This week marks the fundraising initiative for Naked Capitalism. A total of 423 supporters have contributed to our mission to expose and combat corruption and predatory practices, particularly in the financial sector. We invite you to join us in this vital effort through our donation page, where you’ll find options for donating via check, credit card, debit card, PayPal, Clover, or Wise. To learn more about the reasons behind this fundraiser, our achievements over the past year, and our current goal of developing new Coffee Break/Sunday Movie features.
The EU, UK, and Ukraine are employing a blend of heightened surveillance, censorship, and strategic messaging in an effort to shape narratives both within Europe and abroad, particularly in the U.S.
As I discussed in the first part of this series, Delusion, Deception and Dipshittery: Hasbara on the 8th Front, it appears that Western powers are engaged in desperate attempts to control the narrative, making it challenging to differentiate between intentional falsehoods, delusions, and plain absurdity.
In the previous installment, I examined Israel’s maneuvers on its “8th front”. In the third part, I will address the narrative management strategies employed by the Trump administration.
This edition focuses on the efforts by the EU, UK, and Ukraine to redirect the narrative energy within their own nations, especially in the U.S., aiming to re-establish the proxy war in Ukraine as a primary concern.
Moreover, they are resorting to heightened censorship and surveillance to maintain local support for increasingly unpopular policies and administrations.
Ukraine has always been winning
A key indicator of desperation is the resurgence of 2022-style propaganda from The Financial Times:
https://t.co/o2DEyLO1rT pic.twitter.com/AJXZssGUu5
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) September 29, 2025
The article in question is not worth engaging with, as it merely reiterates Biden-era disinformation that even the New York Times has begun distancing itself from in recent months.
In August, Gallup reported a significant decline in support for the ongoing war among Ukrainians:
https://t.co/dKq76XgkbR pic.twitter.com/8yRvfmLbZX
— Nat Wilson Turner (@natwilsonturner) September 29, 2025
Much of the urgency conveyed, which is echoed in recent calls to engage with Russian jets allegedly violating Estonian airspace, speculated Russian drone strikes in Poland, and mysterious drones over Denmark, can be linked to concerns over a posting by Donald Trump stating that “Ukraine, with the backing of the European Union, is positioned to reclaim all of Ukraine in its entirety” on Truth Social. This remark implies an abandonment of both Europe and Ukraine.
Naked Capitalism has previously noted that:
When viewed from a distance, Biden’s substantial financial support for the “bring Russia down” campaign, coupled with the depletion of U.S. and allied weapon stocks, did provide Ukraine with the means to sustain its fight, limiting its territorial losses—a focus of the media and many observers alike. However, the press began gradually addressing the worsening conditions in Ukraine during the latter part of 2024.
Currently, there are many indicators suggesting that Ukraine’s military might is on the verge of collapse, as evidenced by scant troop presence along the front lines and the diminishing effectiveness of its once-lauded drone capabilities against Russia’s advancements.
Amid rising pressure, Zelensky is positioning Ukraine as Europe’s defender, while Polish Prime Minister Tusk advocates for a European crusade against Russia, as reported by The Guardian:
During a security forum in Warsaw, Volodymyr Zelenskyy offered a proposal for a collaborative and effective “shield” against Russian aerial threats, drawing on Ukraine’s military experience.
He asserted that Ukraine’s forces are capable of countering all varieties of Russian drones and missiles, claiming that “if Russia loses its aerial capability, it cannot sustain the war.”
Over the past month, Poland, Romania, and Denmark have experienced drone incursions that led to airport closures, exposing NATO’s shortcomings in response.
In light of these incursions, Donald Tusk remarked on the scale and seriousness of the situation, urging that “the entire transatlantic community” must understand that “this is war.” He continued, “We didn’t desire this conflict; it represents a new kind of warfare, and yet, it is undeniably war.”
Starmer, Surveillance, Censorship, and Digital Grift
German journalist Patrick Baab pointed out on the Glenn Diesen YouTube channel that:
My assertion is that Western elites, particularly in Western Europe, are steering their nations toward conflict. They are leading their countries into a cul-de-sac with no viable options for reversal. I intend to substantiate this claim through economic, political, cultural, psychological, and military lenses, as these factors converge toward a singular path: warfare.
Moreover, Baab highlights another motivation behind the support of European elites for perpetual conflict, surveillance, and censorship—the chance to significantly enhance digital profit:
Furthermore, in the context of digital capitalism, wartime scenarios allow states to become primary investors in digital enterprises. Consider Elon Musk’s Starlink and its network of satellites enabling surveillance along the extensive 1,400-kilometer frontline. Musk is profiting immensely, funded by military contracts. With this state-backed venture capital, Musk is securing a dominant economic position. These companies have no incentive to cease the conflict. …
This transition from neoliberal capitalism to digital capitalism necessitates war, and the promotion of digital enterprises aligns with what the Trump administration aims to achieve to bolster the U.S. economy in competition with China. Microchips and artificial intelligence are key sectors to restore America’s military and economic strength.
This brings us to the UK’s initiative to implement Digital ID, supported by Larry Ellison of Oracle.
Now, let’s examine some of the pressures regarding surveillance and censorship that UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is facing. His popularity is at an all-time low:
Keir Starmer is now the most unpopular British Prime Minister in recorded history.
This is the result of endlessly making pledges he fails to keep and doing precisely what he promised not to do. pic.twitter.com/CkFcZaAEfp— Piers Morgan (@piersmorgan) September 28, 2025
Starmer’s plummeting popularity is driving the Labour government to enthusiastically enforce increasingly onerous censorship laws. As Taylor Lorenz detailed in The Guardian last month:
Reports have indicated that the UK has blocked access to a range of content, from SpongeBob SquarePants gifs to Spotify playlists. Information related to Joe Biden’s police funding proposal has been limited, along with content from an emerging political party. Gamers have reported being unable to alter colors in games like Minecraft. This censorship stems from a new age verification law.
While the stated purpose of this law is to focus on pornographic or harmful content, the subjective nature of its restrictions has led to widespread censorship, essentially removing large portions of content from the internet. Tech companies often find it simpler and less costly to delete vast amounts of material than risk non-compliance.
Starmer has framed the introduction of Digital ID within an anti-immigration context:
I understand that working-class individuals are concerned about the level of illegal immigration in this country. Demanding secure borders and regulated migration is reasonable, and this administration is responsive to those demands.
Digital ID presents a substantial opportunity for the UK. It will complicate illegal work in this country, bolstering border security. Additionally, it will provide ordinary citizens with numerous advantages, such as quickly verifying their identity to access essential services—eliminating the need to scrounge for old utility bills.
We are undertaking the necessary work to promote a fairer Britain for those seeking transformation rather than division at the heart of our Plan for Change, which aims to benefit communities.
Opposition to the UK’s Digital ID scheme primarily comes from the right-leaning Reform party and some factions of the online left. How this situation evolves remains to be seen; however, reversing Starmer’s general unpopularity seems unlikely.
Unfortunately for Starmer, his increasing repression fosters further unpopularity, creating a cycle of clampdowns and leading to a surveillance and censorship predicament.
The EU claims digital currency will safeguard freedom
Not to be outdone, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, is advocating for a digital euro, as reported by Politico. She has even made concessions to national governments to advance this initiative:
The Frankfurt-based ECB is eager to finalize its plans for a purely digital euro, fearing that any significant delays may cause it to lag behind U.S.-based payment systems, particularly in the realm of dollar-denominated stablecoin cryptocurrencies that have gained popularity for cross-border transactions.
…
The previous proposal allowed governments three months, with the possibility of extension to six, to decide on the limits while allowing a qualified majority to veto it. Should no decision be reached, the ECB could proceed with the issuance of the digital euro independently.The latest proposal, presented just one week ahead of a ministers’ meeting, retains the silence-approval mechanism if governments do not reach a decision. However, it clarifies the timeline, requires more countries to agree on limits, and addresses ambiguities raised by countries like Germany and Austria about post-launch scenarios.
Piero Cipollone, a member of the ECB Executive Board, expressed no qualms about adopting utopian/Orwellian sentiments when advocating for the digital euro in a recent speech titled “Digital Euro: Protecting Our Freedom, Autonomy, and Security.”
The EU is also pursuing major advancements in online surveillance, including Chat Control:
The Danish presidency of the EU Council is advocating for a vote on the “Chat Control” proposals, which promote large-scale scanning of devices to detect suspected child abuse material transmitted via encrypted communications platforms by 14 October.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation articulates the objections:
Chat Control represents a troubling legislative initiative mandating that service providers, including those offering end-to-end encrypted communication, scan all communications and stored files to identify “abusive material.” This would involve a technique termed client-side scanning, where content is scanned for specific material before transmission. In essence, Chat Control equates to chat surveillance, granting access to everything on a device while permitting indiscriminate monitoring of all content. In a memo, the Danish presidency claimed this mechanism would not compromise end-to-end encryption.
In summary, these moves toward surveillance, censorship, and narrative control reflect a lack of confidence among powerful actors enjoying widespread public backing for their policies. Instead, these endeavors reveal a complex mix of deception, delusion, and absurdity.
