Speaker 1: If you want to get the show early and ad free,
head on over to the Peak Kinyonas show dot com.
There you can choose from where you wish to support me.
Now listen very carefully. I've had some people ask me
about this, even though I think on the last ad
I stated it pretty clearly. If you want an RSS feed,
you're going to have to subscribe yourself Substack or through Patreon.
You can also subscribe on my website which is right there,
gum Road and what's the other one, subscribe Star And
if you do that, you will get access to the
audio file. So head on over to the pekan Yonashow
dot com. You'll see all the ways that you can
support me there. And I just want to thank everyone.
It's because of you that I can put out the
amount of material that I do. I can do what
I'm doing with doctor Johnson on two hundred Years Together
and everything else, the things that Thomas and I are
doing together on kindinal philosophy, it's all because of you.
And yeah, I mean, I'll never be able to thank
you enough.
Speaker 2: So thank you.
Speaker 1: The pekan Yonashow dot com. Everything's there. I want to
welcome everyone back to the Peking Yona show. I have
two people here that I've been looking forward to talking to,
especially this week as as it may be. Fear Us
Modot is back. How you doing for us?
Speaker 3: Hi?
Speaker 2: How's it going good? Good? Hew you doing? Ron? Ron
Dodson's back, Ay doing.
Speaker 3: Ron doing great? Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1: All Right, I'm going to do a little introduction here
and I'm gonna let you guys go. I think with
everything we've seen in the last week, everything that's happened
in Europe, everything that's happening in England, where fear us is,
immigration is going, is the topic going forward. I don't
think there's any there's any way we're escaping this.
Speaker 2: I think we are.
Speaker 1: Going to be in one long immigration discussion and we
see exactly whether whether it's organic or whether it's or
whether this is some kind of planned op, you know,
Soros kind of thing, quote unquote, It really doesn't matter.
I think it's always usually a combination of both.
Speaker 2: You're going to have.
Speaker 1: People paid to be there or just professional activists, and
you're going to have true believers. But I don't think
I think this is this is going to be the
conversation for not only the near future, but it's going
to be probably for the next decade. So who wants
to start with their take on what we're seeing now,
go ahead, Farris.
Speaker 4: Well from the way that I see it, not only
is it going to be the topic for the next decade.
Here in England, we had the Reform Party, which was
widely expected to win the next election, and as of
today they've decided to completely surrender on the issue of immigration.
They've just appointed a new chairman who, after being chosen
said that immigrants are the lifeblood of Britain. Now, I'm
an immigrant and I'm in Britain. I'm not convinced that
I'm the lifeblood in this country. I think I think
this country would do just without me. You know. I'd
like to think that I contribute, that I pay my taxes,
that I do my civic duties. But I'm pretty sure
I'm not the lifelood of this country. With what we're
seeing in immigration. Pretty much every story here around healthcare,
around housing, around employment, around trade has an immigration angle
attached to it, and it's the most salient conversation that's
happening in the country. To the extent that Sircuit Stormer
Britain's Prime Minister gave his own version of inoch Powell's
Rivers of Blood speech where he declared that thanks to immigration,
Britain has become an island of strangers, and where he
said that this was a planned and that this had
had extremely negative consequences, and where he committed to doing
something to reduce the level of immigration, not to reverse it.
Nobody in in a position to win a future election
has said that they would reverse it. But for this
to come out of Cure Starmer, whose whole party is
adamant that it is in alliance with the migrants, shows
you just how important the issue has become. And now
the big question is to what extent will there be
contagion from the United States. We are seeing riots in
Paris already due to separate issues. We just saw a
huge protest in support to the Palestinians that had the
usual mix of gay pride flags and Palestinian flags, and
no matter what you think on the Israel Palestine conflict,
these two do not mix. And we're seeing this increased
assertiveness from migrant communities while seeing the establishment in Britain
and in Europe unwilling to admit that they have a
national identity and that they have a cultural identity. So
in Europe the situation is pretty dire. Nobody is willing
to say that there is such a thing as a
Western Identity prevent which is an outfit established by the
British government in order to combat terrorism, just updated its
definition of terrorist ideologies and it includes now people who
believe that Western culture is superior. And it goes so
far as to put Western culture and scare quotes implying
that there is no such thing, that Western culture isn't
even real, it's just imagined. But essentially they've declared civic
nationalists to be terrorists or at least on the extremism spectrum.
This is now the official policy of the government of
the United Kingdom. So this is where we are here
on immigration. The last thing I want to mention is
that a very left wing labor MP came out and
said that the north of England is a tinderbox that
can go off at any moment and that ethnic tensions
have never been the severe, as if to confirm her point, yesterday,
two Roma boys tried to rape a girl in northern
Ireland and then around two thousand people got together and
burnt down the houses of these boys. The state evacuated
their families. Thankfully nobody was hurt. But this is according
to members of Parliament from the Labor Party, a tinderbox.
Speaker 3: I didn't I wasn't aware of the uh situation in Ireland.
That is uh uh pretty good indicator of I think
where we are seeing things going really and all of
all of the West. You're seeing these these ethnic tensions
that that have been that have been suppressed only by
the outsized uh you know, the outsized prosperity I think
has been a has been somewhat a subduing agent too
uh uh to to what naturally is going to at
some point bubble up. I mean obviously you're seeing uh
you know, we I don't want to jump the gun
because we'll get into it later. What's going on on
our west coast. And the comments that I mean, the
what I consider just my eyes were opened when the
Mexican president said what she said. I was, you know,
wondering if she had her meds uh you know, set correctly.
But in in England, the the the unwillingness for for
Europeans two to show that what created Europe was a
culture that that these ideas aren't ideology in a vacuum,
that they are part and parcel of a life lived.
You see it. You know again, you guys are Roman Catholic.
I'm Protestant, but it's it's hard not to make the
argument that part of it is is a a a
a kind of a an offshoot of of the Protestant
Reformation in the sense that everything at some point has
become especially in reform circles. And again I think, hey,
I'm reformed by conviction. I had to accept John Calvin
into my heart. Uh, I wasn't born into it. But
the idea that that everything is reduced to ideology and
not part of a cultural milieu, that that is a
lived life, a way of life that you know, Schmidt
talks about this, uh, that has been destructive to culture
and and the and the and the Christian leaders have
not done a good job of of making sure those uh,
those two things are tied together. You know, there's nothing
wrong with ideas, uh, but divorced completely from a life lived, UH,
they can be you know, ideology raw ideology has has
been a dangerous thing throughout uh human history, especially in
the last our last little window of it. Now. I'm
just shocked that of all people, the English would not
see this, uh, not see the importance of the marriage
of these two things.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 3: And that does not pretend well to the near and
mid middle term future. Do you think that? Do you think?
And I know what the answer is, but I'm gonna answer.
I'm gonna ask it anyway. I've got a ton of
I'm Canadian. Uh, I'm kind of honorary Canadian by marriage.
I'm married a Canadian. I've got a lot of Canadian family. Therefore,
and how how King Charles addressed uh the Canadian government
when he came over was shocking to me. Uh, wouldn't it?
Doesn't this seem to be an area where the king
is called to stand up and say no more and
do something, uh, where he's uniquely suited to do something
that would change the course. Or is he just fully
captured as well?
Speaker 4: I don't think he has an interest in it. I
think that I hesitate to say this, and I'm going
to say this carefully. I think that the Windsor royal
family is much more interested in their role in the
Commonwealth and in them being the only royal family that
has nominally a multi racial kingdom than they are in
anything else, and this has captured their imagination and their
ideas from the days of Queen Elizabeth God Rest her Soul,
who insisted on going against both Rhodesia and South Africa
without in any way distinguishing between the two and without
in any way respecting the other side of the argument,
especially on the Rhodesion side that insisted that there must
be qualifications for people to vote. Since then they've shown
a commitment to the idea of multiculturalism and to the
idea that all cultures are fundamentally equal because all people
are equal under God, without realizing that, yes, you can
say that all souls are equal in the heights of
God without lead without the conclusion being well, then therefore
all cultures are equal.
Speaker 3: Right right, Those are completely separate things.
Speaker 4: Very different claims. These are two fundamentally different claims, and
so this has been the attitude of the royal family.
And they've shown no concern for the native white British
population none, do you uh.
Speaker 3: I'm gonna ask a question that's a little bit in
the weeds, and so we can avoid it if if
if it's going to bogg us down but but you
know in uh in Galatians, Saint Paul says that the
law was a pedagogue. In other words, it was a
tutor to bring the people to maturity. Yes, that's a
cultural statement. It's the It shows the importance of how
a way of life is a functional tutor to grow
a people up so that they would be able to
deal with it. Didn't The Torah doesn't answer every question.
It's you know, I have a lot of sympathy with
the with the you know, the the uh, the you know,
reconstructionists and all that kind of thing. Those are great people.
But the law, regardless, it's not a complete civil code.
It doesn't have there's nothing about water rights, there's nothing
about you know. It's this. It's this tutor, this teacher,
this faithful uh, this faithful professor. That is to the
faithful drill sergeant. That's that's trying to produce out of
you an officer ready to rule. Right, And that's the
role of Yeah, that's the role of culture in a
in a in a in a faithful society, right, it
helps bring you up. You don't even have to know
the why all the time. Now, we just don't do
that and then as you get older, you get this
gray hair, then you can think about the why and
everything as you have time to ponder these things. But
but you're creating a set of reflexes that that or
just you know, it's like a golf swing. You don't
if you're thinking about every aspect of the golf swing,
you're not going to have a good one. It's it's
and so again I'm just shocked the English of all
people should know this. Yes, and you know, maybe that's
my I don't see.
Speaker 4: It this way. If you look online, you can very
quickly find videos of people just looting British stores on
mass and you see a group of people going in
filling up a bunch of bags, sometimes with sandwiches, sometimes
with meat, sometimes with booze, whatever they fancy, and then
they take it out and they flog it on the street.
And this is done openly now in Britain, and it's
done regularly. We had an MP who's trying to become
the leader of the Conservative Party. He went down on
the tube the Metro and basically filmed people who were
crossing the barriers without paying and tried to shame them. Now,
mind you, he picked on people who didn't look from
minorities that would be prone to violence. So he did
make that conscious selection. But the result was that finally
the police deployed at least to some stations and started
doing something about people who were getting on the trains
without paying with shoplifting. They're doing nothing about it. There
is no sense at all that the victim has rights.
It's only the criminal who has rights. And there is
no sense that the role of the law and of
the state is to maintain guardrails and to maintain discipline
so that the law can act as a pedagogue and
teach people that bad behavior is to be punished. We're
seeing the inverse. We're seeing people who are locked up
for sentences that are people who tweet are getting sentences
that are pretty close to the sentences received by people
who rape. And we're seeing an effort by the state
to really these criminals early based on the claim that, look,
there's no space in prisons, But they could create all
the space that they needed if they were to just
deport foreign criminals. If you come into the country legally,
you're saddled with endless taxes. If you come into the
country illegally, you sign up for some deliveru account and
then you start working in the shadow economy with nobody
bothering you. So the state is working as as a
corrupting influence, not as a pedagogue.
Speaker 3: Do we need a return of shame?
Speaker 4: Yes, I'm and and need some kind of shame based punishments.
There are some cultures, including Middle Eastern culture from where
I come, where without a sense of shame, people don't
behave properly at all. Right, So, in a way, for
some petty crimes, it's more merciful to use the pillary
or to have a flogging than it is to send
somebody in jail where they will be well, where they
will have access to a television, a phone, drugs, and
a bunch of people who will teach them how to
be more criminal.
Speaker 3: Right, is understood.
Speaker 1: This goes back to in the colonies. Here you would
have people who would be punished by They would be
put in stocks and then people would come out and
they would throw food at them. And people look back
upon that as something barbaric, but really when you look
at that, first of all, the person's not being killed.
Second of all, it gives a community. It allows the
community to come together against a common foe, and it
actually brings people together much more than hanging, much more
than even hanging did, because this is them doing the
punishment themselves.
Speaker 4: You know.
Speaker 1: You see just in Singapore with the public cannings and
things like that, that's one thing. But in Spain during
the Inquisition, there was a guy who was selling magic
potions and the inquisition decided he was guilty, and they
said that they were going to put him on a
horse and ride him through town and then whatever the
people wanted to do to him they would do. And
they brought him out like cakes and food, and they
were like, we forgive you. You know you did wrong, but
we forgive you. And so bring people are so disconnected
from law and order now from themselves, you know when
you talk to people, you know, Ron and I were
at an event and there was someone there who was
British and this person was saying, how one of the
things that they see in people in English people, but
people specifically in England, is that it's not like they
hate their hate their country, hate their hate their government,
hate the crown. It's they've almost reached a point where
they hate themselves. Yes, and they they they're not able
to get past.
Speaker 4: This h This is a direct consequence of materialist thinking.
There is no sense of a spiritual connection between the people.
There's no sense of a spiritual connection between the governing
and the governed. And there is no sense that the
law has a purpose other than you know, punishment or
convenience or something of that sort.
Speaker 3: So there is purely regulatory, purely.
Speaker 4: Leading utilitarian. It's just the management of a problem. It
doesn't serve a higher purpose. It doesn't serve a higher
it's not seen as serving a higher purpose. And so
the question is, well, how can we guarantee the rights
of so and so, How can we protect the prisoners,
How can we keep the officers safe? How can we
keep the prison officers safe? And British prisons are mainly
run by she had these. This should also be emphasized
that she had these run the prisons. And this is
a very deep problem because the genius of Islamic state
was creating this marriage between she had the ideology and criminality.
But going back to the point of self hatred, because
nothing has any value outside of itself, because nothing has
anything other than a utilitarian value, you don't feel any
connection to anything, and Therefore you feel that sense of loathing.
They they've forgotten God, and they've forgotten that God loves
them and they owe him their love, and that has
rendered them incapable of loving anything else. It's a spiritual
crisis at the heart of it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's really good because think about how you care
for I mean, it's a hard example to make in
America because we're so adamized, but how you should care.
For instance, I have a brother and a sister, and
those are not utilitarian relationships. No, I care for them.
It's an ontological thing, right. They are because of literally,
because of who they are. We are connected. And if
my brother's not doing well or my sister's not doing well,
I feel I feel a connection or responsibility somewhere. It
may not be my fault, but there is a connection there.
That is that is Uh, it's beyond even beyond covenantal
but and it's that's the connection we aren't we have
been stripped of.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 3: Sociologically in the West, you know, save for these save
for these close knit communities. UH, but for you know,
northern you're you know, for the vast majority of folks. Uh,
their closest connection might be their their country club. I
don't know, but I don't even know anymore. And it's
I don't know how you get that back. You don't
get it back quick. I don't think without you might
get it back quick if there's tremendous suffering, right, uh
but uh, but otherwise, I I just it's a real pickle.
Speaker 4: I'm afraid that you're right. I mean here, a friend
of mine unfortunately fell into alcoholism. HM. His family's attitude
was not really spectacular, not really caring in any way,
sort of what an inconvenience you are now, rather than
how am I going to help you get out of this?
Or even astern how dare you do this to yourself?
Come and fix yourself, Come and let me help you
fix yourself. And you are seeing this brokenness across the board.
A friend of mine was telling me today that he
was walking around his town and he just found a
guy who was just dead. You know, nobody, nobody, no
nobody had any concern for him. He died on the
street like a dog. I was walking around a small
British down. Every other shop is a betting shop. You
go down the street and there's a doz in gambling
and betting shops just sort of all next to each other,
and that's all that's left of the town center. And
some of these places are beginning to look run down,
and some of these places are beginning to look run down.
Around it, you just see horrific decay, empty buildings, empty stores,
boarded up windows, and you're sort of starting to see
this society collapsing, society falling apart. It feels like something
pre biblical catastrophe. I guess that's probably I guess one
of the great things we have in this country, you know,
still have in this country, espect in the South more
than anywhere else, is the church culture. It's just that people,
you know, I live in a town at twenty five
hundred pe people, there's twenty churches. People still go to
church on Sunday. People still have their Sunday you have
their Sunday evening meals together. They'll still come together if
if people need help. And I think that is you know,
that is something even if you no matter what you
want to say, oh, it's you know that this churches
has a you know, it's like a cold Play concert
or you know this this church is like this church
only does old you know from the old Baptist hymnal
or something like that. It's still a sense of community
that many that many places have just completely lost. And
I think that's one of the reasons why so many
Cosmopolitans hate us, is because they don't have this anymore.
Speaker 3: At least even in both those And I'm a traditionalist
when it comes to church. But h but I think
there's a time to let your hair down to but
the but but at least in each of those, In
each of those examples, there is a cohesive culture. This
is who we are. This is how it's going to
be every Sunday. I think the traditionalist thing is is
even more because it's an other're You're coming and experiencing
something that's separate from the everything that's out there. But regardless,
either way, it's a cohesive thing. This is us and
it's so it's so important. Sorry, paras I was.
Speaker 4: I was going to share a bit of good news,
which is that we are starting to see more youngster
is going into church, especially more young men. So in
I go to two churches, one of them is farther away.
I go to it because it's friendlier to the children.
And therefore, if I'm not busy on a Sunday, that's
where I'll take them and thankfully my children singing the choir.
And then there's the other one that's close by, where
i'd sort of have a very early Sunday Mass and
then head off somewhere else if I had to go
out on a Sunday. I'm seeing more people in both,
and especially in the one close by, which is sometimes
very depressing because you go in and you just see
you only see gray haired people. No offense wrong, but
but I want the church to look, you know, to
include you, and to look to to include youngsters. Now
I'm starting to see some young families starting to go there,
and it often starts with the father and the children,
and then you start seeing the mother going regularly. And
that's my nature is healing anecdote that there is this
response and realization that this is indeed a spiritual crisis,
and that the breakdown in order and in society has
spiritual roots, and that even the migration question, the idea
that you know, all I care about is how much
money I make. If I can hire somebody for ten
percent cheaper, that's all that's it. I'll hire them because
I don't feel any bond to the labor pool that
already exists, because I don't feel because I see them
just as a labor pool. I don't see them as
a community. So there's an awareness that these are interrelated
issues with a spiritual underpinning. It isn't being fully articulated yet.
This is a spiritual crisis. You need to fix it.
I personally look to the Muslim Brotherhood as an example
of an organization that realized in the nineteen twenties that
the reason the Muslim were falling behind was because they
lost their identity. Their identity is based on Islam. I
think it's false, but I will give credit to that
organization and say that it created an awakening in Muslim
societies that is now helping transform a country like Turkey
into a great power. Nothing can happen in the Middle
East or in Southern Europe without Turkey being involved or
at least acquiescing, and without this kind of grassroots organization
that literally has as its only objective the evangelization of society,
the re evangelization of society. I think this is going
to be a very, very long trial really for the West.
I was I now have my own show on the
Lotus Eaters, and I was recording an episode day and
I was pointing out how from the Soviet Union collapsing
to the rise of Putin to the restoration of Russia
as a power, it was pretty much a generation's work.
It took ten years of absolute collapse and then twenty
years of Putin trying to solidify and a couple of
wars for the Russians to sort of rise. For China,
it was a century of humiliation followed by civil war
and Japanese occupation, followed by a break with the past,
followed by deng and the changes that happened economically and
the rise of China. For the Muslim world, it took
perhaps two centuries. The Ottomans began falling apart in the
eighteen hundreds. The British helped keep them up to contain
rival European powers. Now we're seeing Turkey becoming an expansionist
power again. They've got northern Cyprus, They've got Libya, they've
got Syria, They've got serious influence in Kosovo and in
Albania and in Bosnia. They're expanding again.
Speaker 3: Yeah, don't they have? Aren't they expanding influence around the Horn.
Speaker 4: Of Africa and in the Sahel and into sub Saharan Africa. Yes,
so there is going to be The question is now
how long are the decades of misery going to be
for the West and for different countries. It's going to
play out differently, but there is in part due to immigration,
which is itself a reflection of a spiritual crisis. There's
going to be a very long period of re evangelizing society,
of changing people's minds, of bringing back God into the conversation.
And this is going to come with a few defeats
in the same way that the Muslims and the Chinese
and the Russians saw quite a few defeats. And this
is going to come with enormous suffering, and that might
help people reattach themselves to their cross, because there's no
West without Christianity, Protestant or Catholic. There's no West without Christianity.
The difference between us, we can part them aside. We
agree on this fundamental issue. And this is the trajectory
in which the West is heading. It's going from the
peak of its power, it's going to go down to
a crest, and it's going to recover again the question
is how long is the decline, how much suffering will
the West have to endure during that decline, and what
kind of organizations are going to be established to re
evangelize to help begin the recovery, because there's no recovery
without re evangelization.
Speaker 2: Mm hmm.
Speaker 1: Well, one of the you mentioned, you mentioned Russia and
China having to have defeats before they can before they
can rise up again. One of the things that neither
one of those had to just had to suffer were
large diaspora groups invading and taking region.
Speaker 4: Is a uniquely Western problem, and.
Speaker 1: It's yeah, So, I mean, I don't see achieving what
you're what you're talking about, even with a rebirth of
Christianity without removing forces that are hostile to it within US.
Speaker 2: And that I mean that not.
Speaker 1: Only includes Islam, that includes especially Hinduism.
Speaker 4: Not just that, I mean you're beginning to see how
far the left is willing to go in the United States.
So you're not just seeing the riots in la You
saw a small issue in New York in late May,
and you're seeing a call for general protests throughout the
United States. On the fourteenth of June, we're recording now
on the tenth. So throughout this process, the left is
going to side with the enemy. You see this in France,
you see this in Look. I think that what the
Israelis are doing to the Palastinians is absolutely criminal in
terms of cutting off aid, in terms of bombing civilians
and so on. Part that to the side the globe
in Tifada and the support for the Palestinians from the
left is destructive to the West. And these should be
seen as two separate issues and two separate westerns.
Speaker 1: Mm hmm, well said, well, well, let me ask you this,
is it destructive to the West or is it destructive
to the forces that have been occupying the West specifically
since World War Two.
Speaker 4: It's definitely harmful to Jewish power, there's no debate around that.
But it is also harmful to the West as West,
because it is strengthening Islam at the expense of the West.
It's sort of helping Islam fill this vacuue more effectively.
Speaker 3: And there's just a sorry sorry for us. No.
Speaker 4: I did a show recently on the on the Lotus
Eaters where I basically just using the British government's own websites.
There are a Muslim network. There is the civil Service
Muslim network. It's an established thing seeking to promote the
interests of Muslims in the civil service and help them
gain higher positions. The Left is fully an agent of that.
To take action against migration, you're going to have to
have a whole of state approach, working on the welfare question,
and on the healthcare question, and on the fact that
so much of Western logistics is dependent on migrants, and
working on all kinds of minute details, from the legal
to the practical. And this alliance, which has found a
rallying point in the question of Gaza, is helping further
Muslim power in the West at a time when the
priority of Western governments should be reducing it. And this
is an argument again completely separate from the practical reality
of what's happening in Israel Palestine, completely separate from that,
and also separate from what's happening with the extent to
which Western governments are incapable of doing anything that is
in any way seen as harmful to the interests of Israel.
So these are three separate issues. This alliance is purely destructive,
and it's found this rallying point, and this rallying point
is revealing the depth and extent of this alliance and
its insanity expressed by the presence of homosexual flags next
to Palestinian flags.
Speaker 3: Well, so let's see the sum of not an exhaustive list,
but let's talk about some of the reasons that those
things are tied together. First of all, a you have
in we have cultivated and part of it's due to
the lack of a spiritual understanding. In America, we have
an incredibly high time preference and that acts as a
as it completely destroys your immune system culturally. So so
these uh, then you just have competing teleologies with with
both Islam and modern Judaism and the West, because modern
Judaism and Islam are both monatic in their understanding of
who God is and and what do I mean by that.
That's a fancy word, and I don't mean to be pedantic,
but it's you know, Christianity is trinitarian. There is a
there is a relationship even in amongst the Godhead that
we reflect down here. That's where you get all the
you know, by the two or more witnesses. That's a
trinitarian concept. The reason we have a tripartite government in
America is a reflection of a trinitarian understanding. It's why
judicial judicial supremacy and judicial review are honestly monatic corruptions
to a Western understanding of what government is. Even the
kings during the days of kings in the West understood
that they were beholden to their to their nobles, and
their and and and and their their keepers. There was
never even in France under the days of the Sun
king he understood that he was responsible to and accountable
to the nobility. So that is very much a Western idea,
this idea of of relational accountability that doesn't exist in
from the top, at least from the understanding of who
we are as created beings. Uh, that's a competing idea
in Islam and in modern Judaism, that relational accountability just
doesn't exist and we've lost it due to this high
time preference. Because what is time preference? I want to
I don't just live for me. I live for to
honor those who came before me and to bless those
who come after. That is trinitarian, Okay, So so anyway,
I think I think that's part of the philosophical problem
is we've lost our roots and therefore it's easy for
these contagions to come in. And that's again, that's no
I have no I'm not saying anything against the individual
faithful Muslim. I'm not saying anything against the individual faithful
follower of modern Judaism. I'm just saying that culturally and teleologically,
these are competing systems.
Speaker 4: Yes, yes, and and the tragic part of this ron
is that if you were to say this in the
British Parliament, not only would it completely go over their heads,
it almost went over mine.
Speaker 3: But I doubt that very seriously.
Speaker 4: But their eyes would glaze over and then they would
just call you a racist. And that's that's how low
brow the debate is in the public sphere in Britain,
and I would argue I would expect in most of Europe.
I'm most familiar with the debate here.
Speaker 5: So the the situation that we have is not one
where Westerners and especially Western leaders are lost.
Speaker 4: They're lost and they don't know that they're lost. If
you know you're lost, you can begin to find your way.
They don't know that they're lost. They think that they're
still the light onto the world, whereas the rest of
the world now looks at them mockingly. Saudi and Imaati
officials will attack the British political leaders because of their
tolerance for jihadism. There are practices that are permitted here
in Britain that are literally forbidden even in Saudi Arabia,
the UAE and Kuwait. This is how bad things are.
It's not that they don't see Islam as a threat,
which anybody with an understanding of Islam should accept. That
it's a religion that seeks to govern and to govern
who to govern you. They're not even aware of the
possibility of their being a problem because they don't understand
their people as their own. The word our people implies racism,
and in a sense I'm going to say this, they
are correct because it implies that there is a difference
between different groups of people, without in any way saying
that this individual is superior or inferior purely by virtue
of belonging to that group. But the very idea of
difference is alien to them. This is why when there
is crime, what's driving it is socioeconomic factors. That's all.
The only thing that causes crime is socioeconomic factors. And
you're not allowed to go any further.
Speaker 1: Well, well, let me ask, Let me ask this, is
it even possible for them to recognize that groups will
have preference for like Islam wants to rule when for
eighty years they've been taught not to notice that there's
a group ruling over us right now. So if you've
been so if you've been so brainwashed into not being
able to see one group, you're not really going you
may not be able to see another group.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 1: A lot of people will say, well, people are if
you're in power, you're being paid or you're being blackmailed
not to see this. No one is being Everything is
an OP. To some people, everything is an OP. But
also social engineering is very real. And I think that's
one of the problems is is that if you can't
see that one group is in charge and has a
babysitter for everyone in Congress except Thomas Massy. According to
Thomas Massey, how do you how are you gonna be
able to see that any that any other group is
seeking to take power?
Speaker 4: Look, without fully agreeing with you, I'm going to say this.
The theology on which Western leader operate is the theology
of World War two and the post World War two order,
which fundamentally understands Europeans as criminals and other groups as
they're victims any other group. This is a mind virus.
This is very much a mind virus. And it's impossible
to say that actually different groups have different identities therefore
different values and different interests, which makes it more important
to state that loudly and clearly. Nixon did a perfect
job of it. He said, I'm a full on ally
of Israel. I want to support Israel, but some Jewish
Americans think that what is everything good for Israel is
automatically good for America. I'm the president of America. I
think that the interests of America sometimes diverged, and I
will put them first above the interests of Israel. It's simple.
And he even cloaked it as saying, well, not only that,
that is also Israel's actual interest if they were as
wise as I am.
Speaker 3: And that's where we need That's where we need to
go if Israel wants to be I wrote for Claremont
about this. If Israel, as Strauss argued, is part of
the West. And Strauss was no Zionist, I mean he
obviously very much cared about the wealth for the of
the of the Jewish people. He said that was his
entire esoteric purpose was to make the world safe. Uh,
for for uh that Jews could live in peace. Was
was the quote that Jaffa gave and is in his
little known interview with U with the University of Chicago.
But he was he was very concerned that Zionism would
remove the very spirituality that allowed Jews to live at
peace in the world. In other words, if they weren't
governed by some commitment to God given morality and spirituality,
they would become soon become a scourge upon the earth,
was kind of his thinking. So uh. But but he
argued that that that that that Jerusalem is is part
of the West. But for it to be part of
the West, it has to it has to look up,
not down, upon who the West's leader is. And regardless,
I don't care who you are, the United States is
the leader of the West right now, and so a
United The current foreign the current domestic and foreign policy
of Israel is detrimental to the West. What they are
doing is hurting both there and the US and the
wider West reputation. And furthermore, it's driving Iran and Russia
further into the arms of China and a United Eurasia
under China is death to the West.
Speaker 4: Absolutely.
Speaker 3: It doesn't mean it will kill every single Westerner. What
I mean is is that it is death for the
leadership of any hope of the leadership of the West
in the world's long you know, middle and long term future.
And the lack of understanding if when I, you know,
and I wrote hopefully cogently about that about it got
a lot of clicks, then suddenly I'm being labeled, well,
you're just you have the secret, you know, Andy Simon,
I don't. I'm I'm you know, Pete's been around me.
That's not the point is that's exactly what you said.
What is in their best interest is is being aligned
with understanding what the what the larger best interests are,
not the narrow focused self interest. And so it's and
that's this is a very very hard nut to crack
right now. I'm trying to write on it. I'm trying
to write on it in a gracious way and in
a way that is not ultra sectarian or anything, because
that's not my intention. But I do want what's best
for the United States, and I think that's what's best
in the long term for the survival of of a
cohesive Western culture and civilization. And I'm glad we kind
of got into this because I wanted to talk. This
is something I wanted really to get your thoughts on
for us.
Speaker 4: So a couple of things. Israel has lost the capacity
to think strategically. If you're in the Middle East, you
need somebody on your side. If you're in the Middleast
and you're just eight million people in the Middle East
the number of Israeli citizens, you need somebody bigger than
you on your size. Egypt is one hundred and twenty
million people. Turkey's eighty million people. It's taken over Sirias,
there's another twenty million. It might take over northern Iraq,
there's another ten million. These are huge countries. You need
to be able to play them off against each other
and have decent relations with both and if not, at
least you need to have a relationship with Iran, to
work with Iran to counter Turkey and maybe find a
way to appeace Egypt. This is strapsgy one on one.
If you're stuck in the midlif.
Speaker 3: You've got to at least have a three legged stool.
Speaker 4: Yes, my original community before I converted is Jews. We're
a minority community that's been there for a thousand years.
Everybody's tried to destroy us at some point, you know,
and this is something that is in our genes that
you must figure out a way to have a functioning
relationship with people who hate you. The Israelis are incapable
of thinking this way, at least under this government. And
this government is led by Israel's longest serving prime minister
and the most effective coalition builder in Israel, Benjamin Nataniello,
to give him credit where credit is due. They see
the Iranians as a threat, They see the Egyptians as
a threat, They see the Gulf Arabs as a threat,
and the Turks as a threat. They all might be threats,
fair enough, when you're a minority, everybody looks like a threat.
But part of acting as a minority in power is
being confident enough to make temporary arrangements. So the Israelis
are trying to block a US Iran deal, even though
after what we saw in Yemen, it's very obvious that
the US will not lose a shooting war against Iran,
but it won't win one.
Speaker 3: Either, Right, There's no that's a pretty defensible country, extremely so,
and they've burrowed under the mountains.
Speaker 4: Their nuclear sites are deep, deep, deep in the mountains,
so are their missile bases, so are their drone bases.
They can keep firing for a very long time. If
the United States with two aircraft carriers couldn't do anything
against the Hothi, who are fully exposed, it won't be
able to do much against the Iranians.
Speaker 3: That's right. And no one's going to cross that salt desert.
Speaker 4: Nobody's invading Idan, nobody's invading Eada. Absolutely, these Raelis are
trying to obstruct this when really one of the few
rational plays that they have is to work with the
Iranians to prop up a few other communities in the
Middle East in the face of Turkey and the Gulf
Arabs in Egypt, because they're terrified of Turkey, would support
them mhm. But they're so adamant on achieving the unachievable
in Gaza, which is the destruction of Hamas, and Hamas
is just a genuine expression of the Palestinian people. And
that's a horrible thing to say about the Palestinians. I
want to emphasize this. That's an insult to the Palestinians
that Hamas is legitimate, but it is mm hmm. And
these Raelis are just incapable of getting past this and
of finding a way to operate strategically. So Trump has
begun firing a couple of key officials responsible for the
Middle East, including a gentleman who had been at the
Washington Institute, an actual duel Israeli American citizen, and a
lady who is a convert to Judaism who is responsible
for the Lebanon file. All three of those are being dismissed.
This is good news because it points to an Exxonian approach,
which is right now where the American establishment is the
best available approach.
Speaker 2: Mhm.
Speaker 4: So we're seeing Trump try to do this, and we're
seeing him try to reconcile with Russia, but he's not
exerting enough pressure on the Ukrainians. He's not telling Elon
Muster switch off Starlink, which would cause the collapse of
the Ukrainians and fix the problem with Russia, because he's
afraid that Russia would go further Baltics or Finland, and
it's a legitimate fear. The Russians won't feel safe until
they reach the Carpathian Mountains, and until they've consolidated over
the Baltics, that's just the geography of Saint Petersburg. Geography
is merciless, so worse still.
Speaker 3: Ye full the gap is still the full of the gap,
still a gap.
Speaker 4: Exactly exactly. So we're starting to see a shift towards
realism on the part of the Americans. And this is
the only player that counts, or it's the it's the
most The Americans are the most important player in the
Middle East. If we see this shift, and if we
see the imposition of some discipline on Israel, we could
start seeing shifts in strategy. But it's really a test case.
And this is happening at a time when the Americans
are getting ready to withdraw from Syria. They had eight
bases in Syria. They've consolidated them into one. This is
usually a prelude to a full withdrawal, which means that
Turkey is going to fully take Syria mm hm. And
so these Raelis are going to look around them and
they're going to see the Turks in Cyprus, They're going
to see the Turks in North Lebanon, and they're going
to see the Turks in at least half of Syria,
if not more.
Speaker 3: Mm hmm.
Speaker 4: They've got to get realistic. They have to get realistic.
But they are incapable of thinking strategically right now. All
they see around them is enemies with zero opportunities for
localized compromises, which you must do if you're a minority
in them add least. So let's see how this plays out.
Speaker 3: I've got a quick question, do you think it's Do
you think that the current iteration of the State Department
cares enough enough about countering uh China's moves in UH
Saharan and and in Middle Africa to help Russia? And
I know the answers, no, they don't. But my concern
is Russia loses that deep water port into the into
the med they are they're going to lose their ability
to counter Chinese influence and and especially in Northern Africa.
And this is a this is a concern of mine.
It may not be a concern of American you know,
of the American powers that be right now, but you know, again,
if we're talking about a three legged stool, I'd at
least like to see a two legged stool in in
in in Africa. Because the Africans, with few exceptions, are
seen pretty incapable of self government. So they're going to
be very as they always have been in in Again,
I'm just trying to be real. Uh, they're always going
to be subject to foreign influence. Yes, and there's a
lot of there's there's a lot of you know that
that that continent is massive and has not been depleted
of its natural resources whatsoever. So do you see, you know,
if Russia loses that Syrian port, they're gonna have you know,
and then they're completely dependent upon the Turks for getting
in and for Bosporus. Dardnell's that gives the Turks and
a lot of power.
Speaker 4: That's already happened. The Russian port is fully vulnerable to
drone strikes by Turkey's allies.
Speaker 3: Okay, and well I figure but.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and and the reason this hasn't happened was because
Asad fell by some kind of arrangement between Russia and
Turkey and perhaps Israel as a sort of final blow
to Hesbulda. But in reality, Asset was key to the
region's stability, just as Saddam was key to the region stability. Right,
And there is no learning on the part of the Israelis.
It was Natanyahu who advocated very aggressively for the overthrow
of Saddam. He didn't learn his lesson. He then went
and advocated for the overthrow of Asset. Even though the
Israelis were fully informed of all of the military movements
of Hezbullah in Syria, possibly by the Syrians themselves. They
were telling they were sending what SAP messages to the
Syrian Ministry of Defense and to the head of Syrian intelligence,
telling them which shipments they had detected and what they
would do if these shipments were allowed to go through.
That's so much information they had on Syria, and yet
with all of that intelligence, they couldn't they couldn't think
about it strategically. The the the Quran has beautiful passages,
much as I disagree with it. One of them is
about how when God is angry with the people, he
blinds their hearts and their eyes and closes their ears.
Mm hmm. It it sort of feels like this. It's
sort of this is what these wings are suffering from.
Speaker 3: That sounds like Isaiah too, So.
Speaker 4: Yes, yes, because a lot of the Quran is sort
of is. The Quran is Jewish celefism that accepts that
Christ is important. Yeah, that's what the.
Speaker 3: Is with some with a little bit it seems like
a little bit of that uh mid first millennium gnostic influence.
Speaker 4: Uh historian and the story story.
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, very nice question. Do you did you see?
I don't know if it's credible. I saw and I
got an alert that Zelenski was on an airplane to
Washington overnight. You heard anything about this.
Speaker 4: I haven't seen this yet.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I don't know if it's looking at that, but I
haven't seen this yet.
Speaker 3: It was tracking his end number. For those of you
in aviation, Uh, you know, it's from a from a source.
I it's normally pretty reputable. But but we'll see had
made a stopover in Iceland.
Speaker 4: So interesting. Interesting. Yeah, well, look, if Trump has any sense,
he's saying, this isn't my war dropping dropping.
Speaker 3: Well, again, as Pete has alluded to, I think he's
there are a lot of influences that are you know, uh,
that are making that difficult for him to drop it,
both from not a purely not simply on the ethnic issues,
but also on the man that's been a profitable grift
for a long time.
Speaker 4: A lot of people, it's for a lot of people.
Speaker 1: Well, I think the real the real question is, and
I was talking to Tom Lawogo about this, was we
know Europe wants to keep this going, City of London,
EU wants this war to keep going. Yes, And I
actually floated the idea to long ago and he said
he was going to think about it. That is this
an opportunity for Russia to have, for Russia to give
and whoever may be working behind the scenes with them,
give Europe, the EU and the City of London their
own Vietnam where they are just where Russia because they
can they have their own factories, you know, as as
Litwak would say, if you don't make your own you're
not a free country unless you make your own weapons
and e anything. So Russia can do this forever?
Speaker 4: Yes?
Speaker 2: Are they? Are they willing.
Speaker 1: To if if Trump pulls us out, if if Musk
turns off the set, it turns off starlink? Is the
EU and the City of London willing to take over
and keep this going? And does that just slowly grind
them down and destroy their power as well?
Speaker 4: Well? Look at it this way. If you look at
the national debt of Britain, it's one hundred to one
hundred and six percent of GDP with a five percent deficit.
France I think it's one hundred and twenty with a
six percent deficit. Italy Spain almost economic basket cases. Germany
just decided that it was going to allow its debt
to explode. It had a constitutional limit on it. Now
it's going to borrow as much as it needs to.
Russia's debt to GDP is maybe twenty five percent something
like that, and their deficit is around one two percent
of GDP, So they're growing faster than the deficit is growing,
meaning that they're debt to GDP is falling, which is
the inverse for most of us in Europe.
Speaker 3: When it sounds like Christian culture, so again, well it's
it sounds like a manifested Christian culture. I know that's
going to bother people. Yeah, that will bother.
Speaker 1: That's that's going to bother the certain tribe that controls everyone.
Crowd definitely of something that I don't buy into.
Speaker 2: I mean Russia.
Speaker 1: Russia's history, especially in the last I would say thirty
to thirty five to forty years, shows that there's an animosity.
You can look at the road you look at Rhodesia
and see the animosity, see who was supplying weapons to
what side, and you can see the animosity.
Speaker 3: Keep going for as you're doing good stuff.
Speaker 4: So when you look at it from this perspective, from
this just purely materialist economic perspective, the West is in
no position to actually do this for a long time.
When you look at it from the perspective of immigration,
which is where we started this conversation, I'm telling my
clients not to ensure assets that are vulnerable to rioting
in major European cities because I see a pretty serious
risk of escalations and rounds of rioting, And at the
top of my list are Ireland, Britain, France, Belgium. So
these countries are enormously vulnerable. Taking it to the Americans' perspective,
if they want to keep Europe intact, they need to
make Europe lose this war quickly, m to sort of
wake them up to reality rather than prop them up indefinitely.
But the Americans are so attached in terms of financial institutions,
and in terms of defense establishment, and in terms of
NATO to Europe that it isn't clear how they can
navigate this and This is happening at a time where
there is a serious domestic crisis brewing in the United States.
There is a constitutional crisis brewing between the executive and
the judiciary. There is a constitutional crisis brewing between the
states and perhaps all three states of the Western seaboard,
and the federal government. And with the spending issue, it
might become a crisis between Congress and the administration. So
I'm trying to write a piece here arguing that we're
moving from the long poly crisis to the great emergency,
to what I would describe as the great emergency. And
this is solely dependent on the outcome of what happens
with the riots in the United States. If you look
at these riots, they're highly organized. These are activists who
have been training to do this for many years, who
have a very skilled playbook on how to play the
media and to spin the narrative and to rally support.
Everything from putting babies in the front lines of protests,
to how to use batricades, to how to impose decision dilemmas,
et cetera, et cetera. The Elensky playbook essentially that's being
deployed against the state with the full support of the
Democratic Party. Everybody in the Democratic Party who has spoken
about the protests has done so in a mealy mouthed way,
intending to blame the violence on the state enforcing the
law rather than on the lawbreakers.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this sounds a lot like the kind of the
early part of may Dan.
Speaker 4: Yes, this is a color revolution and action. And you
see norm Eysen's fat fingers all over this, and you
see this process of trying to force a crisis now on. Yeah,
and then you wonder, well, what happens if he declares
that certain states are in a state of insurrection?
Speaker 3: Yeah, it does fie on.
Speaker 4: Yeah, and what kind of constitutional crisis do we end
up with? Because you can't go well there in California
any more than you can occupy Iran. You can improve
orders in some cities, and you can break protesters in
some places, but you need some kind of political legitimacy.
And what's happening now in the same way that you
have the leftist Islamist alliance in in in in Western Europe,
you have a leftist Latino alliance that is emerging. And
I smell cartel money.
Speaker 3: Mm hmm. Well that's where that's what I hear. That's
especially especially after especially considering what the Mexican President said,
that smells very corrupt.
Speaker 4: So I always remind clients that look Shine Bown when
she was mayor of Mexico City, statistically brought down the
murder rate. The disappearance rate shot through the roof. To
do her a favor, the cartels began disappearing people rather
than killing them, rather than.
Speaker 3: Stringing them up from bridges.
Speaker 4: Exactly, exactly right. That points to a very close relationship.
Speaker 3: Amen, And I'm glad you said it.
Speaker 4: And once in a century opportunity for Mexico to gain
a lot more influence over the southern United States and
to reclaim what they believe is land that was originally theirs.
So you're seeing this sort of slow moving, crashing train
heading towards the Great Emergency. And God knows what ends
up happening and how things change. But with a spiritual crisis,
it ends up manifesting in a material crisis. So the
people become unbelievers, and then there's a flood, the people
try to reach God, and then there is the Tower
of Babel. It always ends up having a material manifestation. Now,
nobody in analysis will say to you. Oh, the spiritual
and the material are connected. And I don't understand. Why
are you an analysis then? Why?
Speaker 3: Why?
Speaker 4: Why why are you trying to look at the world
like just be an economist and count beans or something.
Speaker 3: Uh, it's all dark, it's all uh, it's all dark energy,
dark matter. It is. We just we just have to
We've got to find a plug for the equation to
make the spiritual go away.
Speaker 4: Yeah, exactly, exactly, just call it act sort of assumab're.
Speaker 3: We're just in a similar simulation.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, what what I'm looking at is what I'm seeing,
and tell me if I'm wrong. I'm seeing that we've
reached a point where in the United States and probably
in Europe too, that you have to govern like your
assumption is that your enemy will never be in power again.
And that seems to be the way people are. That's
the way it seems to be the way people are governing,
but they're not doing The mistake is you're not doing
anything to make sure that doesn't happen. Yes, so you're
everything seems like a band aid and until you're willing to,
you know, cross the rubicon, and I mean sending marines
a lot of people would say sending marines into Los
Angeles and not MPs, but troops into into Los Angeles
is crossing the Rubicon. But the problem is is that
even nowadays, when people crossed Rubicon, they they just decide
to set up a camp on the other side instead
of keeping ongoing.
Speaker 2: If you get what I If you get what I mean.
Speaker 4: There's no well the decisiveness there.
Speaker 3: The the issue is, let's go back to the the
comparison to mad Anne uh and and what we can
put on our tenfoil hats a little bit. You know,
there was the there were the snipers. Yeah, and the
question is is whose side were the sniper's on when
a couple of heads got popped on TV that everybody saw,
especially throughout Europe. Yeah, the the the other side would
love nothing more than some twenty something, you know, crazy Antifa.
But female protester get her head popped by a five
five six.
Speaker 2: Round while she's holding a baby, well, she's.
Speaker 3: Holding whatever it is, right, and so it's a it's
a delicate unless you're gonna again tinfoil hat. I'm not
saying this is part of the but you know, unless
you're willing to, you know, uh put an MP at
twenty thousand feet over southern California and turn all the
lights out, including the broadcast towers and all the computers.
You can't do what is You can't do what is
possibly necessary in order to bring order. So the question
is is it's it's you're just walking a tightrope and
it's super windy and there's no net. And I, you know,
I have a lot of respect for what they're doing
so far, because I think they're doing a pretty good
job of saying, hey, that sure looks like an enemy combatant.
You know, there's chaos and they're flying a ORN flag,
and we're going to respond bye by putting forces in
to make sure they're contained. But they haven't gone willy
nilly and put a chain gun on a group of people,
which because that which exactly they shouldn't do. So so
go in support the deportation, round people up who are
who are rioting, and you know, I saw a great
Uh supposedly they've got some playing closed folks who are
identifying the leaders vanning those people away, and uh, that
takes time. It's not what you know. When I see
the pictures and I get fired up, I'm like this
is the United States of America, you know. And and
what's really sad is there's a lot of Hispanics who've
been here multiple generations who are gonna get cropped, just
like the Japanese in California during World War Two who
had been here for multiple generations, who are going to
get caught in this culture crossfire, which is sad. Who
I know because I know we own apartment complexes and
we've got some awesome this man, They're like, why are
these people doing this? Because it's just going to come
down on me. And I love America. I don't want
any illegal immigration. I don't want any of this. So
that's I think they're they're they're they're acting with as
much wisdom as can be expected right now, even though
it's frustrating for those of us who would like a
quick reprisal so to speak. So far, I think they're
doing a pretty good job. What do you think they
could do? Do you think they could do anything different
right now for us? No?
Speaker 4: I think other than sort of these guys try to
break down their own protests into stages or into zones
and areas where one of them is violent, one of
them is just shutting down roads and causing disruption, and
one of them is, unfortunately, because a big part of
the Latino community must be kept on side, because they
haven't done anything wrong, firstly, and because that's generally a
good thing to do, the state must play by those
rules and sort of focus on the violent elements, focus
on the leaders, focus on the financiers. What I really
want to see is a concerted effort to follow the money,
to say that this guy bought one hundred shields and
dropped them at a protest site, and he's being arrested
for that, and he's being interrogated to identify where he
got the money to buy them, Given that he's probably
a bum or a student or something.
Speaker 3: Like that, who's the cutout exactly?
Speaker 4: So I want to see that step happening. But that's
also something that is difficult, that takes time, and it
requires very good interrogation techniques in order to cross reference
stories from different actors that have been picked up doing this.
I want to see a focus on the logistics of
the protesters, who's providing them with what, and where is
it coming from. The issue is that, given the nature
of the urban sprawl in most of America, it's very
hard to do this and to properly lock up areas. Here,
the police follow the kettling tactic. They place the protesters
in a narrow area, and they just keep on tightening it,
and then when they force them out, they do the arrests.
America's urban geography makes this a little bit harder. I'm
really worried about a scenario. In the Lebanese Civil War
and in the Syrian Civil War, there were many times
where there were talks and then nobody knew who started
firing and who was doing the shooting. If you had
a side, you would say it was the other side.
But if you were neutral, you'd say, I have no idea.
I worry about this. I very much worry about this,
about this kind of dynamic where you start seeing unattribut
unattributable acts of violence that trigger a wider escalation. And
I'm worried that the Democrats are planning to increase the
volume of the protests and their dispersal so that the
state wouldn't have enough troops to throw at anyone problem.
I'm concerned that they're using this tactic with the explicit
intent overstretching the state and creating the impression that there's
a wide insurrection and therefore inviting retribution that goes overboard,
and that flips the media narrative in their favor.
Speaker 3: Mm hmmm.
Speaker 4: I do worry about these things. But I'm curious about
what you've heard about cartel money.
Speaker 3: I just being I've heard the say, you know, saw
the same things you did about the Mexican president when
she was a mayor in you know, I travel not extensively,
but a fair amount in Mexico. I absolutely adore the Yukatan,
love the people. Uh it's a little far afield, but
but but there were these concerns even among the people
of a lot of people sure disappearing, you know, while
she was mayor. And that's uh. And then uh, you
know when there have been the h the Air Force,
UH intelligence gathering, the r c oh I'm forgetting the
has been doing the uh international uh uh international run
up the Sea of Cortes uh and UH. That usually
means that there's paramilitary cartel activity going on in northern
Mexico as they're trying to get the radio traffic. And
that's been very active since Trump took over. So all
these things just point to me to to cartel activity
being subversive uh in in that trans border area. Both sides.
Speaker 4: So that's all have a huge interest in this, and
there is every precedent for narketerrism, and they have a
huge interest in disrupting Trump as much as possible because
the last thing that they want is a secure border.
Speaker 3: Of course, of course, so this is amazing, well they do.
They don't want a secure border, and they don't want
they don't want a situation where mules aren't easily tracked.
Speaker 1: The president of Mexico Senate who I think he was
Secretary of State last year and traveled to the United
States to campaign against Trump. He said two days ago
that you know, if this continues, if you want to
wage a war on Mexico, we're going to take back
to eighteen thirty borders. This is just escalation. I mean,
this is they have no chance of doing that. So
the only reason they're they're doing that is to me,
that's a signal to people within this country, to certain
elements within the country to keep you know, to go
to I mean, it's almost like, I think it's almost
like a trigger because we know that we know this
cartel influence in this country I mean wide influence and.
Speaker 4: Yeah, my political influence. It's just stupid. Don't to do it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, there's no other reason to do this, you know.
And then you know, let's let's remember something else. If
people need to follow Mike Shelby on Twitter, it's gray
zone at Grayzone Intel with an A. He follows all
of this. He he follows the left, like the indivisibles,
all these groups. He follows them and tells you exactly
what they're planning. He reminds us that Trump has said
that this operation in la Is thirty days, is planned
for thirty days. Right, so we haven't even seen this start.
Either this is going to fizzle out or it's going
to get it's going to escalate, and I don't it's
the summer months, it's June. I don't see this fizzling out.
Speaker 4: I'm betting on escalation. And yeah, and maybe Ron you
can sort of help educate us on this. When does
this start affecting financial markets?
Speaker 3: Well, I mean I think it. I think it.
Speaker 1: Well, Oil's oil has been oil has been going up
the past two days.
Speaker 3: I mean, yeah, I think it affects financial markets. If
you see a contagion outside of California, right, Uh, or
a contagion that begins to impact. I mean, let's let's
just be uh where where do the where does the
financial set like to vacation? You know, this gets down
into deep Orange County lagoona Uh, this this starts impacting
where they're in San Diego. Uh. Then then the visibility
I mean, not to be brazen, but a lot of
the financial community is like La County is a disaster anyway,
it just burned up, you know. Uh, now they've got riots.
I mean I think they discount a lot of it. Yeah,
but if you begin to see a the true suburbs,
not the urban area, unable for people to go to
Costco to home depot to Low's, you begin to see
a home you know, you've already got the highest home
inventories in La County that you've had in a long time.
But but those really start to fall off to where
the broker the not the brokerage, but the mortgage companies
begin to see pain because nobody's wanted to buy anything.
Uh now you've got Now it begins or you see, uh,
for instance, the police and the city handled there was
announced protest on the Margaret Hunt Hill bridge here in
Dallas last night and the police were out in force
and they said, this is an unlawful this is an
unlawful assembly, and they started rounding people. They were ready,
and it just went away. So it didn't just go away,
but but it was. It didn't become this big thing.
But you see a successful protest that shuts down in
a you know, an urban center outside of California, then
I think you have a chance for the financial markets
too to uh be impacted. Or you see the cartel
something that's in our obvious cartel move across across the border,
you know, in southern San Diego, or they make a
move uh into Del Rio or are one of the
big plazas as they call them, then then you know,
I don't think that's gonna happen. I really don't. I
think you're gonna see more uh Uh. The cartels have
gotten very good at their intelligence, you know, the operation
side of their intelligence. They they act with great uh sophistication.
You know, the Mexico has a non existent air force
and not a very good army. Their navy is actually decent.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 3: People don't realize that the sailing ship fiasco in in
in New York notwithstanding, uh, they have that because they
actually put money in and effort into their navy. They
have the third largest navy in our hemisphere. People don't
realize that. Uh So, so where the cartels, you know, uh,
really do have. The cartels have a have a presence
on the ground in kind of a paramilitary and and
then an operational intelligence that is that that is operational
into the United States. And that's very very hard to
combat unless you do what Russia is doing in in
the Russian touching piece of you know, the part of
Ukraine that that is that that touches Russia. That's the
only way you wipe you know, you're going to wipe
that out is if you basically make a neutral zone.
And uh, something drastic would have to happen for us
to actually do that other than just fortify the border.
But the border, as long as you've got border crossing,
it's going to be tough to to to to do
much about this. What I so, what I.
Speaker 4: Worry about is the Chinese deciding that they're going to
provide the right kind of drones insufficient volume to the cartels,
which can easily have org these kinds of drones.
Speaker 3: Yeah, for the Iranians.
Speaker 4: Anti tank weapons. Uh, that kind of equipment that then
gets used in an insurgency. Because I don't think of
the cartels as criminal gangs. I think about them as
insurgent groups.
Speaker 3: Well, they're they they are the they are the acting
government in northern Mexico save save uh uh uh uh,
you know, save a couple of urban areas. They they
Mexico is a very unless you are on the level
of sophistication of a United States or Israel or or
very very first world country, Mexico's geography is just makes
for very difficult dispersed government governance. Yes, it's it's mountainous
and desert and it's it is very much set up
for a federal system, which in theory that's what they have.
What they have in reality is uh. Central Mexico is
governed by Mexico City. Northern Mexico is governed by the
cartels with you know, negotiated settlements via you know, money
changing hands, and then uh and and then and then
Southern Mexico a a weird hybrid with a lot of
leftist gorilla groups. And so to think of Mexico as
this monolithic uh state being run from Mexico City is
just not the way it is on the ground. And
so and that's a real problem. I mean, but we've
allowed it. We've allowed it. We've it's our money that
finances that. It's it's it's our turning the other way,
you know. Uh, we allowed what amounted to a communist
revolution in the early part of the last century. Uh.
And that ran out the church, that that basically sub
subdued the Catholic Church. There's still a Catholic Church presence there,
but it is not the centralized governing presence that you
that that you saw prior to the Mexican Revolution. And
we look the other way because the will, the Wilsonian
idea was, you know, let them kind of do their thing,
and it was so so we're we're we are harvesting
the fruit that we sowed a long time ago. It
should be I'm not arguing that it should be a
satrapie or a vassal state, but it absolutely should be
a client state.
Speaker 4: And uh.
Speaker 3: And it's not the fact that Cuba and and and
Mexico I will get into the Canadian thing. That's a
different thing that has traditionally been a European state. But Cuba, Cuba, Honduras,
and Mexico. For them to be allowed to exist as
they have for the past fifty sixty years is a
complete and utter failure of American projective of Monroe doctrine.
So that's my opinion. Love to hear what your thoughts are.
Speaker 4: My only thought about this is that when I think
about the demographic change in the United States and the
number of Hispanics who are now in the United States,
with the issue of remigration or whatever you want to
call it coming to the fore, with the issue of
mass deportations coming to the four this is a territory
that's ripe for insurgency. This is a territory including big
chunks of southern California, including big urban areas in the
United States. These are areas where a combination of left
wing agitation and criminality can seriously disrupt and destabilize the States.
And if I was the cartels and my precursors for
Fentannel are all coming from China, and China is willing
to sell me weapons and there is this increased escalation
in their relationship between China and the United States. What
I would work for over the next four years is
the full destabilization of the US to help China consolidate
over its own sphere of influence in Asia while keeping
the United States on the back foot. And you therefore
end up in a season of madness and extreme instability
where these just agitators build on an existing ethnic grievance
from the Latino community in order to create an insurgency
that empowers the cartels who are the new barons of
Mexico at the end of the day, right, the aristocracy
of Mexico, if you want to think about it in
this way, this is the oligarchy of Mexico.
Speaker 3: It's the oligarchy. This is and and and we've seen
an example of this play out. We saw when think
about it this way, the CIA's support of the Chechens
in Southern Russia is exact is, although the Chechens didn't
have the the complete they didn't have the oligarchical if
we're going to call it that support, they did have
some Muslim money, some Arab money coming in, they absolutely did,
and they had CIA paramilitary support, some suggest as much
as there were even advisors on the ground there, uh uh,
through cutouts. Again, we didn't have uniform people there obviously
that's Russian territory. But we absolutely were supporting the Chechens,
the Chechens who remember killed how many children were killed
in that school? Uh yeah, So I think this is
a it's not an exactly coherent, uh analogy, but it
is it is an analog uh to to to that.
And we could see the we could see the cartels
borrowing from that playbook absolutely because remember remember back when
Los Zetas was powerful, it was they were trained by
this that they came to power because they were trained
by the operational uh the operations director of the CIA.
That's where they got their equipment, their training. And there's
still uh uh, there's still ah, that's the Zeta's morphed
into a couple of different cartels. But that the leadership,
now it's been enough time to where that playbook is
is is absolutely there.
Speaker 4: Yeah, that's my big concern because you have you have
an economic time bomb and Trump is right about and
Musk is right about this, that this is an economic
time bomb. You have a debate within the right should
the cultural issue and the broader agenda supersede the economic agenda,
And that debate has been one thanks to the riots
that we're seeing you have the Democrats understanding that if
Trump is successful, the result of this would be a
reduction in their number of House seats and in their
allocations and the funding that they get. And they see
that they are fund that they've gone insane and are
extremely unpopular, and so to retain their power they must
fight for it. And they have a cartel army willing
to fight for them. And they already have this sort
of ethnic alliance that that that that is agitating for it,
and the logical conclusion of it is going to be
this thing getting considerably worse. So I don't see it
fizzling out. I think they have all of the actors
that matter have an interest in this escalating. The question
is do they get some kind of popular cover through
protests that allows them to spread this across multiple cities.
If they do, I would see that as an extremely
negative indicator. I would see that as the start of
a civil war in the United States. I've been writing
about the possibility of a civil war in the US.
Some people call me crazy for even thinking about it,
But there is this broken national cohesion, broken national identity.
But at the same time, because so much of the
United States is still Christian there is a willingness to fight,
especially among the military and the special forces in the military,
who are predominantly white and who are increasingly Christian. So
this fight can expand quite significantly. And it has a
mirror image in Western Europe, with the Islamists, who are
in control of crime in Western Europe playing the same role,
with the Left playing the same exact role on both
sides of the Atlas Antique. This is why I'm saying
that we're moving from the sort of perma crisis, poly crisis,
whatever you want to call it, that's been on the
outskirts of the West, to something that is happening internally.
And that's the shift that I'm beginning to see. People
have been writing about civil war in the United States
for the better part of three or four decades, and
we don't know how it happens. It's not clear. These
are the events that could lead to it. A street
protest movement that is mixed with criminal money, that is
mixed with foreign support, that plays on an existing ethnic grievance,
that leads to something potentially life changing.
Speaker 2: Mm hm.
Speaker 1: So you you invite, you invite foreign armies to take
this all the way back to immigration. We've invited foreign
armies into our countries, yes, and we don't understand that
unless that is taking care of quickly. I'm also someone
who's been talking about civil war. I'm not talking about
the whole country fighting at once, but it's going to
be pockets of areas here and there. They've become uninhabitable
for long periods of time until until it stops. But
you know, the question is who wins and if you
have if it's foreign if it's foreigners who are doing
a great deal of this fighting, well, I mean, really,
who wins in the end? I mean you do when
when you see the president of the Senate of Mexico
putting up a map and you know, the eighteen thirty
map of Mexico. Well, we don't want to believe as Americans,
we don't want to believe that that's even possible. And
I think it's impossible. But if you let it get
too far, if they gain too much of a foothold
in one place, and then you have, I mean endless
foreign money. Let's remember Time magazine back back in the
eighties had Pablo Escobar on their top ten list of
richest people in the world.
Speaker 2: There's a reason for that.
Speaker 1: So how much money does how much money do the
cartels really have? And when I look at the President
of the Senate out there talking about this, I'm not thinking, Oh,
this is going to be the government of Mexico doing it. No,
it's going to be a paramilitary force is going to
try to do this. Well, I mean, come on, come on,
and then take into it. Take into consideration. The same
thing could happen in England overnight if.
Speaker 4: You look at the unfortunately being from them. At least
I feel like a civil war expert. If you look
at the Lebanese Civil War. Some of the best parties
in Beirut happened during the civil War. Some of the
best ever New Year's parties happened during the war in Syria.
You could still go and have a drink in Damascus
up until it fell, and now you can have a
drink again. Incidentally, civil wars don't sort of explode everywhere
at once. It's a sort of slow moving fire that
jumps around from place to place, and there are some
realities on the ground and then you can't sort of
get past it. The thing that's enabling the cartels more
than anything is this spiritual crisis in America that is
leading so many people to rug addictions, and these addictions
are financing the enemies of civilization and decency. And now
these enemies have captured the Mexican State. The president of
the Mexican State is an ally of the cartels, and
they have a massive chip on their shoulder, and they
have a Russian ally and an Iranian ally and a
Chinese ally who are willing. We've seen Iran moving around
Latin America and all kinds of ways. There are even
stories about some of the families of Hesbelah fighters moving
to South America. And you have this tinder box brought
about by the idea that diversity is our strength. Just
talk to somebody from Lebanon for five minutes and I'll
explain to you why that's not true. And it's ready.
We're accelerating towards the crisis, and people don't understand the
practical impact of this, like having to check the radio
every morning before you leave your house to see if
there are checkpoints on your way to work, having to
constantly have stockpiles at home of everything that you might
need because you don't know when you're going to be
locked in for a couple of weeks trying to figure
out who will move into which neighbor's house if the
fighting comes close to your neighborhood. It isn't chaos everywhere
at once. It isn't everybody has at the same moment.
Life continues, People continue to go to work, people continue
to make money, trade continues, all kinds of factories continue
to operate, etc. But then when the war comes to
your area, your factory gets looted and your house was suited,
And I'm worried about the scenario. One of the reasons
I left the US. I went and lived in the
US from twenty seventeen to twenty nineteen. One of the
reasons I left was a sense of foreboding, a sense
that this is going to blow.
Speaker 2: You know, let me let me interrupt you for a zec.
Speaker 1: I had an Indian gentleman on my show, Giant Bandari.
I don't know you guys know who he is. He
said when he moved to the US. The reason he
left was the same exact thing, he said, even why
he lived in Canada for a while. He said, he
left Canada he said, I don't think Americans can see
it like we can see it.
Speaker 2: From the outside.
Speaker 4: Yes, yes, I'm from a I'm from the most paranoid
minority in the Middle East, second only to the Jews
in our paranoia. Yeah, you know, I'm saying I'm not
attacking anyone. I'm saying this is what keeps minorities alive
in a sea of hostile aliens. You know, it is
what it is. I felt it. It was absolutely safe
where I was. I was absolutely fine. Nobody ever threatened me,
nothing happened to sort of physically tell me this was
the case. But I was meeting with people and I
was talking to them, and this sheer hatred between different
groups in the US was truly striking. You felt it
physically when you went to a black area, like the
only places where I felt I should leave now was
when there were black when there was a big number
of black people around. But that's not only it. Even
when you talked to the most sophisticated people in DC,
you had a sense that they absolutely hated at least
half of the country, and that always translates into something physical.
In Syria, a couple of years before the war, the
level of sectarianism that people had in any private conversation
was just insane, just absolutely insane. And I had the
same sense in the US.
Speaker 3: Yeah, I think people are getting even people who are
reasonable and well educated and generally patient or getting pretty again,
you start some of the images you're seeing do do
things to people, right, h and uh very well say that.
Speaker 4: Only side will govern. Sorry, sorry to interrupt you. Now
you just show that only one side will govern and
that the two sides won't coexist. That's right, that's what
these are.
Speaker 3: And yeah, and you there comes a point where not
that it's some strategic, uh, well thought out deal, it's
just some enough people say I've had enough. Yeah, and
uh it boils over, yes, you know, and it it
and and this is true of people across cultures and
throughout world. It's just a point to where okay, we've
had enough, and I uh what is interesting is that uh,
conflict tends to unite and for good or ill. Uh.
You know this kind of the neocon im and I
am the farthest thing from a Neocon, but part of
their there, you know, the the East Coast Strassian so
to speak, idea of of being kind of functionally spartan.
That that that the reason that they're always in wanting
there to be some kind of war that you're involved
in at all times, and conquest is well, that's what
unites of people, right, that's I think very what's that?
Speaker 4: That sounds very right?
Speaker 1: Well, and it sounds like something ethnic, well in the
ethnic uh yeah.
Speaker 3: But and it's and it's certainly not what strauss are
argued for. I I laugh at the East Coasters, but
uh but it's a it's the you you see that,
uh uh? Used as a anyway, we don't have to
that's a whole other topic for another day. And we're
getting along on this episode. But but uh.
Speaker 2: Let's let's let's let's wrap it. Let's wrap it up. Then.
Speaker 1: I think this was a great talk, and I'm so
glad that we had a rational discussion about civil war
and how it happens and how it how it's I mean,
I think it's inevitable in this country. So I think
we just painted a picture of it that people people
can see.
Speaker 2: I do too.
Speaker 1: I mean, obviously I don't want it. I'm here, I'm here,
I don't want it. Ron's in a city. I'm not Ron.
It'd be worse off for run.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: Yeah, hopefully yeah, I need to get on Zillow.
Speaker 2: We've talked about that before we started recording. It's a
good time, all right, all right, Ron, do your plugs.
Speaker 3: Uh, this is real. These are not plugs. This is uh.
You can find me at I've been writing for the
I've done a foreign policy a geopolitical series over at
the American Mind, part of Claremont. I write regularly for
American Reformer, and I am on Twitter every day, and
then I have a substack, the Eyes of Apilles at
uh ron ron Dodson at substack or however that goes
Ron Dodson dot substack dot com, and you can find
you know, easiest is on Twitter, and I am Ronald
Dodson on Twitter.
Speaker 4: For us. Yeah, you can find me on modad geopolitics
dot com and on modad g o P on Twitter.
Speaker 1: Until the next time, gentlemen, Yes, yes, very much, so
I have uh yeah, I have notifications turned on. But yes,
thank you, And until the next time, let's do this again,
you know, after a while. I'm sure, like I said,
apparently this thing is supposed to be going on in
LA for thirty days, so we have much we could
talk about in thirty days.
Speaker 4: Thanks Pete all right, thank you so much, Thank you
h