Speaker 1: Good morning. I've come to some realizations lately, a lot
having to do with watching everything that's happening, and especially
watching these What we said from the beginning was that
there are going to be elite factions that are going
to be fighting for control of the Trump presidency. Anytime
you have something that appears to be revolutionary, you're going
to If that revolutionary spirit doesn't have a specific idea
behind it, then there's going to be competing factions. And
the competing factions I think I identified as the tech elites,
the you know, civic nationalists kind of, and then of
course the neocons, the israel firsts, the Jews, and if
you look at what's been happening recently, you have to
agree that the Jews and the Zionists, whatever you want
to call them, both of those work and are accurate
that they're winning. No Epstein list, which I don't I
do care about. You know, the children that were hurt,
but I want to know what was how they were
being used, how who committed treason? You know, who needs
to be get the Rosenberg treatment, JFK files. And then
now this with the who thy's and the Gaza being rebombed,
they're winning, and there was always that chance. And I
can sit here in Mayakulpa all day and I do
because there were some things that I thought were going
to happen that aren't happening. I don't know that they're
going to happen. It probably won't. I mean, no one
is talking about the Department of Education. Everyone's concentrating on
the deportations to El Salvador to the prison there, which
I agree with one hundred percent. But then there's some
guy who's here on a green card, and no matter
what you think about that, the legality of the system
is is that he's here, he's married to an American citizen,
and they're going after him solely because he's against the
Zionist agenda. So the question needs to be asked if
they're going to go after him and he is legally here.
And people on our side love to use the slippery
slope argument, which we say is undefeated. When does that
start getting applied to American citizens? If the slippery slope
is undefeated, This isn't a bad question. I'm not asking
a question that's out of line. So the Zionists and
the Jews are winning, and going back to something that
we talked about in the last Inquisition episode. I have
to admit that we're still at the philosophy stage. Our
people still don't know what we are and what we're
supposed to be. This was never about Trump. It was
about what Trump represented. But what he represents is not
what we want. What I've come to believe is that
one man cannot fix a multi racial, multi cultural society.
That's an impossibility. When you go back in history and
you look at the great men, are they what are
the changes they are making? What is the revolution the
revolutionary idea that they're addressing. They're addressing it for one people,
not a hodgepodge or an amalgamation or a soup, or
not even a soup, because a salad there's no integration.
So what you have is you have several different special
interest groups vying for power, vying for the attention of power,
vying for all of the influence of power to back them,
and that can't One man can't fix that. One man
cannot fix what we have. And this is true on
a metaphysical level. If you believe the great men of
the past represented their people the spirit of their people,
that would mean that their people had to have a
coherent message. We're Frenchmen, We're Englishmen, Germans, we're Americans. Okay,
but what does that even mean anymore? It meant something
specific at one time, but it doesn't mean anything anymore
because we were infiltrated. We're occupied, and once you understand
that you're occupied, you understand that there's only a couple
ways to deal with that. You either have to end
the occupation and remove the occupiers, or you have to
figure something else out. And I think at this point
the only answer is is if you believe in the
spiritual is you have to find your own people and
you have to organize that way. And I think that's
the only way the spirit of God can work through you,
the spirit of the that you can fight the spirit
of this age and create a new one for yourselves.
Only through that spirit can you reverse the tower of Babbeyl.
And the only way that you reverse the tower of
Babbel is to be a part of an ethnosis and
be a part of a high culture. Everything else will fail,
has failed and is failing. That's all and is or
it's all failed. And the reason it's failed is because
we've been forced to embrace multiculturalism and multi ethnic, multi racialism.
It just doesn't work. It may work in a small
it may work in a small country like a Singapore,
but what do they do there They basically if you
step out of line a little bit, you get caned
in public. We don't have that here. We don't have
a leader who we don't have a leader who's going
to look at the founding stock of this country and
those people who you'll, like myself, who want the founding
stock of this country, that the continuation of that stock
to control this country and to dictate where it goes
and pander to them and say, yes, this is these
are my people. That's not going to happen. It's just
not So what do you do. I mean, anyone who
anyone who's like promoting that, oh we're just you know,
we're going to kick you, the best of them will
be on the last train out of here. They're selling
you something. It's just it's not going to happen. It's
too far gone. So the only answer is to find
your own people and to organize. And if you do that,
then that spirit, that spirit that has in the past
caused men to come together and do great things and forge. Yeah,
I mean what is the next great frontier? You know,
you people think about the you know, the American West
and pushing west and that spirit, the spirit that possessed
men to do that. I mean, well where else? What
is that now? I mean, the space is really the
only possible thing anyone could think of if they're being realistic, Well,
how do you do that? This is why I think
we're still at the philosophy stage because we don't know
who we We still don't know how this works, how
great societies of the past have worked, and how they failed.
You don't do this by making more laws. You don't
do this by I don't know. It's probably going to
be some thing a lot simpler than the high IQ
people on our side think it is. Because people with
high IQs and people who are intelligent, they want all
of their answers to reflect that. They want you to
know that the answer that they came up with was
because they're so brilliant. Sometimes the answer is really simple.
Find your own people, organize and let the spirit take
Let that spirit take over, because every great civilization has
had a spirit about it. That spirit's gone here, it's gone.
And when people and the people right now who are going, no,
it's not. What they will point to is a smaller group.
They will say, oh, no, it lives here, and it
lives here. Well, you're just making my point. For me.
It's in a smaller group, separate from the bigger group,
which means that national politics is the best you can
hope for is for them to just leave you alone.
The best you can hope for is people who are
in there that are indifferent to you. Because what you're
seeing right now, to go back to the beginning, is
you're seeing different groups vying for power, and the people
who for the last eighty years have had all the
power and gathered all the wealth to themselves because they've
controlled banking even in Europe for the last three hundred years.
They're winning, but they're also losing. I fully, I fully
believe that you can just see it by the way
they're acting. But in the meantime, just sitting around and
waiting and not building what comes next, that's just laziness.
That's just waiting for someone else to do something for you.
And maybe you're not the kind of person who can build,
but you can align yourself with people who do, and
you can help them in any way you can. I
think people, including myself, have allowed ourselves to miss the
big picture because we see that there is a shift
that's happening, and the Trump election in twenty twenty four
did signify a shift, but it's not giving us answers.
It's causing more questions to be asked. And by answering
those questions properly, then we can go into the future
and then we know. Then, when you know that, you
know what needs to be done. And the answer isn't
national politics get your guy elected this and that is
to create your own collective with a high culture and
a spirit that will take you forward and will be indivisible,
and then you keep the shit out of it. All right,
take care and talk to you guys in a few days.
Good morning everyone. Really, I hadn't planned on recording today,
and I'm sorry. I haven't really been doing any substack
drops lately, just been really busy with the podcast and
other things. But something I tweeted about yesterday, I did
it a little clandestinely, trying to get a community note.
Phil Giraldi Formaci agent and no matter what you think
of him, I know some people don't like when people
are bombastic, And I mean, I grew up in New York.
Bombastic is just how we had conversations. So he doesn't
bother me when it comes to that. But he tweeted
something that I've been thinking about a lot, and you know,
of course it's on a subject that I talk about
a lot. But I'll just read out his tweet and
we'll go from there. He says, Israel's friends friends is
in quotes are everywhere. It was recently revealed that the
woman behind the clamp down on pro Palestine demonstrators at
Columbia University of New York City is a former Israeli
intelligence officer, and it has long been known that the
censors and fact checkers on many US social media sites
are actually former Israeli intelligence officers from the notorious Unit
eighty two hundred, secret cyber warfare snooper outfit. It's not
so secret, it's pretty much known. People know Unit ey
two hundred. Now, which when I start this and I
read that first very long sentence, the first thing somebody
is going to scream at me is, oh, but that
guy was here on a green card and he's Hamas
and he's I don't care deport him. I don't give
a fuck. You can try to. This is the typical
kind of bullshit that these fuckers use against you. It's
like you start talking about one thing, you start saying,
there are Israel, there are foreign power intelligence officers of
foreign powers working in our universities and working basically everywhere, implanted,
everywhere in this country. And because it's America's greatest ally,
they immediately go to, Oh, you're on the side of
the terrorists. No, go fuck yourself and your mother. Okay,
fuck you. I'm going to continue here in the current revelation.
Doctor Karen Yarhi malo A Milo, Head of Columbia School
of International and Public Affairs, is a former Israeli military
intelligence officer and an ex official at Israel's Mission to
the United Nations. So she's an ex official at Israel's
Mission to the United Nations. She is married to the
head of that mission currently. Yarhi Milo plays played a
significant role in drumming up public concerned about a supposed
wave of intolerable anti Semitism sweeping over the campus, thereby
laying the groundwork for the extensive crackdown on civil liberties
that has sought to suppress the protests. They would have
you believe that, like everybody who was out there was
someone here on a visa or here illegally, and they
all used to like fight for Hamas. I've heard numbers
as much as half of the people who have been
protesting since October seventh on college campuses are Jewish. I mean, okay,
so they're Hamas. Or some of them may just be like,
can you stop fucking killing kids? So can you stop
making Jews look bad? Or I don't know, maybe some
of them have been completely co opted, have been co
opted with the mind virus of oh, whites are colonizers
and we're Jews and we're perceived as white, or maybe
they even think they're white, and this is going to
blow back on you know, this blows back on us.
It makes us look bad, just the fact that they
try to portray everyone who's out there as Hamas. And
I've heard people that I actually respect, people in power
that I respect, play this game, and it just really
drives me further away from supporting anything anyone does other
than people I know and that I've met and that
I still work with, because I mean, this is fucking retarded.
Let me remind you. This is all about the fact
that Columbia's fool of International and Public Affairs, the head
of it is for it. I mean, do you think Russia,
Let's even if someone was uber qualified. University of Moscow
one of their departments is headed up by former German intelligence.
How about Syrian intelligence? I mean that's a former ally
of theirs. Do you think I mean they gave they
gave a sad in his family. I mean, do you
think they're He's putting them in the government where they
can make where they're making policy, where they're they have
they basically have power over Russians lives. Yeah, I don't
fucking think so nobody does this. You think c C
you think the CCP has Russians working in, you know,
implanted in their government. If they do, it's spot it
would be it would they wouldn't have that, they wouldn't
be welcoming that, it would be something that would be
beyond their control for the time until they figured it out.
How the fuck? I mean, if you accept this as
far as I'm concerned, fuck you if you accept this.
But if you accept this, what it means is you
basically consider Israel in the United states to be the
exact same thing, that there's no difference between us and
what happens, if, what happens when, Because this has happened
throughout the last since nineteen forty eight. Many times they're
caught selling technology that we gave them to the Chinese
for a profit. We give them them something, they turn
around and they sell it to our quote unquote enemies.
That happened. Or they bomb one of our ships. That happened,
and they kept bombing even after they knew that it
was an American ship, and they bombed the life rafts.
That happened. When do you stop making excuses for these fuckers?
Drawdy continues, This should surprise no one, as it is
exactly how Israel and its American allies operate across the board.
Used donations to institutions and individual power brokers to pry
open the door and then staff the targeted entities with
your own people who will do your bidding. And then
there's posts under this where people are just showing how headlines.
This one is from March twentieth, twenty twenty five. There's
just a couple of days ago, Google playing with fire
by acquiring Israel company founded by Unit eighty two hundred veterans.
These these are the censors. These are people who can
see what you're doing unless you have a totally de
googled device. Don't think they can't let me see if
there's any anyone else posting anything here. Yeah. March March seventh,
two thousand and two, US arrest two hundred young Israelis
and spying investigation. And they talked about how in nineteen
eighty four, Jonathan Pollard, who was a US Naval intelligence officer,
was sentenced to life in prison for spying for Israel. Oh,
he was pardoned by Donald Trump. Donald Trump didn't pardon
in the first term, Ross Old brick or pre pardoned
the J six, you know, preemptively pardon the J six
guys and ladies. He didn't part in July in as
songe Or Edwards noted, No, he pardoned somebody who was
spying for a foreign power against the United States as
a US Naval intelligence officer. And then Jonathan Poward went
home and gave interviews and he even has a podcast
now where he says it is every Jew's responsibility in
another country to spy for Israel. Okay, so what sure
I mean oh, that's only one person. Yeah, it was
somebody who spent decades in American prisons for spying and
was a US Naval intelligence officer and then was welcomed
home on the tarmac. I think he flew, if I
remember correctly, he flew to when he was released here,
he flew to Israel on Merriam Adelson's plane, or I
think the older the patriarch Adelson was still alive at
the time and was greeted on the tarmac by Benjamin
Netan Yahoo who also in the past, and Scott Horton
has covered this on his podcast with Experts with Receipts
Help Benjamin Netna, who was one of the ones who
stole nuclear secrets from the United States and took them
back to Israel. But this is our greatest ally and
I don't want to. Oh, I'm sorry, but I'll be
called anti Semitic. You're called that anyway for questioning anything
about this relationship. Get the fuck over it. I mean,
if oh, I go by Baptist Church will or by
my non denominational super church. You know we teach I
don't give a fuck you actually think, oh, you're by
by basically turning your fucking country over to Israelis. The
argument can be made some really aren't even Jews, real Jews,
that that's gonna make Jesus come back. No, you're fucking retarded.
You're retarded. You know you are. You're not only politically illiterate,
you're theologically illiterate. And yeah, and I'm calling your pastor,
the person you respect the most, a person who's you've
invited over your house. I'm calling them a fucking idiot
and a traitor, even if they don't know it. Okay,
this fucking bullshit has to stop. Our fucking country has
there is a foreign power who has implanted intelligence officers
all throughout. Praeger University is run by someone who worked
from a odd They brag about it. That's con inc
They fucking brag about it. It is. It's something when
they when they run down somebody's credentials, they consider it
to be a positive that that person used to be
Israeli intelligence. I mean, I am not a I think
most of you know that. I'm not a imagine if
the roles were reverse kind of person. I'm not one
of these people who you know is like, oh, you
know if this was but I mean We catch CCP
Chinese spies in this country all the time. I mean, senators,
Congress people have had relationships with them, They've been caught
in relationships with them, They've had them as their driver,
and what happens. It can't be tolerated. But you have
an IVY League university and the head of the Internet.
I mean, think about this. She is the head of
the School of International and Public Affairs. Are you fucking retarded?
Do you not get that? Do you not get the
implication of that? I at this point, I don't know
if you are still pushing back on the Oh you're woke,
right if you talk about the Jews. Oh you blame
the Jews for all of your problems in life. Oh
if you stub your toe on your bed, you blame
the Jews. Go fuck yourself, I mean literally, fucking see
Canadian healthcare. And I'm not joking. Fucking don't listen to
my show anymore. If you're donating, please stop donating, okay,
because I'm not gonna fucking this is This is the
fucking hill to die on, because if we don't die
on this fucking hill, the country, there is no country.
It's dead. There hasn't been a country since World War Two.
But if there's ever a chance that something is taken back,
I mean, do you understand why most why people, whether
they realize it or not on our side, move out
of the cities and get as far away from cities
as possible is to get away from these people, and
then you still have them coming to infiltrating the smallest
of fucking towns. It's amazing when you get people contact
me all the time and they're like, I live in
this small town in Montana. Look at this, what's happening.
Look what they're putting in the libraries. And then you
read the story about the new librarian and guess what
this isn't Oh I stubbed my toe. I stubbed my toe.
I'm gonna blame the Jews. This is so coordinated and
it doesn't need to be widespread. That's the stupidest fucking
That's another fucking straw man. It's like, oh, you're it's
like widespread voter fraud, you know in twenty twenty. It's like, oh,
you taught you think there was widespread. No, all it
has to do is be It just has to be
coordinated on by a very small group of people. This
is what elite theory is all about. Right. If you're
someone who ascribes to elite theory, all you need is
a couple people, right. I mean at this point if
when you think about it, I'm not saying I don't
walk around all day thinking about this, Okay, I don't.
I think about it when I talk about it. I
think about it when I see it on Twitter. There's
another reason why I try to spend you know, less
time on Twitter. If you compare the amount I used
to tweet a year ago to the amount I tweet now,
it's fractional, mostly because it's fucking infuriating because all it's
all you can see. And again it's not, oh well,
our problems are, Oh it's the Jews. No, when you
see something, when you see something and you're like that
looks fucky, you're going to find a Jewish name there?
You know who told you this? Dennis Prager has a
video interview where he says, every time you know every
ism out there, feminism, communism, socialism, all these isms except
for Nazism, it's Jews overwhelmingly he uses the term overwhelmingly,
and you have the world Jewish Congress, which is a
powerful fucking organization that you know, Oh, I've never heard
of it, and you know I hear of it every
once in a while, So it must not be powerful
if it's not being blasted into my ear every five
minutes that brags about They have a video where they
brag about every friggin leftist, progressive, disgusting movement they've been behind,
and the first one they talk about is Harvey Milk,
who's a fucking pedophile, who was a pedophile, and there's
a friggin navel. I think there's an aircraft carrier named
after him. This isn't oh I stubbed my toe. I
blame the Jews. This is reading. This is Henry This
is what Henry Ford noticed. This is what Charles Lindberg noticed.
This is what like great men of the past noticed.
And people are like, oh, well, you're not a great man,
but you're admitting. But by saying that, you're admitting that
they're great men. So if I'm reading them and I'm
repeating what they say, I'm just repeating what great men say.
So you're just attacking me because you've already admitted that
they're great men. Do you understand how fucking deep this goes,
This goes into argumentation, This goes into the words that
come out of your mouth. And ever since Israel became
a nation, they've basically they've they've infiltrated everything. Think about this,
how many people when Israel before October seventh, if Jews
all over the world living in pretty much every Western country,
I mean every Western country, most of them playing some
kind of political social NGO type influence on every country.
What what other countries do that? What other countries have
their own country yet have spokespeople and representatives living in
other countries, exercising power in those countries, and refuse to
go live in their own country. I mean, what's wrong
with the country. Why don't they want to live there?
Why do they just want to be in other people's countries?
Have power in other people's countries, control as much as possible.
When the country has become two right wing, start revolutionary
movements or inspire revolutionary movements to destroy that quote unquote
right wing, which is just common sense, historical common sense.
Why why the fuck are you? Why are we putting
up with this? Why are you putting up with this?
Because you don't want to be called antisemitic. You don't
want to see blaming your problems on everyone else. This
isn't your problem, This is everyone's problem. This is the
country's problem. And not only do they attack the country,
but they attack the people, the people who not only
are heritage Americans whose families have been here forever, but
those of us who came after words and have adopted
everything and will fight to fight to the death to
preserve what heritage Americans have built. They're not gonna do that.
If this country becomes too intolerable, they'll go somewhere else.
That's what they've done historically, everywhere but Israel. And you're
just making excuses for him. Un fuck unbelievable. Un fuck unbelievable. Oh,
everybody who complains about my language, shut fuck off, fuck off,
Really grow the fuck up. I really hope you think
about this. If you're struggling with any of it, I
do take care. Good morning, everyone. It's been about a week,
maybe over a week since I did one of these substacks,
and I had an idea for doing substacks to keep
me on the regular here. And if this works out
this morning, maybe we'll address some other chapters. You all
know that I like reading and commenting on things. And
this is a book that was written by Walter Block, libertarian.
I believe the MESA institute just kicked him out because
he's revealed himself to be a Zionist, which means he's
not a real libertarian. On German Happa's officially pronounced him
and not a real libertarian. And he wrote this book
back in nineteen seventy six called Defending the Undefendables, and
I thought I'd read a chapter and see where this goes.
So yeah, I'll just read the first chapter. The first
paragraph of the introduction says here, the people presented in
this book are generally considered villainous and the functions they
perform harmful. Sometimes society itself is damned because it spawns
such reprehensible characters. However, the thrust of this book will
concentrate on the following propositions. They are guilty of no
doing of a violent nature, and virtually every case they
actually benefit society. If we prohibit their activities, we do
so at our own loss. He goes on to say,
the impetus for this book is libertarianism. The basic premise
of this philosophy is that it is illegitimate to engage
in aggression against non aggressors. What is meant by aggression
is not assertiveness, argumentativeness, competitiveness, adventuousness, quarrelsomeness, or antagonism. What
is meant is aggression by aggression is the use of violence,
such as which takes place in murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping.
He goes on, we're not pacifist, do not forbid the
use of violence. You're just not allowed to initiate violence
against nonviolent people or their property. So in this book,
doctor Walter Block takes on people that, Yep, we may
find reprehensible, but my assertion would be, no matter what,
if you are thinking about your policy as anything other
than an economic zone, these people might not be beneficial
and may be harmful. So the first part of this
book deals with sex ual you know, blue laws, things
like that. And the first person that he the first
actor that he presents is the prostitute. So I'm going
to read this and let's see what his argument for
prostitut because remember he's actually said that they're not harmful,
they're actually beneficial. So let's see where this goes. Subject
to ceaseless harassment by blue laws, church groups, chambers of commerce,
et cetera. Prostitutes nevertheless continue to trade with the public.
The value of their service is proven by the fact
that people continue to seek them out despite legal and
civic opposition. A prostitute may be defined as one who
engages in the voluntary trade of sexual services for a fee.
The essential part of the definition, however, is voluntary trade.
A magazine covered by Norman Rockwell some time ago illustrated
the essence of prostitution, if not the specifics. They portrayed
a milkman and a pie man standing near their trucks easily,
each busily eating a pie and drinking milk, both obviously
pleased with their voluntary trade. So immediately what I look at,
what I see is he's framing this as prostitutes are
out there voluntarily. Is that what we know from history? Now,
the next section of this he's going to do, He's
going to talk about the pimp, and I assume what
he's going to do is he's going to argue that
as long as it's a voluntary relationship. The point is,
when in history have we has it been portrayed as such?
Have you ever seen interviews with prostitutes who had pimps,
how many were making excuses and was this really a
voluntary Up until just a couple of decades ago, pornography
was considered white slavery. Prostitution was considered called white slavery.
So immediately the first two paragraphs, the prostitute is being
made to made out to be out there of her
own volition, not being forced, and yeah, she's providing a service.
I'll go on. Those lacking sufficient imagination will see no
connection between the prostitute entertaining her custom stomer and the
aforementioned milk and pie episode. But in both cases two
people have come together on a voluntary basis in an
attempt to mutually gain satisfaction, and in neither case is
force or fraud applied. Of course, the customer the prostitute
may later decide that the services received were not worth
the money he paid. The prostitute may feel that the
money she was paid did not fully compensate her for
the services she provided. Similar to satisfactions could also occur
in the milk pie trade. The milk could have been
sour or the pie under baked, but both regrets would
be after the fact, and would not alter the description
of these trades as voluntary. If all the participants were
not willing, the trades would not have taken place. Well,
do you see what's going on here? He's basically creating
a scenario which in my study, in my reading and
everything I've ever seen is the exception and not the
rule when it comes to prostitution. And now, mind you,
if the kind of quote unquote capitalism, which is basically
one thing that libertarians will do is they will when
things are really wrong with the economy, they'll say, this
isn't real capitalism. Real capitalism is free trade. But when
they need the argument to go in their direction, they'll
point to things like the Orient or or like Korea,
and they'll say, in the last thirty five years, one
billion people have been pulled out of poverty because of capitalism. Well,
which one is it? Is this not real capitalism because
there's no regulations and no laws and nothing binding trade,
Or is this what you call corporatism or crony capitalism
that pull the billion people out of poverty? Which one
is it? But that's the games that they have to play,
is that you know, there's just no true Scotsman fallacies
all throughout all of this where well, I mean, I
don't know of no true scotsmen. I mean, that's that's
a big part of libertarianism too. But basically they're presenting
one thing. They're saying, oh, this is voluntary. But as
soon as you know, when you point out that it's
rare voluntary, then it's like, well, no, no, no, We're
just going to concentrate on the We're going to concentrate
on the perfect here, not the imperfect. This is all theory,
This is all theory going on. There are those women's
liberationists among them who lament the plight of the poor,
downtrodden prostitute, and who think of her life as demeaning
and exploitive and exploitive, exploitative. But the prostitute does not
look upon the sale of sex as demeaning. After considering
the good features, short hours, high renumeration, with the drawbacks,
harassment by the police enforcement commissions, to her pimp uninspiring
work conditions, the prostitute obviously prefers her work, Otherwise she
would not continue it. What's the intention? I'll ask you
this question, and this is for you to answer. Okay,
I'm not going to even give my opinion on this,
so I won't be accused of straw manning. What's the
intention of writing this, what's the intention of putting this
down on paper? I'll continue. There are, of course, many
negative aspects experienced by prostitutes who belie the happy hooker image.
There are prostitutes who are drug addicts, prostitutes are beaten
by pimps, and prostitutes who are held in brothels against
their will. But these sordid aspects have little to do
with the intrinsic career of prostitution. So there is the
idyllic vision of what prostitution should be, which and then
there is the reality of it, which is drug addiction,
getting beaten by pimps, being held against your will in
a brothel, getting beaten by John's the fact that life
is basically going to be shortened. Probably, But let's concentrate
on the ideal. Look here, let's concentrate on the ideal
that we're trying to You know, this is about this
is about money, as what this is about. This is
about economy and money. So don't look at the bad stuff.
Let's look at what it would be if it was
a perfect transaction. There are nurses and doctors who are
kidnapped and forced to perform for fugitives from justice. There
are carpenters who are drug addicts. There are bookkeepers who
are beaten by muggers. We would hardly conclude that any
of these professions or vocations or suspect the meaning or
or exploitative. The life of the prostitute is as good
or as bad as she wishes it to be. She
answers it voluntarily quah prostitute, and it's free to leave
at any time. So prostitute. Because there are nurses and
doctors who have been kidnapped and forced to perform by, say,
fugitives from justice, which he's basically taken out of a movie.
There are carpenters who are drug addicts, yes, especially oxy
wonder where that came from. There are bookkeepers who are
beaten by muggers. But we wouldn't conclude that any of
those professions or brocations or suspected meeting or exploitative. Does
this argument carry for any of you. She is voluntarily
doing this and free to leave it anytime. Her career
as a prostitute is just as good or as bad
as she wishes it to be the qualifications above of
you know, be damned. Why then the harassment and prohibitions
against prostitution. The momentum does not come from the customer.
He is a willing participant. If the customer decides that
patronage of a prostitute is not to his advantage, he
can stop and will stop. Nor does he. Nor does
the move toward prohibition of prostitution come from the prostitutes themselves.
They have volunteered for their tasks and can almost always
quit if they change their minds about the relative benefits.
Let's just change that. Nor did the move towards prohibition
of drugs come from the drug addict themselves. They have
volunteered to be drug addicts and can almost always quit
if they change their minds about the relative This is
fantasy land, this is theory. This is it is not clear.
This is someone who's seeking to destroy your culture. Once
you look into say, oxycodon the whole, all the deaths
that have been attributed to opioids, and when you look
into it, you realize it wasn't an accident. It wasn't like,
oh we didn't know this was addictive. Oh they knew
they hit it for money and other reasons. To go
back to my episode that I did with Trey Garrison,
who wrote a book about this. Continuing, the impetus for
the prohibition of prostitution is initiated by third parties not
directly involved in the trades. Their reasons vary from group
to group, from area to area, and from year to year.
What they have in common is the fact that they
are outside parties. They have neither stake nor stand in
the matter, and should be ignored. To allow them to
decide this matter is absurd as allowing an outsider to
decide about the trade between the milkman and the pie man.
Just let me ask you the question, do you think
your town would benefit from prostitutes being on every corner?
If there were milkmen and pie men set up on
every corner, would a refrigerated truck so that they can
sell you? Would that be Let's take oh, let's use that.
I said the milkman and the pie man. They have
a refrigerated truck, so everything is safe. You're not any
Let's say the prostitute was. It was completely legal, they
were protected by the law, and they were out there
on the corner selling what they're selling. Do you think
that benefits your town? Do you think that benefits your culture?
Do you think explaining to your children who that is
standing on the corner? Do you think that's a net
positive for your polity, for your neighborhood, for your friends,
the people who live around you. Why, then, are the
two cases treated differently. Imagine a league called the Decent
Eaters organized to espouse the doctrine that eating pie together
with milk is evil. Never notice that they have to
go and just like default of the absurd when they're
trying to excuse, when they're trying to excuse degeneracy and
culture destruction and cultural distortion, to use Yacki's term. Even
if it could be demonstrated that the League against Pie
and Milk and the League against prostitution had identical intellectual merit,
namely none, the reaction of the two would still be different.
The attempt to prohibit pie and milk would evoke only laughter,
but there would be a more tolerant attitude toward the
attempt to prohibit prostitution. There is something in operation which
staunchly resists an intellectual penetration of the prostitution question. Why
has prostitution not been legalized, though the arguments against legalization
are without merit. They have never clearly they have never
been clearly assailed by the intellectual community as specious. So basically,
he's saying any argument against legalizing prostitution is without merit,
and he's going to explain why. And he is basically
calling himself the intellectual community here, and that's why he's
going to That's why he's an authority to explain this,
because he's intellectual part of an intellectual community. The difference
between sexual trades such as the ones that take place
in prostitution and other trades such as the pie milk trade,
seems to be based on, or at least connected to
the shame we feel or made to feel at the
prospect of having to buy sex. One is hardly really
a man or in any way to be confused with
an attractive woman if one pays for sex, now, that's no.
The shame of it is the shame we feel or
made to feel at the prospect of having to buy Well,
where does that shame come from? He would have you
believe that it comes from society. Here, let's go on,
hold on the following well known joke illustrates this point.
A good looking man asks an attractive and virtuous woman
if she will go to bed with him for one
hundred thousand dollars. She is appalled by the offer. However,
after some reflection, she concludes that, as evil as prostitution is,
she could use the proceeds of the offer for charity
and good works. And again you have to present the
fantasy scenario. The man seems charming, not at all dangerous
or repugnant. She shyly says yes. The man then asks
how about for twenty dollars. The woman indignantly replies, how
dare you? What kind of woman do you think I am?
As she slaps his face. Well, we've already established what
kind of woman you are. Now we're just trying to
establish the price, he replies. The degree to which demand
replies strikes a telling blow against a woman, as a
small measure of the scorn heaped upon individuals involved in
this kind of endeavor. Again, what is the point of
writing this? What? He's trying to make it out that
basically up here that everything has to do with shame? Okay, well,
where does shame come from? Some will tell you, Oh,
it only comes from religion, or it comes from culture,
it comes from your history, it comes from tradition. Okay,
And what's your point in writing this? To destroy all
of those, to show how stupid they are, to show
how all that matters is to transaction, the money, All
that matters is the economics behind it, and everything else
is just shame. There are two approaches which might combat
the attitude that paying for sex is degrading. There is
the frontal attack, which simply denies that it is wrong
to pay for sex. This, however, would hardly convince those
who think of prostitution as an evil. The other possibility
was to show that we are always paying for sex,
all of us, all the time, and therefore we should
not cavil at the arrangements between a professional prostitute and
a customer. Ah yes, yes, yes, when you were dating
your wife, you should have just thought of her as
a prostitute when you got married. When when you got
married and you pledge to take care of her and
to give your life for if it need be, and
take care of in sickness and health till death to
your part, that's just part of a transaction. It's all
a transaction in what sense. Can it be said that
we all engage in trade and payments when we engage
in sexual activity. At the very least, we have to
offer something to our perspective partners before they will consent
to have sex with us. Yeah, we have to. We
have to offer something like our loyalty, our love, our heart.
That's nothing we have to think with dollar signs. Apparently
we have to think of economics. With explicit prostitution, the
offer is in terms of cash. In other cases, to
trade is not so obvious. Many dating patterns clearly conform
to the prostitutional model. The male is expected to pay
for the movies, dinners, flowers, et cetera, and the female
is expected to reciprocate with sexual services. So no mention
of marriage here, right, Oh wait a minute, he goes on.
The marriage is in which the husband provides the financial
elements and the help and the wife the sexual and
housekeeping functions. Also conforms clearly enough to the model. So
the husband provides a financial and the wife has sex
with them and keeps the house clean. I assume there's
no mention here raising kids, childbearing or anything like that.
So yeah, this is clearly you're paying for a hooker
and a maid. That's how we're going to make the
case for prostitution being legal in your town. In fact,
all voluntary human relationships, for love relation from really, I'm
not Asian. In fact, all voluntary human relationships, from love
relationships to intellectual relationships, are trades. In the case of
romantic love and marriage, the trade is in terms of affection, consideration, kindness,
et cetera. Ah, how sweet of them. The trade may
be a happy one, and the partners may find joy
in the giving, but it is still a trade. It
is clear that unless affection, kindness, et cetera, or something
is given will not be reciprocated. In the same way,
if two non mercenary poets did not get anything from
each other, their relationship too would terminate. If there are trades,
there are also payments. Where there are payments for relationships
which include sexual congress, such as marriage, and in some
dating patterns there is prostitution according to the definition of
that term. So basically what he's doing is he's taking
prostitution which exists over here, he's reducing it to the
ideal nonviolent transaction, voluntary transaction, and so he's able to
clean up prostitution to the point where he thinks that
he can apply it to marriage and dating because in
marriage and in marriage, in dating, the male, because of
tradition and custom and custom rules the law is expected
to pay. Only in modernity is the woman expected to
have sex with him because of that. And really the
dating patterns and all of these things, these are all
modernity because it was only until not too long ago
that we weren't in a world where range marriages or
marriages where people you've known since child, I mean, my
parents met in the seventh grade. Several social commentators have
correctly likened marriage to prostitution. So this part of he
said he's part of the intellectual community who's never explained
it to you as such. So he's presenting himself as
an expert, white coat kind of thing, and he's saying
that several social commentators have correctly likened marriage to prostitution.
But all relationships where trade takes place, those which include
sex as well as those which do not, are a
form of prostitution. So basically, any trade you make, like
if you tell your wife, you promise your wife, you know,
it's like if you promise you're on a Wednesday that Yeah,
I'm going I know we need this, and I know
you want this, and I'm going to buy it for you,
and it just so happens that you guys have sex
at night. That was a form of prostitution, according to
the experts, according to the intellectual community, according to a
hero of libertarianism up until he revealed himself to be
a murderous, genocidal lunatic. And people praise this book a
lot of them, most of them. Instead of condemning all
such relationships because of their similarity to prostitution, Prostitution should
be viewed as just one kind of interaction in which
human beings participate. So if you don't want us to
keep calling your marriage, you're dating, any kind of interaction
you have when you go to the store, if you
sell your car to your neighbor, if you don't want
us to keep calling that prostitution, you're going to have
to normalize prostitution. Objections should not be raised to any
of them, not to marriage, not to friendship, not to prostitution.
So the final paragraph in this chapter, in this little chapter,
he says we shouldn't be complaining about marriage or friendship
because there's some kind of interaction there. There's some kind
of transaction there that is completely forced and referred to
as a transaction just to fit into this framework. And
he says, puts marriage, friendship, and prostitution it's all the
same thing. And if we want prostitution to be normalized,
we need to make it. We need to keep comparing
it to marriage and friendship until people stop looking at
prostitution as a negative or something they don't want in
their towne or something they want to remain illegal. That's it.
That's all I got for you. Let me know in
the comments if this is something you want me to
continue to do. And yeah, yeah, all right, take care,
see you in a few days. Right, good morning, greetings
and salutations. All right, let me jump right into this. So, yeah,
this is from I want to read an article from
zero hedge that gives us some information. This was published
last Thursday, April tenth, and it says the title is
and if you're watching this, I'm sorry. Zero hedge has
pop ups like crazy, so I may be closing those
down and everything, but you know this isn't them. There's
tons of links in here to the showing the information
and the studies and the polls that this is coming from.
So the title here is most Americans now have a
negative view of Israel under fifty. Under fifty GOP support
craters so under fifty years old. While the Trump administration
earnestly redistributes billions of dollars of American wealth to Israel,
that country's immensely destructive war in Gaza appears to be
taking a growing toll on its support among Americans. According
to the latest Pew Research survey, a majority of Americans
now have an unfavorable view of Israel, and a finding
that will cause the greatest alarm in Israeli government offices
and at US based pro Israel organizations. There is now
a huge generational divide within the GOP ranks. I would
the only thing I would say there comment on there
is I don't think. I think a lot of it
has to do with what they've done to Gaza since
October seventh, but I think that there's there was a
shift before that, as some of these numbers will show. Continuing,
fifty three percent of Americans now have an unfavorable view
of Israel, thanks to the share of Americans with dim
views of Israel surging by eleven points in three years.
The comparison point is Pew's survey in March twenty twenty two,
seven months before the O that's not seven months compared
to Pew survey, that would be a year in seven
months before. The October seventh invasion of Southern of Southern
Israel sparked a massive military response that killed more than
fifty thousand Palestinians, about a third of them under eighteen
years old, according to health officials in Gaza. So right there,
someone can jump all over that and say, well, no, no,
that's Gaza. That's people in Gaza. They're going to lie,
and the Israeli government isn't. So who are we supposed
to believe? Question? Most people in this country don't believe
their own government when they say anything, but somehow magically
believe Israel when it says stuff. So over the same span,
the proportion of Americans with very unfavorable views of Israel
has almost doubled from ten to nineteen percent. So in surveys,
people when asked if you have a very unfavorable view
of Israel is almost doubled from ten to nineteen percent.
How many people do you think wouldn't give their opinion
just because of the training that we've received. In the
brainwashing we've received extending back several years, support for Israel
has started to sharply polarize along major party lines, with
Democrats affinity for Israel plummeting, while GEOPA support held relatively steady.
In the Pew Survey's most striking statistic of all, disdain
for the state of Israel among Republicans under age fifty
has soared fifteen points in three years. So when they
say fifteen points at three years, that's before October seventh,
which could signal that support for Israel is poised for
a bipartisan decline for years to come. Among Republicans and
Republican leaners age fifty and older, unfavorable views of Israel
crept up just four points since twenty twenty two, from
nineteen percent to twenty three percent. Among the under fifty
GOP set, it rose from thirty five percent to fifty percent.
That is considerable. Democrats low view of Israel also surged
higher over the three year interval. Sixty nine percent have
an unfavorable view in twenty twenty five, up sixteen points
from twenty twenty two. On that side of party divide
age is much less of a factor. Sixty six percent
of age fifty plus Dems have a negative view of
Israel compared to seventy one percent for those eighteen to
forty nine. That really tells me that and I'm going
to use this term, and people hate when you use
terms like this, It really tells me that boomers, they
go to evangelical churches, are most susceptible to this is
I don't know how many people who would call themselves
registered Democrats who are boomers go to church go to
an evangelical church. So that really seems to be the
dividing line. I'm going to break it up too amongst
denominations here in a little bit. Pew also found interesting
distinctions among views held by Americans as divided by religious affiliations.
One of the key pillars of a Israeli political influence
inside the United States is white Evangelical Protestants, and seventy
two of them accordingly view Israel Israel Israel favorably today. Sorry,
still early non evangelical Protestants are negative on Israel bio
small fifty to forty seven percent margin, While Catholics take
a dim view of Israel by a more substantial fifty
three to forty three percent spread. Seventy three percent of
Jews are favorable, but a quite substantial twenty seven percent
give a thumbs down to the self declared Jewish state. Interesting, huh,
which really goes to show that, you know, when people say, oh, everybody,
everybody is a terrorist? Who on college campuses, who is
protesting protesting against Israel? And you know they're just all
pro Hamas. And I've pointed out that, I mean, I've
seen numbers at as high as forty to fifty percent
of the protesters are Jewish, so apparently they've crossed over.
And how many of those Jews are actually being deported
or arrested or whatever, how many are being punished. Pew
survey did probe the factors driving rising negative views of Israel,
but it's safe to say the major shift springs from
Israel's conduct of the war in Gaza. I would say
that there are numerous reasons for this, Some of them
are metaphysical and some of them are material beyond the
war per se. The exposure of that war's horrors on
social media platforms has also been divisive in our view
with Americans. Having access to raw portrayals of the bloodshed
and suffering, including reporting from alternative and foreign media outlets,
to shine a light on the high civilian death toll,
destruction of hospitals, mass deplacement from homes, hunger, and disease.
It links here to a tweet by Philip proudfoot whatever
has a video of an IDF soldier laughs and smashes
up a shop in Jabalayah refugee camp. The store will
have been someone's pride and joy and source of livelihood.
Such brutal cruelty without a second thought, carried out with
pride and a camera. Yeah, I mean, it's not just
the fact that IDF soldiers are doing this, because this
happens in war. They're so joyful about doing it, and
they video themselves and they put the videos out themselves.
It's they're bragging about this continuing. Ironically, many of the
most damning social media glimpses into the Israeli Defense Forces
conduct of the war have come from IDF soldiers themselves,
who shared photos and videos of themselves gleefully destroying entire
neighborhoods in Gaza, maliciously smashing shops, destroying personal property, and
weirdly dressing up in women's underwear left behind in the
homes of fleeing Palestinians. Well, I'm sorry, that doesn't shock
me at all. I know what Tel Aviv is. That's
not to say the mainstream media hasn't also played a
role in israel surging unpopularity in the United States. One
of the most unsettling repoints reports of the war was
aired on CBS Sunday Morning, which featured the accounts of
American doctors who volunteered in Gaza and were stunned by
the number of children with head shots and other disturbing wounds. Yeah,
what about the children who have like, well, you'll see
where they've been shot in the knees. It's done purposely.
You don't head shots and I mean children being shot
in the head and shot in the knees sounds pretty purposeful.
I mean, I could the head shots. I mean, if
they're throwing a stone at you, you might have to
shoot a kid in the head right right, the shot
in the knee. Well, and then they link to the
tweet showing the IDF soldiers wearing underwear of a Palestinian womanous.
I mean, I think it would be Palaestinia. I don't know,
and that was retweeting someone who said white people with
a Palestinian kafia look so fucking stupid. That's the scarfs
and everything. Sorry I pronounced that wrong. Probably as for
younger excuse me, as for younger Republicans, whether or not
they have empathy for Palestinian civilians. Many under fifty GOP voters,
no doubt see America's open checkbook support for Israel as
inconsistent with the America First philosophy that's opposed to underpin
Trumpian republicanism. Zero edge classic is libertarian. They're going to
go to the whole money thing, you know, and the
money thing has a lot to do with it, you know.
It's like, hey, if you're not gonna you know, And
to me, it's just a cowardly way out right. It's like, well,
if they're going to do this, don't do it with
my money. Well, they're your enemy there, your enemy, there,
your enemy. No Palestinian has tried to get me kicked
off of Twitter. I don't know of any Palestinians who
like work in the city of London or controlled banks
in the City of London, or making Hollywood blockbusters and
three books, three movies about the Holocaust a year or
in the porn industry. And let me remind you when
in I think it was two thousand and six when
Israel took over Israel invaded Gaza. One of the first
things they did was they broadcast porn on the all
the TV channels in Gaza. Would why would they do
Why would they do that? If you're not asking yourself
these questions, you've bought something, You've bought a narrative. And
I don't think you understand where we are or who
we are at this point. In a move last month
that surely aggravated them, fresh after amusingly humiliating Ukrainian President
Vovala demr Zozynski and route to ending the money pit
that is the proxy war against Russia, the Trump administration
turned around and used emergency author authorities to ship off
another four billion in military aid to Israel. Zion Don
strike again. When are we going to get those immigrants
out of this fucking country down? As today's under fifty
crowd proceeds to dominate a Republican electorate, those moves could
start to become a political liability for GOP officials who've
been conditioned to expect Red Team praise for sending US wealth,
weapons and soldiers to the Middle East to advance Israel's agenda.
If rank and file Republicans increasingly embrace George Washington's advice
to avoid passionate attachments that make the United States a
slave to its fondness, a seismic shift in the seventy
seven year US Israel relationship could be in the offing.
Seventy seven years, three more to go. So what was
all this mean? Here's what I will say, because I
know that a lot of young people listen to this,
and some people who it may be considering getting in
politics listen to this. Don't go to their parties, get married,
have kids. If you're planning on becoming a politician, if
you're planning on infiltrating and trying to do something, don't
be bribeable, don't be blackmailable, don't do stupid shit. Don't
go up there and drink, keep your wits about you.
Understand who your enemy is, have an attitude that you're
at war now. The only reason I'm talking about this
and mentioning people who are listening to who might become
politicians is because there are some who will, but I
don't think that's going to change anything. So my advice
to you, even though you're not, there are going to
be people who are not going to take this advice
and not go to Washington and not become politicians. For
those of you who know how stupid that is. If
you want to become a politician, you do it locally,
and you have an attitude of gatekeeping. You have an
attitude of cancelation. You have an attitude of not in
my backyard, you have an attitude of stay away from
here with your influence, get the hell out. I mentioned
this on my livestream before. There were two incidences that
I've heard of in this in the small little town
that I've adopted, where people had infiltrated from the outside,
and one person, one person, not even a community leader,
not somebody whose name you would you know, it's not
somebody who'd be like, oh that's the pastor of the church.
Oh this is the guy who owns this business over here.
No one person pushed back. They haven't heard from those people. Again.
They were trying to push wokeism. They were trying to
say a church group couldn't couldn't pray in public in
a small town in Alabama and one person with a voice.
We haven't heard from those people again, and we're constantly
on guard to make sure it doesn't happen again. We
don't get infiltrated by it. If we see somebody that
we think around here who were like guard, that person's illegal,
we're calling ICE as soon as we find out where
they are. We're calling Nice. If you're sitting around waiting
for Trump to do this or Advance to do it,
or anyone else to do it, besides you, you're you're
a coward. You you don't want change. If you want change,
you're gonna go out there and you're gonna do it
on your own at least, and if it doesn't, even
if it doesn't work, you're at least gonna try it yourself.
You're gonna have a passion about it. You're not gonna
be like, you're not gonna make the excuse, well, I
pay my taxes and they should be working for they
don't work for you, So zip that fucking don't talk
about that shit again, and go do it yourself. All right,
This is a war we're gonna win. We've been occupied
for far too long, and the number are turning. The
only thing they can turn this around is and all
the laws. And let me just say this, they pass
more laws, it's going to turn It's going to turn
more people our way. We don't want that because people
will get hurt. But if they do that, if they
keep pushing, it's just going to turn more people our way.
Understand who the enemy is and do everything you can
to highlight that because we've been occupied for far too long,
and until that occupation can end, you can do something
about it locally. All right. I will try to be
back in a couple of days. It's busy time of year,
not only for podcasting but for stuff around the house,
so I will try. But take care and yeah, try
to be back in a few days. If not. Episodes
coming out every day. See on the live stream on Sunday.
Take care, Good morning. I really didn't have anything to
talk about until yesterday. Something jumped out at me. And
I mean, I know there are some people who are like,
can you stop talking about libertarians? No? No, And if
you're one of these people on if you're one of
these people who comments in the comment section or on
ex Twitter, you know you, really you shouldn't be talking
about these people. They don't mean any You shouldn't be
fuck you, I know more than you. Who do you
think you are? When people are talking about stupid shit
on Twitter, I don't go in there and go, hey,
why are you talking about this? I mean, that's some
really feminine energy. But the I want people to understand this, okay,
because one thing that we talk about is basically taken
back what's been taken from us. Whatever that looks like
to you, I mean, at this point, it's order insanity,
you know. I mean, hoping for forty million deportations is
really hope. It's not going to happen. I don't think
it's going to happen under this administration. Is not going
to happen in the next what three years and nine
months or ten eight months, however much that's going to be.
So you really have to think about building things for yourself.
And when you're thinking about building things for you and
your people, then you're gonna have to do gatekeeping. And
one thing that I know from libertarianism is a lot
of them. First of all, there's no coherence whatsoever they
believe and want. It's so individualistic that they believe in.
They want just things the way they are. And this
isn't only libertarians. I mean this as a matter of fact.
If you understand that there are libertarians who want to
tear everything down or tear certain things down, or that
they just want to tear down, which we want to too,
but we know that there's a certain fence that you
don't cross, or there are certain fences you don't tear down.
They want to tear things down, and really, when you
think about it, they're no different than progressives because progressives
are basically they just want to tear stuff down for
chaos sake, so they can keep tear something down. Oh look,
something got broken, needs to be fixed this way that way.
That's how they that's how they stay in power. That's
how the regime has been in This regime has been
in power for one hundred years. But really libertarians are
no different in that they have no they don't believe
in anything. They're not a party. Yea, how Thomas says
there are no political parties. What oath did you sign?
Where are you paying your dues? What can you get
kicked out of the party for? It's not a real party.
A party would be you come in, you say this
is what we stand for. You pay dues, and if
you go against whatever the oath is that you take,
will you get kicked out. That's not what this is.
And libertarians couldn't do that at all. They just they
have this idea of oh, as long as there is
not aggression against another person, so agre give you an example. Oh,
as long as there's not an aggression against another person
and their property. So tearing down a border wall, to
them is not aggression. Turning down a border wall and
millions of millions of Indians pouring over it into your
country is not aggression because no individual has been hurt,
because no individual owns that wall, and because there is
public property, the Indians walking on that public property, it
doesn't belong to anybody. So it's perfectly fine. This is
what progressives believe. I mean, they don't believe that for
the same exact reasons of private property and non aggression.
But it's no different than what progressives believe. They're on
the side of the progressives. But the biggest problem is
that there are even libertarians out there who aren't anarchists.
They just want smaller government. They want the government to
get to a certain place. Well, they have people who
call themselves the same thing that they call themselves who
won't be happy with that. If one libertarian gets to
the point where he's like, Okay, the taxes are low
enough and the regulations have been stripped away enough that
I'm happy with what I have here, there'd be someone
standing right next to them who's like, no, we're going
to destroy that. And when you start tearing things down,
chaos ensues. You can lose everything you've just built towards.
And you have to understand these are people who are
the enemy. Because I believe that we're just headed for Balkanization.
There is at this point, with all the evidence I'm
being shown, with everything that I can see, we're headed
for Balkanization. And that's the only way basically to that
this regime, that this structure of government that they don't
seem to want to destroy in a way that and
to reform it into something that actually well, I don't
think it can work, so scratch that. It's just too
many people, it's too much. It just can't work. There's
no high culture, there's no common culture. It just can't work.
It can only work in smaller, smaller polities who confederate
with each other the way this was actually supposed to
have worked from the beginning. And people can make arguments about, oh,
China will just step in and do shut up. That's
that's a non argument. It's really a non argument. China
has enough of their own fucking problems. Wherever they go,
they they they run into into problems. I mean, look
what happened in Africa when they what's happening with them
in Africa. If they want their projects in Africa to work,
they're gonna have to import Chinese there, and then yeah,
that becomes its own problem, not ours. Back to the
main topic is people who their whole idea is to
tear everything down. You will hear, you know, and you
will hear the most popular libertarians going okay, okay, a
narco capitalist going okay okay. If you could get it
down to as small as possible, and why can't you
just get rid of government what's altogether? If you can
get it down to minimum, you know, just basically administrative functions,
why can't you get rid of that? What does that
sound like to you? I don't even think that would work,
And I mean, no, government's not going to work on
a homogeneous society. Someone's always going to have to be
able to decide the exception. Someone's always going to have
to be able to decide. Points to somebody and go okay,
you can legally kill people. Yeah, yeah, I just said that.
That's exactly what it is. You can kill people who
need to be killed. But they don't want that. They
think that people are self governing. They think that they
think that people are self governing and that people will
cooperate voluntarily, while they're advocating for infinite pajets and every
other kind of ethnicity that has no high culture, that
has nothing that is doesn't understand the Western values that
we've lost you'd want to get back. So they're advocating, oh,
that everybody can come together voluntarily, while they're saying there
shouldn't be any borders right now and everybody should understand that.
I mean, some of the most popular, you know names
in libertarianism and archo capitalism that you've heard have retreated
from the open borders argument. And what does that do?
That just basically puts them in the camp of consequentialists practicality,
they're not libertarians anymore. They're not a narco capitalist anymore
because now they're stepping away from their revolutionary roots. It's
extremely revolutionary to say we shouldn't have borders in the country,
should be overrun with whoever wants to come in. It's
extremely revolutionary to say that, you know, churches shouldn't exist.
It's very interesting when I was a libertarian the amount
of libertarians that were atheists, and then when you really
start looking at like the revolutionary spirit of libertarianism, how
close it is, how many parallels there are with communism
and classical marks. I'm not even saying that a lot
of classical Marxism didn't make a lot of great points.
It did. The problem is is in the conclusions it
drew and in a lot of its assumptions. But I
mean the Industrial Revolution capitalism as it is, as it
has worked itself out to be. And I've made this
point before about libertarians. Libertarians will argue all day that
this is not capitalism at all, this is corporatism, this
is cronyism, this is whatever. But then when they need to,
they'll point to South Korea and the living standards of
the poor in Asia being lifted in the last thirty
to forty years, and they'll call it capitalism. Oh, they'll
have some qualifiers, but they'll say, look what free markets do. Oh,
but it's not a free market. Look what capitalists. It's
not really capitalism. No, it's all capitalism. If that makes
me sound like a Marxist socialist, but I don't care,
don't really care. These are revolutionaries. Liberals are revolutionaries. People
who say, oh, we don't need this wall, we don't
need this, we don't need this failsafe, we need to
remove them all. Those are revolutionaries. People who stand side
by side with somebody and are like, well, I don't
care that you you got what you wanted. I want
what I want. And if that destroys what you got,
how your happiness as to how things are running right now,
I'm going to go further. It's libertarianism, it's republicans, it's
it's obviously the progressives and the regime, the spirit of
the regime that's been running for one hundred years. These
are revolutionaries, and their path leads to chaos. If your path,
if you're focus, if you're if your endpoint is an order,
you're a revolutionary. You may not be as bad as
this revolutionary over here, or not be as bad as
this revolutionary over here. But if you think that chaos
is going to bring about order, your revolutionary and you're
on the left. Left and right isn't about economics. Left
and right isn't about Republican and democrat. Left and right
is about order versus chaos, and it has a ton
of historical implications as well. But very simply for those
who are just starting out, think of left and right
as chaos versus order, and then we can dig deeper
into exactly what right what the right is. Thomasin Thomas
and On my show has done numerous episodes and numerous
series about this, and we just started one on continental philosophy,
which will lead all the way to this, but will
outline this from the beginning. It's about chaos in order,
and honestly, the kind of economics that most people advocate
for is chaos. Not to mention. Now, we'll just bring
this up real quickly as a little deviation, the concept
of no bless abliege. There is no no bless abliege
on the left. There is no the nobles require a
duty because you're always going to have nobles. You're always
going to have elites. There are always going to be
people who are who can do more than others, who
are going to be able to acquire more than others
for whatever reason. I'd love to see Younger's concept of
the anarch be more prevalent and be something that people
would more strive for. But even in that system, there
will always be people that are more better at doing
things than others, and they will always require an obligation
if they have accumulated much to those who haven't. That
sounds like socialism to some people. If you call that socialism,
you don't know what you're talking about, and you're historically ignorant.
But that doesn't exist today. It rarely exists today. There's
a reason that you know, for whatever you're opinion is
a patreon. There's a reason why it's called patreon, patron patronage.
It's one of the reasons why there's no real right
wing in this country, because there aren't people of means
who are willing to be patrons to people who are
actual right wingers. Cat Turd on Twitter is not a
right winger. He's a classical liberal who thinks that who
thinks that, like the left or the real racists, the
left or the left, or the Nazis. The Nazis were
left wingers because people don't understand continental philosophy. They don't
understand the history. They don't understand history, they don't understand
historical terms, they don't understand historical impulses. They don't understand
anything that's not right wing. We don't have the things,
we don't have the mechanisms, we don't have the people
who should be natural leaders. I remember Dark Enlightenment saying
one day to me, he just said, he said, it's
ridiculous that something like Antelope Hill and Imperium Press needs
to be a startup from one person or one little
group who doesn't really have any funding. That real right
wing book, you know, book distributors should have been something
that patrons, that real patronage would have started on. Its
would have been a startup for that. People would have
stepped up and said, what do you need to do this?
How much do you need? We don't have that. That's
why people think that Maga is going to save us.
If anything, Magia can buy us time. There's no real
right wing. The real right wing is forming offline and
doing good things. And I'm really excited about it. But
as far as politically, there's no real right wing. There's
a left wing, there's a progressive wing there. Progressives have
been running it for over one hundred years. That spirit
has been running it for one hundred years. There's a
reaction to it, which is called MAGA, which in my opinion,
is not going to defeat it. And then there's us
and people hear that. People are listening right now and
they're thinking, well, then we're done, because they're so brainwashed
into the progressive system, into this system that they think
the only way change can happen is you have to
take over Washington, DC and get you know, you get elected,
and then real change happens, even though that flies in
the face of evidence, of historical evidence. Now you're going
to have to go do it yourself if you want to,
I mean, if you want to keep living the way
you're living, you're comfortable by all means. If you see
what I and a lot of people see as coming
down the pipe, you're going to want to abandon that
kind of thinking and embrace collectivism. And yes, people are
going to call you a socialist and call you a
statist or whatever, but really does that matter. Does that
matter when it comes to your safety, your wife's safety,
your kid's safety, your family's safety. Does it matter what
people call you. If your whole friend group is a
group chat on Facebook or Twitter, that probably matters a
lot lot to you. Believe me, I've been close to
people whose whole life they're living online, and then when
someone in their group gets mad at them and the
rest of the group gets mad at them and shuns them,
they have an existential crisis. Can you imagine your ancestors
being able to see you do that? See you act
like this? See you have no friends in real life,
not be able to leave your house right now and
go somewhere and hang out with a friend. Let's circle back.
Most people that you run into revolutionaries and are coming
from the left. They want to tear things down. They
only want things the way they want it. If things,
if you were able to build something that you were
happy with, and they had a chance, they would tear
it down, or they would tell people who tear it down,
They would encourage people to tear it down. They would
push the spirit into existence, push the spirit into the
zeitgeist that would tear it down. These are not your friends,
And I've been told by leaders, thought leaders, what do
you care about people online? We're the thought leaders. We're
the ones that everyone listens to. Really really, I think
when you look at when you look at social media, no,
that's people are attracted to the weirdos. People are calling
out the weirdos. People are the ones that are making
you look bad. Those are the ones that you need
to shun. Those are the ones that you need to
quote unquote kick out of your quote unquote movement. Well,
like I said, there's no parties, there's no gatekeeping. Half
of this stuff is online. More than half of this
stuff is online. But unfortunately, fortunately there is a way
for things, for ideas from to go from online into reality.
And you see that it used to be it was
just pretty much journalists and people with power who are
able to do it. But no, now people who have
little power are able to make ideas run wild. There's
your people and there's everyone else. And when you examine
the spirit behind everyone else, usually that spirit will be
to destroy you and yours, or at least to create
a reality where you and your can't live the way
you want to. I've rambled enough. Try to be back
in a few days, been really busy around the house
and got ready to get into a whole new round
of interviews. So if I'm not back for one of these,
forgive me take care of everyone. Thank you, b