Speaker 1: Welcome back to the Inquisition Podcast. Everybody, the panel reconvenes
with a very special guest, Darryl Cooper from Martyr Mate
is here.
Speaker 2: Darryl, thank you so much for joining us. Man, it's
great to have you.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's great to finally be on here with you guys.
Every time I listen to a show, I'm jealous that
I'm not here so.
Speaker 1: Well, your name's come up since before the show even
started as one of the guys we'd like to join
the panel someday. So I'm glad to bring it to
fruition today. And you've been you've been on Twitter recently.
I mean you've been on Twitter a while now, making
some excellent post and fighting the good fight. But a
couple tweets you made the other day really grab me
and Storm his attention, and we started circulating it around
the group and talking about it. It's stuff that we've
talked about and stuff that we want to get to
in the future more as well. So it was a
good occasion to have you on. So I'd like to
read the tweet for everybody. I will link Darryl's Twitter
in the show notes. I'm sure you already follow him though, So, Darryl,
the other day you tweeted, America is not an outpost
of Europe in the New World. Europe is dying and
sadly will be overrun by Africa and the Middle East
within the century. America is a new civilization and gestation,
and the form it will take is still obscure. Our
natural place is as the leader of Western hemispheric civilization,
and in five hundred years, when we're appointing ambassadors to
the European Caliphate, that will seem obvious to everyone. And
then in parentheses you add, sorry, Euros, I'm pulling for you.
I'm just not optimistic. You're always welcome here though. So, Daryl,
this is something I agree with wholeheartedly. I'd like to
sort of elaborate and expand on a lot of these points,
but I also have to throw in here before I
let you take over that I assume you got some
pushback for this.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, it's definitely the view that you know that
that meme with the cartoon of the guy surrounded by
swords at his neck, it's the one that gets me
that the most on the right wing, probably more than anything,
and understandably so it's a pretty hot take, and you know,
it's one that sort of flies in the face of
I guess what should say is sort of the consensus
right wing position and has been for you know, for
a long time. So I get it, and you know,
I put it up to be inflammatory, I guess, to
provoke discussion.
Speaker 2: You know, it's a hard truth.
Speaker 1: And the very first comment that you responded to is
Europe is dying because it is occupied by America. Now,
this is I think maybe a good place to start
with this tweet. What do you think he means by that?
Speaker 3: Well, if you look, I mean, Thomas has talked about
this a lot. I mean, you know, I think that
even leaving aside the outcomes of the world wars, you know,
those two things could have happened in Europe could still
be surviving if America hadn't occupied and controlled the European
discourse for as long as it has. I mean, you
look throughout the Cold War period, and I mean up
to this very day. You see George Floyd getting you know,
getting dead in Minneapolis, and you see protests BLM, protests
in London and Brussels and all these places where it
makes no sense at all, just the American superculture has
kind of been exported, you know to places, just like
back in the sixties and seventies when black power got
exported to the Caribbean and the blacks there started attacking
the Indians for things that really had no you know,
cultural valance in those places just a decade or two before.
You know, our cultural domination, and in the case of Germany,
you know, our literal domination of their media and education
system and everything is really just you know, created over
the course of a couple of generations. A culture in Europe,
not only a political culture, but you know, to a
large extent. I mean, we've got our guys over there.
There are a lot of good people over there who
are trying to fight, but uh, you know, the society
itself that that really just doesn't have the the wherewithal
to resist their own their their own suicide, you know.
And I think that, you know, again, even if the
two World Wars had gone the way they had, if
America had gone home after the Second World War, and
you know, the Soviet Union hadn't rolled over the place obviously,
then I think Europe would probably be fine. But it's
that multiple generations of indoctrination and just cultural osmosis. I mean,
the probably the clearest and starkest example of this, uh
you know, of this process. It's just the fact that
all of the countries that were behind the Iron Curtain,
you know, living under communist internationalism, and you know, just
they all have a sense of identity that they are
still willing to hold on to and defend. And sure,
part of it is probably because they were living under
the subjugation of the Soviet Union for a while and
so they had a more recent nationalist outburst that sort
of you know that still lingers. But really I think
it's largely that they were protected from the American cultural contamination.
And when you look at just the line of demarcation
in Europe in terms of the countries that are willing
and able to defend themselves and those that aren't, I mean,
it is the Iron Curtain, you know.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 1: I know, Thomas and Pete's time is somewhat limited, so
I'll let you guys come in first to respond.
Speaker 4: God Thomas, Yeah, And the problem is there's an intellectual
poverty among what passes for the right, especially on the
question of Europe, because there's a there's a conceptual of
literacy there. You know, Europe went down at Stalingrad.
Speaker 5: It was done. It's over.
Speaker 4: This thing was decided eighty years ago, and the entire
purpose of the war effort was the annihilation of Europe
as a discrete cultural form and historical phenomena and the
can comaa eradication of its ability to massivelly assert itself
on the world stage and power political terms. You know
that that was the entire purpose of the war. I
salagon our friend Kevin Vianna about this yesterday on his pod.
Speaker 6: You know, so.
Speaker 4: You've got this population of people these days who are
having this kind of conversation with themselves that has nothing
to do with historical, conceptual realities or statig realities on
the ground in the military sense, you know, because they're
their epistemic priors are totally wrong. You know, they're acting like, well,
you know, World War two was bad, but you know
the problem with Europe is that these liberals, you know,
took over things and we have a bad immigration policy,
like it's the whole thing. I mean, I don't even
know where to start with these people, because again, they're
they're so out of touch with the reality of things,
and that's why you know, well.
Speaker 5: What's underway right now.
Speaker 4: I don't want to spin this so often to in
a discussion at current events and military imperatives of the major.
Speaker 5: Actors they're in.
Speaker 4: But you know the reason why this design is crusade
against the Russian Federation. There's a deeper catalyst for that too,
because you know, jude have used their primary enemy as Russia.
They always they hate them on that there's a deeply
coded racial animosity towards them. The more immediate catalyst was
obviously the loss incurred by IDF for the hands of
the armforce of the Russian Federation his Blah and the
then extant Syrian Arab army. You know, obviously that situation
is resolved in my opinion for the worst. But the
you know that was the immediate catalyst was returning to
serve and permanently tying down the Russian armed forces on
their own frontier. But more broadly, you know, it was
an avenue of ingress to uh, you know, preclude and
destroy the Burgening complex and independence between Europe and the
Russian Federation, because that's the only path the European livration,
you know, And just an example of what I was
talking about, the conceptual literacy of the supposed right wing
this or otherwise, almost nobody talks about this. They don't
know what they're talking about. They have no idea of
the actual catalyzing variables with respect to the you know,
zionis aggression against the Russian Federation. They have no idea
what Merkele was trying to accomplish with, you know what
was actually a pretty masterful.
Speaker 5: Bit of.
Speaker 4: Intriguing, you know, whereby she took Germany off of nuclear
power as so that you know, she could generate this
deep independence with the gas prom under auspices of hey,
you know, we're we're going green. You know, that's whole
other subject matter. You know, Miracle was raised in the
d DR. I mean, she she understands exactly what the
situation is. But the war against the Russian Federation is
a part of the continuing racial war against Europe, the
goal of which is the literal annihilation of Europe, just
as uh, you know it always has been. And uh,
that was the raison I'm dead for the Second World War.
That was that was the reason for the occupation. Everything
that afflicts Europe today is approximately caused by the social
engineering regime, which is, was, and is tailored as a
racial assault on Europe qua Europe, the purpose of which
is to eradicate it as an identitarian and historical and
political phenomenon. And anybody doesn't see this isn't in the game.
They're monumentally ignorant.
Speaker 6: You know.
Speaker 4: The American situation is a bit different, but you know
that that's a whole other, related but discrete subject matter.
So yeah, the then I'll stop talking in a minute.
But the the problem is twofold. The problem is, you know,
I mean, we're uh, there's the there's a practical issue
of you know, for the Europeans, they're they're they're they're
at a disadvantage that we are not, you know, and
they're availed to a they're they're availed to a penal
system that can quite literally incarcerate them without any resort
to even superficial due process. But also, and the more
deeper problem is you can't and I mean I cited
Gusty Spence the other week when I was talking when
I was on the panel for the Portland event. You know,
you if there's not a conceptual grounding of your cadre
or actual or potential, you're pissing into the wind, and
I can I can count that number of guys on
one hand who have any kind of profile at all
in in in terms of potential European vanguard, because the
these these people are completely fucked up in terms of
their conceptual orientation. They don't know what the fuck is
going on. You know, it's a real problem. But that's
that those are my thoughts, kind of add a glance.
Speaker 7: I think a big part of it is is that
there are people, even on what would be coin the
dissident right, that have bought into the fact that populism
it is a way forward and can be like the
way forward, when all populism is is just another form
of liberalism, and liberalism is what's got what's got us here,
so you know, whereas populism, like you know, like we
always say, Trump Trump, demand doesn't mean anything, but the
fact that Trump was elected means that people people are
starting to think differently. But still, when you look at
any kind of populist movement, any kind of you know,
anyone saying the only way you're going to get any
real change for you is through Trump, well, these people
have lost They don't understand exactly they don't understand what
Thomas is talking about with the last eighty years brought
to us. They are they're bringing a band you know,
they're they're bringing a band aid to a.
Speaker 6: Weary To recognize that Pete, they would have to acknowledge
who brought this to us. And I think there in
lies the difficulty or the reluctance for them.
Speaker 5: That's part of it. One's in a distint, right, no quick, I.
Speaker 4: Mean yeah, part of it is that there's tremendous pressures
within the psychological environment to not identify the conferences certain
features of this thing. But also it's just something that's
beyond most people. You know, it's not even a matter
of intelligence. I mean, yeah, if you know, somebody who's
really stupid obviously isn't gonna be able to perceive the
nuances of high politics.
Speaker 5: But like, people either get this or they don't.
Speaker 4: They can either perceive these kinds of things that they can't,
you know, and most people they're just not built for
that kind of activity, you know, on that top. And
I mostly one of the balls either because you're marking
yourself out as an outlaw and a disidant element in
a real sense.
Speaker 7: Yeah, go ahead, well, there's also the fact that we
live in a culture where, you know, people like Darryl
can make a difference with what he's doing and the
amount of people he's reaching and the quality of people
that he's reaching, which would be people with the means
to actually who have the means to initiate change on
a fundamental level. But also you have this this creator
culture where if I meant, if I say the wrong thing,
I'm going I'm not going to be able to continue
my income. I maybe get fired from you know, I
may get fired from the you know, from Salem Media
or Jailly Wire or something like that. So there are
a lot of people, I mean, I can I'm not
gonna name names, but I can name the names of
a couple people who know for a fact the spirit
of what of what is taking this over, but they
they will not say it because it's gonna it's going
to affect their income. So yes, I have to deal
with that.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and part of it too.
Speaker 4: There there's also a subset of people who have this
delusion that somehow these things are a big secrets and
you've got to wake up normies and avail them to
these secrets. I mean, that's why I hate like the
red pill metaphor. It's fucking stupid. And like, that's also
not how your point is not how politics works.
Speaker 5: There's not.
Speaker 4: I mean, yeah, the body politics plays an essential role
at scale in any revolutionary paradigm. But it's the idea
that the political realities are a secret and somehow, you know, uh,
you avail people to some you know, to some road
to Damascus awakening, and then everything changes because there's this
kinetic outburst of corrective forces. That that's not how things work.
And also it's not everything the regime has done the
last eighty year has been un like, it's been totally
above board. There's nothing secret about it, you know, I mean,
that's it's that's that's basic as hell too perceive things
that way anyway. But in the case at Bar, it's
literally the opposite of how it's presented.
Speaker 5: I just learned what it's seeing with it.
Speaker 6: To Thomas's point, not only is it one above board
and in full public view, it's done with the basically
the global asing managerial superstructure. It is functionally how they
operate right like that there's I don't know how you
would frame this, Thomas, but since post nineteen eighty five.
I would say, when you had the bond vigilantes and
the merger and acquisitions craze, right, it literally took over
the financial market for about ten years. You took five
to six thousand private companies split private and public companies
split between Europe and the United States, and you turned
them into less than five hundred. Right, all of these
boards got folded in on each other. None of these boards.
Actually people that sit on these boards aren't even the
shareholders themselves, right, They're an accountant or an attorney that
represents the shareholder. Right. So the person that owns these
controlling stakes and these interests can't even be bothered to
actually vote their shares. It's all done by proxy. So
these people live detached lives from you know, capital, and
you kind of see this merger of both the American
I mean, you can call them American, but whatever, the
American and European elites, right where like America's capital class
has viewed itself as the enemy of American people, the
exact same thing in Europe. And what's basically happened after
World War Two. I mean, we talk about the Nuremberg regime,
but we don't ever really get a chance to talk
about is the Nurmberg financial regime. Say something miraculous happened,
it's the it's the Keynesian regime, well kind of.
Speaker 4: I mean, and in broad strokes, I think that's exactly
what it is. I mean that Sumpter, I definitely believe
that's what it was. And everybody who saw at a
corrective solution is in dialogue with keys, you know, whether
you're talking about Rothbart or Trumpeter or even U or
even Freeman.
Speaker 5: I think it's an over So check this out, go ahead.
Speaker 6: Nine tenths of every dollar in the world is printed
overseas and exists overseas.
Speaker 5: Right.
Speaker 6: It's printed by offshore banks and indexed to a European
interest rate. This is like your credit card, your mortgage.
Up until the last you know, year and a half,
those interest rates were set up by someone in London, right,
So for every and when I say dollar printed, I
don't mean actual printing press right, I mean banks lending
money to individuals or businesses denominated in dollars, which is
effectively how our banks print money. Here, nine tenths of
the dollars exists overseas, printed by overseas banks, and what
that's effectively given these people is infinite money to create
a really a bureaucratic transnational state to where like to
what I think is very funny because often you say
like it's globalism versus the resistance, and in a way,
I think globalism is dying. But in another way, I
think you're right. Right, So when Darryl points out that
America has quite is basically distinct different and also the
continuation of European culture, you've basically seen a financial bifurcation, right.
So basically what has been the Nuremberg regime, both political
and financial, has now separated itself from the United States. Right.
So for I don't want to get into like sofur
or libor, but in twenty nineteen, the euro dollar market,
which is this offshore money printing dollar printing machine that exists,
was effectively cut off from the United States. Right, So
basically your money that those dollar bills that you printed
over there aren't allowed to come here anymore. And it
was a big, huge deal. Like they tried to they
whipped up fake insider trading scandals against Jerome Powell. They
did everything to try and I mean Nancy, sorry, Kamala
Harris and John McCain high fived on the Senate floor
when they filibuster the introduction of the US introducing its
own interest rates that only US money has been introduced
or it can be indexed to like Nancy Pelosi adjourned
Congress six months early to not reappoint Jerome Powell and
introduce this system. So basically what we're seeing is a
financial fight that mirrors the fight that you're talking about. Well, yeah,
the conflict diet is identical to the one that Daryl
lays out. There's basically global capital is doing what you
guys are talking about. But unbeknownst to anyone else.
Speaker 4: The term political economy is somewhat redundant because there's a
political aspects to all macroorgonomics. But the nerveerk system is
purely political. There's permutations of other human affairs, sociological structures
and a lake they're impacted, but it is a it
is a purely and nakedly political structure, and it's one
hundred percent ethical in nature as its subject matter. The
economic scheme must serves that political structure absolutely, but it's uh,
they're not they're not synonymous and that's important. And the
reason why I say it's the Keynes regime is because
even when even when America, even when neoliberalism became uh
yass's based in Chicago school economics, which is qualified monitorism,
even when that became the consensus, you know, in like
nineteen eighty five, eighty six, eighty seven, there's still keys
and assumptions that absolutely code and color decision making with
regards to national economic policy.
Speaker 5: And this is important.
Speaker 4: When I say global When I say globalism, is the
reality in the state is dying and you're a buddle,
is that globalism is dying?
Speaker 5: Yeah, this kind of.
Speaker 4: This kind of Clintonian neoliberalism. Nobody believes in that anymore.
And this uh, this, you know, the kind of the
kind of model proposed by these PNAC type guys. We're
staging kind of a comeback. That's over with, that's dead.
What I mean by globalism is what guys like Emmanuel
Wallerstein refer to, you know, owing to the fluidity and
mobility a capital, owing to the reality of a telecom
and WOI competent and dependence is facilitated by that. This
is just the reality, you know, And unless there is
some sort of truly punctuated crisis event where the grid
went down on planetary scale. This is inevitable, it's not
gonna it's you know that that's the new reality. Politically, Yeah,
what's There's the new reality is that devolved kind of
localism And that's what this is a perfect convergence of
circumstances that you know, advantages the resistance, including us.
Speaker 5: That's what I'm talking about.
Speaker 6: Well, in that case, I would say that I agree,
except for in that punctuated crisis event is going to
be basically the financial grid coming down, right, So we're
going to see the exchange and free trafficking and information
and you know, anything of digital means. But what we're
just now starting to see, like right now it's at
the World Bank, I, m F and G seven stage right,
but pretty much everyone in finance at a high level.
Everyone is planning on capital controls coming down within the
next two years, so money will not be able to
leave Europe. Specifically, it's the Europeans that are pushing this,
or the European elite class that are pushing it. China
seems to be on board. So we're going to see digital,
We're going to see an information globalism, to which I
think is just going to accelerate. To your point, but
I think capital for the first time is going to
not be able to move freely. This is why you
see a lot of a lot of money fleeing, right,
because basically a lot of money this is another big
driver of the inflation that we're seeing. It's not so
much just money printing, its flight capital.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 6: So if you're a Chinese guy with a couple of
million dollars outside of the Chinese system, the only thing
you care about is getting it into the United States,
particularly real estate, right, which is another one of these
big drivers. It's not just black Rock buying up all
the homes.
Speaker 4: Think our exchange rate mercantilist anyway, So there's always there's
always a rent.
Speaker 6: Yeah. So basically all the money is scared and running
home or running to the US for safe haven. Says
what it's about to come.
Speaker 5: Next, Stormy.
Speaker 1: I want to bring something up to your point about
Jerome Powell, and this ties back into Daryl's original point,
which was with the release of these Epstein emails, did
you get to read that email I sent you?
Speaker 6: Yeah? Yeah, I think that's very interesting.
Speaker 1: Go ahead, an email between Steve Bannon and Epstein, where
Epstein first is disparaging Jerome Powell because he's not a
PhD in economics, and he's kind of using this as
an excuse to say, oh, he's going to be outclassed
by everybody around him. Then he goes to say that
we need to workshop ways to get him out. We
need to get him out as the chairman of the FED.
We do not want this guy as the chairman of
the FED. And as soon as I read that, I
sent that directly to you.
Speaker 6: That's what's really money. Is the thing that Jerome Powell
broke was how we basically rebuilt Europe through the Marshall Plan.
But the reason that we didn't have massive inflation and
the reason why we didn't have a collapse in asset prices,
so we didn't have inflation or deflation. Right, So we're
the only nation in the history of the world that's
ever done war and not have either inflation or deflation
immediately afterwards. And not only did we do war, but
we did war on a scale that nobody ever had
done war before. Unfortunately it was against our own race,
but in our effort to rebuild Europe, to try and
fight communism. We didn't give them gold, and we didn't
print money to give them. We gave them the We
gave one bank, it was supposed to be the Bank
of England right the ability to lend money in dollars.
But some funny enough, some Epstein like shit happened, and
somehow that right to print money got given to a
private UK bank. It's called Midlands Trust Bank, owned by
of course the usual suspects, but within basically ten years
being able to lend at five percent when every other
bank on the British Isles is forced to lend at
fifteen to twenty percent the actual reflective cost of capital. Right,
you basically had a license to print money. And within
ten years this Midlands Trust Bank had either controlling interest
through convertible notes, so bonds is in like, I won't
show up on the cap table if you try and
see who owns what shares because I own bonds that
I can flip into shares whenever I want to. It's
a very stealthy way of controlling something. Or they just
owned the shares outright to where this bank that no
one had ever fucking heard of, effectively rolled up the
entire UK financial system in less than ten years and
then moved on to the continent. So by the time
I'm the seventies rolled up this, you know, magic dollar
printer had given a small group of people infinite control
over the European capital base. So yeah, it's that's why
that's why I said it's kind of like a Nuremberg
financial regime, because it got rolled up it got rolled
out at the same time.
Speaker 4: Oh no, And it's absolutely I'm not trying to be
finantic or split hair is It's just it's political economy
needs to be distinguished between ethical and ideological structures, particularly
ones narrowly tailored to realize social engineering ambitious, you know,
And there's something that it's kind of it's both. It's
both more complicated and also discreetly adjacent, you know, Like
I said, they're okay, are arguably arguably ethical. Uh, liberalism
like Enlightenment liberalism is economic fe a He's keys, okay,
But that's it's got it's got to be distinguished from
it's got to be distinguished from the ideological program that
was enshrined at the by the internetional militaries for funeral
and and everything they're in.
Speaker 5: Uh, that was my only point. I think this is important.
Speaker 6: Well, we still got you on the line, because you
know your time is limited. I'd like to hear you
and Darryl. You and Darryl talk a bit more about
Daryl's comments about America being kind of the continuation in
the future because it of European cultural civilization, because it
does echo what we've heard from YACKI just the solutions
are backwards. Well, he diagnoses the same. And you mentioned once,
that mentioned several times that Hitler in his comments to
the Germans is like basically the best of Europe went
to this place in that place had infinity resources.
Speaker 5: Yeah, and the best the best mentioned material.
Speaker 4: Migrated here too in his estimation, and just like a
massive percentage of the German of folks lage.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 4: So, Yeah, America, America was and is the future if
a no other reason then for what we just enumerated
and the fact that still the American continent contains about
half of this planet's natural resources. If Central Asia was
a continent, it would be a rival to that, and
probably about a third of our main natural resources are there.
Speaker 5: But my point.
Speaker 4: Being you know that this is one of the reasons
is as nine when he's midway. Zionis historians say, like
Hitler was a nationalist, like no nobody thought in herds
of nationalism anymore, at least of all Hitler, who was
quite literally strived to zeitgeist, you know, Europe had to
become a super or die. And dialectical terms, yeah, I
uh I, you know, not not only Yaqui was correct
about the American situation, but also a lot of these
lost cause historians. What underlay the war between the states
in dialectical and historical terms, was, you know, whether whether
there was going to continue to be this uh, you know,
uh Anglo Celtic kind of cavalier element that viewed themselves
as uh, that viewed their lineage as you know high
you know, in highly racial terms and in deeply historical terms,
and specifically as a population whose political understanding was forged
by the War three Kingdoms. And then moving forward, we're
going to guide the country's destiny with an understanding that
you know, they they were the heirs to you know,
European and in Indo Areyan cultural destiny.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 4: One of the reasons, part part of the seed of
what became the New Dealer ideology. It wasn't exclusively uh
you know, some exotic import you know, of of the ashkenausm.
Speaker 5: I mean, that was part of it.
Speaker 4: But you know, this understanding of you know, we can
create a telluric utopia by ending history and stripping away
was viewed as you know, the burdensome aspects and prejudices
you know of the historical experience, you know, and and
in that way truly secede from Europe and realize the
ambition of the city on a hill by shipping the
final trappings of you know what tethered us to the
old continents and to Britain, you know. And obviously that
viewpoint one out in terms of power, political ambition, and
the trajectory therein I think, yeah, Americans are we are
the standard bearers of what remains of Western civilization. But
the days where it would have been possible to capture
the power apparatus of a superpower and realize that in
you know, in terms of practice on the world stage,
like that's over with, you know, that belongs to the
twentieth century. So, I mean, that's my view of it.
But we're so we're sort of talking about two different
things within a the the common nexus of a of
subject matter. You know, that's the sort answer. I realized
that's not fatuely short, but it's a huge freaking question.
Speaker 6: Yeah, Darryl, what were your thoughts when you I mean, yes,
you're kind of ship posting, but I imagine it's also
something that you firmly believe. How do you imagine the
American continent and the people therein being the continuation of
European cultural civilization, if not ethnic civilization.
Speaker 3: Sure, I mean, yeah, I do mean it, But I
would say I'm not married to the idea. It's something
that I've been kind of wrestling with for several years now.
But yeah, it's a serious idea. I'm not just ship posting,
I guess, you know, I think of America as the
successor of Europe in the sense that you know, through
aeniis Rome was a successor of Troy, where the links
over the centuries will almost become mythical as opposed to
simply ethnic. I think I just think that's kind of inevitable, right,
I mean, you arrive on this gigantic continent and there's
a bunch of European powers who were all in competition
for it, and you know, the people who came here
from the British Isles had a sense of their own
historical destiny that had continuity going back into the past.
But as we resorted to mass immigration, wave after wave,
generation after generation from first all over Europe and now
course the rest of the world, it's sort of induced
a kind of amnesia, permanent amnesia in America, where we
don't have this long term sense of our past, going
back into our European past, a long term sense of
just our historical destiny. It's rooted in the past. It's
something that you know, a lot of a lot of
people have commented on that America kind of lives in
an eternal present. And this wasn't true for everybody. For
all of American history. Even after the waves of immigrants
started rolling in, you still had this Anglo leadership class
that was in control of, you know, very important institutions
that it was using to select and integrate new members
from these immigrants groups that were coming in and sort
of work them into the dough. But by the time
you get up to the sixties and seventies, you know
that that class really kind of gave up the ghost.
And whether that happened just due to you know, a
lack of talent after a certain generation, or whether it
was just they simply got swamped by the hyper development
of of of the managerial system in America, you know,
and and that the bureaucracy and the managerial system sort
of became self aware and shoved aside this traditional leadership
class that really had a sense of personal proprietorship over
over the country and its future. You know, I think, uh,
I mean, yeah, I don't even know who the who
the Rockefellers or Harriman's or any of those people would
even would even be these days.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 3: And so once that happened, once they I don't want
to necessarily say advocated, but once you know, they lost
control of the system.
Speaker 6: At Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 3: At Pearl Harbor, yeah sure, but familiar with the business plot,
Yeah yeah, sure.
Speaker 6: So yeah, I know an awful lot about that because
it's kind of like overlapped with family history, and you
get basically, it's the only time you had all of
these men on side, right, So you have this organization
that first they tried to do it, I mean politely,
and they created something called the American Liberty League. It
was JP Morgan, sorry, Jack Morgan, John Pierrepont's son, frequent
op ed contributor to the Dearborn Independent. By the way,
you had Henry Ford, you had his arch nemesis. Like
these these men committed you know, not just corporate espionage,
but corporate you know, I don't know what you'd call it.
But these men burnt each other's factories down, and they
said if they have they all each said, you know,
if I ever encounter so and So, you know C. K. Rank,
it would be like Fiver encounter you know Henry I,
you know, I'll shoot him or this, that and the
third Like these men hated each other, but C. K.
Rinkin and Henry Ford, right, they teamed up Iree and
Pierre DuPont. And you had Nelson and John Junior Rockefeller
and their arch nemesis at the time, one Huey P. Long.
You had Al Smith, who was the president of the
Democratic Party and the previous run up basically the previous
presidential candidate prior to Roosevelt, and the head of the
Republican Party, all on this organization called the American Liberty League.
And Al Al Smith's speech to the American Liberty League
you can still find and it basically lays out the
conflict diad and he is very very angry because he
well he says specifically, he's like, you know, we put
mister Roosevelt into office thinking we were going to get
a democratic candidate, and what we didn't see is the
he says Eastern European Bolsheviks. But I think we all
know what he means. That he brought in he put
he basically took none of the advisors that he was,
none of the cabinet members that he had all made
deals to bring in and replace them all with Eastern
European Bolsheviks. And these these men are scared, like if
you read if you read that that speech, they're terrified.
Speaker 5: They're like an end of the country to get that yeah, yeah, no,
go ahead.
Speaker 6: I was just saying that these guys, I mean, these
are some of the most powerful men in the world,
and they are terrified, Like you can hear it in
their speeches that they basically view like, oh shit, this
guy lied to us, and he's filling the country or
filling the the executive branch with the same people we
just saw teardown Czarist Russia, Like, are we going to
lose our country because he's basically trying to listen to
World War and they were trying. They had, I mean,
they probably would have successfully got him out. After Pearl Harbor.
Speaker 4: Cornell Hall was uh, you know he was he was
the establishment pettig reed, remember, of the of the deep Cabinet,
but even he was he was a he was a
lame duck anyway. But yeah, it's uh, it's very above bored. Well,
I mean, just like packing the court. Roosevelt made some
flippant comment, you know when I asked, like why all
of his picks from the federal jud this year were Jewish,
you know about how well, you know, it's not my
fault that these men make excellent lawyers. There some something
equally idiotic.
Speaker 6: But yeah, who was that Supreme Court justice that was
basically puppeteering him around Frankfurter, Yeah, strength, Yeah, picked the
supposed Republican. Republican Supreme Court justice basically gave FDR his
marching orders. And what an FDR. We talked about whether
it's abdication. What FDR did is he immediately created a
whole bunch of financial securities departments and agencies. Right, So
you had the creation of the sec you had the
creation of the Financial Crimes Division out of the Department
of Justice, and these organizations were specifically to go after
Anglo power. Oh yeah, you guys immediately, yep, exactly, the.
Speaker 5: Anti banker for these guys did.
Speaker 2: Real what you're talking about.
Speaker 6: This is in the thirties, okay, Right, so you're.
Speaker 1: Saying that the Pearl Harbor was the last time the
Anglo elite were all on side until.
Speaker 6: Yeah, basically during the thirties, right during the first FDR administration,
these men realized that they had a huge fucking problem
and a problem that would potentially be able to yank
control of the country away and take it in a
very Unamerican direction. They noticed who it was. They noticed
they were all Eastern European immigrats if you look at
you know. Anyways, So what FDR did immediately was create
a bunch of executive organizations that started targeting their power centers. Right. So,
you had the creation of the SEC, you had the
creation of of FINSEN, and I can't remember the other
there's like two or three other financial adjacent or basically
financial focused regulatory agencies. And I mean, to Daryl's point earlier,
like JP Morgan didn't hire its first Jew to nineteen
eighty nine, right, Right, Like the Jews were kept out
of banking, they were allowed to do securities trading, right,
So this is why speculator has such a negative connotation
in America. Right, banking was specifically a Anglo institution, and
they immediately went after that. Right, So you had the
introduction of Glass Stiegel, which basically stripped the you know,
banking institutions of a majority of their power and handed
it over to the speculators. So firms like J Goldman Sachs,
which were irrelevant, tiny little shops until the FDR regime
went Hammer and tongs at JP Morgan Chase sorry, JP
Morgan b and wine Melon and Standard Charter. Right, so
that was the you know. Then immediately after that they
went after the oil companies right and tried breaking them up.
Standard Oil and the Rockefellers held on longer than anybody else.
They refused to acknowledge. They viewed the US entry to
war in Europe as illegitimate. Right, they refused all the
way throughout the war to stop selling oil to Germany.
They're like, this war is ridiculous, this war is criminal.
We want no part of it. I mean, I think Pete,
on your show, you and I went through the polling
statistics of what Americans thought of the war in Europe
at the time, as like men were landing in D Day,
seventy percent of the country wanted nothing to do with it,
and something like seventy five percent of the men you know,
landing in D Day had absolutely no idea why the
fact that they were there. So it was kind of
just an immediate right turn right into war into it,
and by the time the war was over, Anglo power
was dead.
Speaker 5: Ye.
Speaker 4: It's a great book by the skuy Kaufman, The Rise
and Fall of Anglo America. It's I mean, it's it's
very much, uh kind of a deliberately a political book.
I would argue with that subject matter can never be
a political but it's the data points in the punctuated
deterioration of control over the institutions is is very it's
very uh well explicated. I highly recommend it.
Speaker 6: One quick point to Daryl's Daryl your comment about how
these uh, these Anglos they indexed themselves to European civilization
for their their history and their identity. This couldn't be
more true. If you read, you know, the diaries of
a lot of these big wasp either scions or you know,
the patriarchs. You see like no bless obleache died out
in the European continent in the sixteen hundreds, but you
see it really pop up in the eighteen hundreds to
nineteen hundreds. So like if you worked on let's say
you were John Pierpont Morgan's mechanic and you worked, you know,
for the family for ten or fifteen years, and some
horrible accident befell you and you're either no longer able
to work or you passed away. The Morgans and they
did this three or four times, but they were not
the only American elite family that would, you know, repeatedly
do this. They would basically take in your sons and
they would put them into the same schools that their
children were in, and they would use their networks to
get you the same jobs that their children would get.
And actually the guy that took over from Jack Morgan,
Pierpont's son, was a man by the name of Tom
was it Tom Lamont? Tom Lamont was the son of
a basically a house employee of the Morgan house that
that passed away, and these men like they are suddenly
they suddenly find themselves richer than anybody had ever been before.
And I would imagine it's an extremely disorienting, you know,
position to find yourself in where you're richer than the
federal government. Like, what the fuck do you even do
with that? Real quick, they turned back to basically, real quick,
the Middle Ages.
Speaker 4: Stormy Richard Whitney, who was chairman of the New York
Stock Exchange. Roosevelt literally had him indicted and thrown in prison,
completely insane, Like think about that, imagine like the imagine
the haunts with the of the of the New York
stock esteen just like being locked in prison and after
two thousand and eight as.
Speaker 5: Like a place.
Speaker 6: I didn't know that.
Speaker 5: Yeah he went to prison, he did like five years.
Speaker 6: Yeah, go ahead, Yeah, yeah, I did not know that that.
That's actually more insane than I thought.
Speaker 4: Yeah, no, I knew that happened. I just wanted to
make sure my data points were roy. That's I was
fucking my phone. I wasn't being a home over like.
Speaker 6: Yeah, but yeah, to Darryl's point, these guys basically went
into like, you know, kind of a story book type
of history of the nobility of Europe because they really
didn't have anything to relate to on the continent, so
they all viewed themselves as you know, noble lords and fiefdoms.
And this is why you get that certain type of
patriarchal sense of the American super rich. In that period
of time, you have like Andrew Carnegie built thirty six
hundred public libraries across the country in every town in America,
and nobody had even heard of a fucking public library before.
But he just felt it was your duty or sorry,
you're right as an American to have infinite knowledge. Like
John D. Rockefeller built almost three thousand churches complete with schools, rectories,
and child care facilities in every town and city in America.
Like John Pierpont Morgan bailed out the federal government. I
literally leveraged everything he owned. If the federal government would
have faltered, he would have literally been homeless, because he's like,
America gave me everything I have. And you know, frankly,
you're an idiot if you you know you bet against America.
He actually kidnapped four other heads of speculator houses, right,
you know, and lured them onto his boat, and I
basically told them, you know, once they were past swimming
distance from the DOC said, I'm it's my intent to
bail out the government of the United States. This morning,
I took out lines of credit from each one of
your institutions, so basically, each one of your banks gave
me double my money back in credit, and I intend
to use this money to bail out the American government.
But I'm ten percent short. So either you contribute to
that other ten percent, or I use the credit that
you all gave me this morning to bankrupt you, and
by the time I take you back to shore, all
of you will be out of business. And then all
that money I borrowed, I now owe to nobody. So
I guess it's mine. And what do you know, Like,
you know, Jacob shiff got a sudden urge of patriotism
and helped bail out the country. But it's just something
that we completely don't see from our rich men today.
It's it's it's patriotism when it's convenient to help me
get my objectives done. But it's not a it's not
a spiritual sense of you know, who they are, what
their duty is, why they have this wealth.
Speaker 4: Yeah, there's there's the end of a serial posture, this
exio matic going to the ethnosectarian aspect of it. But uh,
a guy who I think, I mean, I mean, he's
something a midway, but his data points are useful. Charles
Murray wrote some pretty good stuff about the sociological dynamics
between between the one percent and everybody else, and even uh,
you know, historically, I mean even well into the twentieth century,
even like well into the seventies and eighties, unless unless
you were Andrew Carnegie himself or something like. You know,
even the guys who were the wealthiest men in America,
their lives weren't, you know, inconceivably different than that of
middle class people that all began changing in earnest in
the nineties. You know, the lives of a guy like
Peter Thiel, you know, compared to a dude who's a
you know, like a branch manager at bank one. It's
it's it's it's it's completely insane. It's like comparing the
life of a space alien who it can traverse light years,
so that like an African bushman who hasn't even invented
a slingshot yet, you know, like these people live in
literally different worlds, you know, and that would be a
difficult psychological paradigm to reconcile even if there was a
moral consensus, and there wasn't, you know, this perverse situation
where a hostile elite who views the majority as as
their ethno sectarian enemy, you know, And that's that's actually
an important point. You know, you can't if your class
of managers, you know, uh are our billionaires who every
week travel to different countries on board their private jet.
You know, I mean, how could they find common uh
empathy with anybody but you know, their own cast, you know,
just even if they desire to curate such things, which
obviously they don't, I think it would probably be insurmountable.
That was just something I thought of as you guys
were discussing this subject.
Speaker 3: One of the one of the things that Thomas brings
up often is how the conditions that led to and
enabled the world wars to happen, and then in the
post war period as well, that these are not one
in a generation conditions. These are once in a millennium
kind of conditions that are really not replicable. And you know,
I think about I guess a lot of people kind
of have learned to take for granted over the last
eighty years in the United States, these these very unnatural
economic and global political conditions where you know, the entire
planet had just been destroyed, its industrial base was destroyed.
We had the only one that was left standing. We
had the people, the resources, and the industrial base to
rebuild the entire planet. And so, as you said earlier,
like we go through this great war and don't face
this period of rampant inflation or deflation afterwards, the entire
world needed American capital, labor, resources, et cetera. And it
really pushed us into this just stratospheric economic place where
that over time people learned to kind of take for
granted as part of the natural order of things. And
what the period we're in now and have been in
since maybe the mid two thousands, when maybe the late
two thousands, when Russia and China started to really flex
and push back on the world stage, is a return
to the mean, a turn a return to more natural
like multipolar conditions under which a lot of these institutions
and just the ways we operate can't really function. You know,
in the nineteen nineties you had this you know, to
your point. You go Charles Murray talks about this too.
You go back to the mid twentieth century, and you know,
not only did elites have this sense of no bless oblized,
not only were their lives not so radically different from
the people that work for them, but they were also
much more locally oriented.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 3: You go back and read through like the battles that
the elites in Chicago went through with other big cities
elites to try to get the World's Fair there in
eighteen ninety three, and I mean it was really important
to them, you know. But then over time, as you
go through that process, as Stormy mentioned earlier, where these
thousands of companies become a few hundred companies, all of
those elites shifted to you know, New York, even if
they didn't physically necessarily go there, like that's where there,
that's where their people were, New York, d C. Maybe
LA A few like megalopolises that absorbed all of those people,
and all of that sense of localism really went away.
And when you get into the post Cold War period
and things, you know, start to start to become not
just scaled up at at a national level, but at
a global level. You saw that on a on the
next you know, the next level up where those people
who had kind of left behind loyalty for Detroit, Michigan,
for New York City have now even left behind loyalty
for New York City for you know, just the global
sort of class that they're a part of. And so
but I think that, you know, one of the things
that happened is that the elites really outran the natural
order of things in globalization during that period, so that
they got way far out in front in terms of
their own sense of identity and how their interests are allocated,
way out ahead of where the world itself actually was.
Because you know, Thomas talked about how with just global telecommunications,
just all the different technological and political changes, globalization to
a certain degree and global integration to a degree was inevitable.
But you know, we got to a point where in
the post World War period, this hyper globalization that we
that we really saw and that the elites came to
really identify themselves with, was a result of American unipolarity.
And even if you take away something like just you know,
you have a few other major powers that can control
what goes on in their own region, control the sea
lanes in their own region, all of those kind of things.
The global economic system is has is not in a
place where it is prepared to account for that, and
so yeah, go ahead.
Speaker 4: Despite design, it's it wasn't sustainable from inception and the
the idea of true globalism and the and the the
integration of an adjacent political structure with the new interdependent
you know, uh, economic paradigm that was that's Bush the
Bush Baker administration. Their vision was that the Soviet Union
would remain intact until full nuclear disarmament was realized. There'd
be this gradual you know, stripping away of the command economy,
you know, and uh, the integration of the Soviet economy
into world markets, you know, in a way that wouldn't
cause punctuated disturbances that tended towards the actual crisis level,
you know. And they had something you know, with Goruschev
and shivit Nards, you know, they had an understanding there.
The neocons guy was Yelston, and Yelton completely nuked the
possibility of that being realized, you know, and this kind
of this kind of mass looting operation.
Speaker 5: Set in.
Speaker 4: Coupled with this, you know, hyper aggressive military posture that
was you know, nakedly tailored to facilitate Zionist interests. You know,
the the ultimate goal was to break Russia at the
Soviet Union and the constituent elements, you know, like a
greater Ukraine, you know, like a kind of commissary at
moscown almost like the you know, the the Third Reich
agin in geographic terms, and then like a Soviet Far
East probably uh, you know, some of which would be
conceded proceeded to the PRC, you know, and uh, this
kind of looting the planet at mass scale. Well at
the same time, uh, you know, socially engineering populations by
aggressive ethnic cleansing and forced mixing.
Speaker 6: You know.
Speaker 4: Uh, this was the planetary Morgan foul plan quite literally,
you know.
Speaker 5: And thank God, uh.
Speaker 4: That that that blew up in their faces, and you know,
God bless the resistance for you know, for were indisputably
you know, causing it to fail.
Speaker 5: But that's that was the intention.
Speaker 4: And uh, the ideological and social engineering aspects, it can't
be extricated from the economic ones, which is one of
the reasons why that ambition failed, because, like I said, yes,
when we're talking about economic policy, at national or global scale.
It's it's always politically coded, but setting about to force
political outcomes by way of economic pressure, that's always a
fool's errand and more often than not it's catastrophic.
Speaker 5: That's uh, the key takeaway.
Speaker 4: I think there's many nuances they're in obviously because it's
a huge subject matter. But that's that owes a lot
to to the kind of contempt with which the new
elite view their lessers as they would you know, stack
it up and then you got the that's one of
the reasons to where like Elon Musk is in this
kind of weird role. He's like a weird guy anyway,
but he's like this tech entrepreneur who's this boyish you know,
Anglophone South African, you know. I mean he's like a
man without a country like within this you know, overcast
of managers. I got to raise up in a few minutes,
but I still got a few minutes.
Speaker 5: If you guys that.
Speaker 3: Can they contempt you talk about you know, man, you
guys can feel free to object on this. But it
seems to be in a lot of ways a continuation
of something that we've been dealing with for I mean,
at least probably two hundred years, right, you go back
to just the northern New England contempt for just the
southern resistance to full economic integration and political integration of
the states into a larger federal into a larger federal
project that was more united. You go up to the
nineteen sixties and you have you know, you see it
really starkly with guys like John Lindsay, very much like
a even though I think he was kind of born
upper middle class, not really like a wasp elite. He really,
you know, sort of became became the symbol of the
wasp elite during that period. And you see from people
like him this real contempt for a lot of the
Catholic people living in the big cities who are essentially
resisting integration, you know, resisting giving up their local uh
you know, stubborn attachments and and and allowing themselves to
be melted into a large, theoretically more efficient system. And
now you see the same thing except on a global scale,
where people are looking at their own populations that are
resisting globalism in the same way that you know, that's
sort of like a long tradition.
Speaker 4: Well, yeah, they they created they created the Wallace coalition,
which is you know, the Nixon coalition, which is Meg. Yeah,
that's why I fly the Bloodstained banner, because that's that's
my fucking flag. There's an outlaw flag because these fuckers
hate us. That's one of the reasons too, why I
pushed back when uh, there's like all these doom codd
guys like we're gonna.
Speaker 5: Be a white minority. It's all over.
Speaker 4: We're so fucked it's like gona be First of all,
I've always been a minority Ryan Matt. Second of all,
I mean my tribes the asked for as you know,
South Africa, Ulster, you know here to some degree, Australia,
New Zealand. Like we're always out numbered. People always fucking
hate us. We're always approved target for their hostility, you.
Speaker 6: Know, kicking and screaming into civility. Yeah.
Speaker 4: I wouldn't have it any other way, you know, And
like we're not uh, we're not We're not a bunch
of koolies, We're not a bunch of Hindus.
Speaker 5: We're not like screwed if we don't have some super majority.
Speaker 4: On the ground, you know, Like, yeah, I one of
the reasons why we're hard and effective and unkillable is
uh you know, because uh, we gotta lean and mean
presidence wherever we're at, and we're always beleaguered. You know
that ain't nothing new and it's not gonna change. Like
it's not to say that like demographics aren't consideration. And look,
I can tell you firsthand what it's like to uh
you know, be uh to receive a you know, the
negative consequences of things like the you know, Biden's version
of the Murial boat lift where he dropped you know,
like ten thousand filoni is fin of.
Speaker 5: Swinging military age meals here. You know.
Speaker 4: Like I'm not saying like that's cool or anything. Anybody
who thinks that is basic, but you know my point is,
in broader terms, if you've got to shd this, this
is kind of like soft like pussy ass like boogie
view of these things is where it's like, you know,
if you're not a super majority, like you're fucked.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 4: Plus it's not that that's not the case anyway, Like
it's this idea that this idea that there was some
like monolithic like white Ethnos in America until like twenty
years ago, and now that's over. Like that's food bar thinking.
I mean, I don't want to get into like a
broader debate about like the white race. Yes it's a
real thing. Yes it's important. Yes I stand on business
and I fucking rep it. But it's you know, races
and ethnos and ethnos matters, and America is complicated in
terms of the inner play those things. But I know
only people are making fun of me about like abruptly exiting.
So I'm sorry to live leptic cliche that stuff, but
I'm going to do exactly that. But I wish I
didn't have to. But I got a busy day and
then later today I got dinner plans and stuff. So
thanks for including me, fellas. Uh, I really appreciate that.
I'm very humbled and.
Speaker 3: Good care Thomas.
Speaker 2: Great to have you in as always.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, all right, So if you guys are cool
with it, I'd like to get back to this tweet
because there's a couple of things in it that we
didn't even get to.
Speaker 3: Uh well, let me let me jump in real. Yeah. Yeah,
I'm going to play on that based on something that
Thomas just said. You know, one of the things that
I I guess I meant to put forth with that
tweet is, you know, just like Thomas said, you know,
our guys have got to really shed that doumerism. You
know that like if somehow you dip to a forty
nine percent population, that.
Speaker 6: It's all over with.
Speaker 3: We also, I think, to a certain extent, have got
to shed this like this fortress mentality that is very
understandable given the circumstances that we find ourselves in, but
it's one that I think prevents us from doing one
thing that we really need to be willing and able
to do, which is to prevent leadership to the civilized
minorities that do live among us. You know, And with
that tweet, when I say that, like we need to
embrace our role as the leader of a Western hemispheric civilization,
I mean, it's really kind of ridiculous that we over
the years have tolerated a half failed state on our
southern border, and that it's a state that you know,
we have like good relations with, like you know, and
all there's no hot like like outward hostility there or anything.
But like, we we need the Western hemisphere, every country
in it, to look at us as their leader. And
part of doing that is that you know, our nationalist
core in the United States itself has got to take
on a leadership role with respect to these civilized minorities
who live here with us in this country, you know,
And it can't just be like a you know, a
matter of racial purity or any of those things, because
the bottom line is, I mean, unless there is some
just completely un foreseeable transformation that would probably create a
catastrophe with with uh, you know, outcome that that that
can't be predicted. You know, demographics are going to continue
to trend in the direction they're trending, at least to
a certain point where, you know, where where they stabilize,
and that doesn't look like that's going to happen anytime soon.
That's the world we have to live in. And uh
sort of going into a fortress mode of racial purity
rather than recognizing that, you know, uh, there are a
lot of Latinos, there's a lot of civilized people in
this country who just want to live regular lives and
would be perfectly willing to accept the leadership of people
who know how to make that happen. I think is important,
you know, And I think that you know, because it's
very easy to get to get lost and especially for
somebody like me, probably all of us, to get lost
in the history of the whole thing and thinking about, like,
you know, just what's been lost, all the nostalgia, all
these kind of like larger not abstract but like semi
abstract ways of looking at the whole situation and forgetting
the fact that, you know, the the real important part
here is that our grandkids are still living in a
country where you know, they don't get kidnapped when they
walk down the street, or it's just a functional country,
you know, And there are people out there who aren't
necessarily going to get on board with you know, some
white racial purity test that that can help with that,
you know, and are willing to accept leadership. And so
that's part of what I meant by that tweet.
Speaker 6: Well, to your point, Darrel, I think there's a clear
demarcation that can be made between people that come here
and marry in. I think marriage is probably the oldest
and most you know, stable immigration policy.
Speaker 7: Right.
Speaker 6: If somebody in you know, the host nation vouchers to
the extent that they come further and say like I
love this person, right, that person is no longer a
burden of the state because they are coming into the
country with a support network already in place. Right, they
have no choice, not no choice, but they are very
very excited about culturally integrating because they are integrating at
the most core level a person can be integrated to anything,
right is the integration of man and wife into that
singular human being. Also, it clears away a lot of
political problems. Right. So, right now you have a whole
bunch of very wound up, left eoyed women and I
think basically telling them like, oh no, immigration is now
actually your choice. You just have to marry them, like
you can bring in whoever you want, but you have
to love them, and you have to love them forever.
The other thing is you can probably draw a very
clear demarcation line between those that come to live here
by where they keep their money. Right, there are individuals
like a lot of the Latino individuals that you talk about,
they're not sending money back home to Mexico. Right, They're
building their future where they see their future as being right.
But then you need to also, you know, well it
just by making that one distinction draws a clear contrast
between the people that view this as an economic zone
for extracting. Like I mean, even guys like Vivek Ramaswami,
the the healthcare stock fraudster. His parents had no problem
coming to America and having him and getting set up
in lovely sinecure positions. So American PhDs don't get paid anything.
But they've been your twenty years. Their son got to
make five hundred million dollars in America and they still
don't want to become US citizens. They're sending all their
money back home to India, building nice little I mean,
I hate to point him out and make it, actually
I don't. I hate that man. I think he is
kind of the epitome of what we're seeing. But there
is a clear line between who sends money out of
the country to where those people see their home actually being.
And the amount of money that leaves this country is staggering, right.
We're talking half a trillion dollars at a clip, right,
h fisk. I mean literally half of the almost half
of the sorry, almost more than half of the entire
Defense Department's budget leaves this country in remittances, all right.
So that means money is earned here, and it's a
money that could have been given to somebody that actually
lives here. And you know is from here, it's given
to somebody else, and that money doesn't stay in the economy.
And this is kind of the lie about you know,
immigration being a boost to GDP, which is the lie
that a lot of our elites are told, right, because
if GDP backward dates, the sovereign debt begins to quickly
lose value, which accelerates rapidly and will end the nation
in sovereign debt default really fucking quickly. So it's not
just that they only care about line goes up, it's
that they can only care about line goes up because
how much debt all of these nations are in. But
there's also a foreign policy element. There is a I
can pull it up on my phone, but there's a
speech that Prime Minister Modi is given giving to his
BNP party talking about how and it's actually really funny
because he basically says, we're going to do what the
Jews do for Israel. We are going to put as
many individuals into America, into these Western countries as possible,
and those people will then lobby for India's interests and
the Modi government is basically helped facilitate you know, you
actually have. You know, it's not just these people filling
out frauds in H one B applications. It's the fucking
Indian government doing it. It's the Chinese government doing it.
And I mean every time, I mean, I'm sure it's
really embarrassing to the people at the DoD, but every
time we catch somebody selling secrets, their name is always
like Ching Chong Lee. Actually, I remember one of the
very first things I heard you do was a episode
you did with Jocko and this is you're the only
other person at that time that I had heard talk
about the faction in the US military slash intelligence communities,
and like, these men are not like this is not
a monolith. These people are often you know, have diametrically
opposed goals. But in that episode you talked about basically
the racial sensitivity training that was somehow also you know,
be on the lookout for people, you know, stealing intelligence information,
but also don't be racist at the same time, so
you'd have to parse those people out too. I don't
know how you go about doing that bit, because it
seems that a lot of the people that are selling
US intelligence and US sensitive intellectual property seem to be
second generation. You see the problem in the UK a lot.
It's not the first generation Arabs that are the hyper
extreme ones. It's the second and third generation that are
you know, full on isis in the streets. So it's
the ones that are actually born here that are trying
to tear the country down, which is I don't know
how to how I how to go about squaring that circle.
Speaker 3: What you know, it's like that's a that's something you
almost have to call like a natural process just because
it's occurred in so many other contexts where you look
at you know, when when during the Great Migration, when
the Blacks all moved out of the South up into
the northern and western cities. You know, it wasn't the
first generation for the most part that really really went
up there and you know, trashed the inner cities. I
mean it was to a degree they were you know, rowdy,
illiterate Southerners for the most part, you know, who were
in the big city for the first time. So there
was an element of that, But it wasn't until you
got up to the nineteen sixties when that first generation's
kids began to turn into grown men. Eighteen nineteen twenty
year old kids or men who you know, they had
carried a lot more resentment, a lot more of an
identity crisis, a lot more of all these things that
they had to compensate for than their parents ever did.
And you see it in the US. Like I knew
when I lived down in SoCal, I knew a lot
of people who worked in education in LA and Orange County.
So I used to I used to date a woman
who was a vice principal down there, and you know,
she would point out to me that, you know, they
like the America is a nation of immigrants. People. They
love to point to statistics that show that American citizens, uh,
you know, have a higher crime rate than immigrants. Right,
I've never like studied that deeply. I'm willing to believe it,
Like I'm willing to believe that that first generation of
immigrants comes in. But look at their kids. It's a
totally different story. You know, the people in education that
I would be talking to down there, they would say
that they have these parents. You know, dad works in
a field, mom works cleaning up a hotel. They're both
like basically just hard working, normal Catholic people and they're
coming to the vice principal, coming to the school administration saying,
I don't know what to do with my kids, Like
they all want to be gangbangers, they all want to
be this want to be that. You know, they're out
flying a Mexican flag at a protest like you told
them not to go to. You know, it's very much
that second generation that was raised up in American culture,
and you have to attribute part of it to American
culture and media, but I think there's also just a
more natural element where you know, there's an identity crisis
that kind of takes place among people like that, especially
when you know the the woman that I dated, it
was the vice principal. She was a Palestinian woman Arab,
and you know, she grew up just like a lot
of the Palestinian just Arab immigrants at the time before
they made their money and moved down to you know,
nicer parts of Orange County and stuff. She lived down
in Southgate in South LA and basically Latino community, Latino
black Arab community. And when she was a kid, and
you know, one of the things that they will tell
you and Latinas will tell you the same thing. You know,
if they don't think that, you know, they're they're in
a conversation where it's going to be, you know, heard
the wrong way. I guess is they'll tell you that,
you know, in their communities, being with a white guy
is like a status symbol, and that's something that creates
a great deal of resentment among you know, the the
other women as well, especially the men. You know, you
saw this very much in the like Black Power movement
in nineteen sixties. Because to this day, you know, you
if you if you go to I've seen the numbers before.
But it's not something they study or published very often,
but they but they have. And the numbers of black
women who go to university, graduate with a four year
degree who end up marrying black men is very low.
You know, a huge number of them end up marrying
into the white community, essentially leaving the black community behind.
And you know that kind of thing. It creates resentment
within communities, you know, and and it creates a sort
of identity crisis among the next generation that comes up.
It's trying to figure out who and what they are.
And you know, in a country like China, I mean,
I imagine if any of us were to go over to China,
they would probably have a dedicated agent tracking our every movement,
listening to our phone calls. They would know every single
thing we did in that country, and so it's much
much much harder for us to take advantage of any
kind of you know, any kind of fissures or cracks
that might exist in a society like that, whereas over
here in our open society.
Speaker 5: You know.
Speaker 3: Again, like you said in that converence, that training that
I had, it was it was opsect training where they
were telling us how to look for internal threats, you know,
people who might be in gambling debts or whatever, because
they might, you know, be vulnerable to blackmail or selling information.
And they went through all of these real world examples,
like ten of them, and all of them except for one,
there was one guy who had gotten a divorce and
lost a lot of money and was in a lot
of gambling debt. But all like nine out of the ten,
we're all Chinese Americans who were spying for China, Jewish
Americans spying for Israel, just all of them. And that
was when I raise my hand and asked the question,
and they told me, just we don't. You were instructed
not to consider that as part of the information that
you're you know that you're looking at and that's a
that's a difficult thing in the United States that a
lot of other countries just don't have.
Speaker 6: Do you think that that is going to be one
of the things that have to go away? I mean
because I mean as far as like the black community,
the probably the greatest single, you know, bit of damage
that was ever done to it was desegregation. Right, Nobody
talks about the absolute apocalypse of black business. That happens
like if you were you had black banks, you had
black grocery stores, credit unions, black insurance companies, black energy companies,
and the second the day after integration, you basically told
the black community, much like you were talking about with
with uh, you know who they're trying to date. If
you give a black the choice between, hey, do you
want to put your money in a black bank or
a white bank, what do you think he's going to do?
And we bankrupted black business literally overnight.
Speaker 7: Well to understand that though properly is that what at
the time, It wasn't people that you would call right
wing racialists that were responsible for that. It was progressives.
They wanted that they wanted everyone to be together. They
didn't want a black bank and a white bank. They
wanted everyone to do. They wanted equality for everyone. When
you know something that Daryl talked about earlier about you know,
just basically teaching uncivilized people how to live in this country.
To his his tweet about you know what he sees
happening to Europe, I mean, I think this is one
of the reasons why Eric Prince talks so much about
Africa now, is if you don't do something about Africa,
and I mean, I know people have gone in there
and oh, we've tried to civilize them and are yeah, okay, fine,
don't try to turn them into white people. Figure out
what's best for them, how something works for them, and
then stay there until you can produce people who can
actually reproduce it. But if you don't do something about
them too, they're just going to overtake Europe. And if
they overtake Europe, they're going to come here. So I mean,
this is I know white people, you know, our guys
don't want to hear this, mostly because they don't want
to do anything. They just want to post on Twitter
and they want to listen to podcasts. Thank you for
listening to podcasts. I appreciate it, but maybe you really
have to start doing something too, and you have to
start thinking about ways that the future going forward for
all peoples. Because you can say, we just have to
figure out how to what's best for us and take
care of ourselves, but the actually that army is going
to come to you, and it's just a matter of
are you going to be able to hold the army off?
Or you go, what's there's a future that entails doing
stuff And it doesn't seem like we can do stuff
now because we're under occupation and everything. But if you
if we don't start acting now, then there really is
no future. There's the future is going to be very
very isolated into different spots and yeah, you're waiting for
somebody to just come and you know, overrun you. And
now maybe we can develop technology that if an army
shows up, we can vaporize them. But okay, who's doing that?
Who's who's doing it? Or are you doing that little
that research in your community of two thousand people.
Speaker 6: So I think to Pete's point and too Darryl's point,
right A, you have the need for hemispheric leadership. You
have the lack of opportunities, frankly because of the financialization
of the economy and systematic exclusion. But you have a
lot of I mean everyone talks about like the competency crisis,
and I really don't think it is a competency crisis
at all. Right, Like, I'm not a navy guy, but
you can pretty much take the average white kid and
teach him how to run a nuclear reactor ten thousand
feet underwater in about two years, a little less than
two years. So there's really nothing that I think our
guys can't learn in a relatively small amount of time.
They've just been excluded from these opportunities. I think colonialism
solves all this, and I mean, really I do. I
know mister Prince probably agrees with that. But if you
go to India, I don't recommend you do, especially not now.
You ask a majority of the Indians over fifty you
know what political reality they want, and they will tell
you full throatedly that they want the brit They wish
the British would come back. You could say the exact
same thing for Africa, right almost. I mean even in
South Africa, right where it's politically you know, it's bad
politically to say something like this. But I think we
need to get over our squeamishness that leadership is a
hands on thing, right, It's a way. You know, you're
not going to teach you know, the Guatemalan about American
leadership unless you're doing it, you know, where he can
see it, right, where he can see the benefit of
your way of doing things versus not it. Also, I mean,
there's we can either fight over the same pie and
then we have to be exclusionary to be like, Okay,
well you're not part of this group of white young
men that have been excluded from the professional environment, so
we need to remove you and we need to put
these guys back in. That'll be really, really difficult. But
if you just expand the pie, you solve a lot
of problems at once. But the US would have to
get over this, like colonialism is bad thing because if
you look at what happened to the quality of lives
of these people, the worst thing that ever happened to
them was that we left.
Speaker 3: There are moves being made in that direction, and Prince
is actually a big part of it. I know a
few guys who run a company that Prince is on
the board. Is one of their consultants and right now
they're trying to or they're in the process of buying
a cobalt mine, cobalt processing plant in the Congo. And
this is something that really would not have been I mean,
it would have been hyper speculative, you know, if you
would have tried it just a few years ago. But
the Trump administration, we've got some We've got some very
smart guys who are like young guys who are in
the administration like doing work. You know, they're not necessarily
the ones saying yes or no, but the ones who
are who are putting out. We've got some solid guys
in there, a lot of them working for VANCE. But
but but throughout the administration and State Department other places,
and what the Trump administration did was set up an
agency that essentially provides political risk insurance for somebody who's
willing to go in and try to do something like
purchase a you know, a cobalt mining plant in uh
in the Congo and doing it in ways where they're
trying to like very actively, like very consciously trying to
develop an economic elite in that country. That is somebody
that are people that we can work with and have
goals that we consider you know, worthy of just not
not only their country, but in our own interests as well.
You know. The problem, of course, like for for a
long time, is that this type of economic colonialism has
taken the form of, you know, we're doing it so
that you legalize public butt sex, you know, and that's
something that thankfully for the moment, you know, for the
time being, has been put aside. The headwinds that people
like that are facing, though, are that you know, like
like you ask, okay, the people in power, they get
accused all the time of being just in it for money,
They're selling their souls all this kind of stuff. Wouldn't
like you would think if it were just like a
straightforward version of that, that they would have a problem
with a half a trillion dollars leaving the country every
year in remittances. But they don't. And the reason is
that there is there are a lot of these people
who are very much in the mode of just the
party's ending. Soon, steal the fucking silverware and get out,
you know, and and take the take the nice door
knobs off, and all the nice faucets and just get
the hell out. And you know, just as a specific example,
of that. I have this from an absolutely unimpeachable cabinet
level source. I can't go further than that. Right now,
I'm working on how to, you know, talking to a
few people about how to make it more detailed in public.
But that, Susie Wilds, the Chief of Staff, is just
straight up, very openly like Tammany Hall style. Anybody that
wants to talk to the president has got to make
a forty thousand dollars dollar donation to her consulting company
per month or two hundred thousand dollars per year. And
it's just very very briefcase under the cash style like
nineteenth century like open corruption, you know. And again that
is from an absolutely unimpeachable cabinet level source. And there's
a lot of people who are like that. And so
we have like a lot of good guys who are
trying to advance these goals in the administration, but they
got to deal with people like that, you know, you
got to deal with I know a guy who was
at dinner with Tom home one on one and no, no,
I'm sorry he was. He was at dinner with a
Texas sheriff who had who knows Tom Holman very well
and had worked with his people on a big operation
down there recently, and he was saying that Tom said that,
you know, this is these are the kind of things
that just make our system very difficult to work around.
That Christy Nome wants to run for president in twenty
twenty eight, and so she's actually slow rolling a lot
of the attempts to engage in mass deportations any of
these things that would look like, you know, either massive
successes for people like Vance, who's you know, closer to
closer to the president and sort of the obvious successor,
but also look at the by the Republican and other
people whose support that she's going to want as her
you know, sort of going along with this barbaric practice
and blah blah blah. So she's like actively as the
head of DHS, actively stonewalling the attempts to you know,
to engage in the deportation process and and home, and
very often is having to find ways to do it
where they can just basically go around the DHS infrastructure,
you know, like the the one in particular where in
Texas that I'm talking about, Like he had to go
actually and work with a lower level guy at the
FBI and use their resources to go down and round
up a bunch of these people because it was a
small enough number that they could handle it with local,
local resources and some help from the FBI, without having
to run it all the way up to the DHS
flag pole. And so these are the kind of things
that make it very, very difficult. But there are people
in there who understand what you're saying, that you know,
colonial like a benevolent colonialism, you know, a sort of
a sort of you know, almost almost Marshall Plan for
the Western hemisphere, you know, idea that like, you know,
you can you can put one hundred foot wall up
lined with machine guns. You know, Israel tried that and
they still get through from time to time, and it's
still a problem for them. And as long as uh,
you know, we have economic policies and just governmental and
social systems in Latin America that are completely fucked, it's
just it's it's gonna be a permanent problem and the
only way to really permanently fix it. Like, I don't
know what the numbers are of people fleeing El Salvador
for the United States right now, but I imagine they're
a hell of a lot lower than they used to be,
you know. And uh, if you could get twenty more
bouquels and you know, actually have some governments and uh
that that that were not just you know, systematic looting
operations basically in these countries, then you know, you could
stem the tide a bit that way. And and and
I think that you know, in a way, yeah, like
if Africa takes over Europe, they're eventually coming here is
kind of a thing. But you know, obviously you have
the oceans between us. But also I think it's a
lot easier for people, you know, if we were much
more integrated and seen as a natural leader of the
Western head hemisphere, as the protector of the Western hemisphere,
and seen that way by the other countries you know
that are here with us, it's a lot easier for
your average American sort of normy Christian type to justify
and rationalize to themselves. Uh, keeping people from you know,
from over the oceans, from coming across the oceans and
coming in here, en Moss and the same type of
numbers that we've dealt with from Latin America. They can
they can justify that to themselves, especially if they can
frame it in terms of protecting the Western hemisphere itself,
you know, and being leaders of the Western hemisphere. But
it does require like a you know, a lot more
integration with our hemispheric neighbors, you know, which it's very
unfortunate that due to uh, you know, a lot of
it due to the Cold War, but a lot of
it due to just economic practices and and and the
way we managed relations with a lot of Latin America
in the you know, the early years of sort of
advanced capitalism. We have a lot of we have a
lot of ending of fences to do, you know, a
lot of bridges to rebuild with a lot of those countries.
But we can totally do it. And and I think that,
you know, one of the things is about it too,
is it? You know? And this sounds like something I
mentioned this to my wife the other day or a
version of this, and you know, she's always very much
in the in the in the mode of like, well,
we don't need any of that. We just need like
somebody in charge, people in charge who are willing to
bring out the tanks if they have to and roll
over any resistance. And I say, yeah, like theoretically that's true,
but realistically. You know, you have to give the American
people like like a moral escape route. You know, you
have to be able to let them frame things in
a way that doesn't make them feel like like a
like an Unchristian kind of terrible person. Even if a
lot of it is just been siopped into them since
they were little kids, it's still there and we still
have to deal with that. And you know, further integration
with Latin America and the Latin Americans who are in
this country, who are who are here and want to
be here, and who are willing to be Americans, I
think it gives them a lot of the moral cover
that they would need to do the other hard things
that would be necessary.
Speaker 6: Canada has to go. I mean, we talked about a
narco state on our border. That's basically Canada. I mean,
you've got members of the CCP Intelligence Apparatus as MP's
in the Canadian Parliament.
Speaker 7: Dude, you have, you have, you have Indian government sanctioned
hits being carried out in Canada.
Speaker 6: Yep. The out of all of the arguments that we
just made for a more benevolent type of way to
view our politics, the Indians Cattaco I mean it's you know,
there are two nationalists like they'll never they never integrate.
There's there's only one nationalism that's going to have to
be allowed.
Speaker 7: It's I mean, it's it's diaspe people, Zionism, Hinduism.
Speaker 6: But well, if Zionism is the same as Indianism, now
ender of Israeli.
Speaker 7: States is you're pretty aligned. You know, I'm not calling
for dealing with diaspora groups the way Stalin did, but
it's interesting that Stalin understood exactly what the ospital, what
could a the ospera group could do to what he
was building there. And yeah, and it's also interesting that
you really even after nineteen forty eight, it took a
couple of years and he died in what fifty four, Sarah,
it took it took a couple of years for him
to understand that now that Israel was a state, that Okay,
we may have a problem here, but yeah, I mean,
when everything Darryl's saying is correct, and we could do
all this, but we're occupied. And until that occupation is
dealt with, you know, until you have somebody who can
run and I think everyone knows by now, I'm not
a national politics guy. But until you have someone who
can run for president who is openly anti Zionist, who's
openly anti Israel, like or or at least no, not
even anti Israel, but like now we're not gonna know. No,
they're just like Mandami. I think Cameron McGregor made a
really good point when he was on my show recently.
He said, Mamdami getting elected, Mandammi getting elected in New
York should be a white pill for people who understand,
you know, who are anti Zionist power, because even if
he is not anti Zionist, even if this is all
an act, and even if he's going to kiss the wall,
you know, in a couple of weeks, the people voted
for somebody who was like, yeah, we know, we don't
care about that country over there. No, it's it's here.
The reason I'm I want to be mayor is I
want to take care of New Yorkers. Now we know
he just wants to. He's a gay race communist is
basically what he is. He's not an undercover Muslim, he's Obama.
He's a gay race communist. But still what the people
chose should be a white pill.
Speaker 6: I agree. I think anti we'll call it like anti
zionist interventionism and anti zionist fiscal support is going to
be on the ticket in twenty twenty six. Right the midterms,
it's already happening, like the congressman getting the most traction
basically to primary some of the ones that are sorry,
the future congressman in the process of primarying some of
the existing congressmen. The ones that are running on the
fact that they are taking no A pack dollars are
getting a tremendous amount of traction and they don't have
to pay one red cent to any marketing company for
any of that traction because it's organic, isn't. Susie Wiles
the former campaign manager for Benjamin Nett and Yahoo that
Susie wild.
Speaker 3: I don't remember who's the campaign manager, but she definitely
ran something for him.
Speaker 6: Yeah, oh man, Yeah, I don't, I don't, I don't.
Speaker 7: It's literally it's comical at this point. It's common. It's
comical at this point that when you when you bring
somebody up, it's like, you know, Josh Hammer running, Douglas
Murray running all over the place. Right, Oh, you're woke, right,
you're woke. Right. They write speeches for Israeli politicians and
they're not registered under Farah.
Speaker 6: All I want is just what it was nationalism for me.
Speaker 7: Yeah, exactly, it's.
Speaker 6: All I want. Somebody. Can we just have a little
bit of what Israel has? Yeah, it's this is going
to be the pass through.
Speaker 7: Yeah. And it goes back to the whole thing about like, look, man,
I'm my family is not heritage American. I have nowhere
else to go. I have no I have notes ties,
I've lived in another country before I came back. Why
I didn't belong there. It's just I have no place
off to go, man, So I'm.
Speaker 3: Gonna fa In twelve Block's novel Submission, the guy is
a Jewish girlfriend who's leaving for Israel because things are,
you know, becoming Muslim in France, and he tells her,
I don't have an Israel to go to.
Speaker 6: And then anyways, it's a fantastic book.
Speaker 3: I mean, look, you know the the Yeah, it's really amazing.
How Yeah, when you read something like Cuddy's book The
Ordeal of Civility, and then you look at the just
the smooth, the smooth of the propaganda that really consumed
us over the course of the twentieth century. What you
kind of realize is that that was entirely dependent on
having very very few media channels that could be run
by very very adept propagandists, and that once everything opened up,
I mean, you see this ordeal of civility thesis just
spill out into public in ways that are really radicalizing people.
I mean, you just you know, I don't know if
you guys saw the video that's been going around. I
think it was at that event Barry Weiss held the
other day or last week or whatever, and there was
this this female Jewish activist or institutional leader, I don't
even remember who she was, but she was going on
and on about how, you know, just they're losing the
younger generation because the younger generation is seeing all of
these pictures of destruction and dead babies in Gaza, and
they're filtering all of our arguments that were giving them
in favor of Israel, like through the lens of the
carnage they're witnessing, and this is something that you know,
we really need to get control of. And then she says,
you know, because for years we invested a lot, we
bet a lot on Holocaust education as a way, Oh yes,
anti Semitism, and uh, you know, but people have taken
the wrong lesson from that. They think the lesson is
that we should not be comfortable with big, strong, you know,
powerful people of pressing and harming smaller, weaker people. That's
not the lesson, you know. The and in the old days,
when you had three channels, you know, in a couple
of newspapers, whatever, there would have been like somebody in
the hierarchy, like before it got to the level of
like mass public attention, that would be like somebody, shut
this bitch up. Like no, that just doesn't exist anymore.
You know. You have this ordeal of civility just playing
out in public. I mean, you have guys like John
pod Horetz, who's one of my favorite kind of just
I don't know, I don't, I don't. I'm the type
of person I don't generally like to like go at
people personally. Uh when I'm want to Joe, but I
can't stand that prick dude, Like he's a guy who
Like there was this woman she was like a TV chef,
like I can't remember her name, TV celebrity chef type,
you know. Uh no it wasn't Rachel Ray, but it
was somebody else and she made a I mean just
like a miss Rachel type, just anodyne comment about like,
wouldn't it be great if all of this destruction in
Gaza stopped, you know, something, just completely inoffensive. And he
said he just comes out he doesn't know this woman
all right, and I don't know who her father or
brothers or husband are, where the fuck they are, But
he goes on in public and just says to this woman, well,
maybe you should keep your mouth shut, you anti Semitic
fucking piece of shit. And it's like Jesus, like, what
kind of a human being like just goes in public
and speaks to a woman that he doesn't know like that,
you know. And the answer is somebody like John pod
Horritz and all of his friends and they just can't
help themselves.
Speaker 5: And so.
Speaker 6: Yeah, it's in your DNA.
Speaker 3: Have you seen. Yeah, there was somebody passing around. It
was from YouTube and just other other platforms. The number
of subscribers by month that Daily Wire and Ben Shapiro
were gaining it is like over the last year, and
it's like, you know, the first six months are all
like gaining this many, gaining this many, and then around
April May. It's just like losing this many, losing this many,
just straight on through. I sent it to Tucker last
night and we were laughing about it because he's right, like,
these people are shooting themselves in the foot. All you
have to do is put a microphone in front of
them and let him speak for themselves, and the whole
thing unravels.
Speaker 1: Well, the Mark Levin tirade that I believe, I believe
Tucker played this specific tirade that I saw him go on,
and to your point about the ordeal of civility, like
the Ordeal of civility is basically over like because the
whole point of that book is is that these arguments
are their way of obfuskating this like racial ethnic animal
that's like undermining or underpinning excuse me, all of their
philosophies and their theories and how it's really just ethnic
grievances that's gone now because Mark Levine was just like,
you people want to kill Jews, you want to genocide us,
and it's not going to happen. You couldn't do it
before and you're not gonna be able to do it now.
And who is this resonating with? I mean, what person
listening to that young person in particular, but even also
even boomers like this doesn't even Mike Savage, who was
like remember him, did you ever listen to Michael Savage?
He was just a vicious pro war like genocide.
Speaker 2: Iraqis right.
Speaker 1: He never even said things like this like we are
so far beyond even THO.
Speaker 7: He's Michael Savage. I forget what he calls. He's been
ripping on Mark Levin lately because he realizes the damage
that Mark Levin is doing.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly, That's exactly my point. I didn't even know that.
Speaker 6: Well, this is kind of like what was happening in Weimar,
where you had like the German Jews who had been
there for Nerot makes difference, you know, six hundred years,
four hundred years. They're screaming at the top of their lungs.
I mean, don't get me wrong, like a German Jewish
owned media company is screaming at newly formed you know,
Eastern European Jewish company media companies as the only media
conversation happening in Germany, I mean, is a problem. But
they're screaming at these guys. They're like, you need to
like you need to settle the fuck down, or you
are going to get us all in a whole bunch
of trouble. And they said that right up until, like
I think it was actually after Crystal Knock. They were
still they were still trying to calm these fools down.
But they don't listen. They have no you know, volume
down button. It's only volume of is.
Speaker 1: No one wants to genocide them, No one is. They're
not under attack. I mean the Dave Portnoy thing, what
did what did the guy say, fuck Jews and he
threw a penny at him, Like that's the only example
they have of them being under a hack. You know,
nobody is saying this, so I don't know who it's
going to resonate with. And it's just uh, shooting themselves
in the foot.
Speaker 7: Literally, it's literally what bringing people would do to Italians
in New York or you know. I mean, it's that
kind of stuff that those are kind of ethnic jokes
that you would see in New York when I was
growing up in New York, you know, and it would
be taken as a as a joke. But the reason
why it's not taken as a joke, and even the
person who's doing it has some malice behind it is
because it's become so they can't shut up. I mean,
Dave Portnoy is one of those people, one of those
same people who you criticize him a little bit on
the smallest thing, and he starts screaming, you know, pogram
and you just can't do you can't do that. There
was some Zionist lady at the God what is this
thing called the Jewish Federation of North America?
Speaker 6: She is something something we don't control everything, Yes, of
North America.
Speaker 7: Yeah, yeah, Sarah her work, she says she mourned that
Western Jews reimagine Judaism as a Protestant style religion in
order to integrate into Western society, rather than retaining a
strong identity that's loyal to the state of Israel. She quoted,
the problem is we're not just a religion. We're a nation, civilization, tribe, peoplehood,
but most of all, we're a family. And so if
you're a young person raised in America who thinks Judaism
as a Protestant star religion, then the seven million Jews
in Israel merely your co religionists. So my co religion
is if I look at them, and they're not practicing
my religion or social justice and certain prophetic values, then
what do I have to do with them? But that's
a category era the seven million people in Israel. They're
not my co religionists, they're my siblings. But I think
if you think of them as merely your co religionists,
it's easy to slide into anti Zionism. You don't necessarily
have a connection to them. You know, she's basically saying
that the world should be lay the Jews are. The
world should be loyal to Israel no matter what Israel does,
not because that's the moral or truthful position, but because
Israel is where their loyalties really, you know, where they belong.
And it's like you read that and then you look
at Biden's cabinet, or you look at all the people,
you look at the person who's standing behind Donald Trump
every time he speaks, and you're like, well, I mean, well,
we don't have a country. Then we're being ruled by
a people who have a loyalty, and not only a loyalty,
but like an intense, like like blood tie to someplace else.
You know, it's the same, it's the same reason why
you know when when Ben Shapiro talks about sending money
to Israel, he calls it aid, and when Americans want money,
Ben Shapiro calls it welfare. Yeah, if you have somebody
here who needs money, Ben Shapiro calls it welfare. But
it's aid to Israel, and Israel won't survive. Yeah, fuck Americans,
But fuck Americans who aren't going to survive unless they
have unless they're able to get a check.
Speaker 6: You don't have a right to live where you were born.
Speaker 7: That's you want to know why Nick Foynes is becoming huge.
That Yeah, that's it right there, because Nick is pointing
out that you know, oh I can't I can't live
where my ancestors were buried. But you don't even have it.
Your your ties are all to Russia, you know, and
yet you you know, yet you want us to send
money to this place that you went and conquered, you know,
a century ago.
Speaker 6: It makes me think about a quote from you gentiles,
like we use will never be satisfied. It will never
be enough, no matter what you do for us, something something,
And then it ends with like where the destroyers of worlds?
Speaker 7: The craziest part of that whole book is it's just
one long vetch because he didn't like the nineteen twenty
four Immigration Act. This literally what that old? He says
it at the end of the book.
Speaker 6: Yeah. So, but like there is no this is kind
of a one way street. Historically has been a one
way street. So I don't know what that looks like.
Because America is a big place, but also this time,
because of you know, the digital environment that what's her name,
Sarah something or other that you were just quoting about,
it's global. So I mean, how does this how does
this end? Anybody?
Speaker 2: Go ahead?
Speaker 3: Darryl ah Man, I don't know. I you know, I mean,
I think that one of the uh, one of the
big benefits of global multipolarity coming back is that you
have powers that are rising that can actually exert themselves
on a global stage that are not beholden to this
power and it you know, and it also might be
this is maybe I guess I'm of a double mind
on this. But also, like you know, the demographic transformations
that are taking place in America are also something that
like you said, with New York City, you know, I know,
like the white liberals they're all voted for Mom, Donnie too.
But there's you know, there are a lot of people
there who who voted for him because they're just not
subject to the to the Zionist propaganda regime that the
rest of us have all been taken in by, you know,
since World War Two. And you know, so these changes
are taking place and they are losing power. You know,
the concern whenever you have you know, a very solipsistic
and arrogant ruling classes, we do that that that perceives
any loss of control on their part as like a
major emergency for everybody, for the whole world, that they
could you know, really blow things up rather than go
out peacefully. But you know, as far as yeah, far
as how it ends, I mean.
Speaker 6: Well that was a plant Russia numbers, I mean generationally,
and you see the way I mean, you have to think.
Speaker 3: Of it like this. And I'm coming from like a
perspective of somebody who like, they threw the entire kitchen
sink at me when I was on Tucker last year.
They threw everything they had, I mean, just the Republican
or rather the Congressional Jewish Caucus, the White House, the
major papers. I mean just they.
Speaker 6: Threw the White House came after you.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, they issued they issued an official statement condemning
me by name, and like you know, it did absolutely nothing.
It did nothing to me, you know, and I'm just
an ordinary person. So when you look now at somebody
like Tucker, you know, there's a reason the terrified of Tucker,
and they should be, because he sees what's going on.
He knows what's going on. You know, he's very much
like a like a gen X Christian American who is
uncomfortable with you know, as he said in that Fuentes interview,
like many times, you know, with any kind of ascribing
of group guilt to people, all those things. He's very
averse to all of that. But in terms of these
people were talking about the specific people are who are
pulling the levers on these things, he knows who they are,
and he and they know that he knows who they are.
And he's a conduit, you know to just normy conservatives
who've never been able to hear this stuff before. And
if they have heard it, you know, it triggered one
of those deeply embedded emotional sort of you know trauma
triggers they got watching shitters lit in sixth grade at school,
you know, and so Tucker is similar to the way
that like, by the time you got up to twenty sixteen,
like most Republican voters were like, man, we are never
going to get this albatross of the era war and
everything off our fucking back or around from our neck.
And but we can't like just denounce it or whatever,
because then we're saying, oh, yeah, Nancy Pelosi was right
all along and blah blah blah, we can't do that.
But Trump came in and gave them permission to be like, no,
that was all bullshit. And Tucker is doing that for
a normy audience right now, and he understands, like, you know,
one of the things that he understands very well is
that all of us have a place in the ladder,
you know, and that normany start at the bottom. You
have to give them a low rung to grab onto,
and then you have to give them a second rung
to grab onto. There's a lot of people out there,
you know, a lot of the annon's on Twitter and
other places who they just they want anybody with any
kind of a public profile to prove their bona fides
by going out there and just you know, screaming the
most obsig, it's going to get them banned, like just
to show that they're really down for the cause or whatever.
I always tell these people, you don't understand how propaganda works,
you know. Somebody like Tucker understands that his job is
to point people to point Pete. His job is to
take people who are bored with Matt Walsh and send
him to me. My job is to take people who
get bored with me and send them to Pete. You know.
And when I hear I've told Pete this before, when
I hear people like or see people online being like,
you know, I used to listen to Darryl, but then
I realized he's just a cuck faggot who won't say
any of the real shit. So now I only listen
to Thomas. I'm like, yeah, another, and like, I don't
take that personally at all, because I'm comfortable with my place,
you know, on the ladder, and we need all of
those pieces. I was talking to Oran McIntyre about this
the other day. He came out and he said something
that was more strident than you're used to hearing from
oron from Oran about the people we're talking about. And
I didn't go in and you know, like concern troll
him or anything. But I got into his DMS and
because you know, we're pretty good buddies by this point,
and I was like, dude, just be careful. We need
you exactly where you are, Like you know, we don't
need you like coming over even further to our So
like all that is great, like do that internally, but
in terms of the propaganda process, we need you exactly
where you are. You know, you play a very important
role in this whole thing. So and he understands that,
and uh, you know, just all of us always have
to keep that in mind. You know, like this is
a process and you have to like normal people like look,
I I Americans are basically decent people. You know, like
foreigners who come over here, they all say the same thing,
like you know, you just they're they're always surprised by
just sort of how open Americans are. They'll just start
talking to you about their family and their whatever, like
the day you meet them kind of thing, and uh,
you know, they're kind. They're the kind of people who
you know, they don't they're not comfortable feeling like they're
doing something that like really goes that that that goes
against like a deeply held principle that they have. You know,
they don't want to be an immoral person. They don't
want to feel like they're being unjust to anybody or
any group. And none of this, you know, none of
the things that we're talking about are unjust to anybody
or any group.
Speaker 7: You know.
Speaker 3: It's just about you know, offering them, presenting these ideas
to them in a way that works around those triggers
you know that got embedded in them in fourth grade.
Speaker 1: Hey, I want to bring something up to you real quick, Arrol,
because you mentioned Tucker and I've been thinking about this
a lot lately, especially since he had Fuentes on. Okay,
we've got several instances over the last century of these
witch hunts of you know, the Jewish lobby, the Jewish media.
I was gonna say Zionists, but some of these things
go back before Israel was a state, so we can't
really call it Zionist. Where they go after Charles Lindberg
and they completely like disappear him, they totally take him
down and he's no longer a factor. They go after
Sam Francis, they go after Pat Buchanan, and the neo
cons went ham on pap Buchanan, And if you go
back and read their you know, editorials that they wrote
for the National Review, et cetera, about Pat Buchanan, they
were saying the same things then as they're saying about
you know, anti Zionists.
Speaker 2: Now it's like this, It's like they have a playbook.
Speaker 1: And I mean, I've become convinced that they actually do
have a real, actual playbook that they all refer to,
because they all say the same things even twenty five
years later. Now they're trying to do that to Tucker.
And I don't really understand how Tucker's network works, but
as far as I know, it's completely independent.
Speaker 2: So they're going after him.
Speaker 1: They're trying to bring him down in the same way
they brought these they brought these other guys down. I
don't see how it can work. I don't see how
they can do it. He's not they're not cutting off
his funding. They're not kicking him out of the editorial
board of a national magazine. They can't fire him from
Fox News. They already did that. And look at him now,
I mean even on AXI he's huge, but he's on YouTube,
he's all over the internet, and even if they could
somehow get him off those platforms, which it looks like
they're not going to, he would still have the Tucker
Carlson Network.
Speaker 2: So I think it's not gonna work this time.
Speaker 8: I mean, I've be that their only way of getting
rid of him, and they do this to a lot
of our guys, And it's something I counsel against all
the time, like any time I can. I is they
know that the only way they can deal with him
is to provoke him into starting to say things that
are gonna make your sort of like nor me who's
just dipping their toe in sort of like pull back
and be like, oh, yeah, I don't know about this,
Like they know that that the whole point.
Speaker 3: He said this in a few of his episodes. You
might have said it in his interview with me recently,
that their goal is to make you hate them and
then to act hateful, hatefully toward them, and to do
it in public in ways that people see that'll make
them withdraw from you. That's the goal, and you can't
give into that. You know, you have to be aware
that that's the game they're playing.
Speaker 7: Yeah, and I'll say I'll say this, this is something
I think that's really important. If you're if you're consumed
by hate, you can't build anything. You're stuck in one place.
You can't move forward. That's why there's so many people,
so many of these ANNs are stuck on Twitter and
won't get off Twitter and build, build what comes next
because they're consumed by hate. Now, you have an adversary,
and you deal understand who your adversary is and structure
your life so that that adversary you can mitigate as
much of the negative consequences of that adversary as you can.
And that's it. You can't get consumed by hate. You
will end up saying stupid shit and then you know, yeah,
I've been anonymous on the internet. It's no fun. It's
no fun. You're just yeah, I mean, I may have.
Speaker 3: Told you about this, Pete, but you know, I know.
Gu I'm friends with a guy who he's currently getting
protested processed out of the Navy. He was a commander five,
graduated second in his class at the academy. He's a
Navy doctor. He was a candidate for the astronaut program
and came up second among the candidates only the Johnny Kim,
which is a silver Star winning Navy seal that used
to work for Jocko and Ramadi who now is a
Harvard educated doctor, and he's just a freaking super candidate, right,
this guy came in second to him. This buddy of
mine was on track to be an admiral. I mean,
he was gonna be one of our guys like up
at the flag level in the Navy. And he started
listening to you know, TRS podcast. He starts go, it
is a super smart guy obviously, starts listening to a
lot of these just you know, sort of more uncontrolled
kinds of content that we have out there on our side,
and he just did the he did the thing that
we have seen happen to so many people where you
like literally couldn't bring him into mixed company anymore, because
ten minutes into any conversation with your grandmother, he's going
to start talking about the Jews or something. And it
got to the and it got to that point where
he couldn't keep his fucking mouth shut in front of
his boss, in front of an admiral. And now he's
getting processed out of the Navy, and you know he's forgetting,
I mean forget about like just having a guy in
his position who understands where we're coming from. It's a
guy with a wife and kid, and now you know
he's going to be in a in a very just difficult,
difficult situation, you know, coming out of the Navy on
a on like other than honorable kind of circumstances, and
so like, those are the kind of things we really
have to avoid just on a personal level, but also
just because it takes you out of the game when
you do that, you know, and and it just makes
you so predictable and so reactive, so easily provoked by
the enemy. You know, they know somebody who is full
of anger, full of rage and hate. They know exactly
what to say to get you to freak out, just
the same way that you know. I made this point
to h to Scott the other day on our Provoked podcast,
Scott Horton. When I was trying to I was just
mounting a defense of of the groupers to a degree
where you know, I was trying to explain to him
that like for years, these guys have been in an
extremely asymmetric war right where the people that they're combating
can destroy their lives. They out them, they get them fired,
from their job. They put them on massive websites like
SPLC and ADL, the hate Watch. You know, that just
is there permanently, and this is the first they make sure.
It's the first thing that comes up if you google
their name when they're trying to rent a house or
get a job or something like that. These are all
the tools. They're canceling, their bank accounts, their credit cards.
These are the tools that their enemies had to use
against them. And what did they have at their disposal?
What weapons did they have? Well, they know that they
can say a few things. If you make a comment
to you that is going to trigger you and pull
you down to their level and make you look like
an asshole. And so that's what they do. You know,
you can destroy them by getting them fired from their
job and putting them on the hate watch website. They
can call you a racial slur, a jew, whatever, and
watch you freak out and knack like a more on online.
And that's the weapon that they had to fight back with,
you know, And you could you could say whatever you
want about that, but that's what was going on. And so, uh,
you know, I totally understand where a lot of that
comes from, but at a time now where we're really like,
we've got a lot of momentum behind us, and I
don't want to overplay that too much. We've still got
a long, long hill to climb, a lot of obstacles
to overcome. Uh, but you know, we're we're at a
place now where they can no longer they can no
longer fight us on those asymmetric terms so much. You know,
they have to actually meet us in the field. And
you see how that's going for him. It's not going well.
And so you know, being in a in a more
in more even combat like that, it requires different tactics,
you know, and and and people just have to keep
that in mind.
Speaker 7: All right, I got to cut out. I want to
thank Darryl for joining us. Awesome, thank you, and I'll
be in touch soon. And I got to go record.
I got to go record episode eighty eight, two hundred
years together.
Speaker 6: Amazing.
Speaker 7: Thank you, Darryl. Appreciate you.
Speaker 6: Take care, guys, make it easy.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that might be so.
Speaker 6: I can go on for another forty five.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I think I might have to cut it off
to Daryl, Are you good on time?
Speaker 3: No, not really, I've actually got to get going here soon,
So I'm gonna do a few more minutes if there's
something you want to talk about, but I gotta get going.
Speaker 6: There is one thing. I think, it's about American identity
going forward, because the biggest problem that we have both rhetorically,
you can see it in guys like Vance, guys like Tucker,
is when they are interacting with comments like the kind
that Mark Livin and Ben Shapiro are nice enough to
give us all the time about advocating about Jews, advocating
for Jews, why it's necessary, and why advocating for Israel
is really the only logical, you know, position for someone
of their ethno religious persuasion. But when guys like Tucker
will point out like why it's wrong and why x
y Z policy that the administration is doing is wrong,
and why America you know, why x y Z is
bad and you know, bad for America, that they can't
when they say like, oh, well, these things are we
need to do these things for Americans, they seem to
struggle with the ability of pointing out who that is right.
So if I go to like China and I ask
a Chinese man, what is an American? What does he
look like? The Chinese man will tell me same thing.
If I go to India, i go to Africa, they'll
tell me what an African or the African will tell
me what an American is. And no one in our
political apparatus, you know, on our side, is able to
tell me what an American is. So when they say
they want to do all of these things for the
benefit of Americans, they seem to be enable to attach
that to even an idea of a people group because
you say, like, well, who is an American? Well, everyone's
an American. And I think this is probably one of
the biggest shackles holding back both the direction of the
directing of policy but also the directing of the rhetorical
fight we're in. So I'd love to hear your take
on what that would look like. Yeah, what is an
American identity?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it's an incredible I mean, I'll say, first of all,
I think we're still kind of in the process of
that ethnogenesis, so like you, but it's it's really like
the question of questions for us at this point, and
people who are from even just a generation a little
bit behind us, I think have a lot more difficulty
with it than we do. It certainly than people who
are younger than us, do you know. I mean, if
you think about it, like for somebody like Tucker, I mean,
it's partly moral ethical, but it's also just partly pragmatic.
And I understand this part of it like very well
that he looks at the situation and says, look, man,
if we start talking just about race, like if you
look at the like the the the the trajectory of demographics,
if we go into that kind of a you know,
just say again like fortress mentality, where we just withdraw
into like racial identity purely, like purely, that we're gonna
end up in a country that, uh, you know where
where the majority populations are allied against us, and that
we can't really provide any kind of leadership for now.
And and I'm sympathetic to that, to that, to that
idea for sure, because it is I mean, we do
have to deal with the world as we find it
right now, and we also have to you know, I mean,
look like I've I've brought this up before, I think
in a in an article for I don't remember who,
but you know, Thomas talked about how this ideal of
like the white American Obviously, you go back to the
very beginning, and people knew that African slaves had darker
skin than them, and they were black, and they were
white like. People understood that on some level, but in
terms of like the operative elements of their identity outside
the South, like people were Catholic or Protestant, they were
Irish or Italian or Jewish or Anglo, and the idea
of you know, just us being white people was again
they were aware of it, but it wasn't it wasn't
the operative part of their identity because it would have
been like going to Norway back in nineteen fifty and
making a big you know, I'm a Norwegian kind of thing.
It was just everybody was Norwegian. There's no reason to
even have it enter into your consciousness. For the most part,
the things that the differentiations that actually made a difference
to them were things that applied in their local community,
you know, Irish, Catholic, Italian, Catholic, Jewish, whatever. And you know,
it was only with the great migration of the blacks
out of the South, but you had all of these
dipate white groups who were confronted with this, with this
alien force that was really wreaking havoc on their neighborhoods
and in their lives, their community lives. And then after
they got drove out, driven out into the suburbs where
you're an Italian guy who has an Irish neighbor and
a Jewish neighbor, and you know, there's the old Italian
Catholic church is forty five minutes across town, and only
old ladies who still live in the neighborhood go there,
and you don't go there anymore. Like that, you had
that sort of like all of those people begin to
melt into a white population. But that's something that's like
pretty recent, you know, in terms of having that as
an operative part of any identity. And we have, like
anybody above the age of about forty went through at
least twelve years of indoctrination in school, an entire lifetime
of indoctrination by the media telling them that anytime that
part of their identity starts to assert itself, they need
to put themselves in check because not only is it
immoral danger, it's going to be personally dangerous for you
if that gets if that gets to be too much
of what you're thinking about. And so you know, it's
very hard for people a little older than us to
really to overcome that and figure out a way too,
you know, preserve that element of racial identity which is
going to become. It's just it's going to be important
going forward, and you know, in the world and in
the United States, but also being willing to branch out
and have relationships, have a sort of you know, maybe
even like a you could say, like a like a
not geographically demarketed in the same way, but the way
Switzerland has like an ethnic federation in a way you know,
where you have these different groups, different people, and you know,
the any in the in the people who are you know,
who are willing and and and desiring to be part
of the project you know of America. We can work
with them, We can provide leadership to them, We can
work with their leaders and give them their respect that
do you know, as people who are here and who
want to be a part of the project and who
contribute to it, give them a respect without necessarily having
to just melt together into like some new hemispheric race
or something, which I just don't think is going to
happen regardless. I mean, and you know, so I mean
if you think about it, like that period after the
Second World War up to about maybe the JFK assassination
or so, like that was probably the closest we came
to having like a real American ethnogenesis on like a
national level where you had like a people who really
felt like, you know, there was something just meaningfully American
things that they were, you know, that that everybody was
proud of, even if it was based on a lot
of propaganda in the World wars and things like that,
but that that really brought them together and united them
as a people. You know, I think about how you know,
the city of the town of Vicksburgh never celebrated the
fourth of July after it was conquered during the Civil
War until July forth nineteen forty four, after the D
Day landing, and it was just you know, again propaganda
or not like we had had by nineteen forty four,
twenty years or really like thirty years because immigration kind
of you know, really came to a trickle when the
First World War broke out. It wasn't just in nineteen
twenty four, and so they had thirty years at that point,
the entire generation had been able to grow up into
working age adults who were all born in America. We
hadn't didn't have like a new generation. Is the first
time it's really happened in American history. You know, you
have seventeen seventy six and basically within a generation you've
got Germans and Irish flooding. In a generation later it's
Italians and Jews and others from Eastern and southern Europe.
But then after that petered out with the First World War,
that kind of the overseas immigration kind of came to
an end, and by the time you get up to
the end of the Second World War really been almost
thirty years. But of course by that point is you know,
we replaced that, We replaced that with the great migration
of blacks out of the South, and so that really
did like contribute to an ethnogenesis among American whites during
that period. And you know, you wonder what might have
happened if, you know, if we hadn't passed heart Seller
in nineteen sixty five and we had figured out a
way to integrate, you know, blacks into the country in
a way that you know, didn't place them in such
a hostile relationship to it. For the most part, and like,
you know, you wonder, but again, like this is the
world that that we got to live with now, and
it's much much more difficult, you know, Like Anglos had
to renegotiate American identity with Germans and Irish, not easy
given the time, you know, I mean, they were very
different and often hostile peoples. You had to do it
again with the Italians and Jews and others in the
late nineteenth early twentieth century. But still, you know, this
was something that, compared to what we're facing now, was
pretty doable. Now when we're dealing with people who are
you know, not just a different denomination of Christianity or
even you know, in the case of the Jews, like
people who are sort of part of the Biblical tradition
or something. We're just dealing with a huge assortment of
radically different culturally, racially.
Speaker 7: You know all.
Speaker 3: And we're doing it in at a time when you know,
that old Anglo leadership superstructure that had always guided this
country is no longer in place, and we have just
this sort of this this over built bureaucratic system that
has replaced any meaningful, coherent leadership class that is open
for anybody who kind of knows how to Any organized
minority who knows how to work the controls can take
control of the ship and drive it for their own purposes,
you know. And so these are very difficult circumstances that
like we didn't have to deal with when we were
trying to rein when we were trying to integrate the
European immigrants. Over the years, figuring out how to do
it again, and I just think that we have to
be able to reach out and uh and create relationships
with the civilized minorities that are out there. You know,
We're just we're not going to accomplish it without their cooperation,
without their help. And I think that you know, they,
like I said earlier, you know, you ask like you
talk to a lot of latinas, you talk to like
Arab women, you talk to a lot of minority women,
and it's seen as like a status symbol to be
with a white guy. It still is to this day.
There are a lot of these people, these groups that
would be perfectly willing to to to to accept the
leadership of heritage Americans in this project of you know,
sort of civilizing the rest of the country and dealing
with the people that can't be civilized, but we do
need their help and cooperation. I very much believe that.
Speaker 6: I think I think that that goes out saying just
because they're simply even to get the ball rolling, you're
going to need their cooperation. The thing that worries me, though,
is because of the people above fifty or above forty
to your point, or inable to articulate in or really
cognize it, because not only do they not allow themselves
to say it, they quickly not allow themselves to think it.
Eighty percent of the tax dollars that fund the government
are paid by people that look like you and me.
So I don't think this will happen now, but eventually
it will. The people that pay for the government, I think,
will only allow the government to work against their own
particular and broad self interest, which none of the organized
minorities seem to really give a shit about. It's kind
of that like like you said earlier about like you know,
taking the silverware, and you know, even the doorknobs off
of a sinking ship don't really particularly care one way
or the other. But the people that our politicians are
unable to articulate existing are the only people that fund
the government. So you have this type of Mexican standoff
where one party doesn't realize that they have a gun.
If any moment in time these people decided to say,
stop paying for a government that didn't service them, it
would collapse literally overnight. I mean, the treasury bonds that
underpin the global financial system are basically promisory notes on
the future contributions of that class of people. So I mean,
it could get really shitty if it goes that way.
And I mean the only way it would probably go
that way is if the administration lost the midterms and
then lost the election, which I think is a very
real risk because of their inability to articulate the people
that vote for them. Right, Black males don't vote, Black
females vote almost entirely left. It doesn't really matter how
many of them you went over. There not a large
demographic Hispanics. I think, to your point is a coalition
that that you can build the type of commonality at
least enough for everyone to vote the same way. But
I think this inability to recognize that our voters are
almost entirely white people at this stage in the game,
and particularly because of the acceleration in rhetoric that guys
like Shapiro and guys like Mark Levin are doing in
a negative sense, it's actually the Jews that are accelerating this,
this group of people finally, as the leftoid say, getting
racial consciousness. So I think, like, I mean, look what
happened in Virginia and look what's about to happen in Florida. Right, Like,
the leadership of the ostensible conservative parties are adverse of
either a articulating who they actually serve who votes for them,
and be running candidates that represent those people. And I
think unless this has figured out in the short term,
I think it's enough to lose the midterms, especially with
like the repetitive comments out of the administration about how
much we need H one b's or whatever. I don't
think they're aware of how much ground they're losing between
the only voter base that actually votes for them.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's the real importance and significance of Trump and
why it's important I tell this to people who you know,
even are very suspicious of jd. Vance because of his
tel ties or whatever. That forget about the man himself
and whether you trust him. Like, the significance of these
people is providing us with enough time, enough cover, for
enough time to talk to each other and organize with
each other without having the FBI sicked on us. Like
that's their certificate and that's really all we need from
them at this point. You know, you're not going to
take somebody. I think Tucker is fifty six people guys
who were fifty six, Like, they don't they don't have
like revolutionary changes in their moral compass or any of
those kind of things, you know, like scientific paradigms at
what's an old quote like that, nobody changes their minds.
Like the people who believe one thing just retire and
die off, and they get replaced with people who understand
the new paradigm better. And that's why that system that
I was talking about earlier, that is just important, you know,
like getting somebody getting some of the older generations, somebody
like Tucker to speak directly to the things that we
think need to be spoken to, like a I think,
you know, just for propaganda purposes. That's just not as product.
But it's you're not gonna not gonna be able to
do that. You know. What you can do is get
somebody like him to open up enough space for somebody
like me to operate, and then somebody like me to
open up enough space for you know, people who can
be more direct to operate. And if we can continue
to take advantage of that in the time we have,
you know, if we can get VANCE in there for
eight years. Yeah, I mean this is and again forget
about like what you think VANCE is gonna accomplish. Anybody
out there who doesn't like it, I don't care about that.
That's fine. That gives us twelve years of not having
you know, the IRS and FBI and everything else on
our back, of not having the federal government probably going
ham trying to force Elon Musk to sell Twitter, you know,
and closing down that channel of communication. It gives us
twelve years to you know, be able to to have
in person meetings and talk to each other face to
face and get to know each other without having our
groups infiltrated by you know, uh informants the FBI. That's
the kind of work that needs to be done right now.
And that's the work that we are able to accomplish,
whatever anybody thinks about the Trump administration or future Dvant administration.
And when you add to that the fact that you know,
this happened to a great degree, like in the Reagan
and first Bush term twelve years, you know, the Republicans
held power, and we can look back and say, oh,
they were forget their politics, right. What happened during that period, though,
is a lot of the opposition financial networks that had
existed in the sixties and seventies, a lot of the
just sort of the ideological infrastructure that had supported the
left up until like through the nineteen seventies, Like all
of that stuff just evaporated because they were out of
power for twelve years, and so money went elsewhere. A
lot of the people who were running a lot of
those institutions all retired and got replaced with new people.
So that you get to the nineteen nineties and the
Democrats basically had to run a guy uh To to
win the presidency that was basically a Republican in the
nineteen eighties, you know, and uh, you know, if we
if we have twelve years to work with where these
people are out of power, you know, they're all like
the Chuck Schumer is going to retire. A lot of
these people are going to retire, and a lot of
the talent they have at like the lower levels. You know,
Chuck Schumer's a moral monster find but like these people
are at least political animals who knew how to operate
and knew how to get their way. You know, a
lot of times Ben Shapiro is not going to be
able to replace, you know, just or just look at
the uh, look at the just the generational difference between
the neo Conservatives. You know, say what you want about
Norm pod Hortz and Irving Crystal. These were very intelligent guys.
Their kids are just these retard fail sons who like
are just embarrassment to their own families, you know. And
and that's a lot of the Democrat Party. And you know,
they have themselves to thank for that to a large degree,
just because you know, one of the best things it
really happened in the Democrat Party over the course of
the Obama administration is that the Clinton's, the Clinton machine
just completely cleaned off their whole bench, like they because
they didn't want a repeat of twenty eight in twenty sixteen.
They didn't want anybody to step up who was really
going to challenge Hillary Clinton. And so when you got
to the end of the Obama administration, the Democrats had
no bench whatsoever. I mean, you look at the Republican
primaries in twenty sixteen, and you had like probably like
at least half a dozen, probably ten viable candidates, you know,
forgetting about their politics or whatever, like ten guys who
probably could have run a competent presidential campaign. The Democrats
they got nobody, you know, they got nobody, and you know,
as their financial networks just start to migrate or evaporate,
because you know, they're just not in power, as a
lot of the competent leadership that they have left starts
to retire and die off. Twelve years a long time.
A lot can happen in twelve years, you know, and
we can get to a point where I mean, I
mean just in the time period we've had, and this
is with a four year break with the federal government
going hard at us during the Biden administration, but just
in the time we've had since twenty fifteen twenty sixteen,
Look how much we've been able to accomplish, you know,
and so if we can get another you know, nine
years of that will be in a very very different place.
You know, things things are changing way too much. You
look at the polls of like the way younger generations
think about it. People who are zoomers now are going
to be in their mid forties, you know, and they're
going to be the middle managers of companies, and they're
going to actually be people who, you know, who aren't
just participating in this stuff as anonymous Twitter trolls, but
they're going to be participating in society in different ways,
you know, and in more elevated ways. So we just
got to buy ourselves at time. And it's why I'm
you know again, I tell people I don't really care
what your thoughts about him personally are hundred percent advanced
twenty twenty eight, just because we he's not hostile to us.
He's not going to sick the federal government on us,
and that is all we need residential administration right now.
Speaker 6: Well that and our own and we'll call it like
gentile financial networks too, because all of this does, you know,
organize and costs money. And that's probably the thing that
I'm most discouraged about is the lack of these But
if you think about, you know, who amongst us has
that type of money, you're really all talking about people
that are past the you know, we'll call it the
fifty year old dividing line and are fundamentally unable to
see politics as it is now. I think that that
and probably housing is probably the biggest hurdle for our
guys right now. Is the lack of organized financial support,
like there is no h Arabella networks for people like us.
It's probably one of the biggest you know, I probably
say the biggest, if not like the second biggest issue
that we have to overcome, and I think probably the
second is housing unless this administration is able to a
stop and reverse immigration to a large degree, but stop
and reverse both private equity and more importantly and larger
foreign nationals purchasing US real estate. They don't live in them, right, So,
like three quarters of the kind of the apartments in
Manhattan are owned by Chinese, Russian, Indian nationals that will
never step foot in them, nor will they ever rent them.
It's just that their financial systems are coming apart. And
the safest thing in the world to invest in, safer
than the US dollars because it protects you from inflation,
is US real estate. So until we kind of allow
guys to form families, yes too, I think a type
of mindset is generated by a man that has a family, right,
a wife and a house. It makes his perception of
time much longer, and it makes them capable of doing
the hard work that takes a long time before you
see results. So it's not just you know, it gives
them a long term time horizon, it's something that you know,
it's a victory that they can put underneath their belt
that says, Okay, if I struggle at something for a
very long time, eventually it will yield results for me
that are worth it. I think that's probably the first
step on the ladder. And unfortunately, all of the you know,
solutions that we've seen out of this administration so far
are not really able to deal with that. But I
think if you've solved those two things, get get guys,
get people with ideas like us. You know, luckily, I
don't you know, I was very lucky professionally, and I
don't have to worry about a lot of the things
that other people worry about. But I don't have enough
money to you know, I'm not a I'm not George
Soros money. I'm not you know, Bill Gates money, So
I we don't have those type of people that share
our ideas that are willing to put money to work
where people can make this their full time job, because
we do have to order. I agree with you, we
do have to. There needs to be an entire infrastructure
of people that come in with vance, both in public
organization in private. So I hope those things can could
get solved. But I asked for you. You're going to
say something, I'm.
Speaker 2: Just kind of have to go. I want to give
Darrell the last word.
Speaker 3: Well, actually I got a roll too, brother. I just
got a phone call. I got a contractor that was
supposed to be at one and he's going to be
here in just a few minutes, so I got to
roll out too.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, there you go. Look, this was a great show, Darryl,
thanks for coming, man. Just really honored to have you here.
Speaker 3: Like I always tell you, man, anytime I'm trying to
dial back like appearances on just kind of you know,
turning down invitations in general. But that's never going to
apply to my friends.
Speaker 6: So the questions part two come out, Uh probably, I'm
sure you hate that.
Speaker 3: Sure, late February, early March. That's what I think I'm
on track for right now. So yeah, we'll see Stormy
it was awesome talk to you man. I've been a
fan for a while. I love you guys on the
Inquisition and I'll come back anytime.
Speaker 2: We'll make it happen soon.
Speaker 9: Thanks every great fella listening, and thanks Against
Speaker 6: Stott.