraction and monarchies grew out of those systems Even religions like the Papacy are an extraction system Fascist governments run by Hitler and Mussolini knew the extraction system well and exploited it to wage their wars for inequality
What’s unique about the current acceleration of the extraction system in the US is the fiat currency economic system created by Nixon taking the dollar off a gold standard in 1971 This has led to escalation of extraction with all its manifestations which Lukium has covered For more on fiat currency and its ides of March 2026 predictable collapse see MacleodFinance substack channel
Although one should not be surprised about this collapse as these extraction systems have historically disintegrated by Revolutions eg French 1790’s, Boshevik 1910’s, roaring 1920’s leading to FDR’s New Deal and a flourishing prosperous middle class, there is hope that 2026 will be the end of the current extraction system and be replaced by an "FDR transition with the hope of a New Beginning" meaning an adoption of a metallic standard as defined by the Constitution Article One
It should be pointed out for the sake of accuracy that the "corporatism" that Mussolini alluded to in that quote was not in the same sense of "corporations" as we would understand them (companies with CEOs and boards of directors maximizing profits for stockholders), but in the sense of a governing structure that unifies various institutions, including guilds, trade unions etc. and coordinates and regiments their activities towards a certain goal. But it turns out to be true that fascism DOES cater to and largely rely on corporations in the more widely understood sense, as Lukium shows in this series and "Uncovering MAGA". Correct me if I'm wrong about Mussolini's quote, anyone.
Oh, also important to note, on the graphic in my other reply. I don't think that either extreme is necessarily good.
I made this Overton-window graphic a few years ago: https://imgur.com/qEJs5qJ
Quick caveat: this is a one-axis sketch meant to show a trend (how much economic power is insulated from democratic control), not a full political map. A multi-axis chart would capture important differences this flattens.
On “corporatism”: when Mussolini used that term, he wasn’t talking about modern shareholder corporations in the narrow “CEO/board/profit-maximization” sense. He meant a corporative structure—state-organized “corporations” of sectors (employers, unions, guilds, professions) coordinated under the regime.
In Unmasking MAGA (and generally), I’m using “corporatism” to describe a direction of movement along a spectrum—toward tighter state–private firm fusion—where democratic control erodes and ordinary people lose leverage. That drift can take two forms: the state subordinating firms (Mussolini’s theory) or firms capturing the state (more common in the U.S. today). Different route, similar destination: disciplined labor, protected capital, and hollowed-out democracy.
So to your point specifically, Luis: “companies with CEOs and boards maximizing profits for stockholders” is one configuration on that spectrum. Mussolini’s corporatism is a different configuration further along the fusion axis—more formalized state–firm integration, with the state explicitly steering the arrangement. My argument is that, absent countervailing democratic constraints (labor power, antitrust, public financing, strong institutions, etc.), shareholder capitalism tends to drift toward tighter state–private entanglement over time—so you can have “CEO/board/shareholder-profit” corporations in the 1970s and still have them today, yet be further along the fusion axis now because the underlying degree of capture/entanglement has intensified. That drift can land either in a more openly state-directed corporatist model, or in the contemporary U.S. pattern: firms capturing the state.
Excellent points