Speaker 1: If you want to get the show early and ad free,
head on over to the Peak Kinyonas Show dot com.
There you can choose from where you wish to support me.
Now listen very carefully. I've had some people ask me
about this, even though I think on the last ad
I stated it pretty clearly. If you want an RSS feed,
you're going to have to subscribe yoursel Substack or through Patreon.
You can also subscribe on my website which is right there,
gum Road and what's the other one, subscribe Star And
if you do that, you will get access to the
audio file. So head on over to the Pekanyonashow dot com.
You'll see all the ways that you can support me there.
And I just want to thank everyone. It's because of
you that I can put out the amount of material
that I do. I can do what I'm doing with
doctor Johnson on two hundred Years Together and everything else,
the things that Thomas and I are doing together onkindinal philosophy,
it's all because of you. And yeah, I mean, I'll
never be able to thank you enough.
Speaker 2: So thank you.
Speaker 1: The Pekanyonas Show dot com. Everything's there. I want to
welcome everyone back to the peaking Yona Show. Kevin Diana's here,
Greg Hood is here, James Kirkpatrick is here, but he's
been going as Kevin Deanna lately. So hey, man, how
are you doing.
Speaker 2: I'm doing well. I'm doing well. It is getting tiresome
and trying to kill off all these different pen names,
which I think sometimes came with alternate personalities too, so
it can be a little switch.
Speaker 1: Sometimes, well some people have. Every once in a while,
someone will refer to me as the hardest working man
in podcasting. When you're talking into Mike, when you're talking
into a microphone, it's not that difficult. Yeah, you just
really have to know how to schedule. Well, you're probably
the hardest working man I know, because not only are
you podcasting and live streaming, but you're right. You're right
all the time, and so and I respect the hell
out of you, and I've wanted to get you on
for a little while now, especially since I look at
things as there are events. I think October seventh was
a seminal event that has changed the world forever. And
I think that the Charlie Kirk assassination. We will not
talk about conspiracies today. We will just take it as
the man is dead and he was killed in public,
Well that's our assumption. I think it's a good assumption.
I think this is another one of those. So tell
me what were you, what were you thinking that day,
and where did your mind immediately go?
Speaker 2: Well, the first thing that I posted when it happened,
even before, oh, was he actually because remember initially there
were all these different reports, is he actually dead? There
were some reports saying he'd gone to the hospital, or
people obviously who I know who knew him, who were
reporting to me as things were happening, and they weren't
even sure whether he was alive or dead initially. But
the very first thing I posted was this is the
beginning of the American years of lead, and that assumption
has not quite gone away. I don't think we're anywhere
near the level well, not that I think we're objectively
not near the level of political violence we saw in
this country in the late sixties and early seventies, But
the atmosphere of existential political struggle I think is even
stronger than it was then. One of the big things
that I've hammered away on. And people can disagree with
me on this if they want, but I think right
and left are actually meaningful concepts, that there is a
right and there is a left, and there's going to
be no peace between them, especially not in our lifetime.
Nobody is pretending anymore that there's any discussion to be had.
There's no common ground that's even possible. And the reason
for that is because we're not talking about things like
how do we distribute national wealth. We're not talking about
things about like how do we keep the country safe
or something like that. It's essentially just a battle of
us v then. And if left and right are meaningless
political concepts, it's because those have just become a cover
for my tribe versus your tribe. And Kirk being slain,
especially the way he was slain, it was almost a
perfect script written presentation of the time for talk is over.
There is nothing more to discuss. I'm not interested in
having a debate with any of these people, and they're
not interested in having a debate with me. And more
to it, and this may be a bit more difficult
for all of us, for those of us on the right.
We all have our different ideological disagreements, we all have
the things that we value. I've often said I think
there's only one left, but there are many rights. But
regardless of what we think about each other or what
we think about our own motivations, we're all in the
same pot here. We're all in this together, whether we
like it or not, because ultimately, it's not about what
we think, it's about what they think, because they're the
ones with the gun to our heads.
Speaker 1: One of the things that I saw yesterday was like, oh,
Steven Crowder, who's going to go back out there and
do his change my mind thing? And you know there's
a kid who is taking over for Charlie Kirk who
looks like you.
Speaker 2: Yeah, nobody design everybody. Everybody's already dunking on him. Nobody's
nobody's going for that.
Speaker 1: I mean, he was created in a lab and you
need any two hundred in Tel Aviv. I mean, it's
just it's so obvious, it's insane. But people are you know,
my guys, you know, like the old Glory Club, we
were saying, why are you doing this? There's no conversation
to be had anymore. It's like, oh, and people are like, oh, well,
now you're just going to be cowards. This is like
sticking it in their face that you know, we're not
scared anymore. Now you just don't people. I mean, how
incredible is it that we have every book. We can
study the Spanish Civil War, we can study the years
of Lead, we can study all these things, and it's like, look,
the only thing you should be doing right now is
figuring out people in your area that you can team
up with and basically plan. I'm not saying too you're
going to plan to be revolutionaries, You're going to plan
to go look for trouble, but you're planning because where
this goes goes beyond showing up on campuses to go, oh,
debate me bro.
Speaker 2: Yeah, And there's something that revolts me about the whole
debate culture that's sort of grown up online because it's
not a real debate. I mean, everything is just sort
of you recite some talking points as quickly as possible,
you try to get a clip out of context, your
guys dunk on people forever. And a lot of it
has to do with manipulating social media as opposed to
making a good argument. That's how it's become on college
campuses as well, to have a meaningful debate, to have
a debate where it's actually worth doing the research and
making real arguments and everything else. There has to be
at least some common ground. We have to at least
have a shared conception of the good, and we do
not have that anymore. I mean, one of the things
that really struck me the most after Charlie Kirk was
assassinated was when the black president of I believe, the
student union at Oxford, who's just this slob who they
admitted and gave the job to because he's so unimpressive.
If he was impressive, they wouldn't have let him in,
they wouldn't have given him this job, was openly celebrating
that he had been killed. And this is a guy
who had debated Kirk not long ago. And that struck
me because when you know someone, even if you meet
them briefly, I mean, this is one of the things
they tell you when you're doing sales or something like that.
If you have any kind of a personal relationship with someone,
however brief, even if you didn't like that person, if
you found out something bad happened to them, it tends
to really affect you. You tend to feel really bad
about it. In the immediate aftermath. His instant reaction with
everything that was going on was to celebrate, was to
indulge in his bloodlust, even with maybe especially with the
position that he has, tell only what we're supposed to
do with a person like that? Why exactly are we
supposed to talk to this person? What common interest could
I possibly have with this? How is this anything other
than an enemy to be avoided, expelled, or destroyed? So
that simple.
Speaker 1: I think one of the problems is is that people
think winning is owning people online. Yeah you've had this,
Yeah you got.
Speaker 2: We have to define our terms here, and people on
the right like to talk about power, but people on
the left to actually pursue power. And what power really
means is it means being able to transfer resources, including
the most precious resource, which is safety, away from your
enemies and towards your friends. It's a very practical thing.
You can power, something that can be quantified. And what
we're seeing in the aftermath is this argument from Republicans
and from campus conservative and the rest of Well, let's
continue the conversation. Let's appeal to the left's morality. Remember
Ted Cruz making this sickening bag basically saying what we need.
This was after the Ice shooting, I should clarify, we
need to get the Democrats to stop using this violent
rhetoric comparing ICE officers to Nazis or whatever else. But
they do think you're Nazis. They actually think that. That's
not just their retarded opinion, and they're playing a game.
They believe that, and therefore they think they're justified in
doing this to you. And I assume Ted Cruz also
thinks it's justified in doing that to Nazis. So what now,
What exactly are you going to say to them to
dissuade them from this course of action. There comes a
point where we really have to talk less about ideas,
particularly with people that we have nothing in common with,
not even the basic idea of truth, and start talking
in real terms about what it means to be organized,
what it means to pursue power, what it means to
be able to protect ourselves, even at the most basic love.
Because what I'm afraid of, especially with the second Trump administration,
and I know everybody loves to dunk on him, I'm
afraid that five years from now we really are going
to look back on this as the Golden age, because
this is as good as it gets.
Speaker 1: One of the things you said there about Nazis, it
seems like fifteen ten, fifteen years ago, they just called
you a Nazi. Maybe they didn't believe you were a Nazi,
but they called you a Nazi just to insult you.
And then like a few years five years after that,
they called you a Nazi to try to get you
deplatformed or debanked or anything. And now it seems like
they're calling you a Nazi so that it's okay to
kill you. And I don't think people get that, you know.
Orin McIntyre Reason magazine of all things, a freaking lolcow
Central like wrote an article basically saying, and this was
a hit piece on Orin just a few days ago,
saying he invokes the charlsbmit. Yeah right, and it's and
and Orrin said, look, don't take this as them calling
me a Nazi because they think I'm a Nazi. They
they're calling me a Nazi because they do think I'm
a Nazi. But they want me dead. They're trying to
get me shot. And that's what people don't realize. That's
where we're at now.
Speaker 2: They just want to get fired, and they want your
family to starve. That's the friendly interpretation that they just
want you fired and your family to starve.
Speaker 1: But that's that's not it anymore, is it? People are
It's not everybody want to Oh, let's set up a
booth on campus to own, to own the libs while
people are dying.
Speaker 2: Did you see when those manga there's a couple of
days after Kirk was assassinated, maybe a week and a half,
talked about in identity politics, I think two episodes back.
These white kids went to Tennessee State. Tennessee State is
a historically black college. President Trump actually just dramatically increased
the amount of tax payer money that goes to these institutions.
And a bunch of white kids set up a table
on campus and they were just set upon people, screaming,
destroying their stuff, making threats. Eventually the campus kicked them off.
The campus president made this whole little statement about how
they were the ones who were causing danger and everything else.
And what was interesting is when these kids were coming up,
they were making these claims that you think are just
on sort of crazy black schizo TikTok or something, But no,
this is what black college students believe. That white people
are savages who didn't know how to read or write
until blacks taught them. They invented science, they invented math.
They're the ones who did everything, and so therefore white
people have no rights and they can do whatever they want.
The most insane racial resentment has been so deeply internalized
by non whites and among whites and Jews. I think
this idea that everybody on the right is actually a fascist.
I mean, one of the things I would add to
what you just said. I think fifteen years years ago,
they would call you a Nazi to get you in trouble,
but they didn't really believe you are a Nazi. Now
they really believe you're a Nazi. They really do believe
what they're saying. They really do believe you're a fascist.
And how do you deal with fascist. You deal with
it the way the Partisans dealt with Mussolini. That is
what they are saying, and there's no reason to disbelieve
them at this point. This is something that has been
brewing for a very long time, not just in academia,
but probably more relevantly in pop culture, because basically, since
twenty sixteen, we've been in this brown scare where every
video game, every movie, every television show tells us that
there's this secret network of Nazis that's controlling America behind
the scenes, and that the true enemy of World War
two was not in fact Germany or Italy, but the
racist oligarchs within our own country. And now those racist
oligarchs are in charge, and Trump is their head. Doesn't
matter if we believe any of that, doesn't matter. If
we believe that Trump is the farthest thing from this
and is actually just a slave to a foreign power.
You can say whatever you want about the president. The
people who are willing to take up arms believe this,
and the academics and the entertainment medium moguls and the
politicians who support these people, including the well healed legal
and judicial networks, the lawyers and the judges who are
willing to give these guys a slap on the wrists
or get them off entirely, they all believe this too,
and that's what we have to deal with.
Speaker 1: Well, if it takes ten or fifteen years for it
to go from oh, we really don't think you're Nazis,
we're just going to say that to get you fired,
to we really think you're Nazis. How long is it
going to take for people on the right to be like, yeah,
you know, I'm not a Nazi. I'm just like a
normal Yeah, I'm a normal person who wants to grill
to Maybe there's something to this, you know, maybe maybe
that's already aiding.
Speaker 2: Right, that's already happening to some extent. I was on yesterday,
this guy, the Warrior Philosopher was on, and obviously if
you know him, you know, not talking about like racial politics.
We're talking about ideology and stuff. We were talking a
lot about pre war Italy, or rather post World War
One Italy Thanunzio and things like that. And there's this
show MS Son of the Century, which is another example
of this fascist panic I'm talking about. They literally have
the Mussolini guy turned toward the camera and go make
Italy great Again, where it's like, okay, yeah, very on
the nose here. But there's a scene where one of
the fascists is killed by the communists and Italio Balbo
leads the black Shirts on a raid on these Communist
party headquarters and they're screaming, you know, where is the comrade?
Wherever Florio? Then their friend who was killed, and everyone's
going presente and When you see that segment now on YouTube,
all the comments are like, where is the comrade Charlie
Kirk presente? Where is the comrade Charlie Kirk. There was
an incident when I was first starting off in politics.
It was a very long time ago, very minor incident,
but there was a college Republican convention where a bunch
of college Republicans, this is during the Bush air, We're
singing a song called Stomping Out the Reds, and one
of the lyrics was basically we're grinding their guts underneath
our panzers or something like that. It was this kind
of a song. I don't even know where it came from.
I've never heard it before or since, and everybody went nuts.
It was a huge media scandal. The very idea that
people would not just say something like this, but would
just identify with this within their own heads was truly shocking.
Now it's just taken for granted. I've been among some
of the most milk toast college Republicans and someone will
just playfully throw up a Roman and everybody just kind
of accepts it and move on. And this is not
the way it was fifteen years ago. And this is
very much an age thing because someone like me is
immediately uncomfortable and looking around because I'm like, guys, don't
you understand this could be a whole thing. Kids now,
they don't care. I think they understand at a gut
level that were past all this. And while boomer conservatives,
I think are going to still be playing the post
World War War World War two playbook. I mean, anyone
who's on the right who's gen z or younger, I
mean they're talking about things like the RDD and they're
not ashamed.
Speaker 1: Well, how does this how do you see this playing out?
Speaker 2: Like?
Speaker 1: I think there are still a lot of people on
the right who are waiting for like And I'm not
talking about you know, oh you need to form militias
or anything like that. I'm talking about you know, you
should be forming fraternities, you should be forming clubs, you
should be forming you know, people getting together with people
in your area, joining.
Speaker 2: Ice do I mean yes, yeah, I mean if you
were like I mean you refer to the Spanish Civil War, right,
I mean, what were the other than getting the legionnaires
over from Africa and the Moroccans and the rest of
it with the air I mean, what was the big
thing that determined whether a city went with the republic
or went with the nationalists at the beginning, what happened
with the civil Guard and what happened with the Assault
Guard and these sorts of forces personnel's policy right, And
it's very important that really, for the first time in
my entire life, you have a government bureaucracy and armed
government bureaucracy that is recruiting our type of person And
I think you're out of your mind. If you don't
have anything going on right now and you're looking for
a job, you don't think about this a little bit.
And incidentally, they're also doing another hiring thing to go
over immigration application. So if you just want an office job,
if you're maybe a bit older or not in the
best shape or something, these jobs are now available too.
What happens with these sorts of bureaucracies is going to
be extremely critical going forward, because during the first Trump administration,
one of the main reasons you couldn't get anything done
is because they really botched the hiring process, and they've
done a much better job this time. And the way
that they're getting around the opposition of things like the
FBI is not just decapitating at the top and putting
one of their guys in charge, but they're essentially replacing them.
I mean, if you look at a lot of these
raids that are taking place against Antifah and things like that,
it's it's ICE. Why is ICE getting involved in domestic
law enforcement of this kind? But that's what's happening, And
I think to some extent it's because it's the only
armed body of guys that they can count on. So
it's not just a question of organizing within your own
community and a lot of the things that we've talked about.
I mean, obviously I agree with all of that, but
there are opportunities that are available now which I do
not think are going to be available much longer.
Speaker 1: That also goes to people who, you know, like make
a more libertarian argument, and I'm not saying that this
isn't a good argument that you know, these these kind
of units can be used against us too. You know,
there's a chance in the future that if you're joining
the military, if you're joining this.
Speaker 2: That's going to happen anyway.
Speaker 1: Right, But the more of our guys who are in
there can basically not de escalate, but actually be able
to talk to people no we shouldn't be doing this,
or just basically say no, we're not going to you know,
we're not going to do this. You get into leadership
positions and you can our guys can like actually have
some power in this. And I think that when I
say that people with who are true right wingers, they
haven't had power in so long, they see that as
a fantasy. They see it as something But no, it's
not a fantasy. We're already seeing it. I mean, the
last time we you and I talked, we talked about
how we both know people are guys who are working
in government right now, and they are working towards helping us,
and there are some very targeted things that there are
some people who are doing, some people are doing, and yeah,
I mean that's that's another way is if you have
people in power who are able to play defense, you know,
and offense against our enemy, but defense against anything that
might swing our way. That's just that just makes sense
at this point, you know, and I don't know that
we've seen anything like that in the past where you
can compare that in opportunity where where your own guys
can get in there and actually be able to. I mean,
you could probably talk about the Bolshevik revolution going after
their enemies and rewarding their friends. Yes, things like that,
But well, if you if you want to talk about that,
then use that as an example to get all get
all of our guys friggin you know, hired into into
the government, and let's see where this goes.
Speaker 2: One of the things I've been thinking about a lot
over the last few minutes because I wrote a book
about a year ago and then I'm kind of revising
it because so many things have changed. But also I
think part of my thesis was wrong. I think that
politics is the science of power, and power has to
be at the center of everything. Power is everything. The
solution is always power, and we have to be specific
in our terms and be thinking about what it is
to actually have it, because we talk about these things
all the time, but then we never quite connect what
we're talking about with how it actually works. I mean,
to give one specific example, people are always complaining about
Indians now only giving jobs to their people, and we
complain about it like, well, it's unfair and how could
this be happening? And there are rules and everything else,
But it's like, but this is what power actually is.
It's when you have control over resources that you yourself did
not create, and you can redistribute them to whom you will.
That is what you should always be thinking of. I mean,
that is essentially the purpose of life is to get
as much of that as possible and give it to
your friends and take it away from your enemies. That's
what it is. To provide for a family, for example.
I mean, once you're a father with kids and a
wife and you got to provide for a household, like
this is what you do. This is all you think about.
And when it comes to the military, and when it
comes to government, and when it comes to staffing these
sorts of positions, it is simply a fact that people,
most people, ninety nine percent of people are going to
follow whoever signs their paycheck and whoever gives them the orders.
And so therefore, if you can just put yourself in
that position, you have more ability to affect how policy
plays out on the ground than even the most skilled
political organizer. And so you should always be thinking in
these terms, and on the American right because for so long,
especially in the conservative movement, and especially on college campuses,
which is something which I can speak with some authority
about we've been trained that we're going to create like
a space where there is no power because we have
constitutions and legal guarantees and so therefore we don't have
to really think about any of these things. But it's
precisely in the area where you don't have the state,
where authority is questionable, where you're not totally sure who's
in charge, that's when political skill matters the most. It
would be like in a post apocalyptic situation where everybody
is running around forming militias, fighting for food or whatever else.
That's precisely when you would need political skills. And you
want to be in positions where if things do start
to break down, if there is a conflict, if there
are the kinds of jurisdictional decisions that we're seeing play
out right now, where you have things like federal and
state officials fighting about who has the right to enforce
the law on a certain city. I mean, these are
the most important political questions that there are, and you
better believe you want these bureaucracies staffed with your guys,
because the reason these blue cities and blue states are
able to put up so much opposition is because they've
made sure that the sheriffs and the police chiefs and
the das are people that they can rely on. If
the American right does not have people that they can
rely on and key positions, this conflict, be it a
kinetic one or be it a simple political one, is
going to be over very quickly and we are not
going to win.
Speaker 1: Well, you're talking about right there, being wise when it
comes to strategy. What do you think the purpose of
Trump and having his Justice Department go after Camy and
Obama and all of these people.
Speaker 2: I'm yeah, good, I gotta be hon And I say
this as somebody who probably defends Trump way more maybe
than you, maybe more more of your listeners. This is
one of these things where I'm just sort of like,
I really don't care. I mean, going after Comy, going
after Obama, it's like going after COVID stuff from twenty twenty.
It's like, these are dead things. These are not the
things that matter. Now. What I want to see more of,
what I think would be the more important priority would
be dismantling these left wing networks that are on the ground.
And if you want to go after these sorts of people,
I would like to see what kind of law enforcement
decisions were made when these people were really acting up
in twenty twenty. I mean, we know, for example, that
do had FBI agents annealing to Black Lives Matter protesters
and some of these agents have since been fired. Well,
what kind of directors were coming from the top while
all this was happening. We remember, and this is something
that has been extremely memory hold. People talk about oh
J six and people marching on the Capitol. Do you
remember when the White House was basically attacked and they
were trying to pull down the Andrew accent statue, and
they hustled President Trump to the bunker underneath, And then everybody,
of course was making fun of him for being hustled
to the bunker, as if he had a choice in
the matter. I mean, the president doesn't really get to
decide what he wants to do in these sorts of situations.
And there are reports that I think it was Mark
Miley and Steven Miller basically got into a screaming argument
about what the military should be doing in these circumstances.
In the military more or less refused orders to put
down these sorts of disruptions. I'd like to see investigations
into these sorts of things. I'd like to find out
what's happening with their because this is relevant to what's
happening right now. And I think that I'm not against
obviously indicting call me, but I mean it's going to
go before a DC jury, and we all kind of
know how this is going to play out. I mean,
they didn't get a single acquittal with any J six defendant.
I think that went before a DC jury. So I
don't think if I'm calling, I'm sleeping soundly. I don't
think I have anything to worry about. And I think
that the political benefits from this kind of a decision
are much less than going after some of these other
groups and investigating some of these other decisions, which could
lead to cases all around the country, and we could
actually dismantle your political opposition before twenty twenty eight, which
is what needs to happen. I think Greg Johnson said
this to me a while back. One side of the
other is essentially going to declare the opposition illegal. It's
going to happen fairly quickly in the United States of America.
It may not be that formal, it may not be
that like obvious but they're just going to make it
impossible for one side to operate, and it's just a
question of whether it's going to be US or them.
Speaker 1: Well, you have someone like Trump who law Fair was
just I mean, it was used as war against him
so that ye couldn't get back get back in. You know,
there are reports that Milania and Millennia was debanked. I mean,
so how does to me it looks like what the
battle is is the battle is against governors and mayors
and representatives who are just absolutely saying, no, this is
a sanctuary city. No, you're not going to do this.
And I'm one of those people who believes theoretically, I
believe in states rights. I believe states should be able
to should be able to do But the way I
look at that is I think that my state should
be able to do that. You know, I think Alabama
should be able to do that. I don't think California
or Illinois or any of these any of these just no.
Speaker 2: We should actually, yeah, we should be trying to break
these states up. I mean, we should be trying to
dismantle these networks and disrupt them at every level. There's
no reason for California, for example, to even be one state.
I mean, this might be a great time to start
getting behind the State of Jefferson effort and break away
the north. There there's no reason. There's a whole effort
to get certain counties out of the more conservative counties
here in Virginia. When you had Democratic governor, there was
a strong effort which was endorsed by the governor of
West Virginia when I was living there, for certain counties
in Virginia to join West Virginia. In fact, there's one
county I think it's Washington or Frederick here in Virginia
that can just straight up join West Virginia because of
some whatever legal thing where it doesn't have to be
approved by anybody and they can just do it. The
only reason they haven't is because basically the Republicans took
over Virginia. Again. These are the sorts of things that
people can be doing right now, and these are the
sorts of things that can happen within mainstream politics. And
these are the sorts of things that Republicans should start
thinking about if they want to have creative solutions to
how can we disrupt the political opposition without basically falling
into the trap of being the sort of comic book
authoritarians that they want us to be. I do think
that the arguments about state or federal autonomy, because if
if you put me to the question and said, are
you a federalist or an anti federalist? Who was right?
I'd say, yeah, the anti federalists were probably right as
far as the problems that would develop with the Constitution
or whatever else. But that's almost beside the point. It'd
sort of like be asking who do you prefer, Jefferson
or Hamilton on every issue that I care about. Jefferson
and Hamilton would believe the exact same thing about what
needs to be done and who counts as an American
and who does not. That is the question that matters
right now, and the real issue with these governors and
with these representatives someone like ellin Omar to use a
very cliched and obvious example, but it's still relevant. I mean,
she's a congresswoman. This is not an American. There's no
reason for this person to be in any position of
authority over my life. That is far more intolerable than
anything that existed under George the Third. At least George
the Third was of kindred blood these people have to
be denaturalized, deported, and their voters need to go too.
And this has to be view almost as like an
anti colonial struggle in the way of the original Revolution,
that these are foreign interlopers that are exercising power over us.
And some of those interlopers, of course physically occupy our
territory and put up their own chieftains to reign over us.
And then some of these other interlopers operate with power
over us in a different way, especially when it comes
to foreign policy, where it's not so much the physical
occupation of territory and resettlement, although it is that, but
it's essentially subversion. And that's really what American politics is
about right now. I mean, the fundamental question is who
is an American? Because only somebody who is an American
should have any say here whatsoever.
Speaker 1: If you would have told me ten years ago that
you know, they're yeah, maybe even a year ago, that
I'll hand Omar needs to be being naturalized and all
these people in the I would have told you there's
no chance of this happening. Yet, I don't think the
left understands when you start shooting people there is a
chance of this happening. Yeah, because you know, and I've
been saying for for for a few years now, the
future in this country is either right or left wing authoritarianism.
It's going to happen. And the way the left is acting,
they're just pushing it, and it'll happen that much quicker.
You know, the answer is which one, which one do
you prefer? I mean, I think I know which one
we prefer. But when you what they're pushing towards is
I mean, I can honestly see a time when yes,
these people are getting round basically getting rounded up and
deported and sent back to wherever they came from. It
just it does I mean, I don't see that. I mean,
it's not going to happen with American blacks, It's just not.
But when you have these, you know, the population like
in Minneapolis and even even deer Born and who was funny,
didn't Dearborn break for Trump this time?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean it's not so much that it's sort
of the same thing you saw in the UK, where
I mean some of them may have broken for Trump
in terms of how they actually voted, but what actually
really happened on the ground is they more broke away
from the Democrats in the same way that the UK
Muslims broke away from Labor and voted for their own
little independent Muslim parties and even got some of their
guys elected into Parliament. And that's one of the things
that we sort of have to deal with, is that
if you look at what the left is now, I mean,
this is something Steve Sailor has been hammering on for
very long time. The Democratic Party is essentially a coalition
of all of the different groups that are mobilized against
the American Median, the generic American Party, as Peter Brimlaw
used to always call them. The more distinct you are
from what you might call a heritage American, the more
likely you are to be a Democrat. And the Democrats
are able to exercise power because people who are motivated
by spite and resentment and collective loyalty are more politically
powerful in the democracy. But there is a problem, which is,
of course, that their collective interests do not always align
with each other. Obviously, American Jews and American Muslims when
it comes to Israel Palestine tend to have very different opinions.
At least older American Jews younger American Jews, maybe even
not so much. So you're going to have these conflicts
and it gets in the way of the national Party
being able to operate well. I think everybody sort of
understands that the current governor of Pennsylvania would have been
a stronger vice presidential candidate for Kamala Harris last time around,
but he probably couldn't have gotten the nomination purely over
the Palestine issue because wasn't the involved with the IDF
or something like that, and that's why.
Speaker 1: He was signing bombs.
Speaker 2: And so. And this is something that wouldn't have even
been a big deal in the Democratic Party ten years before.
I mean, rom Emanuel, right, But now it's a thing,
and it's not just going to be on Israel Palestin.
There's going to be a host of these sorts of
issues where there's only so many resources to go around,
there's only so many jobs to go around, and you
have certain constituencies that feel like they're entitled, especially blacks,
to have positions that they really aren't entitled to and
don't work very well for the party. I mean the
way black women within the Democratic Party operated to make
sure that Harris would not get the nomination taken away,
and that these people had to fall in line and
endorse her right away, even when a lot of them
really did not want to. I mean, that's a big
reason why twenty twenty four it was such a catastrophe
for that party, and you're going to see more and
more issues like that within the Democrats. The problem is
that at the end of the day, it is just
a question of numbers and the Republicans. It's not that
the Republican Party has such a great or such a
bad ideology. It's that if you're white, you're sort of
default into this position because that's where most voters are
and are going to go in the future. And the
white voters that do not go there are consciously anti
white at this point. I mean, we've all seen the
studies that show white liberals actually have a negative in
bias against their own group. Then they're unique in every
group in the world in that respect. I think that's
only going to intensify. And even the people who say, well,
it's not Republican Democrat, we shouldn't vote, we shouldn't do this, that,
and the other thing. When it comes time to analyzing
political attitudes, they always default to how did Republicans vote,
how did Democrats vote? What were the voting patterns in
the last election. This really is the best metric that
we have. And I think that as politics becomes much
more focused on race, ethnicity, identity, Republicans and Democrats, that's
they just become labels of convenience for racial confederations. I
almost think ideology has nothing to do with it anymore.
Speaker 1: So when you see all of these uh like attack
on ice facilities things like that, and you see the
troops going in. There was something that happened in Atlanta
a few years ago, a couple of years ago. It
was an attack on cop city, yep, and they basically
they did a Rico round up and they all went
to jail. I mean there were spl law there were
spl C lawyers picked up in that and they all
went to jail. What what's keeping them from doing that?
Because Rico is the way to the way to do this,
I mean going forward.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Well, I mean they might be right. I mean
we all have our doubts. Take that as red, but
you know they're they're not going to come up with
a Rico statue in a week. I mean, they if
they're going to do this. They've whatever you would expect
them to do in the short term. They are now
doing even the signs of weakness that we saw, like
when we had that one ICE official pushed that woman
to the ground and the reporters went nuts and they
fired them, I mean they rehired them. So you are
seeing that they're not just folding. It's not just talk.
It's a bit early, but it does have to be rico.
It does have to be actually dismantling these networks. It
does have to be going after the funding sources. President
Trump has said that these things are going to happen.
President Trump says a lot of things, though it doesn't
me We'll see. What I think is more interesting, maybe
not more interesting, but is more relevant to us from
a strategic perspective, is for the first time in my life,
you see the left actually regarding the state as an enemy,
because they've already they've always theoretically regarded as an enemy.
They'll be oh, the CIA, the federal government, the military,
whatever else. But these people have never really been opposed.
They've already they've always kind of worked hand in glove,
even anti on cops. I've never really been opposed too much.
You only have to look at how things played out
in Charlottesville to see that. But now they have made
the strategic choice, and I don't think they can be
talked down from the ledge that we need to attack ice,
we need to attack cops, we need to attack these
people physically, and that is not going to end well
for them. I don't think it's a sound political strategy
for anybody right or left to attack the state as such.
It's just not a battle you can win.
Speaker 1: Well. The but the escalation once it seems like once
you reach a certain point of escalation, the I mean
they have an overconfidence because they've been so pretty.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: So like when when they try to get somebody fired
now when they're like, oh you're a fascist, you're you're
a Nazi or not, and people are like, well end yeah, right,
it just doesn't work anymore. Now it seems like, okay,
well if they're not going to if they're embracing these terms,
we're just going to defaults of violence. And so I
don't really see I don't see a problem with them
deciding well, yeah, sure it's the state, and sure they're
doing it.
Speaker 2: But they're doing it. I just don't think we should
do it. I mean, every once in a while people
will be like, people are like, oh, you know, the
cops aren't your friend. It's like, the cops are cops.
The cops aren't anybody's friend. The cops are the friends
of whoever tells them to arrest this person or that person.
There was a story. I can't remember the exact source,
but I'm just going to tell the story anyway. There's
a story of course during you know, during the Comps side,
when the German National Socialists were doing their thing in
Germany before they took power, and one of the lies
that you're told is that they, you know, they had
sympathy from the police and the judges or whatever else.
Like that was probably true in some cases, but you know,
these guys are getting beat up by the cops, are
going to arrested, they're being told they're not allowed to
do certain things. The cops are messing with them. And
I think it was Gebel's or somebody like the day
after they took power, the police chief like just kind
of walked in and this is the same guy who
is like trying to arrest him and arrest all his guys,
like the day before and he's like, well, what are
you doing, And I'm like, well, who do you want
us to arrest? And it was just this is how
it is now, this is just the nature of the beast.
And I think that's how it is with government bureaucracies.
It doesn't fundamentally matter to most people whether it's a fascist,
whether it's a communist, whether it's a Democrat, whether it's
a Republican. It's a question of who has the authority
to give the orders and who controls the money. And
therefore it is foolish to say entire bureaucracies or parts
of the government are inherently enemies and try to dismantle
them through force outside the state, leaving a side that
that's probably impossible. It's also just not really true, because
if you're able to capture the machinery of the state,
you may face resistance depending on the politics of the
people involved. Certainly Trump is dealt without with the FBI,
but by and large, most of these guys are just
going to do what you say, and so really what
you should be focused on is trying to capture the state,
not try to dismantle it by doing these kind of
ragtag terrorist attacks against random guys on the ground, who,
by the way, are just normal people trying to do
their job and probably don't have too many political considerations
one way or the other.
Speaker 1: Well, not to invoke TV shows or anything like that,
but there's this classic scene from Game of Thrones where
the question is asked, if you have a king, you
have a priest, and you have a rich man. You
know what you know I'm talking about, right, and yeah,
you know, each one looks at an assassin and orders
to kill the other two in which one who do
they kill who? So basically, when you look at that
situation right now, who do you think the average American
thinks has the power?
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean that's what's dangerous is the average American.
And this is an advantage and it's a disadvantage. The
average American probably has some vague idea that Donald Trump
is in charge and has the power, and Donald Trump
has less power than the average American thinks he does.
And Donald Trump probably has less power than Donald Trump
thinks he does. I mean, Donald Trump will say things
occasionally like I'm running the country, I'm running the world,
and it's like, well, you're not really, I mean he's
facing resistance from bureaucracies, he's facing judges who say what
he's doing is illegal, even if it's not. He always
has to deal with this. And the problem, of course,
is that most people just want problems solved, and if
Trump can't solve those problems, even if he lacks the
power to solve the problems, even if he has the
right solution and wants to solve the problem, but he
just can't because he just doesn't have the power and
the system doesn't work that way, He's still going to
be the one who gets the blame. And this is
my view on the entire system, is that we're in
a situation now where we see these deep seated problems
and we see entrenched privileges that prevent us from solving
these problems, something like say illegal immigration. The agricultural companies
are dependent on illegal immigration. You need to get rid
of these people. But if you're going to do that,
they are going to be massive short term costs. And
those short term costs are not something you know, increase
food prices, whatever. These are not costs that any politician
is going to want to deal with. So we kick
the can down the road. And this is what happens
in every revolutionary situation. It's not that people don't see
the problems. It's not that people don't have solutions to
the problems. It's not that the system could not pass
solutions to these problems and we could just be done
with it. It's that the cost is always the short
term cost is always so great, and the benefits are
always so concentrated that resistance is just too much to overcome,
and you need somebody to come with the sword to
cut the Gordian knot. And our system is more or
less set up to prevent that from happening. And my
fear is that Trump is giving the aesthetic of somebody
who's going to swing the sword, who's going to be Caesar,
who's going to solve all these problems. But he lacks
not just the will. Maybe he does have the will,
but he certainly lacks the power and the capability to
do it. And so all that's going to happen is
you're going to get the reaction, the anti fascist reaction
against authoritarianism. You're going to whip the left up in
that regard, but you're also going to get the blame
from people who are frustrated that he can't solve the problem,
And unfortunately, there's not really a way to get around
this until the country moves into a no kidding, revolutionary
situation where a lot of the institutional safeguards simply fall
away and we can actually get to work solving the
problems that we need to solve.
Speaker 1: Well, that's the thing, isn't it is? If you if
you take the theory that they're elite cadres that are
pulling strings and competing behind the scenes, I mean, I
think there's like three or four, definitely three I can
identify that are going after Trump right now and pulling
them in opposite directions. I think we know which cadre
has been the most influential so far and has gotten
the most done for their group. But I think one
of the things that elites always fear the most is
revolution is that they lose. They can't leave the house
that they that you know, guillotines are pretty easy to build,
and they're always going to come for them first. So
I mean, what would I actually believe one of those
cadres is stupid enough to think revolution is a good
thing and that like violent revolution would actually be in
their favor, But.
Speaker 2: I mean, how do.
Speaker 1: Is there any way to avoid it? At this point?
And I'm not talking about like a widespread revolution. I
don't think there'll be widespread revolution, but I think pockets
of it everywhere. You know, your Portland's, your California's, your Illinois,
your places that are you know, blue and blue to
the point where they may not be completely blue. I mean,
you know, just look at Illinois. I mean, so they're
in Illinois is all farmland and it's all red, but
you have this concentrated population. How do they avoid that?
Speaker 2: At this point? I think that the most likely outcome
for the country as a whole is sort of the long,
slow degeneration and if they're able to manage decline, which
is what I think leaders in the West want more
than anything, is they want to keep the institutions in place.
They want to keep the system running as advertised or
at least as much as possible they want. But few
outbreaks of large scale political violence that aren't just play acting,
you know, Occupy Wall Street type stuff where it's like, oh,
look they're having a demonstration about equality or whatever. Isn't
that cute? But nothing that really threatens anything The long,
slow decline is the most likely outcome, but that outcome
is still a lot less likely than it was ten
years ago. I think Fukuyama's idea that we really are
at the end of history is now up to question
in a way that it wasn't even five years ago.
And the big question becomes whether the people who the
elite factions of the left can keep their own radicals
in charge, because there doesn't seem to be a way
to talk these people down. You said earlier, what happens next, Well,
a lot of it depends on whether this spate of
political violence continues, because yeah, you may get another attack
on ice, you may get another attack on police or
something like that. But we had a lot of that
in twenty twenty two and that didn't even lead to
a right wing counter reaction. But the reaction to the
Charlie Kirk assassination has been something. You have people who
are openly celebrating it on their LinkedIn no op sect whatsoever.
It's never even occurred to them that they should be
physically afraid, or even be afraid for their careers. Openly
celebrating the murder of a young man in front of
his family and It's not hard to imagine that somebody
who gets all gassed up on new movie in theaters,
or a new TV show or video game, or political
speech or us on Piker giving a stream where he's
saying you need to kill these people or whatever else,
that somebody is going to get gassed up and take
a shot at somebody else. And I think that we're
only like one or two violent acts away until you
get into that tit for tat political violence, and that's
when things really start to kick off, because then you
start getting into questions of can you trust the justice
system to be impartial? Can you trust that you are
going to see a killer brought to justice even if
a lot of people in that area have political sympathy
with what he did, Because as we've seen over the
last ten years, when it comes to nonviolent political activism,
the answer to all those questions is no. I mean,
we all just kind of understand that whether you get
justice or not is totally dependent on what city you're
in and the political sympathies of the people who are
going to be on the jury and who are in
that area. So I think that you will probably get
the slow decline. You probably will not get this huge crisis.
You probably will not even get years of lead, let
alone Spanish civil war. But it wouldn't take much to
push us onto that timeline. I think it probably wouldn't
take us more than two or three more targeted killings.
And you have a radicalized base that has access to
weaponry of millions of people, some of whom are completely
insane because they're transgender, and they're essentially just cooked from
online propaganda as well as whatever medical things they're ghosting
themselves with, and any number of those people could set
the whole thing off. It could be happening right now
as we're talking.
Speaker 1: Well, I know you have other stuff today, so I'm
gonna ask you one more question. And you already touched
on this a little bit. How does rice play into
the future. I mean, people are.
Speaker 2: This could be yeah, let me let me.
Speaker 1: Let me throw a little more. And you know, people
are organizing locally, people are you know, they're they're trying
to do everything they can, and I I just see
that the way things are playing out. And you know,
you go back to everybody forgets about Shiloh Hendrix and
how important that was, and I think, you know, the
fatigue that we always talk about is setting is setting
in more and more every day. So what what does
the future look like when it comes to people just
living out their everyday life and just trying to survive
if it really does you know, if we really start
cooking as far as like revolutionary activity starts.
Speaker 2: Race is the thing that people are going to come
to last, but it's also the most important. It's at
the root of everything else. And if somebody tells me
what religion they are, if somebody tells me what political sympathies,
what political ideology they have, none of that really tells
me very much. If they tell me about what they
think about race, now I know who they are. Now
I know who their friends are, who their enemies are,
how they can play out in any given situation. But
that said, people have a lot of things they got
to work through before they get to that point. And
right now, on the right, when you see people throwing
around labels like oh, christian nationalism, okay, which Christianity, I mean,
a lot of this seems attempts to be able to
organize tribally but not to have to touch race because
we still just don't want to do that. But to me,
identity is not just who you are in terms of blood,
and it's not just the inherent culture cultural mindset that
you've been brought up with. It's more than that. It's
also is socially constructed in the sense that it's what
power does to you. And I think San Francis was
fundamentally right when he said that when the enemies of
the West come to kill us, it is not whether
that's literally come to kill us, or whether that's in
the political sense of confiscating our wealth and taking away
our power, that kind of thing. It's not going to
be because we're conservatives. It's not going to be because
we're Christians. It's not going to be because we're Americans.
It's not going to be because we're capitalists. It's going
to be because we're white. That is what animates them.
That is what unites the whole left wing coldition. Going further,
that is what defines left and right. Left and right
are meaningful terms in America today and the West today,
because that tells me what you think about race. That's
what it is to be on the right, That's what
it is to be on the left. And the left
is the one pushing this forward. I mean, the right
is like five years behind the left as far as
political radicalization goes. People talk about the radicalization of the right,
but if you look at any graph where you see
political extremism over time, you see that the left has
radicalized far more quickly than the right has. The right
is still more or less where it was a few
years ago. And what we were talking about before, with
some factions of the right maybe willing to accept some
edgy aesthetics or maybe even the occasional edgy gesture from
Mussolini or whatever else. I mean, that's still very much
a minority, and still very much young people in situations
where they don't think they're going to get in trouble.
In the left, it is right out there. We need
to kill these people. This is anti fascism. These people
need to be silenced. Here's Mark Bray, author of the
Anti Fascist Handbook, which talks about silencing Trump's supporter, is
physically here. He is on Network News, is explaining to
you why anti fascism is good. Here he is explaining
to you why the Trump administration is such a serious
problem to your freedom. These people are going to try
to impose their will on us. If the left was smart,
it would calm these people down, play for time, wait
for demographics to change, and they're going to get everything
they want. But I don't think they can calm their
own people down. And I think one of the reasons
they can't calm their own people down is because you're
still in modern America, where people are looking for meaning,
people are looking for purpose, people are looking for community,
and unfortunately, one of the best ways to do that
is to become an Internet hero by acting out violently
in the name of some ideology, because a significant chunk
of people are going to call you a hero and
are going to praise you and say what you did
was the right thing. I think that if we end
up in a timeline where we do get existential political conflict,
it is not going to start out based on race.
It is not going to start out where people are
saying we are doing this because of race, although certainly
you will see leftists saying we're doing this to fight
white supremacy or whatever else. But if it really picks
up very quickly, it will become all about race. And
the metaphor that I would use, or the comparison I
should say that I would use is the way you
often bring up the Spanish Civil War. Jose Antonio Prima
de Rivera, at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War
fairly marginal figure in jail. The Falange was not very big.
We only had a few thousand guys. But when things
kicked off, it grew very, very very fast, and Franco
had to almost incorporate it as a pillar of his
regime and the ideological legitimacy, because when things hit the fan,
that's what people turn to. And I think that's how
it's going to work with white identity. We all vaguely
sense that we are under attack as whites. We don't
quite have the vocabulary to define why we should be
allowed to defend ourselves as whites. But as the attacks
continue to come, and I don't think the left can
prevent itself from stopping those attacks, people are going to
get more and more comfortable talking in racial terms, and
eventually they're going to start organizing on racial terms.
Speaker 1: Then how do you deal with the fact that so
many of the people that are against so many of
the people that are calling for white death are white,
that they are considered allies. And you know, I know
a lot of people who listen to my show right
now are going to go they're not white man, you
know what they are?
Speaker 2: Right right? I'm not aside from those people, yes, aside
from that, Yeah, I think these.
Speaker 1: People are white, right.
Speaker 2: I think that the most obvious thing is, like what
I said before, when you look at liberal whites, they
have a negative ingroup bias. Yes they are white. But
it's the same way that there were certain capitalists who
favored the Bolshevik Revolution, that there were aristocrats who went
along with the French Revolution. They consciously see the themselves.
They will tell you that they are anti white. They
will see what they are doing as a noble sacrifice.
They somewhere in the back of their mind probably expect
to be able to maintain personal power and status throughout
this revolutionary process. But as far as their political activism goes,
they still think that they are ultimately opposing whiteness, which
is a moral and just thing to do. Now, what
happens to them to some extent is not really our concern.
I think of the brother of the king in the
French Revolution, Philip A. Galatea right, who went along was
basically indispensable toward getting the revolution off the ground, changed
his name Jettison to his title, changed his last name
to Equality, and what ended up happening. He ended up
getting guillotined because at the end of the day, you
are what you are. And as these ideologies are taken
to their logical conclusion, nobody trusts a trader, even the
people who benefit from that treason. And so white people
who say they are anti white, they're just enemies. I mean,
traders are a thing, and traders have always been a thing.
And what motivates a trader, whether it's a misguided sense
of short term gain, whether it's a misguided moral sense,
whether it's simply sadism or spite, doesn't really matter to me.
I mean, there's only one way to deal with traders.
Speaker 1: All right, Kevin Deanna, tell everybody where they can find
your work right now.
Speaker 2: Well, you can find it at American Renaissance. That's amrend
dot com. That's where all my articles and that's also
where every episode of Identity Politics is published. On Odyssey
and Rumble. We'll try it on YouTube for now, let's
see how long that lasts, and then on x you
can find me as vdare Jamescat.
Speaker 1: Always appreciate it.
Speaker 2: Thank you very much, thank you for having me on.
Really appreciate it.