I had a very long day today with a lot of socialization, and near the end I very much felt myself crashing and I wanted to be alone. What originally was a source of potential conflict instead turned out to be a very deep heart-to-heart with a close friend. I’ve known this friend for two months now, and we have hung out a lot since then but this was the first time I got to really know her in this intimate sense of both of us sharing some trauma. We talked for like two hours, and I realize that I actually feel good. Like I don’t feel misunderstood or hurt, but I actually feel like the opposite. Like I feel really valued, and I feel connected to people rather than isolated. I’m really grateful for this friend and also how my life has started to bare fruit that I have planted earlier

Die Tafeln von Chartres sind ein merkwürdiges Ding. Sechs farbige Formen auf einem Stück Papier, ein Blick, der leicht schielt, und irgendwann schwebt zwischen den beiden Reihen eine dritte. Violett, stabil, nicht da und doch da. Du weißt im gleichen Moment, ob du drin bist oder nicht. Kein Lehrer muss es dir sagen, keine Maschine misst etwas, dein eigenes Sehen ist das Feedback.

Das ist der entscheidende Punkt. Bei fast jeder anderen Meditationsform tappst du im Dunkeln. Du sitzt auf einem Kissen und fragst dich, ob du gerade meditierst oder nur sitzt und denkst, du meditierst. Du wiederholst ein Mantra und hoffst, dass etwas passiert. Bei den Tafeln gibt es diese Ambiguität nicht. Die dritte Reihe ist da, oder sie ist nicht da. Und sie bleibt nur da, solange dein Sehapparat, dein Nervensystem, deine Aufmerksamkeit in einem bestimmten Zustand kooperieren. Sobald du abgelenkt bist, zerfällt das Bild. Das zwingt dich, ohne dass dir jemand Druck macht.

Dazu kommt dieses paradoxe Element, das Zen-Lehrer seit Jahrhunderten beschreiben und das kaum jemand aus Worten lernt: gleichzeitig fokussiert und entspannt sein. Strengst du dich zu sehr an, zerfällt die Fusion. Lässt du zu sehr los, auch. Es gibt nur einen schmalen Streifen dazwischen, und in diesem Streifen entsteht dieser Zustand, den die Tradition “mühelose Wachheit” nennt. Die Tafeln geben dir diesen Zustand nicht als Konzept. Sie zwingen dich biomechanisch hinein.

Dass das Ding 1977 zum ersten Mal aufgeschrieben wurde, ist fast absurd. Eine Technik, die neurophysiologisch so klar funktioniert, die so wenig Material braucht, die so direkt wirkt, und sie taucht in einem Buch über Zigeuner-Traditionen auf und verschwindet dann wieder im Nischenregal esoterischer Buchläden. George Pennington hat sechzehn Jahre damit gearbeitet, bevor er sein eigenes Buch geschrieben hat. Sechzehn Jahre. Und trotzdem kennt das heute kaum jemand.

Über das Alter kann niemand etwas Seriöses sagen. Die Fahrenden haben es mündlich weitergegeben, Derlon durfte erst schreiben, als die Stammesväter es erlaubten, und davor ist Dunkelheit. Die Formen der Tafeln entsprechen der Geometrie der Kathedrale von Chartres, die um 1200 gebaut wurde, aber ob die Meditation so alt ist oder ob die Fahrenden die Formen später von der Kathedrale genommen haben oder ob beide aus einer noch älteren Quelle schöpfen, wissen wir nicht. Die Geschichte der Technik ist offen. Was geschlossen ist, ist ihre Funktion.

Wenn du täglich damit arbeitest, passiert mehrerlei. Am Anfang merkst du nur, dass dein Blick ausdauernder wird und dass du diesen fusionierten Zustand länger halten kannst. Das sieht nach nichts aus. Nach ein paar Wochen stellst du fest, dass deine Aufmerksamkeit im Alltag anders funktioniert. Klarer, weniger sprunghaft. Nach Monaten, sagt die Tradition, fangen tiefere Schichten an sich zu öffnen. Erst das persönliche Unbewusste mit all dem, was du verdrängt hast, und dann das, was Jung das kollektive Unbewusste genannt hat. Das sind große Worte, und man sollte vorsichtig damit sein, aber die Praxis scheint genau diese Richtung einzuschlagen.

Was mich am meisten an diesem Werkzeug fasziniert, ist sein Status außerhalb jeder Ökonomie. Du brauchst keinen Coach. Du brauchst keinen Kurs. Du brauchst keine App. Du brauchst kein Abo. Du brauchst einen Drucker oder einen Kopierer, ein Stück Papier, einen Tisch. Das war es. Keine andere Meditationstradition ist so vollständig unbestechlich durch den Markt. Sie lässt sich nicht verpacken, nicht monetarisieren, nicht zertifizieren. Vielleicht ist das der eigentliche Grund, warum sie im Dunkel geblieben ist. Was sich nicht verkaufen lässt, verbreitet sich nicht.

Und das führt zu einem größeren Gedanken, über den wir gesprochen haben. Die Tafeln sind nicht das einzige vergessene Werkzeug dieser Art. Da gibt es die Dreamachine von Gysin, ein Karton vor einer Glühbirne, der über Stroboskop-Effekte visuelle Zustände erzeugt. Den Phosphenismus von Lefebure, der mit Nachbildern arbeitet. Das Ganzfeld-Experiment mit halbierten Tischtennisbällen. Die Spiegelübung, bei der sich dein eigenes Gesicht nach zwanzig Minuten verzerrt. Das Herzensgebet der orthodoxen Mönche, ein Satz, der sich mit dem Atem vermählt und das Herz-Kreislauf-System messbar verändert. Das taoistische Zuowang, “Sitzen und Vergessen”. Nada Yoga, das Hineinhören in den inneren Klang. Das Bön-Tönen mit fünf Vokalen.

All diese Techniken haben etwas gemeinsam. Sie kosten nichts. Sie brauchen keinen Lehrer, jedenfalls nicht dauerhaft. Sie lassen sich nicht in ein Produkt verwandeln. Und sie sind alle in unterschiedlichem Maß verschwunden. Die lauten Systeme haben überlebt, die leisen sind in Nischen zurückgezogen. Das ist kein Zufall und keine Verschwörung. Es ist einfach, wie Aufmerksamkeit sich verteilt in einer Ökonomie, die auf Wiederverkauf angewiesen ist.

Vielleicht ist das, was die Tafeln repräsentieren, eine Art Gegenarchiv. Werkzeuge für Menschen, die sich nichts verkaufen lassen wollen. Praktiken, die davon ausgehen, dass der Mensch im Kern schon alles hat, was er braucht, und dass Technik in diesem Sinne nur ein leiser Anschubs sein sollte, kein System, in das man sich einschreibt. Ein Blatt Papier, ein Blick, ein Moment Stille. Mehr nicht. Und in diesem Wenig steckt mehr, als die meisten teuren Systeme je liefern werden.

Before the dawn of man ...

... there was a covenant between the land and the sea people – a covenant long forgotten by those who stayed on shore, but indelibly etched in the minds of others – the dolphins of Altair.

Now the covenant had been broken. Dolphins were being wantonly sacrificed in the name of scientific research, their waters increasingly polluted, their number dangerously diminished. They had to find allies and strike back. Allies willing to sever their own earthly bonds for the sake of their sea brothers – willing, if necessary, to execute the destruction of the whole human race ...

Margaret St. Clair's novels Sign of the Labrys and The Shadow People are cited in the Dungeon Master's Guide “Appendix N: Inspirational and Educational Reading.” I've read the former couple of days ago, and enjoyed it quite much. It was also fascinating seeing how much of it read like an old-school dungeon delve.

When I researched the author, I read that the latter, The Shadow People, is part of loose trilogy comprised of The Dolphins of Altair (1967), The Shadow People (1969), and The Dancers of Noyo (1973). Since all three are relatively short (~200 pages each), I decided to simply read them in publishing order.

Mild spoilers ahead.

The story is presented from the perspective of a psionic dolphin historian. He narrates how the sea people—dolphins—used Udra (psychic powers, similar to psionics in OD&D) to find and collaborate with three splits—humans—to flood the world.

The writing is punchy, especially in the first half. Everything moves fast, and I enjoyed the implicit writing style. There is action, there is a little bit of mystery, and there are surprises and turns. Some of the hallucinations / visions are quite trippy, which I liked as well.

The Dolphins of Altair is not listed in the Appendix N, so I did not expect any D&D tropes. There is a lot of psionics, and some of the techniques are well described. Only 1-in-100 000 are receptive to it; there are mentions of ESP. If this was an OD&D module or setting it would be labelled as gonzo for sure.

At its core, The Dolphins of Altair is an ecological doomsday book infused with psychedelic and psionics. I found it to be quite a quick and enjoyable read, and am looking forward to discovering how exactly it relates to The Shadow People.

#Reading #Fantasy #ScienceFiction

¿Hacen versos las máquinas? ¿Pero quieren?  ¿Desean? ¿Seducen? ¿Perpetúan?

¿Quién desea un corazón, ahora que en la palma de la mano llevamos mundos virtuales? Un corazón verdadero, digo.

Es sencillo encontrar la paz interior cuando actuamos con bondad.

Jesus was kneeling in the thin cold grass at Kate Sessions Park while the city below Him still looked half asleep. The lights along Mission Bay had not fully faded yet. The houses on the hills were quiet. Even the roads seemed to be holding their breath for a few more minutes before the day started making demands. He had come there before dawn and bowed His head in quiet prayer with the calm of someone who was not trying to escape the world, but was entering it on purpose. Twenty feet away, inside a dented gray Corolla with a cracked rear light and a stack of unpaid envelopes in the passenger seat, Adriana Flores had both hands on the steering wheel and was trying not to cry hard enough to make herself sick. Her landlord had texted at 5:11 that morning and said rent had to be in by noon or he was filing. Her son had sent a separate message at 5:27 asking if she had sixty dollars and adding a quick sorry at the end like that softened anything. A shutoff notice from SDG&E was folded in the cup holder. The city looked beautiful from where she sat, and that only made it worse. San Diego always seemed to know how to shine right in the face of people who were coming apart.

She did not notice Him at first because she was staring at the windshield without seeing it. She was trying to do the math one more time as if a different answer might appear if she stayed desperate long enough. She had already used part of the rent money for groceries three days earlier. She had skipped paying her phone bill the month before. She had taken an extra cleaning shift in Pacific Beach and another one in Hillcrest, and all of it still felt like pouring cups of water into a hole in the sand. When the first sound finally broke through her thoughts, it was not traffic. It was the quiet scrape of a shoe in the grass and then a knuckle against her window. She jerked and turned fast. A man stood there with the morning still around Him. There was nothing hurried in His face. There was no edge in Him. He was looking at her the way people look when they are not trying to win anything from you. She lowered the window halfway because that was all the trust she had. He did not ask her what was wrong right away. He said, “You have been carrying more than one person should carry.” It was such a plain sentence that it slipped past her defenses before she could stop it.

Adriana laughed once in that sharp bitter way tired people do when kindness feels suspicious. She wiped under one eye with the heel of her hand and told Him she had to go to work. He nodded as if that mattered. She told Him she cleaned vacation rentals near Mission Boulevard and then had to be in Hillcrest after that. She said it all fast because she wanted Him to hear how impossible the morning already was. He listened without interrupting. The sky behind Him was beginning to pale. A runner passed on the path and never glanced their way. He asked if she had eaten. She told Him no and then added that she did not need anything. He rested one hand on the top of the open window and said, “That is not the same thing.” She should have driven away then. She should have rolled up the glass and gone down the hill like every other morning. Instead she sat there with the key in her hand and the strange feeling that if she left too fast she would take all the noise inside her with her. “I don’t have time for a conversation,” she said. “Then let me keep you company while you do what has to be done,” He said. She almost said no again. What came out instead was, “Get in if you want. I’m late already.”

The car smelled faintly like old coffee and bleach. A bag with folded work shirts sat on the backseat next to a cheap backpack that belonged to her son Nico. Jesus closed the door and settled in without taking over the space. Adriana pulled out of the park and started down toward Pacific Beach while the city slowly woke around them. She expected Him to start asking questions that would force her into some story she did not want to tell. He only looked out at the streets as they changed from quiet neighborhoods to wider roads and low storefronts preparing to open. When they passed a woman walking a dog in slippers and a robe, He smiled a little. When they stopped at a red light and a man on a bicycle coasted through before the signal changed, He watched him too. Nothing in His attention felt random. That unsettled her more than pity would have. “You seem really calm for six in the morning,” she said. “Morning belongs to the truth before the world starts performing,” He said. Adriana shook her head and turned onto a street lined with pale apartment buildings and short-term rentals. “That sounds nice,” she said. “My mornings belong to whoever needs money from me first.” He looked at her then, not with correction, but with something sad and steady. “And when does any part of you belong to God,” He asked, “or even to yourself?” She tightened her grip on the wheel and did not answer because she had not let herself ask that question in a very long time.

The rental she had to clean sat three blocks from the beach and looked cheerful in the fake way expensive places often do. It had a blue door, potted plants that someone else maintained, and a little sign by the gate reminding guests to respect the neighbors as if people with enough money to vacation always thought they were respectful. Adriana unlocked the side box, pulled the key, and went in first with her cleaning bag over one shoulder. The place was wrecked. Wet towels lay in a heap near the bathroom. Sand tracked through the kitchen. Two empty hard seltzer cans had been left on a nightstand beside a Bible that the owners kept there for decoration more than belief. Someone had smeared makeup into a white pillowcase. She stood in the middle of it and felt that familiar drop inside her chest, not because the mess was unusual, but because it was. This was how her days worked now. She moved through the wreckage of other people’s pleasure and called it income. Jesus came in behind her and took in the room with one slow look. She felt suddenly embarrassed, as if He had stepped into something too small and too worn for Him. “You don’t have to stand there,” she muttered. “I’ll be quick.” He picked up a trash bag from the counter and asked where she kept the fresh linens. She stared at Him. “You’re not doing this.” He already had the bag open in His hand. “Nothing honest is beneath Me,” He said. It was not grand when He said it. It sounded like the simplest thing in the world.

She worked faster after that, almost angrily, as if she could scrub her own life into order by how hard she wiped down a kitchen island that would hold somebody’s brunch in a few hours. Jesus stripped the beds and folded towels with the ease of someone who did not need credit for being useful. He moved without fuss. He did not give her speeches while she vacuumed sand from the floor. He did not keep glancing at her to see if she was learning something. He just stayed present in the room, and that presence began to expose how frantic she had become. She had not cleaned anything slowly in years. Every movement in her body carried urgency even when no one was chasing her. Halfway through mopping the bathroom she heard the front door open and knew before she looked that Sabrina had arrived. Sabrina was twenty-three and pretty in a tired careless way. She did not wear enough sleep and she wore too much brightness. She had one of those smiles that people use when they are hiding panic under politeness. “I can take the outside trash and reset the patio,” Sabrina said as she came in. Her voice was cheerful by force. When she reached for the extra garbage bags, Jesus noticed the fading mark around her wrist before Adriana did. He did not stare. He simply said, “You do not owe your safety to anyone’s temper.” Sabrina froze with the plastic half pulled from the box. Adriana stopped moving too. Sabrina looked at Him like somebody had reached into a locked drawer and taken out the one thing she had been hoping no one could see.

For a second nobody in the little rental said anything. The hum of the refrigerator seemed too loud. Sabrina swallowed and let out a small dry laugh. She said He must have mistaken her for somebody else. Jesus did not argue. He only answered, “No. I saw you.” The sentence landed harder than a warning would have. Sabrina set the box down and looked toward the sliding glass door because it was easier than looking at Him. Adriana knew enough to mind her own business in most places. That was how working women survived. You noticed things and then you folded them up inside yourself unless somebody asked plainly for help. Still, she watched Sabrina’s face change. The performance slipped for one second and what showed underneath was not weakness. It was exhaustion. “He says he just gets angry,” Sabrina whispered. “Then he says sorry.” Jesus nodded once. “A person can be sorry and still be dangerous.” Sabrina’s eyes filled before she could stop them. Adriana found herself holding a clean pillowcase in both hands and feeling suddenly ashamed of how often she had called survival peace just because it got everyone through another day. Jesus did not press the girl further. He only told her, “When you are ready to leave what harms you, do not say you have no place to go. Ask, and God will begin with the next step.”

By the time they finished the rental, the sun had risen enough to turn the upper windows gold. The street outside had shifted. Joggers were out. Someone was walking back from the beach with a surfboard tucked under one arm. A delivery truck blocked half the lane. Adriana locked up, put the key back in the box, and stood on the sidewalk with sweat drying at the base of her neck. She checked her phone and felt the blood leave her face. The landlord had texted again. Noon means noon, Adriana. I cannot keep doing this. Nico had sent another message too. u there? and then, never mind. She stared at that one longer because it looked too much like the voice boys use when they are pretending not to need their mothers anymore. Jesus was beside her but not crowding her. There was a small taco shop around the corner already open, and He asked if she would sit down for a few minutes. She almost refused from habit. Then she realized her hands were shaking from more than hunger. They sat at a metal table outside with two breakfast burritos wrapped in foil and paper cups of coffee that tasted burnt and honest. The traffic on Garnet was building now. Adriana unwrapped half her food and then forgot to eat it. “I used to think if I kept moving fast enough I could outrun humiliation,” she said, surprising herself by saying anything at all. “Now I think I just gave it better shoes.” Jesus looked at her with that calm attention that never once felt like distance. “Humiliation grows in secret,” He said. “Truth opens a window.” She let out a hard breath and looked away toward the road. “Truth gets people evicted too.”

He let that sentence sit between them without pretending it was foolish. That was one of the things beginning to undo her. He did not answer pain with slogans. He did not treat money trouble like a lesson from a safe distance. Adriana told Him more then because there did not seem to be any point in half lying to someone who could already see her. She told Him Nico was nineteen and drifting. She told Him he had stopped going to City College weeks earlier, though he kept saying he was still enrolled. She told Him his father had not been part of their lives in almost six years except for the occasional promise that arrived by text and died the same way. She admitted that she had begun hiding mail in her glove compartment because looking at it in the apartment made the whole place feel smaller. She confessed that she sometimes parked before work in places with a view just so she could cry for ten minutes where nobody knew her. Jesus tore off a piece of burrito and ate it like a man who understood ordinary hunger. Then He said, “You learned to keep peace by hiding the fire.” Adriana laughed once and rubbed her forehead. “Peace. That’s generous.” He shook His head. “No. Survival. But survival that keeps lying becomes another kind of prison.” The words were not cruel, and that made them worse because she could not dismiss them.

Her next client lived in Hillcrest in an old building with narrow halls and an elevator that complained every time it moved. The drive there took longer than it should have because the city was fully awake now and so was her mind. They passed through streets that changed mood every few blocks. Palm trees gave way to bus stops. Storefront glass caught the sun. A man in scrubs hurried across an intersection with his badge swinging from his neck. Outside UC San Diego Medical Center, families were already moving in and out with that strained serious look hospitals put on people. Adriana parked two streets over where the meter still had time on it from somebody else and stared at the steering wheel before getting out. “Mrs. Bae is hard on a normal day,” she said. “Today I might say something back.” Jesus opened His door and stepped into the morning. “Then today I will come in with you,” He said. Mrs. Bae lived alone with a television that was always too loud and a living room so neat it felt anxious. Her late husband’s photo sat near a vase of fake flowers. Her son lived in Seattle and called on Sundays unless work got in the way. Adriana had been coming three afternoons a week for almost a year, helping with groceries, meals, laundry, and pills the older woman acted insulted to need. When Mrs. Bae saw Jesus enter behind Adriana, her eyes narrowed at once. “You cannot bring men in here,” she snapped. “I did not bring trouble,” Adriana said, tired enough to be honest. “I brought help.”

Mrs. Bae muttered under her breath in Korean and waved them both toward the kitchen as if surrendering would cost less energy than arguing. Adriana washed produce and checked the pill organizer while Jesus set a kettle on the stove. He moved through the small apartment with reverence that had nothing to do with the furniture and everything to do with the life inside it. When Mrs. Bae complained that the bananas were too green, He nodded and asked when she had last heard from her son. The question should have been rude. Somehow it was not. Mrs. Bae stiffened as if she had been struck in a place no one was supposed to touch. “My son is busy,” she said. “He has responsibilities.” Jesus put a mug on the counter and answered, “That may be true, but it is not the same as being accompanied.” Adriana stopped sorting pills and looked over. Mrs. Bae’s mouth tightened. “I do not need pity.” Jesus turned the flame down under the kettle. “No. But you do need tenderness, and you have started calling that weakness because you were left alone too long.” The old woman’s face changed in the smallest way. Not softened exactly. More like exposed. She looked toward her husband’s picture and then away from it. “Everybody leaves,” she said. It came out flatter than grief and much older than anger. Jesus handed her the warm mug with both hands. “Not everybody,” He said.

Adriana had spent months inside that apartment and had never once seen Mrs. Bae sit down before noon. That day the older woman lowered herself into a chair by the window and held her tea without talking. The room got quiet in a different way. Not empty. Open. Adriana finished the pills and started a load of laundry in the tiny hall machine. When she came back, Mrs. Bae was telling Jesus about the market she and her husband used to walk to before his legs gave out. She was speaking with more memory than bitterness for the first time Adriana could remember. Jesus listened as if lost years were still worth hearing in full. That did something to the room. It made time feel less like a threat. Adriana stood in the doorway with a basket of folded towels and felt a wave of sadness so sudden it almost bent her. She could not remember the last time anyone had listened to her that way. She did not mean listened for information. She meant listened as if her life had shape and weight and did not need to prove itself before receiving care. Her phone rang then and sliced the moment in half. The call was from a counselor at San Diego City College asking if she was Nico’s mother. She stepped into the hall to answer, already afraid. By the time the woman on the line explained that Nico had not attended classes in over three weeks and had missed required meetings about his enrollment status, Adriana had gone cold all the way down to her hands.

She thanked the counselor like people do when they are being handed bad news in a professional voice. Then she hung up and stood in the dim hallway outside the apartment while the dryer rattled behind one door and somebody somewhere above her dragged a chair across the floor. Shame came first. It always did. Shame was faster than grief. Shame told her she should have known. Shame reminded her that she had signed forms and made plans and told church people her son was getting himself together. Shame made a fool out of hope in under five seconds. When Jesus opened the apartment door and stepped into the hall, she had one hand over her mouth and the other braced against the wall. He did not ask what happened. She told Him anyway. The words came out clipped and ugly. Nico lied. She lied too by repeating the lie because maybe if she said it enough it would stay true. She had been so busy keeping the lights on that she stopped asking where her son spent his days. “Go home at lunch,” Jesus said. “I can’t,” she answered at once. “I have another shift later and I still need rent.” He held her gaze. “Go home now.” Something in His voice carried neither pressure nor room for self-deception. She nodded before she had fully decided to.

The apartment in City Heights was on the second floor of a building that had once been painted tan and now looked tired in every direction. The outside stairs held the heat even before noon. A shopping cart with one bent wheel sat near the dumpster. On the walk up Adriana already knew something was wrong because her window AC unit was silent. She unlocked the door and the apartment met her with still air and dimness. The power had been cut. For one long second she stood there with her hand still on the knob. The refrigerator was quiet. The old clock above the stove was dark. A smell of stale fabric and last night’s takeout hung in the heat. “Nico,” she called, though she knew from the feel of the place that he was not there. No answer came. His backpack was gone from the couch. One kitchen chair had been knocked sideways. In his room the bed was unmade and a drawer was hanging open. She stared at it all with the numb focus of someone who has no energy left for surprise. Jesus walked slowly through the apartment and stopped at the kitchen counter where the unpaid bills she thought she had hidden were spread out like evidence. Nico had found them. She felt stripped bare by that simple fact. A knock came at the half-open door. It was Yessenia from next door, fourteen years old and always carrying herself like a little mother because the adults around her were too busy or too worn down to do it right.

Yessenia held a grocery sack against one hip and glanced past Adriana into the dark apartment. “Your son left with those guys again,” she said quietly. “The one with the gray car and the neck tattoo. They were loud.” Adriana closed her eyes for a second. “When?” she asked. “Maybe an hour ago.” Yessenia shifted the bag and lowered her voice. “He looked mad.” There was nothing dramatic in the girl’s face. That made the fear worse. Kids in that building had learned to tell the truth without performing it. Jesus stepped forward and took the heavy bag from her before she could object. “Is your grandmother home,” He asked. Yessenia nodded. “Her knees hurt.” He carried the groceries two steps down to their doorway as naturally as if He had lived there all His life. Adriana watched that tiny act and nearly broke from it. There were people all around her life. She knew their names. She borrowed onions and gave rides and watched children in a pinch. Yet she had built her suffering like a locked room inside a crowded building. Yessenia’s grandmother thanked Him from her chair just inside the doorway, and He answered her with warmth that made the little apartment feel dignified instead of poor. When He came back, Adriana was standing in the kitchen with both palms pressed hard against the dead counter. “I cannot do this anymore,” she said. “I know,” Jesus answered.

She turned on Him then with all the force she had been using to stay upright. She told Him that no, He did not know. He did not know what it was like to count every gallon of gas, to lie to your son because truth sounded too much like failure, to work inside beautiful homes and then come back to a place where the electricity could vanish before lunch. She told Him He did not know what San Diego looked like to people who served it rather than enjoyed it. She told Him that faith sounded different when rent was due by noon and your child might be in a car with boys who called bad decisions freedom. The words kept coming because once grief feels safe enough to stand up, it rarely does so quietly. Jesus let every sentence land. He did not defend Himself. He did not shrink either. When she finally ran out of breath, the apartment was still except for distant traffic on El Cajon Boulevard and the faint bark of a dog in another unit. “You are right,” He said at last. “You are speaking from where you hurt. Say the rest.” She stared at Him, angry tears hot under her eyes. Nobody ever said that. They said calm down. They said be strong. They said pray. He told her to say the rest. So she did. She said she was tired of being needed more than she was loved. She said she was tired of every day being a rescue mission that still ended in loss. She said she was starting to resent even the people she would die for, and that made her feel monstrous. When she finished, she looked sick with honesty. Jesus stepped closer and said, “Now we are near the truth.”

She slid down into the kitchen chair because her legs had nothing left in them. Light from the window fell across the floor in a bright square that stopped short of her shoes. Jesus sat across from her at the dead table as if darkness and heat were not reasons to leave. The city went on outside. Somewhere nearby a leaf blower started up. A siren moved through an intersection and faded. The ordinary noise made her pain feel even more brutal because suffering is often loneliest when the rest of the world keeps functioning. “What am I supposed to do first,” she asked. The question was stripped clean now. No sarcasm. No defense. “Tell the truth,” He said. “To who?” she asked. “To God. To your son. To the people you have trained to believe you are never in need. To yourself.” She laughed weakly and shook her head. “That sounds noble when you say it.” He leaned forward, elbows on His knees. “It is not noble. It is necessary. You cannot build peace on concealment.” She looked around the dark apartment and thought of every polished answer she had given in church hallways, at work, on the phone, to Nico, to herself. Fine. Busy. A little behind. We’re getting there. It all sounded obscene now. Before she could answer, her phone buzzed on the table. Unknown number. She stared at it, then picked up. Nico’s voice came through rough and low, half covered by street noise. “Mom.” Her whole body went rigid. “Where are you?” she asked. He exhaled hard. “Don’t start. Just come get me.” She could hear people yelling in the background. A train bell clanged somewhere far off. “Where,” she said again. There was a pause, then, “Near 12th and Imperial.” His voice broke on the last word. “Please just come.”

He hung up before she could say another thing. Adriana kept the phone to her ear for a second longer because putting it down would make the moment real. When she finally lowered it, Jesus was already standing. There was no panic in Him. Only readiness. She looked up at Him and saw the calm that had unsettled her all morning now becoming the one thing keeping her from falling apart. Outside, the city was moving toward late afternoon. Traffic would be thick soon. The rent deadline had passed. The lights were still off. Nothing in her life had been neatly solved. Yet something had cracked open that she could not close again. She rose from the chair, grabbed her keys from the counter, and wiped her face with both hands. “If he’s in trouble,” she said, “I don’t know what I’m walking into.” Jesus moved toward the door and opened it to the hot hallway. “Then do not walk in alone,” He said.

Adriana drove faster than she wanted to and slower than fear demanded. That was how panic worked when you had responsibilities. It filled your chest like a siren, but your hands still had to keep the car between the lines. The afternoon heat had deepened and the air through the cracked window felt like breath from an open oven. Jesus sat beside her in the same steady silence He had kept all day, watching the streets shift as they moved west. City Heights gave way to wider lanes and busier corners. A man in a Padres cap pushed a shopping cart full of blankets past a check-cashing place. Two women stood outside a laundromat talking with their whole bodies, one laughing too hard at something that probably was not funny. Adriana barely saw any of it. Her mind was already down by the tracks. She kept hearing the way Nico had said please. He had not sounded angry at the end. He had sounded scared, and that frightened her more than a scream would have. “If he got himself into something stupid, I can’t fix it,” she said, mostly to the windshield. “You were never meant to be his savior,” Jesus answered. “You were meant to be his mother.” She gripped the wheel harder. “That sounds nice until he needs more than I have.” Jesus looked out at the road ahead. “Then give what is true,” He said. “It is stronger than the performance of strength.”

By the time they reached 12th and Imperial, the place carried the heavy unsettled feeling of late afternoon downtown. The buses hissed at the curb. The trolley bells rang and then fell silent. People moved with that mix of urgency and drift that belongs to transit centers, where some are on their way somewhere and others have nowhere in particular to go but still need motion. A security guard stood near the stairs watching the platform with tired alertness. Two teenagers shared earbuds under the shade of a sign. A man argued into a phone in a voice loud enough for the whole station to hear. Adriana pulled into a loading zone and killed the engine. For one second she could not move. The fear inside her had stopped feeling sharp and turned heavy. Jesus opened His door first. “Come,” He said, and there was no force in it, only presence. She followed Him through the station, scanning faces too quickly at first to recognize anything. Then she saw Nico near the edge of the lower plaza by the bus bays, sitting on the concrete with his elbows on his knees, one hand pressed to the side of his face.

He looked younger when he was scared. That broke her before anything else did. He had a split lip and one side of his cheek was already swelling. His T-shirt was dirty at the shoulder. Two boys stood several feet away, pretending not to wait on him. One of them was thin and restless with a neck tattoo that looked cheap and unfinished. The other kept looking toward the street like he was watching for a car. Nico saw Adriana and straightened too fast, trying to recover whatever version of himself he had been performing before she arrived. “I’m fine,” he said before she even reached him. “No, you are not,” she snapped back, then hated the first sentence out of her mouth because it sounded like anger reaching for cover. The boy with the neck tattoo stepped forward and said Nico owed him. He said it casually, like that made it reasonable. Jesus moved just enough to stand between the boys and the little space where Adriana and Nico were trying to find each other. He did not puff Himself up. He did not threaten. He only looked at the young man and said, “You know the difference between collecting a debt and feeding on weakness.” The boy’s mouth twitched into a smirk that did not hold. “Who are You?” he asked. Jesus answered, “Someone who sees what you are becoming.” It was quiet, but it struck harder than a shout.

The thin boy tried to laugh it off, yet the sound came out brittle. His friend muttered that they should go. For a second the tattooed one stayed there, trying to keep his posture mean enough to protect whatever name he had built for himself. Jesus held his gaze without humiliation and without fear. “You were not born for this,” He said. Something passed over the young man’s face then, quick and defensive and pained all at once. It was the kind of expression that only appears when a person has been recognized beneath the mask they hate and depend on. He swore under his breath and backed away. The other boy followed him, and within seconds they were swallowed by the moving crowd. Adriana turned to Nico and crouched in front of him. Up close the split lip looked worse. There was a scrape on his knuckles too. “What happened?” she asked. Nico would not meet her eyes. He said he had borrowed money because he was going to flip something and make it back. He said it like he was ashamed of how stupid it sounded now that the failure was visible on his face. He admitted he had not been going to class because he was already behind and then got too embarrassed to face the teachers. He told her one lie had turned into five and then into a whole life he had to maintain every day. Adriana closed her eyes because hearing him say it out loud felt like hearing her own secret in a younger voice.

Jesus knelt beside them on the concrete as though that platform were as worthy of reverence as a church floor. People kept walking past. A trolley arrived and released another wash of bodies into the station. Somewhere overhead a recorded voice announced departures in the flat official tone cities use when they need to sound orderly. None of it touched the small circle of truth opening there. Nico looked at Jesus with suspicion first, then confusion, then something like relief that he did not know how to admit. “She thinks I’m trash now anyway,” he muttered. Adriana flinched. “I don’t think that.” “You should,” he shot back, pain turning quick and ugly the way it does in nineteen-year-old boys who are still children in the places that matter most. “I quit school. I lied. I borrowed money from idiots. I keep saying I’m gonna figure it out and then I don’t.” He looked away and wiped at his mouth with the back of his hand. “You should be done with me.” Jesus answered before Adriana could speak from her hurt. “Shame always tells a person that failure has become identity.” Nico stared at Him. Jesus continued, “But falling apart is not the same as being worthless. Lying is not the same as being lost forever. You are responsible for what you have done. That is true. But you are not beyond your mother’s love, and you are not beyond God’s reach.” Nico swallowed hard and looked like he hated how much he needed those words.

Adriana sat down on the warm concrete beside her son because suddenly standing above him felt wrong. She did not know what to say first. I’m angry felt true. I’m scared felt truer. I should have known felt truest of all, but that one was more confession than help. Nico rubbed his forehead and said, “I saw the bills.” The sentence landed softly and still made her chest tighten. “I know,” she said. “I saw that you saw them.” He let out a breath and shook his head. “I thought if I could just fix something fast, maybe I wouldn’t be another thing you had to carry.” Adriana looked at him then with the kind of pain only a mother knows, the pain of watching love bend itself into a lie inside your child. “Nico,” she said, and his name sounded different in her mouth now, fuller and rawer. “You do not help me by disappearing into stupid things and making me guess where you are. You help me by telling me the truth while there is still time to stand inside it together.” He stared at the ground. “I didn’t want you to know how bad I was doing.” Her voice shook but held. “I didn’t want you to know how bad I was doing either.” That got his attention. He turned to her slowly. She told him then, right there at the station, about the shutoff notice, the rent, the hidden bills, the fear she parked with every morning before work. She told him the part she hated saying most, that she had been pretending because she thought her job was to keep him from seeing the cracks. “All I did,” she said, “was teach you to do the same thing.”

For a long moment he said nothing. Then he covered his eyes with one hand and started crying in the quiet broken way boys cry when they have spent years learning not to. Adriana put her arm around him and he let her, which mattered more than either of them could have explained. Jesus remained beside them with that same near stillness He had brought into every room that day, and it changed the quality of their grief. It did not remove it. It gave it somewhere to stand. When Nico could speak again, he admitted he had been sleeping badly, drifting with people he did not even like because they made his failure feel less lonely, and lying to himself so hard that he had started to resent anyone who spoke honestly. He said he did not know how to start over without feeling stupid. Jesus answered, “People often call the first honest step humiliation because pride cannot survive it. But truth is not there to destroy you. It is there to let you come home.” Nico lowered his hand and looked at Him. “Home to what?” he asked. Jesus turned slightly and glanced at Adriana before looking back at the young man. “Home to the place where you can stop pretending you are beyond love, beyond discipline, beyond repair, or beyond God.” Nico wiped his face and shook his head like he wanted to believe Him and did not know how.

The security guard who had been watching from a distance finally came over, more curious than confrontational. He asked if everything was okay. Adriana almost gave the automatic answer. Fine. We’re good. Go ahead. The lie rose halfway and then died in her mouth. “No,” she said instead. “Not really. But we’re trying to make it right.” The guard looked at Jesus, then at Nico’s face, then back at Adriana. He nodded once in the way tired people do when honesty feels rare enough to respect. He asked if they needed police or medical help. Nico said no too quickly. Jesus put a hand lightly on his shoulder and asked the guard if there was a place nearby to wash up and sit for a few minutes. The man pointed them toward a quieter area off the main flow near the station offices. It was a small thing, but Adriana felt it. Truth had not made the sky split open. It had not solved the rent. It had not erased the choices her son made. It had simply created enough space for the next real thing to happen, and right then that felt holy.

They sat on a low wall in the shade while Nico cleaned the blood from his lip with paper towels dampened from the restroom sink. He looked worn out in a way that had little to do with the bruise. The tension in his shoulders was the tension of somebody who had been trying to act tougher than he was for too long. Jesus asked him what he had loved before he started trying to impress people who did not care whether he lived well. Nico frowned like the question itself irritated him. Then he said, after a while, that he used to draw. He had sketched trolley cars, old buildings, sneakers, faces on buses, anything that sat still long enough. He used to carry a pad everywhere. He had even thought about graphic design once. Adriana turned and stared because she had not heard him say that in years. Somewhere between high school and drift, the part of him that loved making things had been buried under the performance of being unfazed. Jesus nodded as if hearing about a treasure someone else had forgotten they owned. “And when did you decide that being hard was safer than being alive?” He asked it so gently that Nico could not dodge it with sarcasm. The young man looked out toward the tracks and said, “Probably around the time everybody started acting like weakness was the only thing that was honest about me.” Jesus answered, “Pain is honest. But it is not the whole truth about you.”

They left the station near evening. Downtown had begun to soften at the edges in the way cities sometimes do when the worst part of the heat lifts and the light turns forgiving. Jesus suggested they walk a little before driving home, and Adriana almost rejected the idea because nothing in her life was arranged enough for a walk. Then she realized that was exactly why she needed one. They moved west past long blocks where office workers were trading places with people coming out for the night. The city held all its versions of itself at once. Near the edge of the Gaslamp, a valet jogged to open a polished car door while two unhoused men divided a sandwich near a brick wall. A woman in heels laughed too loudly into her phone. A man pushed a janitorial cart out the back door of a hotel and lit a cigarette before his break was even officially his. The contradictions were so close together it almost made Adriana dizzy. “This city wears beauty like makeup,” she said. Jesus glanced at her and then toward the bay where late light was turning the water pale gold. “Many people do,” He said. “It is still possible to be loved beneath it.”

They kept walking until the air changed and brought salt into the conversation. Near the Embarcadero, families moved past with strollers and shopping bags. Tourists leaned against the rail and took pictures of boats they would forget by next month. Workers in uniforms ended shifts and headed toward buses or parked scooters or long rides home. A street musician near Seaport Village was singing with more heart than audience. Nico slowed there, listening without pretending he cared. The singer’s voice was cracked but real. A little girl dropped two quarters into the open guitar case and grinned as if she had funded the arts herself. Jesus smiled at that. Then His gaze moved beyond the storefronts to a man sitting alone at the edge of the walkway with a maintenance vest folded beside him and a lunch bag unopened at his feet. His shoulders were slumped in that particular way men slump when they are losing a private battle in public. Jesus turned toward him without announcement. Adriana and Nico followed because by now both of them knew that when His attention settled somewhere, something unseen was already being called into the light.

The man looked up warily when Jesus stopped nearby. He was maybe in his late forties, with sun-worn skin and the heavy look of someone whose body paid for every hour he worked. Jesus asked if the meal in the bag was waiting for hunger or for bad news to pass. The man gave a humorless half laugh. “Bad news already got here,” he said. He held up his phone where a message glowed on the screen. Adriana did not read the words, but the expression on his face said enough. “My wife says she’s done,” he added. “Says she’s tired of me bringing home my temper from work.” He said it defensively at first, like a case he had already rehearsed. Then something in Jesus’ face must have invited less performance because the man’s shoulders dropped lower. “Truth is, I’ve been mad for years,” he said. “I just keep finding new reasons.” Nico looked at the bay. Adriana watched Jesus. He did not excuse the man. He did not condemn him with spectacle either. He said, “Anger will always introduce itself as strength before it reveals what it is eating.” The man stared at the water and nodded slowly. “I thought if I kept people scared enough, they wouldn’t see how ashamed I was.” Jesus sat beside him on the low concrete wall as if there were no rank between them. “Fear never builds a home,” He said. “It only forces people to survive in your presence.”

The man covered his mouth and rubbed it hard. He said his father had been the same way. He said work had gotten harder, money tighter, and every room in his life felt smaller than his frustration. He said he had started slamming cabinets, then doors, then words into people he loved until his house carried his anger even when he was not inside it. Adriana stood very still because she thought of Sabrina’s wrist. Jesus asked the man what his wife’s name was. “Maribel,” he said. Jesus asked if he loved her or merely feared losing what she had done for him. That question cracked him open. He bent forward with both elbows on his knees and wept without elegance. Nobody nearby knew his story. That made the moment even more human. A maintenance worker crying by the water near the end of a shift while tourists kept walking and gulls kept calling overhead. Jesus laid a hand on his back and told him to go home without excuses. To tell the truth without begging for quick comfort. To be willing to lose the false version of himself if he wanted anything real to live. The man nodded again and again like each word hurt and helped at once. When he finally stood, he looked lighter and more afraid, which was sometimes the truest sign that a person had begun to repent.

As the man left, Nico asked quietly, “Do You always do that?” Jesus looked at him. “Do what?” Nico shrugged. “Talk to people like You already know the worst thing and still don’t back away.” Jesus’ expression gentled. “Most people are starving for someone to see them without agreeing with the lie they built to survive.” Nico absorbed that in silence. Adriana did too. She thought of the whole day. Sabrina. Mrs. Bae. Yessenia. The boy with the tattoo. The man by the water. Her son. Herself. Everywhere Jesus went, He did not flatter pain and He did not deny it. He kept bringing people to the place where truth and mercy met, and the meeting always cost something. “That sounds hard,” Nico said. “It is,” Jesus answered. “But falsehood is harder. It just hides the cost until later.” Nico looked out at the bay and then said, almost under his breath, “I don’t know how to do later different.” Jesus replied, “Then begin with tonight.”

They drove home by way of Barrio Logan because traffic pulled them there and because Jesus asked Adriana to stop when they were near Chicano Park. The evening light had gone softer now, and the pillars under the bridge held their painted stories in long shadows and color. Children were still playing not far off. A couple sat on a bench eating something from foam containers. The murals rose above them with faces and history and struggle made visible. It did not feel like a place for polished words. It felt like a place where people had fought to be remembered. Jesus stood looking at the painted concrete for a long quiet moment. Adriana joined Him. Nico stayed half a step back. “People mark walls when they are afraid their pain will be erased,” Jesus said. “Or their dignity,” Adriana added. “Yes,” He said. Then He looked at her, not at the murals. “Do not erase your own need anymore.” She exhaled slowly. It was one thing to say that at a transit center in the rush of crisis. It was another thing to hear it here, with history all around her and her son close enough to hear it too. “I don’t even know where to begin,” she admitted. Jesus nodded toward her phone. “Call the landlord. Not with a polished voice. With the truth.” Her stomach clenched on instinct. “Right now?” “Yes,” He said. “Before fear has time to rewrite your words.”

So she did. She stood beneath painted pillars with the smell of exhaust and evening food in the air and called the man she had been dodging all day. He answered on the second ring already irritated. She started to give her usual explanation and stopped herself in the middle of the first sentence. Then she told the truth. She told him the rent was late because her finances were worse than she had admitted. She told him the power had been cut. She told him she could give him a partial payment by the next afternoon and the rest in four days if he would hold off filing. She did not dress it up. She did not promise what she did not have. When she finished, there was a pause long enough to make her pulse pound in her throat. Then he sighed the way tired landlords do when they are balancing business against whatever remains of their patience. He said he did not like surprises. She said she knew. He said he would give her until Friday but no longer. She thanked him without groveling. When the call ended, she looked down at the phone as if expecting it to explain why honesty had worked better than performance. It had not solved everything. It had simply replaced fog with ground. That was more than she had been living on for months.

Nico asked if she had anyone she could ask for help. Adriana almost answered no. Then faces rose in her mind, not as saviors, but as people she had kept at arm’s length from the truth. Mrs. Alvarez from church who always asked twice if Adriana meant it when she said she was fine. The woman who ran the small pantry near University Avenue. Even Mrs. Bae, who had more loneliness than softness but also had more perception than Adriana had credited. “Maybe,” she said. Jesus looked at her with quiet approval, not because asking for help was easy, but because she had finally stopped calling isolation strength. Nico shifted his weight and said he could sell a few things, not drugs or nonsense, just his old game system and some shoes he had been acting too proud about. He said he could also go back to the small print shop near North Park where a guy had once offered him weekend work. The words sounded clumsy coming out of him because he was speaking from sincerity instead of performance. Adriana did not rush to praise him. She just nodded and said, “Then do that.” It was such a small exchange, but Jesus smiled as if watching a wall begin to crack.

The drive back to City Heights was quieter. The day had emptied something out of all three of them. Yet the silence now was not the hard packed silence of strangers or the brittle silence of hidden panic. It had room in it. Nico leaned his head against the window for part of the ride and watched the city pass. At one stoplight he said, almost to himself, that he had forgotten San Diego looked different when he was not trying to outrun something. Adriana glanced over and asked what he meant. He pointed toward the west where the sky still held a little light and the palms were cut dark against it. “I don’t know,” he said. “It’s the same city. It just doesn’t feel like it wants something from me for one minute.” Jesus answered before she could. “Sometimes the world looks cruelest when all you can see is what it is taking. Sometimes it becomes bearable again when truth lets you notice what has not left.” Nico thought about that without replying. Adriana did too. She had spent so long measuring her life by what was overdue, unpaid, late, broken, missing, or about to collapse that she had almost forgotten how to see what remained. Her son was still beside her. Breath was still in her chest. The day had not ended in a jail cell or a hospital room or a body bag. That was not a full redemption. It was mercy enough for one evening.

When they got back to the apartment building, the hallway was still hot and the unit was still dark. Nothing about the physical scene had changed enough to flatter anybody’s faith. The dead clock remained dead. The air remained stale. The unpaid notices still sat where they had been left. Yet the space felt different because the lies inside it were no longer in charge. Nico went straight to the kitchen sink and washed his face properly this time. Adriana opened the windows and let the evening air move what it could. A knock came at the door before she had even finished. It was Yessenia again with a plug-in lantern from her grandmother and a foil-covered plate balanced on top. “Abuela said you should eat this before it gets weird,” the girl said with the casual kindness of people who cannot afford to make generosity dramatic. Adriana nearly laughed and cried at the same time. She thanked her and took the food. Jesus crouched to the girl’s eye level and asked how her grandmother’s knees were tonight. “Still mad at her,” Yessenia said. He smiled. “Then tell her they are allowed.” The girl grinned and went back next door. Adriana set the lantern on the table and looked at the plate. Rice, beans, chicken. Ordinary food. A feast in that moment.

They ate at the table with the windows open and the lantern throwing soft light across the scratched surface. Nico said the food tasted like every decent thing in the world. Adriana told him not to get dramatic. He smiled for the first time all day, split lip and all. Jesus ate with them, and the apartment that had felt like evidence a few hours earlier began to feel like a room where life might still continue. After they finished, Nico went into his room and came back with a battered sketchbook from under the bed. He looked embarrassed to even hold it. Then he handed it to Jesus. Inside were pencil drawings of trolley cars, storefronts, old men on benches, a pair of sneakers on a wire, the palms outside a bus stop, Mrs. Bae’s building without Adriana even knowing he had ever seen it. The drawings were good, not in the way mothers say things are good, but in the way quiet gifts often are when they have been starved by shame and neglect. Jesus turned the pages slowly, giving each one the dignity of His attention. When He closed the sketchbook, He handed it back and said, “Do not bury what was given to you because you are angry at your own fear.” Nico took the book with both hands. He nodded once, unable to speak.

Night settled the rest of the way. Outside, the sounds of the building changed from daytime movement to evening life. A television laughed through one wall. Someone argued softly in the parking lot and then made up or got tired. A baby cried and was soothed. Nico asked if he could go tomorrow to the print shop and then to campus to see what could still be salvaged. Adriana told him yes, and then, because the day had taught her not to leave truth half spoken, she added that rebuilding trust would take time. He said he knew. She told him she loved him, but she would not cover lies anymore. He said he knew that too, and this time he sounded almost grateful. Jesus watched the exchange with the quiet of someone seeing a door open where there had only been walls before. Later, when Nico went to shower at a friend’s place in the next building where the power still worked and the mother there kept spare soap like she was running a ministry whether she meant to or not, Adriana stayed at the table with Jesus and the lantern between them.

The fatigue in her body had gone past exhaustion and entered that strange clear place where truth can finally be heard because there is no strength left to perform against it. “I kept thinking I had to save everybody from seeing how hard it was,” she said. Jesus rested His hands around the cooling mug in front of Him and listened. “But all I did was make everybody lonelier, including me.” He nodded. “Secrets often feel like protection while they are making a prison.” She looked toward Nico’s room and then back at Him. “What if tomorrow is still awful?” she asked. “What if Friday comes and I’m still short. What if he backslides. What if the power stays off another day. What if I do all this truth and still end up underwater.” Jesus answered her with the kind of honesty she had come to trust from Him because it never pretended suffering would skip her house. “Tomorrow may still hurt,” He said. “Truth does not turn every hard road into an easy one. But lies make suffering lonelier and more confusing. Truth lets love enter it. Truth lets people stand where God can meet them.” Adriana stared at the lantern flame-shaped bulb for a long moment. “I think I’ve been angry at God for a while,” she admitted. “I know,” He said gently. “And He has not left.”

That sentence undid her more than anything else that day. Not because it was polished. Because it was simple enough to be real. She bowed her head and wept there at the little kitchen table in the dark apartment with the windows open and the city breathing outside. Jesus did not rush her through it. He remained near. When the tears finally slowed, she laughed once at herself and wiped her face. “This has been the worst day in months,” she said. “And somehow I feel less trapped in it than I did this morning.” Jesus’ expression softened with something like joy. “Because this morning you were carrying darkness and calling it order.” She let that settle. Then she asked the question that had been living in her chest all day without words. “Who are You really?” He looked at her with a stillness that made the room feel deeper than its walls. “The One who comes near,” He said. “The One who tells the truth without abandoning the wounded. The One who will not leave you to your fear or your hiding place. The One who knows the burden you cannot explain and the hunger beneath it. The One who calls you back to the Father, not after you become clean enough to ask, but while you are still standing in the ruin.” Adriana could not answer. She did not need to. The truth of Him had already been moving through the whole day.

When Nico returned, cleaner and quieter, Jesus told them both He was going out for a little while. Adriana asked if He would be back. He smiled in that way He had when she first saw Him by the car at dawn, as if absence and nearness did not mean the same thing to Him that they meant to everyone else. “Keep the windows open tonight,” He said. “Let the air move through what was shut.” Then He added, looking from mother to son, “And speak plainly. Shame loses strength where truth is allowed to stay in the room.” Nico nodded with the sketchbook tucked under one arm. Adriana rose from the chair because suddenly letting Him walk out felt impossible. At the doorway she said only, “Thank You.” It was a small sentence compared to what the day had held, yet it carried all she had. He touched her shoulder lightly, then stepped into the hallway and was gone before either of them found anything better to say.

Adriana did not sleep much that night, but for once sleeplessness was not just fear grinding her down. It was also something opening. She and Nico sat at the table longer than they had in years, saying hard things in plain voices. He told her the names of the people he needed to stop following. She told him what the bills actually were. He admitted how close he had come to thinking numbness was the same as freedom. She admitted how often she had confused control with love. Neither of them fixed everything. Neither of them left the table glowing with easy transformation. But the lies had been dragged into the air and could not go back to ruling in the dark. Near midnight Nico went to bed with the sketchbook on top of his dresser where he could see it. Adriana remained by the window a few minutes longer, listening to the low sounds of the neighborhood and the hum of lives stacked close together. The city was still hard. It was still beautiful. It was still expensive, unfair, glittering, exhausted, hungry, restless, and alive. Yet for the first time in months, maybe years, she did not feel entirely sealed off inside her struggle.

Before dawn the next morning, while the apartment was still dim and Nico still asleep, Jesus stood alone above the city again, this time at the far edge of Sunset Cliffs where the sea met the waking light with that patient sound only water knows how to make. The wind moved softly over the bluff. Below Him the Pacific rolled and lifted and rolled again as if carrying the whole night away one measured breath at a time. He bowed His head in quiet prayer while gulls crossed the brightening sky and the first pale line of morning gathered itself over the water. He prayed with the calm of One who had not merely observed the burden of the city but entered it, carried it, and loved the people inside it without turning from their need. Behind Him San Diego was beginning again. Lights were going out in some windows and turning on in others. Workers would rise. Children would stir. Rent would still be due. Grief would still exist. Shame would still try to speak first in many rooms. Yet prayer had met the day before the day could name itself. And in one apartment in City Heights, a mother and son were sleeping in a truer peace than the one they had been faking, because mercy had come near enough to tell the truth and stay.

Your friend, Douglas Vandergraph

Watch Douglas Vandergraph inspiring faith-based videos on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@douglasvandergraph

Support the ministry by buying Douglas a coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/douglasvandergraph

For the better part of a decade, Brussels was the city that Big Tech feared. The General Data Protection Regulation, adopted in 2016 and enforced from 2018, became the gold standard for privacy law worldwide, inspiring more than 150 countries to craft their own versions. The AI Act, finalised in 2024, was the planet's first comprehensive attempt to regulate artificial intelligence by risk category. Together, these two landmark laws positioned the European Union as the undisputed global standard-bearer for rights-based digital governance, a regulatory superpower wielding what scholars call the “Brussels Effect” to shape corporate behaviour far beyond its borders.

That era may be ending. On 19 November 2025, the European Commission published its Digital Omnibus Package, a sweeping legislative proposal that amends the GDPR, the ePrivacy Directive, the AI Act, the Data Act, the Data Governance Act, and the NIS2 Directive in a single stroke. Framed as a necessary exercise in “simplification” and “competitiveness,” the package has drawn fierce opposition from an extraordinary coalition of civil society organisations, data protection authorities, privacy advocates, and digital rights groups who see it as something altogether different: a systematic dismantling of the very protections that made European digital law the envy of democracies everywhere.

Amnesty International has called it a threat to produce “the biggest rollback of digital fundamental rights in EU history.” European Digital Rights (EDRi), the continent's leading digital rights network, has labelled the proposals “a major rollback of EU digital protections.” A coalition of 127 civil society organisations, trade unions, and public interest defenders has issued an open letter demanding the Commission halt the Digital Omnibus entirely. And Corporate Europe Observatory, working alongside LobbyControl, has published a granular, article-by-article analysis tracing many of the most consequential changes directly to lobbying documents submitted by Google, Meta, Microsoft, and their trade associations.

The question is no longer whether Europe's digital rights framework is under pressure. It is whether rights-based AI governance can survive anywhere if the jurisdiction that invented it decides the cost of leadership is too high.

The Competitiveness Argument and the Draghi Shadow

To understand the Digital Omnibus, you first need to understand the political climate that produced it. The European Commission did not wake up one morning and decide to rewrite its own landmark legislation on a whim. The proposals emerged from a sustained campaign, years in the making, to reframe European regulation as an obstacle to economic growth rather than a democratic achievement worth preserving.

The intellectual foundation was laid in September 2024, when Mario Draghi, the former president of the European Central Bank and former Italian prime minister, delivered his landmark report on the future of European competitiveness. Commissioned by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, the Draghi Report warned that “excessive regulatory and administrative burden can hinder the ease of doing business in the EU and the competitiveness of EU companies.” It singled out the GDPR by name, claiming the regulation had “raised the cost of data by about 20 percent for EU firms compared with US peers.” It pointed to “unclear overlaps” between the GDPR and the AI Act as a specific drag on innovation.

The Draghi Report called for “a radical simplification of GDPR,” harmonised AI sandbox regimes across all member states, and the appointment of a new Vice-President for Simplification to coordinate the process. Within months, the Commission had announced the Digital Omnibus as its primary vehicle for delivering on those recommendations. The speed was notable. What had been discussed as a measured, evidence-based review of the EU's digital rulebook became an accelerated legislative push, outpacing the Commission's own planned “Digital Fitness Check” that was originally scheduled for 2026.

The Commission projects that the package, if adopted as proposed, would save businesses and public administrations at least six billion euros by the end of 2029. The stated goals are to reduce duplicative compliance costs, lighten the regulatory load on small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), improve legal certainty, and make the EU's digital rulebook “easier to navigate.”

These are not trivial ambitions. European businesses, particularly smaller ones, have legitimate complaints about regulatory complexity. The GDPR, the AI Act, the Data Act, the Digital Services Act, the Digital Markets Act, and the ePrivacy Directive collectively create a dense web of overlapping obligations that can be genuinely difficult and expensive to navigate. The Commission's Omnibus IV Simplification Package, published separately in May 2025, addressed some of the most straightforward concerns, exempting small and micro companies from the obligation to maintain records of processing activities under the GDPR.

But the Digital Omnibus goes far beyond tidying up paperwork. Critics argue it uses the language of simplification to smuggle in substantive deregulation, weakening core protections in ways that have nothing to do with reducing administrative burdens and everything to do with accommodating the commercial priorities of the largest technology companies on earth.

What the Omnibus Actually Changes

The specific amendments proposed in the Digital Omnibus are extensive, spanning hundreds of pages of legislative text. Several stand out for their potential impact on the rights of hundreds of millions of European citizens.

Perhaps the most technically significant change concerns the very definition of personal data. The Commission proposes to narrow this definition by codifying what it calls a “relative” concept: information qualifies as personal data only if the current holder can identify the data subject using means “reasonably available” to it. The ability of a subsequent recipient to identify the person does not make the data personal for the current holder. This sounds like a minor clarification. It is not. The European Data Protection Board (EDPB) and the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), in their Joint Opinion 2/2026 published in February 2026, warned that this change “goes far beyond a targeted modification of the GDPR” or “a mere codification of CJEU jurisprudence,” and would “significantly narrow the concept of personal data.” They urged co-legislators not to adopt it.

The implications are enormous. A narrower definition of personal data means less data falls under the GDPR's protection regime. Companies processing information that they argue they cannot use to identify individuals, even if that identification becomes possible in another context or with additional resources, would face fewer restrictions on how they collect, store, and monetise that information. For companies training AI models on vast datasets scraped from the internet, this is precisely the kind of legal breathing room they have been seeking for years.

The second major change creates an explicit legal basis for using personal data to train AI systems. The proposed new Article 88c of the GDPR would establish that processing personal data for the development and operation of AI systems or AI models qualifies as a “legitimate interest” under Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR. This means companies would no longer need to obtain consent to use personal data for AI training, provided they can demonstrate the processing is necessary, proportionate, and not overridden by the interests of data subjects. Data subjects would retain an unconditional right to object, and companies would need to apply data minimisation measures, but the burden of proof effectively shifts. Rather than asking permission, companies train first and handle objections later.

The EDPB itself noted, somewhat dryly, that this provision is “unnecessary” because the Board had already published guidance confirming that legitimate interest could, in appropriate circumstances, serve as a lawful basis for AI training. The difference, of course, is between regulatory guidance that preserves the balancing test and a statutory provision that tilts the scales toward commercial use.

Third, the Omnibus restructures the relationship between the ePrivacy Directive and the GDPR in ways that affect every internet user. Rules governing access to terminal equipment, including cookies and tracking technologies, are moved from the ePrivacy Directive to the GDPR where personal data is processed. The ePrivacy Directive would no longer govern personal data processing; the GDPR alone would apply. The proposals expand the circumstances under which data can be stored on or accessed from a user's device without consent, including for “aggregated audience measuring” and device security. While the Commission frames these changes as addressing “cookie consent fatigue” (introducing requirements for single-click refusal, six-month moratoriums on repeat consent requests, and machine-readable preference signalling through browsers), civil society groups warn that weakening the ePrivacy framework removes one of the few clear rules preventing companies and governments from constantly tracking what people do on their devices, their cars, and their smart home systems.

Fourth, on the AI Act side, the Omnibus proposes to delay the implementation of rules for high-risk AI systems, which were originally due to take effect in August 2026. The new timeline allows a maximum 16-month extension, with backstop compliance dates of 2 December 2027 and 2 August 2028 depending on the category of high-risk system. The rationale is that the Commission wants to ensure “adequate compliance support” is available before obligations kick in. Critics see a straightforward concession to industry: more time to deploy AI systems without the guardrails that the AI Act was specifically designed to impose. In practical terms, it means that AI systems used in hiring, credit scoring, law enforcement, and migration management will operate for years longer without the mandatory risk assessments and transparency requirements that were supposed to protect people from algorithmic harm.

The Omnibus also introduces a new provision permitting the processing of special categories of personal data (including biometric data, data revealing racial or ethnic origin, and health data) for bias detection and correction in high-risk AI systems. While bias detection is a legitimate and important goal, civil society organisations have raised concerns about creating explicit statutory routes for processing the most sensitive categories of personal data in AI contexts, arguing it could be exploited well beyond its stated purpose.

Finally, the breach notification framework is softened. The timeframe for notifying data protection authorities of personal data breaches is extended from 72 hours to 96 hours, and only breaches likely to result in “high risk” to data subjects would require notification. This is the kind of change that, in isolation, might seem reasonable. Taken alongside everything else, it forms part of a pattern: a consistent loosening of obligations that, cumulatively, transforms the character of the entire regulatory regime.

Following the Money, Article by Article

If the Digital Omnibus were purely a good-faith attempt at regulatory streamlining, its provisions would be expected to reflect the concerns of the broadest possible range of stakeholders: businesses of all sizes, civil society, data protection authorities, consumers, and affected communities. What Corporate Europe Observatory and LobbyControl found, in their analysis published in January 2026, tells a different story.

Their article-by-article comparison of the Digital Omnibus proposals with lobbying documents submitted by Google, Meta, Microsoft, and major technology trade associations reveals what they describe as a close alignment between the Commission's text and Big Tech's longstanding policy demands. The narrowing of the personal data definition, the legitimate interest basis for AI training, the weakening of ePrivacy protections, the delays to high-risk AI obligations: each of these changes corresponds to specific asks documented in corporate lobbying materials.

One particularly striking example involves Google. In a lobbying paper dated 16 August 2025, directed at the German government, Google called for the introduction of a “disproportionate efforts” exemption to compliance. This language subsequently appeared in the Omnibus proposals, which require companies to remove personal data from AI systems only if doing so does not require “disproportionate efforts,” a term that remains undefined and, critics argue, open to systematic abuse by the very companies with the deepest pockets and most sophisticated legal teams.

Documents obtained by Corporate Europe Observatory also show that Google and Microsoft conducted a concerted and successful lobbying effort to remove “large-scale, illegal discrimination” from the list of systemic risks in the AI Code of Practice, a voluntary framework that was meant to guide responsible AI deployment even before the AI Act's binding provisions took effect.

The scale of the lobbying operation is staggering. According to Corporate Europe Observatory's research, published in October 2025, the technology industry's spending on EU lobbying reached a record 151 million euros, with just ten companies accounting for 49 million euros of that total. Meta led the pack at 10 million euros, followed by Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon at 7 million euros each, and Google and Qualcomm at 4.5 million euros each. In the first half of 2025 alone, Big Tech companies held 146 meetings with high-level European Commission staff, an average of more than one meeting for every working day. Amazon logged 43 meetings, Microsoft 36, Google 35, Apple 29, and Meta 27.

The revolving door between industry and the institutions meant to regulate it adds another layer of concern. In February 2026, MEP Aura Salla of the European People's Party was appointed as the European Parliament's rapporteur for the Digital Omnibus. Salla served as Meta's Public Policy Director and Head of EU Affairs from May 2020 to April 2023. Seven civil society watchdog organisations, including Transparency International EU, Corporate Europe Observatory, and The Good Lobby, called for the withdrawal of her appointment, noting that she had failed to declare her previous work at Meta as a potential conflict of interest in her formal declaration of awareness, as required by Article 3 of the Code of Conduct. She had also met with her former employer multiple times since taking office, including lobby meetings in September 2024 and January 2025. Separately, in April 2025, Salla sold stocks in a defence company following reporting by Follow The Money, stocks she had never reported in her declaration of private interests.

Death by a Thousand Cuts

The privacy advocacy organisation noyb, founded by the Austrian lawyer and activist Max Schrems, has described the Digital Omnibus as “death by a thousand cuts” for the GDPR. The characterisation captures something important about the strategy at work. No single amendment in the package is necessarily fatal to the European data protection framework. Each can be individually rationalised. Taken together, they represent a fundamental reorientation of the relationship between citizens and the companies that harvest their data.

Noyb has been particularly critical of the procedural dimension. Rather than following through on the originally planned “Digital Fitness Check” scheduled for 2026, which would have involved systematic evidence gathering and impact assessment, the Commission pushed through the Omnibus in what noyb describes as a “fast track” procedure, bypassing the normal consultative process. The Commission followed what civil society groups characterise as a procedure with legislative shortcuts that circumvented democratic scrutiny, sidelining concerns from organisations acting in the public interest. The result, noyb argues, is a set of proposals that massively lower protections for Europeans while providing “basically no real benefit for average European small and medium businesses.” The changes, in noyb's analysis, are “a gift to US big tech” that open up numerous new loopholes.

A noyb-conducted survey of data protection professionals reinforced this critique, revealing what noyb described as “an enormous gap between the needs of real people working on compliance every day and the problems pushed by the Brussels lobby bubble.” Compliance professionals, it turned out, wanted less paperwork, not fewer rights. The Commission's proposals delivered the opposite: they reduced substantive protections while doing relatively little to simplify the administrative burden that actual practitioners find most burdensome.

The EDPB and EDPS, in their Joint Opinion, echoed many of these concerns while maintaining a more measured tone. They expressed support for certain specific proposals, including the extension of breach notification timelines and targeted changes to data protection impact assessment requirements. But on the most consequential amendments, including the narrowing of the personal data definition and the restructuring of lawful bases for AI training, they raised serious objections. Their overall assessment was that the proposals “may adversely affect the level of protection enjoyed by individuals, create legal uncertainty, and make data protection law more difficult to apply.” Coming from the EU's own data protection authorities, this was a remarkable intervention, a polite but unmistakable warning that the Commission's own watchdogs considered its proposals harmful.

The leaked drafts of the Omnibus generated strong opposition in the European Parliament, particularly from the Social Democrats (S&D), Renew Europe, and the Greens. But the political dynamics are complex. The European People's Party, the largest group in Parliament, has broadly supported the Commission's competitiveness agenda, and the appointment of Aura Salla as rapporteur signals the direction of travel in the Parliament's Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) committee.

The Global Ripple Effect

The implications of the Digital Omnibus extend far beyond Europe's borders. The GDPR's influence on global privacy regulation has been one of the most consequential developments in international law over the past decade. More than 150 countries have adopted domestic privacy laws that resemble the GDPR in some form, drawn by the regulation's extraterritorial reach and by the mechanism of “adequacy decisions,” through which the European Commission certifies that a third country's data protection framework provides sufficient protection to allow data transfers from the EU. Countries seeking adequacy status have had powerful incentives to align their domestic laws with European standards. If those European standards are weakened, the entire global architecture shifts.

The timing is particularly significant. The United States, under the Trump administration's December 2025 executive order, has moved toward what it describes as a “minimally burdensome national standard for AI policy,” explicitly seeking to limit state-level regulatory divergence and create a more permissive environment for AI development. Three new US comprehensive privacy laws, in Indiana, Kentucky, and Rhode Island, transitioned from planning to enforcement on 1 January 2026, but these state-level efforts exist in a federal vacuum that the executive order is designed to fill with minimal regulatory ambition. The United Kingdom, having departed the EU, enacted its Data Use and Access Act (DUAA) in June 2025, which expands the circumstances for automated decision-making, broadens the definition of “scientific research” to include commercial research, and allows broader consent mechanisms for data processing, with many provisions coming into force in early 2026. Both the US and UK approaches prioritise innovation and economic growth over the precautionary, rights-based model that has defined European regulation.

If Europe now follows the same trajectory, converging toward a lighter-touch regime in the name of competitiveness, the question becomes: who is left to champion rights-based governance?

One potential answer comes from the Global South. India hosted the AI Impact Summit in February 2026, the first time this global governance forum was held outside the developed world. Ninety-one countries and international organisations adopted the AI Impact Summit Declaration, which notably shifted the framing from “risk” (the language of previous summits in Bletchley, Seoul, and Paris) to “impact.” India's IndiaAI mission has deployed a national “common compute” pool of more than 34,000 publicly funded GPUs, seeking to democratise access to AI infrastructure for startups, researchers, and public sector innovators. The United Nations has opened a consultation on AI governance with an April 2026 deadline, seeking input that could shape a global framework.

But the capacity of Global South nations to fill a governance vacuum left by Europe is constrained by the same structural inequalities that shape the AI landscape itself: limited compute infrastructure, dependence on Western and Chinese platforms, and the persistent influence of adequacy mechanisms that tie data flows to European standards, even as those standards erode. Success in addressing AI governance from the Global South depends on three critical issues, as analysts at the Brookings Institution have noted: infrastructure access, governance influence, and local adaptation. Countries lacking compute capacity, energy grids, and connectivity cannot build their own models or process their own data domestically, leaving them reliant on the very corporations whose influence the GDPR was designed to check.

As the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation has argued (from a position sympathetic to deregulation), the Brussels Effect can constrain Global South innovation by imposing compliance costs on countries that lack the institutional capacity to bear them. The irony is that weakening GDPR standards might simultaneously reduce the compliance burden and remove the normative floor that gave smaller nations a template for protecting their citizens' rights. It is a double bind with no easy resolution.

The Deeper Question of Durability

What the Digital Omnibus reveals is not simply a policy debate about the optimal balance between privacy and innovation. It exposes a structural vulnerability in rights-based governance itself. Digital rights frameworks are politically expensive to create and politically cheap to dismantle. The GDPR took years of negotiation, involved thousands of stakeholders, and required sustained political will to overcome industry opposition. The AI Act endured an even more fraught legislative process, with real-time lobbying battles over the regulation of foundation models, biometric surveillance, and high-risk applications.

Dismantling these protections requires no comparable effort. A single omnibus proposal, framed in the anodyne language of “simplification” and “competitiveness,” can undo years of democratic deliberation in a legislative session. The asymmetry is inherent: concentrated corporate interests can sustain lobbying pressure indefinitely, while the diffuse public interest in privacy and algorithmic accountability lacks a permanent, well-funded constituency to defend it. Big Tech companies are spending as much as 550 billion US dollars in 2026 to dominate the AI market, according to Corporate Europe Observatory's estimates. Against that scale of capital deployment, the resources available to civil society watchdogs are negligible.

This dynamic is compounded by the geopolitical pressure that European policymakers face. The AI race between the United States and China is often framed as an existential competition in which regulatory overhead is a strategic disadvantage. The Draghi Report explicitly invoked this framing, and Commission President von der Leyen has repeatedly emphasised the need for Europe to “keep pace” with its geopolitical rivals. In this environment, rights-based regulation is perpetually on the defensive, required to justify its existence in economic terms rather than being valued as a democratic achievement in its own right.

Amnesty International's April 2026 analysis connects the Digital Omnibus to a broader pattern of democratic backsliding on digital rights. The organisation's research has documented how platform algorithms contributed to ethnic cleansing against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar and grave human rights abuses against Tigrayan people in Ethiopia, with Meta failing to moderate, and in some instances actively amplifying, harmful and discriminatory content. The weakening of the DSA and DMA, which have also been mentioned as potential targets for simplification, would reduce the already limited tools available to hold platforms accountable for these harms. EDRi has warned that this deregulatory political moment is likely to spill over into upcoming legislation, including the Digital Fairness Act expected later in 2026, a law meant to modernise consumer protection for the digital age and tackle manipulative design practices.

The appointment of Aura Salla as rapporteur, the record lobbying expenditures, the secretive meetings between Commission officials and industry representatives (documented by Corporate Europe Observatory in a November 2025 report on the Commission's pre-proposal consultations), the fast-tracking of legislation without proper impact assessment: these are not aberrations in an otherwise healthy democratic process. They are symptoms of a regulatory capture that civil society organisations have been warning about for years.

Where This Leaves Us

The Digital Omnibus is still moving through the ordinary legislative procedure. The European Parliament and the Council must both approve the proposals before they become law, and adoption is not expected before mid-to-late 2026 at the earliest. There is still time for amendments, and the opposition from data protection authorities, civil society, and significant parliamentary blocs suggests the final text may differ substantially from the Commission's proposal.

But the direction of travel is clear. Even if the most controversial provisions are modified or removed, the political consensus that produced the GDPR and the AI Act has fractured. The forces pushing for deregulation, supercharged by record lobbying spending, a sympathetic Commission leadership, and a geopolitical environment that privileges speed over safety, are not going away. The 127 civil society organisations that signed the open letter demanding the Commission halt the Omnibus are fighting a defensive battle, and they know it.

The consequences extend beyond any single piece of legislation. If Europe retreats from its position as the global standard-bearer for digital rights, the vacuum will not remain empty. It will be filled by regulatory models that prioritise corporate freedom over individual protection, by voluntary industry codes that lack enforcement mechanisms, and by a fragmented global landscape in which the most powerful technology companies operate with minimal democratic oversight. The “Brussels Effect” works in reverse, too: when the standard-setter lowers its standards, the floor drops for everyone.

What is at stake in the Digital Omnibus is not merely the future of European data protection. It is whether democratic societies possess the institutional resilience to maintain rights-based governance of powerful technologies in the face of sustained commercial pressure. The evidence so far is not encouraging. But the fight is not over, and its outcome will shape digital governance for a generation.

---

References and Sources

1. European Commission, “Digital Package: Simplification of EU Digital Rules,” published 19 November 2025. Available at: https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/faqs/digital-package

2. Amnesty International, “EU Simplification: Throwing Human Rights Under the Omnibus,” published 19 November 2025. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/11/eu-simplification-throwing-human-rights-under-the-omnibus/

3. Amnesty International, “EU: Digital Omnibus Proposals Will Tear Apart Accountability on Digital Rights,” published November 2025. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2025/11/eu-digital-omnibus-proposals-will-tear-apart-accountability-on-digital-rights/

4. Amnesty International, “How EU Proposals to 'Simplify' Tech Laws Will Roll Back Our Rights,” published April 2026. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2026/04/eu-simplification-laws/

5. Corporate Europe Observatory and LobbyControl, “Article by Article, How Big Tech Shaped the EU's Roll-back of Digital Rights,” published 14 January 2026. Available at: https://corporateeurope.org/en/2026/01/article-article-how-big-tech-shaped-eus-roll-back-digital-rights

6. Corporate Europe Observatory, “Revealed: Tech Industry Now Spending Record 151 Million Euros on Lobbying the EU,” published October 2025. Available at: https://corporateeurope.org/en/2025/10/revealed-tech-industry-now-spending-record-eu151-million-lobbying-eu

7. Corporate Europe Observatory, “Preparing a Roll-back of Digital Rights: Commission's Secretive Meetings with Industry,” published November 2025. Available at: https://corporateeurope.org/en/2025/11/preparing-roll-back-digital-rights-commissions-secretive-meetings-industry

8. European Digital Rights (EDRi), “Commission's Digital Omnibus is a Major Rollback of EU Digital Protections,” published 2025. Available at: https://edri.org/our-work/commissions-digital-omnibus-is-a-major-rollback-of-eu-digital-protections/

9. EDRi, “Forthcoming Digital Omnibus Would Mark Point of No Return,” published 2025. Available at: https://edri.org/our-work/forthcoming-digital-omnibus-would-mark-point-of-no-return/

10. EDPB and EDPS, “Joint Opinion 2/2026 on the Proposal for a Regulation (Digital Omnibus),” published February 2026. Available at: https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2026-02/edpb_edps_jointopinion_202602_digitalomnibus_en.pdf

11. noyb, “Digital Omnibus: EU Commission Wants to Wreck Core GDPR Principles,” published 2025. Available at: https://noyb.eu/en/digital-omnibus-eu-commission-wants-wreck-core-gdpr-principles

12. noyb, “Open Letter: Digital Omnibus Brings Deregulation, Not Simplification,” published 2025. Available at: https://noyb.eu/en/open-letter-digital-omnibus-brings-deregulation-not-simplification

13. People vs Big Tech, “'Stop the Digital Omnibus,' Say 127 Civil Society Organisations,” published 2025. Available at: https://peoplevsbig.tech/the-eu-must-uphold-hard-won-protections-for-digital-human-rights/

14. Mario Draghi, “The Future of European Competitiveness” (Draghi Report), commissioned by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, published September 2024. Available at: https://commission.europa.eu/topics/competitiveness/draghi-report_en

15. European Parliament, “Simplifying EU Digital Laws for Competitiveness,” published November 2025. Available at: https://epthinktank.eu/2025/11/20/simplifying-eu-digital-laws-for-competitiveness/

16. Transparency International EU, “Call to Withdraw European Parliament's Digital Omnibus Rapporteur Appointment,” published February 2026. Available at: https://transparency.eu/call-to-withdraw-european-parliaments-digital-omnibus-rapporteur-appointment/

17. Corporate Europe Observatory, “Watchdog Organisations Issue Call to Withdraw Aura Salla's Appointment as Digital Omnibus Rapporteur,” published February 2026. Available at: https://corporateeurope.org/en/2026/02/watchdog-organisations-issue-call-withdraw-aura-sallas-appointment-digital-omnibus

18. White and Case LLP, “GDPR Under Revision: Key Takeaways from the Digital Omnibus Regulation Proposal,” published 2025. Available at: https://www.whitecase.com/insight-alert/gdpr-under-revision-key-takeaways-from-digital-omnibus-regulation-proposal

19. IAPP, “EU Digital Omnibus: Analysis of Key Changes,” published 2025. Available at: https://iapp.org/news/a/eu-digital-omnibus-analysis-of-key-changes

20. Bruegel, “Efficiency and Distribution in the European Union's Digital Deregulation Push,” published 2025. Available at: https://www.bruegel.org/policy-brief/efficiency-and-distribution-european-unions-digital-deregulation-push

21. ITIF, “How the Brussels Effect Hinders Innovation in the Global South,” published January 2026. Available at: https://itif.org/publications/2026/01/26/how-brussels-effect-hinders-innovation-in-global-south/

22. The Record from Recorded Future News, “Civil Society Decries Digital Rights 'Rollback' as European Commission Pushes Data Protection Changes,” published 2025. Available at: https://therecord.media/civil-society-privacy-rollback

23. Brookings Institution, “AI in the Global South: Opportunities and Challenges Towards More Inclusive Governance,” published 2025. Available at: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/ai-in-the-global-south-opportunities-and-challenges-towards-more-inclusive-governance/

24. EDPB and EDPS, “Digital Omnibus: EDPB and EDPS Support Simplification and Competitiveness While Raising Key Concerns,” published February 2026. Available at: https://www.edpb.europa.eu/news/news/2026/digital-omnibus-edpb-and-edps-support-simplification-and-competitiveness-while_en

---

Tim Green UK-based Systems Theorist & Independent Technology Writer

Tim explores the intersections of artificial intelligence, decentralised cognition, and posthuman ethics. His work, published at smarterarticles.co.uk, challenges dominant narratives of technological progress while proposing interdisciplinary frameworks for collective intelligence and digital stewardship.

His writing has been featured on Ground News and shared by independent researchers across both academic and technological communities.

ORCID: 0009-0002-0156-9795 Email: tim@smarterarticles.co.uk

Our Father Who art in Heaven Hallowed be Thy name Thy Kingdom come Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven Give us this day our daily Bread And forgive us our trespasses As we forgive those who trespass against us And lead us not into temptation But deliver us from evil

Amen

Jesus is Lord! Come Lord Jesus!

Come Lord Jesus! Christ is Lord!

Count your blessing Each by one In feral truth, a standard of love Quest for worth- This isle and vase The dearest win Of home in Heaven And finding Whale- by ransom The bitter edge- will hold you near To telegraph and pod Mercy for days The sinewy nest With nearest war- to grave you And caution when- you lift to prose And Whale to protect In the Earth’s own heaviest waters A chain went up At random tide The mercy blowing high In truth we met In solemn day The Eucharist will find us first To Gottingen- and paying mire The Earth will have its tree And judgement come In plastic place We’ll blast the shore- in ecstasy.

In Summary: * After an afternoon filled with Baseball (listening to) and Golf (watching TV coverage) I'm catching up on the day's pending chess games and a few of my favorite podcasts before the second Baseball Game of the day demands my attention. I'll finish my night prayers during this second game, then retire for the night after it ends.

Prayers, etc.: * I have a daily prayer regimen I try to follow throughout the day from early morning, as soon as I roll out of bed, until head hits pillow at night. Details of that regimen are linked to my link tree, which is linked to my profile page here.

Starting Ash Wednesday, 2026, I've added this daily prayer as part of the Prayer Crusade Preceding the 2026 SSPX Episcopal Consecrations.

Health Metrics: * bw= 232.81 lbs. * bp= 137/82 (71)

Exercise: * morning stretches, balance exercises, kegel pelvic floor exercises, half squats, calf raises, wall push-ups

Diet: * 07:15 – 1 banana, 1 peanut butter sandwich * 09:30 – crispy oatmeal cookies * 10:40 – fried chicken * 11:50 – dish of ice cream * 16:00 – salmon with spinach, mushrooms, and sauce, and white bread

Activities, Chores, etc.: * 07:00 – bank accounts activity monitored. * 07:40- read, write, pray, follow news reports from various sources, surf the socials, nap. * 11:30 – listening to WFAN New York Sports Radio ahead of this afternoon's MLB Game between the Yankees and the Royals. * 15:10 – And the Yankees win, final score: 13 to 4. * 15:20 – Now watching PGA Tour Golf. 3rd Round coverage from the RBC Heritage Tournament at the Harbour Town Golf Links on Hilton Head Island, S. C.

Chess: * 17:20 – moved in all pending CC games

#writing #organizing #revolution

me with some rad friends

I was thinking the other day about how things can change so massively, so quickly — and how we get used to monumental changes. And even in the midst of profound backsliding and reactionary violence, I have been inspired by Rebecca Solnit’s Hope in the Dark, originally published in 2004, but with ever-renewed relevance in our oft-darkened world.

…the more profound revolutions that had unfolded in our lifetimes, around race, gender, sexuality, food, economics, and so much more, the slow incremental victories that begin in the imagination and change the rules. But seeing those revolutions requires looking for something very different than armed cadres. It also requires being able to recognize the shades of gray between black and white or maybe to see the world in full color.

-Rebecca Solnit, Hope in the Dark

In this series, I’m going to walk through what I perceive as some of the major “social revolutions” of my brief 28 years on this planet.

—

Pretty much all of my examples have also been followed by backlashes, but that is to be expected. Dealing with the backlash for each one will probably look different from community to community, but I think it's important to note the shifts that have taken place, because they represent spaces of possibility.

source: my photo from Venice in 2019, artwork by Mœbius

Although I don't believe in teleological views of history or a linear idea of progress — or even the arc of the universe bending one way or another — I do believe that once the genie is out of the bottle, once an idea becomes a meme, it begins to reproduce itself, and it takes deliberate and sustained effort from the ruling classes to make people forget.

This is one reason people's history, labor history, women's history, pre-colonial anthropology are so heavily suppressed.

So I take these social revolutions not as “evidence of progress” per se, but as genies the ruling classes are desperately trying to shove back in their bottles. Will they succeed? Or will we manage to keep them free?

That remains up to us.

Certains mots dans l’œuvre de Médard Bourgault dérangent aujourd’hui.

Le mot « race », en particulier, suscite des réactions immédiates.

Pour le comprendre, il faut revenir à une figure centrale du contexte intellectuel de l’époque : Lionel Groulx.

---

Un intellectuel majeur de son époque

Lionel Groulx (1878–1967) est un prêtre, historien et penseur influent au Québec.

Pendant la première moitié du XXe siècle, il joue un rôle important dans la réflexion sur :

• l’identité canadienne-française
• la survivance culturelle
• la transmission de l’histoire

Ses écrits ont marqué toute une génération.

Aujourd’hui, Lionel Groulx est une figure discutée. Son importance dans l’histoire intellectuelle du Québec est reconnue, mais certaines de ses idées sont relues de manière critique.

---

Une pensée située dans un contexte précis

À l’époque de Groulx, les Canadiens français se perçoivent comme une minorité fragile en Amérique du Nord.

Leur langue, leur culture et leur continuité historique semblent menacées.

Dans ce contexte, certains mots prennent un sens particulier.

Le mot « race », notamment, est utilisé pour désigner :

• un peuple
• une communauté historique
• une continuité culturelle

Il ne renvoie pas uniquement à une idée biologique, comme c’est souvent le cas aujourd’hui.

---

Le mot « race » chez Groulx

Chez Lionel Groulx, « race » est un mot chargé, mais son usage est lié à une volonté de définir une identité collective.

Il sert à nommer :

• un groupe distinct
• une mémoire commune
• une manière d’exister dans le temps

Il s’inscrit dans une logique de survivance, plus que dans une logique de domination.

---

Une influence réelle

Cette manière de penser a circulé largement dans la société québécoise.

Elle a influencé :

• les discours
• les écrits
• et, indirectement, les artistes

Médard Bourgault connaissait ces idées.

Il appréciait Lionel Groulx, comme plusieurs créateurs de son époque.

---

Médard Bourgault dans son contexte

Médard Bourgault n’est pas un théoricien.

Mais il évolue dans un environnement où ces mots et ces concepts existent.

Ses œuvres et leurs titres ne sont pas détachés de ce contexte.

Ils en portent certaines traces.

---

Le décalage aujourd’hui

Aujourd’hui, le mot « race » est compris autrement.

Il est associé à :

• des dérives idéologiques
• des classifications rigides
• des formes d’exclusion

Ce sens contemporain n’est pas celui du début du XXe siècle.

---

Une lecture à ajuster

Lorsque l’on rencontre ce mot dans une œuvre ancienne, un choix se présente :

• le juger immédiatement avec le sens actuel
• ou tenter de comprendre ce qu’il signifiait dans son contexte

Ce choix change entièrement la lecture.

---

Comprendre sans adopter

Comprendre l’usage du mot « race » chez Groulx — et dans le contexte de Médard Bourgault — ne signifie pas :

• le reprendre aujourd’hui
• le défendre tel quel

Cela signifie simplement :

👉 reconnaître qu’un mot peut changer de sens 👉 et que les œuvres portent la marque de leur époque

---

Conclusion

Les titres des œuvres de Médard Bourgault ne sont pas des accidents.

Ils sont liés à un moment précis de l’histoire intellectuelle du Québec.

Les modifier, c’est risquer d’effacer une partie de ce contexte.

Les comprendre, c’est accepter que le passé ne parle pas toujours avec les mots du présent.

---

Raphaël Maltais Bourgault

For my second MLB Game today I'll try to follow the Texas Rangers vs the Seattle Mariners. This game has a scheduled start time of 6:15 PM CDT and should fit quite comfortably into my Saturday night.

And the adventure continues.

Surely you’re aware of Ed McMahon, aren’t you? Americans of a certain age will be. I was vaguely aware of him in the way that any child of the 90’s was vaguely aware of people like Richard Nixon or, even, Richard Marx. Ed McMahon sat on the couch of the living room of America for 30 years, with a catchphrase, Heeere’s Johnny! That achieved immortality with a younger, but now older, generation via Homer Simpson’s insane ravings in a Treehouse of Horror episode in 1994.

Well, what happened to old Ed after the Tonight Show closed its final curtain? A lot of things, but one thing stands out as a cultural moment that seems to have slipped into oblivion, one that is asking to be brought forward again and examined, like a broken sand dollar, before we cast it out into the sea again. The Miracle Fryer. Do you remember that infomercial? I certainly don’t. As an avid 1990’s infomercial watcher, I remember “set it and forget it!” and food dehydrators and the slanted grill that “cuts the fat” and a British man in a red bow tie yelling about fresh salsa. But the Miracle Fryer existed, too, and it’s an astonishing look into peak America, before it crumbled, quickly, then slowly, then quickly again until we arrived at present day.

The Miracle Fryer, to be clear, is a mesh screen sitting on top of a tray. That’s the entire product. Supposedly, one can place a wide variety of different brown foods—chicken nuggets, french fries, onion rings, fish sticks, and more! onto the mesh-covered tray, insert it into your oven, and use your oven’s own thermal waves to cook your food while also cutting the fat, a particularly obsessive fixation of the late 1990s that has morphed repeatedly and now sits firmly into the protein supplementation of everything.

Now, little research was done for this essay beyond watching the infomercial and reading Ed McMahon’s Wikipedia page. But I think that’s enough. I don’t know what the Miracle Fryer is made out of, I don’t know how many units it sold, or if it’s still available outside of a single second hand store somewhere near Topeka. I don’t even know if it really works in the way that Nancy Nelson’s loud MMMMs and grinning countenance seem to imply, but I have my doubts.

There’s something startling about Ed McMahon’s appearance three minutes into the infomercial. We’ve been educated on the evils of deep frying and the unquestionable unwantedness of fat in our foods. We’ve already seen Nancy taking a crunchy bite of french fries that allegedly have had their calories cut by 83%. Then, she pivots. There’s a gentleman she needs to tell us about. A man who, as she describes, is “here to unveil a discovery of his.” A discovery. Ed McMahon was in his garage in the San Fernando Valley, as I imagine it, surrounded by tools and parts and prototypes, and late on a Saturday night, _discovered it. _And now, 18 months later, he strolls in—no, wanders in—after Nancy Nelson’s introduction. He’s dressed to the nines, pocket square and all, and he brings Nancy into a hug. He’s glad to be here. He’s here to talk about his discovery, and the technology. They’re big claims. Yet the man in front of us is Ed McMahon, who we mostly know for his hosting chops, his catchphrase, and his background laugh on the Tonight Show. We did not know about his engineering proficiency, and his tenacious inventive spirit. Now we do.

A YouTube commenter jokes that Ed “knocked a few back” before the infomercial. I will not speculate. But I also won’t judge. He’s probably at a sound stage in Burbank, it’s the middle of the day, he’s in his golden years—who wouldn’t knock a few back? I don’t hold it against him.

What unfolds after the introduction is something to behold. We watch Ed McMahon, in his suit, and in his genteelness, carefully load chicken strips and onion rings (Ed’s favorite), onto the mesh screen. He is fixed in place for the entire infomercial, where I imagine two yellow footprints have been painted on the floor, while Nancy runs to and fro, putting his creations into the oven, retrieving things that are ready to taste, and he’s just…there. He’s a professional, of course—you can’t not be after decades in showbiz. He has the enthusiasm in his voice about fish sticks. He even smiles. But there’s something else there, behind his eyes. There is an, “I’m completing my contractual obligations. I wonder if my driver is still out back, if he’s kept the car idling. I wonder if the Irish bar down the road has air conditioning,” all churning behind those big glasses.

At one point, they bring out and introduce a Culinary Institute of America-trained chef. He’s framed as the actual inventor, or perhaps the executor to Ed’s idea. The Saturday night garage vision evaporates. We recalibrate. Okay, it was this guy. Ed was the idea guy. Fine. But Nancy and Ed continue presenting, and the chef gets interrupted, and can’t seem to get a word in. He does manage a few key sentences about grease dripping or excess calories, or the crunch of the foods that have been cooked on the Miracle Fryer (a particular preoccupation of this infomercial), but otherwise he’s largely ignored. If he’s the inventor, shouldn’t he be the main presenter? What’s Ed doing here? It’s not that Ed was the one to actually sign the endorsement and licensing deal, was it? I will wonder this until the end.

When it ends, I’m left feeling uneasy. I have thoughts about how we treat our aging celebrities, what we do with our “beloved” entertainers, those who we welcomed into our living rooms every night, now that we’re done with them. I’m also happy that Ed got some money, though I imagine he was disappointed this product wasn’t a runaway success like the Foreman Grill. In fact, in some ways, this is a product ahead of its time. Air fryers are legitimately one of the most popular counter-top appliances in America now. Damnit, Ed, you were so close. In sum, I feel a bit sad.

The YouTube video ends and I’m treated to a post-roll ad for car insurance, and then a recommended music video for an artist whose video I accidentally clicked on two weeks ago. I’m on my phone now, searching “air fryer” on Amazon. Maybe I should see what all the hype is about. I’d like to cut the fat too, and tell my family to be quiet so they can all hear that satisfying crunch of my now-healthy french fry.

And what I see is stunning. Dozens of brands. Perhaps hundreds, all trying to sell their air fryers to me. And many of these brands, I’ve never heard of. Rivee. Ordai. Lyncia. Whatever. They don’t care about me. They’re all made in the same factory, and the brand name is changed, and really, the brand name doesn’t matter. No one’s actually trying to sell me anything. I’m just scrolling. Here’s a product. Here’s another. Buy it, or don’t. Who cares.

There’s no Nancy Nelson. There’s no Ed McMahon. There’s no gentleman, no pocket square, no trembling hand carefully maneuvering a chicken nugget. These people weren’t perfect, but they at least showed up to the studio that day. They learned their lines. Nancy performed her enthusiasm. I was told a price, and then the price was slashed in half with a red X and now I’m getting a deal. Now, I see the same list prices crossed out, and they’re always crossed out, and they always will be crossed out, and the price is calculated by the day by an algorithm, I’m sure. And I find myself missing the flawed, loose with the truth, anecdotal, reminiscent-about-boyhood-onion-rings charm of it all. And I wish Ed would try to sell me one more thing. I would buy it.

#essays