Speaker 1: If you want to support the show and get the
episodes early and ad free, head on over to Freemanbeyond
the Wall dot com forward slash Support. I want to
explain something right now. If you support me through substack
or Patreon, you have access to an RSS feed that
you can plug into any pop catcher, including Apple, and
you'll be able to listen to the episodes through there.
If you support me through subscribe, star gum Road, or
on my website directly, I will send you a link
where you can download the file and you can listen
to it any way you wish. I really appreciate the
support everyone gives me. It keeps the show going. It
allows me to basically put out an episode every day now,
and I'm not going to stop. I'm just going to accelerate.
I think sometimes you see that I'm putting out two
even three a day, and yeah, I can't do it
without you, So thank you for the support. Head on
over to Freeman Beyond the Wall dot com, forward slash
Support and do it there. Thank you. I want to
welcome everyone back to the Pekingano Show. It's been a while,
but Greg Hood's back. How's it going doing, good Man?
Speaker 2: Call me chat. You can call me James Kirpatrick, you
can call me whatever you want. I think the anyone
who cares knows who I am at this point.
Speaker 1: Yeah, after the after the docs sing, it's you know.
Speaker 2: I mean, that's that's one of the big things. I mean,
it's inevitable. You're going to get docs. You just got
to deal with it.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you gotta set it up so that you have
some kind of backup plan ready to go and when
it eventually happens. Let's jump in with this. One of
the big things that you've been pushing ever since Trump
got elected is remittances remittance taxes on people sending money
back home who came here illegally. And what a day
to talk about that because so much of it has
to do with India. I think India four percent of
their GDP is remittances from from the United States. And
then we have this cartoon character congressman from Michigan who
and I hate I hated to use this joke because
I love the man so much, but I said, gott
is he not Peter Brimolo. If Peter Brimlow had had
a baby with Vivak Ramaswani, I mean.
Speaker 2: If Peter Brimblow looked like an NPC from oblivion maybe.
I mean, it's it's absurd. And you see everybody right
now dunking on him, just like what are we doing here?
Like who is this guy? Why is he in the country?
Why is he in Congress? Now he's saying we need
to impeach Trump because Trump deported an illegal I mean,
but what exactly is the point of the country. What
have we been reduced to if this is where we're at.
But I mean, to go to remittances. I think that's
the biggest missed opportunity so far. I mean, a remittance
tax is something that Trump talked about during his first
run for president. There was a plan. Everybody forgets this,
but there was an actual plan for how they were
going to get Mexico to pay for the wall, and
it said right there, black and white, we are going
to have a remittance tax. That's how we're going to
do it, and we just haven't heard anything about it.
I kind of wonder what Stephen Miller is doing. I mean,
he's so clearly detail oriented, and he's going out there
just schooling the press on the ins and outs of
all these policies and yet we've just heard nothing about that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's I just don't think people realize that. You know,
I've been talking a lot about immigration, just you know,
covering it as much as possible. And I had someone
who you know, contacted me and is like, what you
really have to understand is just if they want to
keep these dollars circulating, especially globally, they need these people
in here. They need more people in here, because if
they want to have a global currency, the more people
they have here sending money back home, the more the
dollar is in demand worldwide. And hell, who I mean
if it means that, you know, we take half of
the subcontinent in who cares, right, right?
Speaker 2: And but that is one of the big questions do
they want that? Because one of the big things that
we're seeing with this tariff policy, Trump of course just
doubled down on the external revenue service idea, is that
maybe we don't want the dollar to be the global
currency anymore. We don't want the dollar to be as strong.
We want the dollar to have a different role. And
if you're serious about stopping immigration, and if you're serious
about America being a nation and not just a marketplace,
eventually you're going to kind of run headfirst into a
lot of these really difficult issues that we built a
system over the last fifty years that can only operate
in this way, and now we're trying to wrench it
off the tracks by force and put it on something else.
And you're not going to be able to do that
without upsetting a lot of very powerful people. I mean,
what's interesting now is that for all the talk about
how the billionaires are backing Trump now and he was
put in by the elites, this is far more threatening
to elite power than anything he ever talked about doing
in his first term, certainly a lot more threatening than
anything he talked about during his first reelection. Bid Whether
he can pull it off, I don't know, but I
think it's a fight worth having because we'll have it out.
We're going to know whether America is a real country
or not by the end of this term. And then,
you know, the first book I ever wrote was basically
about giving up on the idea of America and the
idea of American identity ending and just embracing a white identity. Now,
I don't really think that's plausible now, but it might
be if you have the entire system come down and
say no, we are literally going to impeach you for
deporting the legal immigrants. And that's actually what we're going
to call fascism. If that's where we're at, why even
talk about reforming the system anymore.
Speaker 1: That's a point. Another point I've been making a lot
recently is that if we're going to have another election,
there's a chance a Democrat is going to take over.
And if a Democrat takes over, then they're going to
punish Oh yeah, their enemies. I mean, and it's not
going to be J six throwing people in the hole.
I mean, they are Chris Murphy. I don't know if
you saw Mike Mike Shelby shared that video. Chris Murphy,
he's literally getting ready for a color revolution. He's it
was him planning a color revolution. So if we're going
to have another election, really, what is this? What on
a national level, a national country, why what.
Speaker 2: Are we doing here? This is something I mean, this
is going to sound a bit larvae, but it's something
that Trump seems to be hinting at more and more.
And Stephen Miller again, Stephen Miller basically said that the
Democrats can never again be allowed to have national leadership
because they just simply can't be trusted with these sorts
of fundamental ideas. We are at the point now where
I think it makes sense to talk about American empire
as a form of government, not just territorial expansion. The
system we have now, first of all, is so far
gone from the Constitution that to even talk about constitutional
rule is laughable. But second, we all see that the
people that were told run the country don't actually run
the country. I mean, the biggest dog that hasn't barked
for the first one hundred days. Where the hell is Congress?
We have a Republican Congress. When's the last time Congress
has done anything other than representative mace like posing for
the camera and some of these other Republicans asking these
silly rhetorical questions to get engagement, bait. I don't know
what they're doing these days. The only action is coming
from the White House and coming from the Judiciary, neither
one of which was considered to be by the Framers,
the main branch of government, the thing where everything was
going to come from. Clearly, I think what we have, too,
is that we have structural problems that are so profound
and require such a long term perspective that the system
we have in place now, again very different from what
the Framers wanted, makes it impossible to do. I mean
the things that President Trump was talking about in terms
of trade, in terms of immigration, in terms of re
orienting how the government funds itself, and maybe not having
most people pay taxes any more. These are things that
require like a decade. This is Singapore style reconstitution. It
can't really work in a system of government where you
basically have two years and then you're guaranteed to lose power,
which is why the other side wins, because unfortunately, concentrated
benefits always win over diffuse costs. I think that's why
like Doge and these opportunities to cut government funding really
haven't been going anywhere.
Speaker 1: So there's a bunch there we When I look at
like the MAGA. Yeah, when I look at the Magabase,
I see basically conservatives, liberals, classical liberal types. But I think,
even though they don't realize it, subconsciously they were voting
for a king. They wanted someone to come in there.
And you know, I'll say this too. Last month I
went I was in Al Salvador for like eight days,
I felt safer in sen Salvador walking around at night
with my wife than if I was in New York
City or you know, most big cities on the Atlanta
in this country.
Speaker 2: Yeah, a country. We can't say that about large parts
of America.
Speaker 1: If he's I mean, it's it's time for that, right,
I mean, that's the only only possible way.
Speaker 2: I mean, what when we talk about the kinds of
policies that need to be implemented, I'm just talking like
policy nerd stuff. You know, write your position papers. We
can reorient trade this way or that way. It is
not possible to be done through Congress. It just can't
be done because of the way it is structured. And
this is something political scientists have been talking about for
a very long time. Heck, when I was in college,
there was a book I read called The Irony of Reform,
which talked about how the kinds of good government reforms
progressive I put in place have basically crippled Congress as
an institution. And as somebody who's as an intern but
was was up there for a little while and got
to see a little bit about how the process works.
None of these people read the bills. None of them
know what's in it. None of them even sign the bills.
When it comes to co sponsoring and stuff, the LAS
or even the interns do that. The government itself is
basically run by a bunch of twenty year old legislative
aids who are telling them what to say. They're too
busy running around being on TV and trying to raise money.
Their districts are too big, they represent too many people,
they have too many things that they're trying to do
in order to keep themselves in the press as opposed
to legislating. The whole system is impossible of any kind
of coherent governing agenda. And so what you have now
is President Trump essentially trying to govern by decree, and
the judiciary is stepping in saying, well, you're not allowed
to do that. But when you actually look at the
legal reasoning in a lot of these cases, they're just
making it up. And they've been doing that basically since
the war in court, but nobody's ever called them out
on it. Now we're seeing people actually call them out
on it. The things you talk to me about when
you said, hey, do you want to come on? You said, well,
what are you what's your feeling on the first hundred
days of Trump? You know, basically, are you happy or not?
I'm extraordinarily happy. But part of that is because my
expectations were very low, I mean, especially after the first term,
and because I'm old and bitter, just don't I don't
expect very much from the political process. But I'm also realistic.
I don't think that there's a better alternative. I don't
think that if we all just stay home, you know,
we're going to get some right wing authoritarian rising to
glory in eight years, any more than not voting led
the Libertarians to come to power, you know, because you
refuse your consent to the system or whatever else. I
think Trump is the best we can expect for a
very long time. And what is the value of Trump.
He's forcing every single one of these institutions and now
we're on the judiciary to completely shred its legitimacy. However
this ends up, and I think you're right. If the
left regains power, there are going to come for all
of us. They are going to come for you, regardless
of what you think about Trump. If you're right of center,
you may be looking at real persecution, losing your bank account,
losing your job, losing losing your freedom, and going to
jail over some invented things. Look at what was done
to v there with Letitia James. And of course Letitia
James is only being held accountable somewhat now because of
Trump won all that's coming for every single one of us,
but people are going to be far more aware of it,
and we're willing to resist it in a way that
just wouldn't have been possible ten years ago. I mean,
the very fact that Trump was elected not despite his
support for the j six prisoners, but partially because of it,
I think is eloquid testimony to that.
Speaker 1: So I think there's three elite groups around Trump vying
for power. Obviously, the Israel lobbies always there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and the number one threat right there too.
Speaker 1: Right yeah, I mean, don't get me started over.
Speaker 2: I mean that's yeah, there's yeah.
Speaker 1: That's we're I mean, yeah, the bank, the banking lobby,
the Wall Street and strangely the Federal Reserve, you know,
because Jerome Powell private equity pal. I mean, he's basically
been working for Wall Street for since he got into, uh,
since he got into the Federal Reserve. And then you
have the tech elites. Who's do you see the tech
elites or being any kind of real the tech elites
and Wall Street being any kind of real push or
any kind of you know, if you have competing factions
and one gets to win here, one gets to win there,
it's a lot better than if one is just dominated.
What do you see?
Speaker 2: Well, I think what's interesting is right now Trump has
staked his entire presidency on the thing that is clearly
most important to him, one thing he's been consistent on
for about forty years. But it's also something that none
of the constituencies you just mentioned darn favor of, and
that of course is tariffs and this trade policy, and
a lot of people on our side even are freaking
out about it because it's a huge gamble. I mean,
it is going to cause economic disruption at best, at
worst massive damage. We're probably going to start seeing a
supply crunch and some issues with trucking and some other
stuff in the next coming days. And I don't think
any of those people support that. Certainly not Wall Street,
certainly not the Israel lobby. I mean, right off the bat,
Trump slaps some tariffs on Israel, and basically net and
Yahoo had to come to him to basically try to
negotiate and get them removed. And I still don't think
he removes everything. So, I mean, none of those guys
are clearly calling the shots as far as everything. As
far as who has the upper hand most of all,
I don't know. I think that Wall Street is probably
the most powerful. But that's because what they want is
chiefly a negative agenda, going to tax unrealized gains. We're
not going to raise taxes on the wealthy. I mean,
Trump will probably try to push through another tax cut
and that'll be the way. Maybe he can get them
on board with tariffs. We're going to try to get
trade deals that will allow us to compete better in
foreign markets. Maybe that's the way he can sell them
on some of this stuff. I mean, as far as
the tech bros go, look, Zuckerberg's heart has never really
been in it as far as I can tell. Censorship
on Facebook and all the other things he controls hasn't
changed all that much. Same with YouTube. I mean, as
far as Elon Musk goes, he clearly seems to be
on the outs as far as the administration goes, and
he's not very popular anymore so if he ever was,
He's not been disowned, certainly by Trump. But I think
Musk is an opponent of some of the tariff policies
that Trump's trying to do. I mean, as far as
Zionist go, and as far as the foreign policy lobby
and the neocons go, I think there's more reason for
optimism on that than there was in his first turn.
I mean, we don't see John Bolton, we don't see
a lot of the people that we would have expected.
I think Trump does not want to let Iran get
a nuclear weapon, but then again, really, no American administration
of the last certainly my entire lifetime, would have been
on board with it. And that doesn't necessarily mean that
he personally would order American forces to do anything about it.
It is possible I could see him looking the other
way if Israel decides to take it out themselves. But
there is going to be an effort at negotiation for
that first, which frankly is probably more than we could
expect if any other Republican would have won.
Speaker 1: Yeah, the thing you said about having about the people
around him, especially when it comes to foreign policy, it
definitely the do you think the signal leaks were done purposely.
It almost seems like it's you can make the argument
for or against, and I think that I come down
the middle. It come down in the middle on it.
The one thing the signal the League's told me was
that none of these people fear God, none of these
people have a conscience at all, and they're willing to
drop that. They're willing to do exactly what Israel will do,
drop a building full of people in order to get
one person. And I mean, it's just depressing just to
see that and see all these quote unquote Christians in
there celebrating that.
Speaker 2: What do you think of the reporting indicator? And again,
how much of this reporting could we even trust? That
it was Vance and the Secretary of Defense who were
pushing back on the idea of America striking a rain
right away. I found that pretty interesting, not that surprising,
because Vance strikes me as somebody who's a little suspicious
of any long term foreign intervention. As far as willing
to kill people, I mean, I think to get to
that level, it almost requires us a ruthlessness. You're just
going to get in one hundred percent of the people. Yeah,
there's a reason I think become president. Yeah, well, I
think Vance Vance and Haig Seth. I think they have enough. Definitely,
Vance has enough. Inspiration, is taking enough, It is listening
enough to that section of the tech elite that are
saying that China is our number one enemy. And I mean,
at this point, I can't disagree they once you really
start digging into China and what they do and how
they do it, and the fact that they're they're basically
destroying all of the ecology off of the western coast
of South America right now, which is fish with overfishing.
I mean, they have no conscience whatsoever. It is a
civilization threat, and it's Yeah, this kind of gets us
to it, I think is the main thing. And you
and I are both thought about these issues, and it's
really the issue for our entire movement. It's the one
thing that we kind of just have to have out.
And I'm not sure there is a correct answer, which
is are our interests tied to the interests of this
entity called the United States of America, Because clearly as
it exists now, not like the American nation as an ideal,
not what America could have been, not what America once was.
But the thing we're in now. The thing that is
going to be, barring mass deportations, and that's a separate issue,
is going to be majority non white within our lifetimes,
and that's going to change everything. If we are looking
at it from an American point of view, from sort
of a civic nationalist point of view, Clearly China is
the main threat economically, possibly militarily, in terms of the
global order, in terms of this whole system that we've
set up. From the point of view of an American
living in this country, of a white American living in
this country, what I'm most afraid of is what you
talked about earlier. The Democrats come back and for years
and start doing all these terrible things. I mean, China
hasn't done those things to me, but Democratic officials have.
And so that raises a certain question about who is
it that I really should be worried about, and who
is my political enemy. From a geopolitical point of view,
the Trump administration is in a weird place because there
are clearly factions of their base that are already thinking
in terms of weird And you would see these flags
all over when you would drive around rural America. Take
Back America, you know, very vulgar terms about Joe Biden,
Kamala Harris, you know this idea that it was.
Speaker 1: I live in rural Alabama, Yeah.
Speaker 2: So you know, I mean, it's it's basically like it
was basically like an uprising against an occupation government. I
heard people and this is that Trump rallies, these are
normally Republicans explicitly talk about it in these terms that
we're expelling a trader, that we're going to do this,
that we're going to do that. So you have that,
but then also Trump has to manage the American empire,
the existing American empire effectively, so he doesn't disrupt everything
too much. Can you do both those things at once?
I don't know. And where does that leave us for
people who who are talking about politics, who are interested
in what it is to be American now as opposed
to what it was when the founders created this country.
Because we're simultaneously the super patriots and also the exiles.
We're simultaneously the people who want the American flag to
conquer New Lands and also the people who might want
to break up the whole thing, and there's not really
a consensus. I think about how we go forward. What
I've come to believe is that there's not going to
be a consensus one way or the other until we
see how it plays out with Trump, and Trump is
our best shot right now.
Speaker 1: I think what you're seeing, and you know Thomas seven
seven seven has been talking about this, even Jared I
remember him talking at the last conference about this is
I think you're going to see people of like mind,
either organically or intentionally, going and living, living near each
other and basically collectivizing. I mean, I know I'm not
going to dox you, but I know where you live,
and I know that there you're surrounded by our people.
A bunch of our people are.
Speaker 2: I mean people are where no where I live. I
live in Lynchburg, Virginia. Everone knows I live round If
people want to get if people want to get me,
I mean I got another house too, But like, if
people want to get me, they're going to get me.
And if people want to know who I am and
like where I've been, I mean all that I've had
so much my stupid private life like thrown out in
the media for years and half of it's not even true.
But it doesn't matter. At a certain point, I think
one of the big things that's changed is that when
I was starting out in this kind of stuff, when
I would write stuff, you were taking ideas to their
logical conclusion and maybe being militant because in some sense,
there was no consequence to any of this. You were
just sort of following the ideas where it would lead you.
But now there are real consequences because people are actually
paying attention and there is a responsibility to actually organize
and win because the stakes are there. I think what's
weird about the movement maybe in twenty ten as opposed
to now, is you could say the most extreme stuff
in twenty ten, and yet the idea that you would
be censored, the idea that even like Google would censor
you was just crazy, like, oh, that'll never happen. Nobody
thought that. Nobody accept the most like extreme people. And
guess what, those extreme people were right about what was coming.
But at the same time, even though we face real,
no kidding, repression, and certainly our European comrades face it
a lot more than we do, at the same time,
we also have a mass base, which is something we
didn't have before. And if you ask me, what's the
explanation for that, I really don't have one other than
Donald Trump. We would not be here without him.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I've gotten to the point where I'm pretty much decided.
I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that there's
gonna be targeted violence in the future.
Speaker 2: And yeah, I think, yeah, Luigi whatever, Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah, people can figure out where I live and if it. Yeah,
I used to be like one of these people when
I first started doing this, where it was like, well,
I'm gonna use a fake name and I'm gonna do
I'm gonna do everything I can do this and anything.
And now I'm at the point, like I mean, it's
if you once you decide to become a partisan, you
pretty to put a yeah, put a put a bull's
eye on your back.
Speaker 2: So I mean, just don't just know what you're getting into.
For any of the younger guys out there, you know,
make your choice and stick to it. But if if
you're going for a real job in the administration or
something like that, then don't be stupid. There are things
possible twenty years ago as far as kind of leading
a dual life the way a lot of us did
working in mainstream politics and extreme politics at the same time,
that's just not an option anymore.
Speaker 1: Well, and I think you know this. I mean, I
try not to talk about it because the more light
you put on it. But I'm sure you know, you
know our guys who are working in the administration. Oh,
there's a lot of them. People would be shocked to
know how many there are, and in some of the
places that they actually are, it's crazy. All right, Well,
we got to talk about this immigration.
Speaker 2: Well, there are a couple big things going on right now.
First of all, the legal battle is going to be
it's going to determine everything because obviously the best thing
to do is for Trump to actually win. He has
this authority to get rid of these people. The fact
that they're even trying to fight him on this is insane.
It's not true that he's got fewer deportations than Biden.
I think there's a big sleight of hand here where
basically the people that they would let into the country
and then deport later these his deportations. What Trump has
done within he did it within the first week. Forget
at the first one hundred days. He shut down the border.
As far as illegal immigration coming in. I mean, it's
just not a thing at the southern border anymore. I
think they said what three people got in? I mean
that alone. Remember that was what the Biden administration was saying,
we need new legislation to stop. We cannot secure this
border without new legislation. And remember it was a lot
of Republicans like that idiot senator from Oklahoma Langford who said, yep,
this is what we have to do, and it was
Trump who shut it down. He's proven himself entirely correct
on that one, and no one's giving him any credit
for it. What he's doing now is he's going after
some of the hardest cases and the Democrats the hardest cases,
meaning the hardest cases for the Democrats to defend the
gang members and all the rest of it, and they're
going to the mat for them. And what's remarkable is
that the media, having learned nothing, is repeating these kinds
of narratives. So we are going to have it out
over the best battleground we could poss stably have it out.
I think if we didn't move into the tariff territory,
which is I think more politically problematic. But that's like
saying if only Trump wasn't Trump, I mean he was
always going to do that. I think we'd be in
a pretty good position. On immigration. The deportation mechanism, I
think is still getting up and running. They need more funding,
they need a lot of things to really get this
to where it needs to go, But clearly things are
moving in the right direction. All that said, what we're
talking about to keep America America, we basically need to
get rid of like twenty million people, and probably if
we're serious, we need to strip citizenship from a lot
of anchor babies and send them back to And to
be blunt, I think the second thing is certainly not
going to happen in this administration, and the first thing
unless he wins US unless I almost said unless he
wins another term. Although he is selling the Trump twenty
twenty eight heads. Unless they somehow keep control of the
White House for a very long time, I don't know
how they can achieve that level of deportations unless they
do a lot more to drive self deportation. And at
the top of that list is remittance taxes and going
after the employers, and we are not seeing them go
after employers. That is the number one thing they could
be doing. And furthermore, you could have a lot of
fun with guys like Bernie Sanders, who said for decades
that this is the thing the government needs to be doing.
I don't want to see Ms thirteen gangsters in handcuffs
so much as I want to see meat packing plant
CEOs and handcuffs. Because if you want to actually make
a difference, and this is a numbers game, you have
to dry up that magnet. You just have to break
the backs of the people who hire these people, and
they'll stop coming or they'll leave. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I have a friend who he's already done, the mayor
Kulpa on this, but from California, and he defended a
bunch of like the employers who were employee employing illegals.
So he knows the inside outs of this system. And
he said, really, he goes it's regulations. He said, that's
what Obama did. Obama just got some regulations put through
so it was legal for them and it actually encourage
them to hire illegals. He said, all you need is
regulations in the other direction. And I'm not against at
this point, like you know one, yeah, the first first offense,
you know, I mean a heavy fine. I'm talking about
millions of dollars. Second offense, we auction off your we
option off your company. We just take it and we
option off your company. I mean, that's the only thing
that's going to stop these people. People have to understand Walmart,
these these companies, even the smallest companies, they love immigration
because it increases their customer base. They love they love entitlements.
The more money that's printed, the more money that's given
to them, is the more money that makes its way
to them. The companies are not our friends. I'm sorry
if I sound like a socialist. Businesses are not our friends.
If this is capitalism, fuck capitalism.
Speaker 2: You cannot have the merchant fundamentally running society. It's that simple.
I mean, this is traditionalism one on one. I mean,
once you have the driving force of a society being money,
you don't have a society anymore. Because at the end
of the day, what you are going to do is
you're going to champion a system that takes money from
the public and puts it into private interests. And you're
going to get a lot of useful idiots who call
themselves libertarians, who are not libertarians, calling this the free
market when it is anything but the free market. We
don't even need to have the capitalism debate, because whatever
this is right now, it's just organized theft. It has
nothing to do with the free market. But I think
the scope of the problem is so much deeper than
anybody knows. I mean a lot of people might now
know this. I work in the trades for a little while,
and when you go to these let's say it's like
a Walmart. You're working at night, that kind of thing,
and you're surrounded by construction workers or whatever else. I mean,
you're dealing with one hundred percent Spanish speakers, one hundred percent.
I mean, some trades are still ninety nine percent white,
but for something like construction, there are no white people anymore.
It's just not a thing. And is it really possible
that every single one of these people who are working
in this are citizens? Is it really possible that hundreds
and hundreds and hundreds of workers all working for this
place and none of them speak English. Not just they
won't talk to you. I mean I knew enough Spanish
to kind of get by and figure out what they
were saying, but the higher ups asked to talk to them,
and they can't understand any of it. Is it really
possible that none of these people speak any English after
doing this job for presumably years. I don't think so.
I think that the illegal immigration problem is it's not
twelve million. I don't think it's fifteen million. Frankly, if
it was thirty million, or above thirty million, that wouldn't
surprise me. And to say that Trump is not delivering
a nass deportations, even though that's true to some extent,
although I think he's doing, he's setting up the groundwork
that you're going to need to do if you're serious
about this thing. What it's going to require, if you're
trying to literally grab people and send them out by force,
I mean, essentially, it's going to require a military operation
as great as World War Two. It's not feasible unless
it's accompanied with punishing the people who have created the
magnet that created this problem in the first place. And furthermore, frankly,
to get Americans on board. I think that what they
were going to do with Dose should have been done
where he gave everybody a rebate, we start confiscating some
of these ill gone gains. Frankly, I think Americans should
get a share of that. That's one way to get
Americans on board. I mean, we're in this mess because
American tax payer money goes to private interests and NGOs
and places like that, and so they're committed to this. Well,
Americans start getting a share in this, then they'll be
committed to a program of national reclamation.
Speaker 1: Do you take Eric Prince seriously when he says he
can you give me this amount of money and I
can do this?
Speaker 2: I think if anybody could do it would probably be him.
I think most of the problems that we have in
this country could be solved very quickly if we had
people with sufficient will. The problem is, I don't think
it's a question of money so much as breaking through
a lot of the institutions, number one being the courts,
and that's what's being fought over right now. President Trump
is going to be forced, I think, into a historic
choice because I don't think the courts are going to
let him deport these people, and he's going to have
to defy them. I don't think they would have allowed
Eisenhower to do what he did, which, of course at
the time, everybody took totally for granted that he's allowed
to do it. I wrote for Vedare for a very
long time. If you look at immigration law, if you
look at the actual laws as they a written, the
president has almost unlimited power to get rid of foreigners
in this country. There's no legal dispute to be had.
This could be done tomorrow, But right now you are
going to be facing not only all these random federal
judges and probably the Supreme Court, but you're also dealing
with these states and these localities that are essentially in
a minor form of insurrection because they're saying, we are
not going to allow you to get rid of these foreigners.
And you have to ask yourself, given that he's present
and he's dealing with all these other issues, how far
are you willing to take this, Because however far you
think it's going to be, it's going to be farther
if we actually want to solve this problem. And I
think what we're running into now. Before every revolution, there's
always a period where people see the problems, they know
there have to be major reforms, they know that the
structure can't operate much longer, and they say, hey, we
get to change these things or the whole thing's going
to fall apart. And the people who are benefiting from
the way things are so no, no, no, you can't
do that. And usually what they do is they cloak
themselves in the language of traditional liberties and privileges and
constitutions and the way things have always been done. That's
what happened to the aristocracy in France before the revolution.
Of course, it didn't do him any good in the
long run. And I think we're dealing with the same
sort of issue here. These NGOs, these corporations, all the
people who benefit from this program of unlimited cheap labor,
all the people who benefit from DEI. There's no circumstance
where they're going to allow you to reform their lives,
their meaning, the purpose of their lives, more than just
their livelihoods out of existence. So if Trump can't do it,
and I think it's too early to throw in the
towel on that, but obviously he's facing ferocious resistance, but
I think he is fighting hard. If he can't do that,
what next, Because the answer can't just be the people
are going to rise up, or that the system is
going to collapse, or that we automatically win. Because I'm
more ideologically extreme than Trump is, I don't think any
of those things are going to happen. I think we're
going to face some very difficult ideological choices, and we're
going to face an even more difficult organizing struggle.
Speaker 1: Well, I think that like say the Democrats take over
the House and the Senate in the midterms, and they
somehow get somebody, you know, the voting machines get turned
back on again, and they get someone in in twenty
twenty eight. I think it can be so bad that
finally some of these quote unquote patriots wake up and realize,
you know, we have to have some kind of separation,
and you have to treat Washington, DC, treat the federal
government like your under occupation, and you know, use federalism
in whatever way, shape or form to try to reconstitute something.
But if the right keeps, say, say they gain the
Republicans gain seats in the House in the Senate in
the midterms, and JD. Vance gets elected in twenty twenty eight,
I don't think these I don't think the people on
the left are going to have the same idea. Well,
you know, maybe California should separate, and maybe you should. No,
I think it's just going to be out and out violence.
I think it's going to be the streets. You will
not want to be near a city. And I'm not
talking about big cities. I'm talking about cities.
Speaker 2: I think maybe this is too pessimistic, and I'd like
to hear what you think and what other people think too.
I don't think the right is capable of doing any
kind of serious political action in the sense of totally
defeating the left unless we control the system to some extent.
We're just not wired for it. The way the left
has reacted since President Trump's election, that would not have
happened had Harris one. You would not see big protests,
you would not see people gearing up. Really, the only
thing that allowed Trump to win is the fact that
every buddy, who had very different ideas, they all had
one focus on this, and this was Trump, and you
had people with mutually incomprehensible ideology supporting him as a
savior figure, and that was able to work for him.
But I don't think the right is capable in the
same way that say, the Antebellum South was capable in
having a coherent block, with a coherent governing class and
a counter ideology that would justify separation from the United States.
I think you would just see a lot of bizarre
conspiracy theories and local flare ups here and there that
wouldn't really go anywhere because there's only one left. But
there are lots of different rights, and the rights don't
tend to get along, and if you're the left, the
way you crush them is you make sure that there's
nowhere to go to get away from everything. In terms
of mass immigration, I mean, why not And we saw
this under Obama, and we saw this under Biden. Why
not just make sure that lots of new immigrants are
revitalizing Appalachia in West Virginia. Why make sure, just make
sure they're going to Idaho, make sure they're going to
what areas of Red Texas still remain where there's nowhere
to escape. You're already seeing this in England, where they're
targeting a lot of the kind of reform areas with
new settlements of Southeastern immigrants, Southeastern Asian immigration. And I
just maybe this, maybe I'm too pessimistic, maybe I'm just
too bitter, or maybe just too old, but I doubt
the capability of the American right to develop a true
anti system alternative. I think that the only way we
get anywhere is that we have the system, the left overreacts,
which it tends to do, and then the right is
the one which gets to bring the hammer down. And
that's the only way this is going to work. I
would like to be proven wrong, but I think we'd
see more signs of it. And frankly, the only real
counter revolution that we've seen over the last ten years
has basically been funneled through Trump. And I don't think
he's a safety valve. I think if it weren't for him,
we just wouldn't be seeing anything substantial happening. I mean,
what are we going to do, go back to the
tea party or something.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, the thing is, and I'm not calling for
this anyone who's listening, revolutionary violence on the right always
has to be pushed to the point where they just
can't stop. They can't help it anymore. Like Spain in
nineteen thirty six. That's the only way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but even Spain you had it wasn't Spain is?
I agree? The best thing to look at is in
terms of where we might be is Spain. I mean,
Spain is about as pure a right versus left fight
as it ever existed. But the big difference between Spain
and the situation now is. In Spain, you had a
lot of institutions that were still totally or not totally
but overwhelmingly on the right, traditional institutions, above all the
army and above all the foreign legion in North Africa,
and then the owners that they were able to bring in.
I mean, the Moroccans were a key to that initial
wave of tax I mean it was a failed coup originally,
which then became a civil war, but it was a
coup that wasn't launched without support from some of the
organs of state and the left. One of the big
things that really crippled them in the early going was
they were reluctant to arm the anarchists, and they were
reluctant to arm the left wing forces that probably could
have crushed the right wing uprising, but weren't necessarily allied
to the republican state smaller republican state. And I don't
think the left now is that conservative or that cowardly.
I think they we saw in twenty twenty. They have
no problem giving cover to revolutionary forces. They have no
problem turning the other way when certain acts of violence
take place, and there are no institutions on a national
level in the United States that we can say are
comfortably on the right. I mean, certainly before Trump, I
think a lot of people would assume that would have
been true of the military. I mean, does anybody believe that? Now?
Does anybody believe, like Alliver Stone sort of conspiracy theory
is that the CIA is actually a super right wing
secret government that just can't wait to return America to
right wing authoritarianism. Now, of course not. We've seen all
these CIA girl bosses running for Congress, and they're all
left wing beyond belief. I mean, what one institution is
on our side, even the Catholic Church, even the churches.
I mean, we can't even say or I wouldn't even
call him right of center. I mean, you want to
talk about who's importing the illegal immigrants and who's profiting
from it, the religious charities above all. I mean that
may be George W. Bush's greatest impact on American history
was funding these religious groups to do quote unquote charity.
So unfortunately, the only way we were actually able to
get any kind of state power is basically by electing
some crazy guy president twice. And that's where we're at now.
But I mean, the one thing that we do have
which we didn't have fifteen years ago, is I mean,
you have a label, You have an organized something you
can organize around, You have people and parties. You have
a rebirth of a lot of these kind of conservative
groups that are no longer willing to aggressively gatekeep the
way they did fifteen years ago, which was basically the
story of my life when you're young and trying to
organize within the conservative movement and you're constantly being gate kept.
That gatekeeping has failed utterly. Trump broke it. And I
think Trump has opened up the way for what comes next,
but what ultimately needs to come next. And I hate
to say this because it just sounds so cheap, but
I've been thinking about this for a very long time,
and I really do think it is a simple. You're
going to need another charismic personality to come along and
get elected to something and rally a movement that way.
I think that the only way the Right can really
collectively have a push forward is it's going to be
around personality, not ideology, because I just don't think the
American Right is capable of uniting around an ideological program
right now. Aside maybe from the idea of national reclamation.
And even if we did that, the libertarians and the
normy conservatives would probably be at our throats when it
comes to doing what needs to be done, just getting
rid of these illegals.
Speaker 1: Well, I think, yeah, that's when you say that I
agree with a lot.
Speaker 2: Of that amotistic I guess that's the question.
Speaker 1: No, no, no, no, you're the civic, the civic national
you know. And I'll say this, and it's a bizarretive
religion is so ingrained in normy conservatives. And then you
have you know, I mean you have on the right
now because they've migrated to the right because of because
immigration threatens them. Is so many Zionists. You have all
of these Zionists who have I'm right wing.
Speaker 2: That's arguably true of like the neo conservatives as far
back as the safeties. I mean that was the original
migration right. I mean, you had all these guys who
supported the civil rights movement and supported a lot of
these radical movements, and then it started coming for them
and they said, oh wait, that's where Podhortz and Crystal
and a lot of these guys. Frankly, the original generation
of neo Conservatives was more impressive in a lot of
ways than the current generation. At least those guys had
something to say once in a while, whereas the ones
now are just pure hacks. And I think that the
real danger with the neo conservatives now, or you know,
the Zionism above everything else type quote unquote conservatives is
at some of them, I think they even know America
and its current trajectory is going down, but they want
to use this last opportunity to get us involved in
one last stupid war to achieve certain geopolitical objectives. And
it's just a question of not letting them do that.
If you look at the polls over the next twenty years,
I mean, it's going to become basically completely untenable to
be pro Israel and a Democrat. Certainly, I think something
like eighty percent of the young Democratic base is anti Israel.
The danger, of course, is then you end up with
the situation in the United Kingdom where basically the Labor
Party is moving into the pro Palestindian Party and the
Tories are going to be the pro Israel Party, and
that will create I mean, arguably we're already there, and
then you'll end up having to do all these stupid
fights over that stupid desert instead of what we need
to do here. But really, as far as Zionism goes,
especially if we define it in terms of foreign policy,
it's just it's very simple. We just can't let them
drag us into another war, because if that happens, that
becomes the entire story of the Trump movement, not just
of this administration, but everything you ever did. Just like
George W. Bush when he got reelected, it was to
stop gay marriage, it was to stop a lot of
these things that a lot of Republican voters at the
time were really upset about. He had all these domestic
plans and everything else. But if you ask anyone what
was George W. Bush all about, it was the Iraq War.
And there was nothing else he did that was of
any real importance. And if Trump gets dragged into a
middlea some war, then that's all he was going to
be about. But at the same time, I think that
he's shown more resistance than just about any other Republican
would have at this point. I mean, one of the
things we got to talk about in terms of the
factions fighting over the Trump administration, one we always seem
to overlook is Trump himself. I mean, that's one of
the reasons I think so many people voted for him.
We're not voting for a front man. We're voting for
a guy who is the closest thing America has to
a sovereign and Trump, maybe because he's egotistical and self centered,
actually takes responsibility for his choices precisely because he wants
to have the credit for doing big things. And I
don't know, I guess at some level it comes down
to do you have faith enough in Trump to resist
getting us involved in one of these things. I mean,
he did do it in the first time, aside from
a couple of missile strikes against Syria, if you gant.
Speaker 1: That, and solemony and solemony.
Speaker 2: I mean, can we reorient American foreign policy away from
being anti Iran? I mean, that's really going to be
the story of these negotiations over the nuclear plant. So
we'll see.
Speaker 1: Anti Iran and anti Russia. There's no reason we see
at odds with Russia.
Speaker 2: Well, that's obviously what he's trying to do now with
the some sort of a I mean, there's no there's
no ability to maneuver away from that. While the war
in Ukraine is going on, and obviously he's trying to
stop that. Now the question is, is Putin does that work
the Putin's advantage ers he just determined to grind this
thing out until they can secure control over those four regions,
or does he actually think he's going to take all
of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: I hate to stay on the Zionist Jewish power thing,
but these anti anti free speech laws that are getting.
Speaker 2: Complete disgrace, there's no defending him. I mean, there's there's
an argument that I'll say this, all these guys who
are being deported, none of these guys should be in
the country. None of them are anti Zionism for the
correct reasons. You know, all these guys are all we
want to destroy Western civilization and we have a white supremacy, this,
that and the other thing. But that's not why they're
being deported. Like I would support it explicitly. If we're look,
this guy's anti white, he's a foreigner, he shouldn't be here.
We're deporting him. That that shouldn't even be controversial. I mean,
if you, I mean, let's let's ask this question. If
you had I don't know, somebody from Europe or Russia
or whatever who is the head of the neo Nazi
group and started saying how we need to destroy black
people in the United States or something like that. He's
a foreigner, he's there on a student visa, and the
Biden administration decided to deport him for that reason. Do
you think anybody would be raising a stink? Do you
think anybody would be upset about it? No? I mean,
I think that is something. I don't see why it's
so unthinkable to deport people for being anti white or
anti American. But the reason they're deporting these people, it's
not even because they're anti Semitic. It's because they're anti
Israel specifically. So now you're setting up the precedent where
you're saying that it is because of their opinion about
a foreign country that we're going to kick these people out,
And we're not willing to kick these people out for
having the wrong opinion about our country. I understand the
I just want these people out by any means necessary.
I'm certainly not going to shed a tear for them,
But I mean I want these people out, probably way
more than even the people in charge now and do.
But the rationale that they're using is frankly bizarre to
any normal American and I think they're handing away an
issue that politically doesn't get them anything, and it's also
just a terrible precedent to set. But I mean, this
particular fixation, it just comes down to obviously certain key donors.
This is something that they probably demanded in return for
the big donations. And there's no mass constituency for this.
But unfortunately politics is played at the elite level and
it's dictated from the top down, and that's where we are.
I mean, ultimately, what we have to have is we
have to have an explicitly pro white lobby in this
country if we want politicians to respond to us. But
we do not have that yet. That's really what American
renaissance is all about.
Speaker 1: I mean, I thought Qatar was taking over the colleges.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, well a Qatar. Obviously we're all in the
Katari payroll, so you know, I'm actually broadcasting from Dubai
right now.
Speaker 1: That was one of the weirdest syops and there's still
people are still going with it. The whole look right
thing too, is.
Speaker 2: Just so stupid and it they're just bad at this.
This is what I don't understand is that, I mean,
this is a whole other can of worms. But when
you look at the Douglas Murray interview and you look
at some of the arguments that of being trotted out now,
and you look at this gatekeeping effort being launched against
like Joe Rogan and people like that, and it's so
hamhanded and so clumsily done, and nobody believes it, and
they've just completely lost it. They've certainly lost the entire left.
I mean, that's just gone and you're just never going
to see that again, and they don't even know why.
And then in terms of the right, I mean, if
you wanted to, Occasionally I'll see people on ours and
they'll say, like, look, the pro Israel lobby is trying
to couch its arguments in terms of a defense of
white identity or Western civilization or something like that, and
that's how they're going to trick people into getting involved
in the new midle Eastern War. I think that's giving
them too much credit. If you look at the kind
of arguments that they're raising now, it's like they've learned nothing.
I mean, this is stuff that was dated twenty years ago.
This is stuff that sounds familiar to the George W.
Bush days, and I just don't see anybody going for it.
But it's almost like a zombie movie, zombie movement just
because there's so much money and institutional power behind it
that they're just going forward with it. Unfortunately, if you
look at people in Congress for the GOP, those people
seem to find it compelling. I mean, the quiet revolution
that's undergoing with the GOP base regarding Middle Eastern policy
just seems to have no effect whatsoever on the people
who are in office right now. None of them seem
to even notice it.
Speaker 1: One of the other things that they're using is that
the factions, the whole Israel thing is going to cause
factions on the right, and the right will never be
able to be united. And you know what they don't
understand is is that as long as that is there,
as long as that Israeli influenced, as long as what
Massey said, everyone has an a packet, you're not reuniting
the rights. The right is not going to be united.
And and you know how you can tell the the
right's not going to be united because Trump got elected.
Trump is not a unifying force even within even within
the Republican Party, he's not unifying. There are too many
people who consider one thing the left can do is
they can they can agree that power is what all
we want to do is have power, and then you
can go over here and do your chopping dick soft thing,
and you can go over here and do this or whatever.
Just give it. Just get us power, Just get us power.
The right gets power and they don't know how to
use it. They're afraid or.
Speaker 2: I think they're not allowed to use it. I mean,
that's the biggest thing, is the right treats. I mean,
for most of my life, the right has been defined
as it is our job to oppose any use of
state power, and if we use state power, we're just
as bad as the other side, which is really a
way of negating politics itself, because politics is power. Politics
is the pursuit of power. Power is a constant. Sovereignty endures,
It cannot be eradicated. Someone is going to use state power,
and it's always a question of whether it is you
or whether it is going to be used against you.
You don't get to opt out unless you somehow flee
the area of sovereignty. And regarding foreign policy, regarding Israel
and regarding to those others issues. There's no version of
the right, no coherent version of the right where you
say a permanent alliance with a foreign country is core
to our worldview. But that is the absurd position the
mainstream conservative movement is in right now. And you certainly
see and I can say this with utter certainty having
worked in it for so long, for religious reasons, for
institutional support reasons. Maybe you could argue that there was
once a legitimate reason for it with the Cold War,
because it was sort of a Cold War ally in
the Middle East, but that hasn't been true for a
very long time, and if it ever was, there's no
reason to be going to the mat on something like this,
And there's no way to explain people going to the
mat on something like this other than they think either
money or institutional power is on their side, and this
is how you have to get it, that this is
just the price you have to pay. Now. I think
that the left is going to have a lot more
freedom to operate, especially as the Palestinian cause becomes more
popular among the youth, and especially as America is increasingly
non white and a lot of the non whites in
America think of themselves almost as america as Palestinians. I
remember the if you're familiar with the Attsalan movement and
the Chicano movement, they used to always this is like
decades ago, they would refer to themselves as America's Palestinians.
This is the way that they would conceptualize what they
were going through. Now, this is the way that the
Palestinian flag, it may become sort of like the intersectional flag,
the sort of pan leftist flag that can be used
by lots of different constituencies to communicate one message that
kind of makes sense. Whereas the right, there's not really
a way you can have a we're defending Western liberal
values chiefly done by Israel, and that's our front line
against militant Islam, but also we're importing millions of Muslims,
and supporting Israel doesn't seem to do anything to stop it.
I mean, the whole argument is so incoherent and just
falls on its face. I mean, the only thing that
I'm ever I always pushed back at is that I
just don't think. I mean, support Palestine if you want,
but none of these people are ever going to support you,
on the causes that matter to us. I mean, I've
never seen a pro white activist who supports Palestine. I've
seen a lot of people try, like go to a
Palestinian demonstration and be met with anything other than violence.
So we do need to be honest about that. Sometimes
the way the enemy isn't your friend, it's just another enemy.
Speaker 1: Yeah, true, Or you just just watch from a distance
as they fight your enemy and you don't say anything.
Speaker 2: But one thing I will say, and I remember, I
think it was Nick Nifuentes who said this a year
ago when it was all like really kicking off, and
you said this about me, but it was more broadly
a criticism the conservative movement. And I'm going to say
he's one hundred percent right. You can't say, well, I
just don't care about either one of them. When do
you United States of America is overwhelming and this was
he was saying this when Biden was in office, is
overwhelmingly on one side, when the United States of America
is like, your taxes are supporting one side. And that's
doubly true. Now, so, like you do have a stake
in these things. I wonder if there's going to be
a point where, particularly if the Democrats take over, particularly
depending on who gets elected, if you're going to see
America start weighing in on the other side, and we
may see a real slugfest in the Democratic nomination. If
Governor Shapiro of Pennsylvania runs. That was the guy who
the Trump campaign was terrified was going to be named
as the vice presidential nominee and who a lot of
them were even afraid was going to be the presidential
nominee in the last election. If he runs in twenty
twenty eight, that's going to be really interesting to see
in the Democratic Party, and it will be very instructive
as far as telling us how power is really wielded
in American politics. Because someone like that is able to
get the nomination, I think that tells us a lot
about how little public opinion within a party really matters.
Speaker 1: When it comes to just like the what they call
the right, I mean, I'll just call the Republicans, because
I'm very strict on what right wing means, very historical
right wing means. But Republicans they if they don't have
the stomach for what needs to be done, then they do.
You see a certain segment of them because I think
there's a lot of people who voted for Trump this
time who may have voted for Biden in twenty twenty.
I think there were people who were like, well, you know,
I just it's that center they talk about who has
no kind of you know, No, there's no ideology there.
It's just whichever the wind blows. I mean they turn yeah, yeah,
well if the economy is shitting the bed in twenty
twenty six, and I mean, do we see like basically
a bunch of people just abandoning MAGA and being like, well,
we need to get people in here. Even though you know,
like we've already said, Congress is doing nothing. Do they
do anything anymore other than run interference for certain things?
I mean, do we see a gigantic change because I mean,
these aren't people who have any kind of ideology whatsoever.
Their ideology is financial.
Speaker 2: I think that the biggest missed opportunity of the Trump
administration thus far is not giving people the dojerbait checks,
not turning people into financial clients. And a democracy, you
have to establish a patron client relationship with your voters,
and Trump did that with the stimulus checks. A lot
of blacks actually, according to that book fight about the
twenty twenty four election, said they wouldn't vote for Biden
because Trump had given him a stimulus and Biden hadn't. Now,
of course Biden did, but they didn't know that. But
Trump was smart enough to put his name on the check.
I think if MAGA fails, or if the economy goes
bad and the tariffs aren't able to turn it around
by twenty twenty eight, or whatever situation we end up facing,
I think you're going to see a large number of
people shift towards the left and whatever party is promising
them free stuff and sort of a vague soak the
rich mentality. I wouldn't underestimate AOC, frankly running on just
sort of pining the sky. Social programs and whatever else.
Whether they work or not doesn't matter, and whether they
make people's lives worse or not really doesn't matter. I mean,
what is the one thing that everybody in this country
agrees on. Healthcare sucks? What do they all agree should
be done about it? If you look at the polls,
give more power to the people who made healthcare SoCs
to begin with, People are not capable of masses of
people anyway, are not capable of severing that connection. And
I don't think you're going to see like a new
right of MAGA movement takes shape. I don't think you're
going to see some anti state movement. I don't think
you're going to see like neo libertarianism or whatever else.
I think you're just going to see a kind of
left and you're already seeing it at some level, a
kind of left wing populism where we basically we're going
to have a kind of democratic socialism, and we're going
to make a couple head fakes toward disenfranchised white males
to win back some of these guys, and then we're
going to screw them over on cultural policies once we're
in power. I think that's the most likely political reaction.
I mean, the real question of what the right's going
to do in terms of a reaction if Manga fails
is I don't think they're going to do anything. I
think they're gonna just retreated to fan world in private life.
I don't think that there's any real air parent or
real rising movement that has any political presence that can
really accomplish anything. I think whatever comes after Maga is
going to be calling itself like the true MAGA, or
calling itself like what the Trump Revolution was really about,
and we're going to succeed where he failed and that
kind of thing. But I also think it's a little
too early to be giving up of a president.
Speaker 1: Yeah. No, I mean, I'm just like I follow people
like Mike Shelby and he what he does?
Speaker 2: You know, Yeah, I've been following him pretty closely too.
Speaker 1: Yeah. He sits in on all the like the calls
and everything like Indivisible places like that. People think that
stuff gone has gone away because us A I D. No,
they're not going anywhere, and basically what they're doing is there.
Mike doesn't think that there is going to be like
this is going to be a Summer of George kind
of thing, except if some of these groups are calling
for to get violent when it comes to deportations. If
you see a deportation, man stand in front of it.
If you see an airplane, you know, if you can
if you find out that flight.
Speaker 2: I really hope. So yeah, that's that is That's what
I want. If you're like, what do I what do
I think is the best thing that could happen? What
is the only way and I'm I'm maybe I'm too pessimistic,
maybe I'm too scornful. But what is the only way
I think that the right actually does what needs to
be done. I'll tell you exactly. And this already happened,
by the way. Everybody forgets that. But there was a
democratic terrorist who shot at an ice station in Colorado
a few years back. Remember he was killed, And there
were other attempts like this. The best thing that could
happen is if the left tries to violently stop deportation operations,
and that provides the opportunity to bring the hammer down
with things like Rico prosecutions of these organizations, where you
actually start breaking up these groups, where you actually start
going after the ngngos, where you actually start dismantling these networks,
and you do it legitimately under the auspices of the state.
One of the things that we really I mean, you
know this, but I think a lot of people on
the right don't know this. They have these fantasies where
it's like, well, you know, the balloon's gonna go up
and we're gonna have a fight, and the right wing
will wap the floor with them. Yeah, And it's like, no,
the left is better organized than you. There will power,
you know, pound for pound is greater. But most importantly,
they're able to use force and violence in a limited way,
in the way that the right is just not capable
of doing so. And you see this at protests. You know,
they'll go up to a certain thing and they'll break
a certain law, but they won't break another law. So
then that way, when they get arrested, they look like
the victims, or they'll maybe they'll they'll turn it up
a notch, but there'll be other people in the protest
sort of covering for them, sometimes literally, like somebody will
throw a brick and then the other people will cover
them to make sure they can escape. You see this
on the right. It's either we're going to do nothing,
or we're going to go completely nuts and do crazy,
self destructive, violent things that make everybody hate us. And
I think that in terms of how we actually defeat this,
it has to be done under the auspices of the
state and under the auspices of legitimacy. And this also
seems to be something that's inherent to the Anglo American worldview.
I mean, every time you see a revolutionary situation, in
an English speaking country English Civil War, American Revolution, War
between the States, the rebel side, even when it wins,
especially when it wins, it always cloaks itself in legitimacy
and institutions that already existed. Then ever, just say oh,
we're starting a new regime. It doesn't operate that way.
I mean, that's something like the French might be able
to do, or in certain continental traditions they can do that,
but it's just not the way the legalistic Anglo works.
And I think it's dangerous to expect too much from
the American right. What I want is the left to
overreact against programs that by and large, if you look
at the polls, Americans want illegals gone. And if the
left starts violently resisting deportation operations, so much the better,
then we can put them down, because that actually is
the legitimate and lawful thing to do.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I just I think that a lot of people
on the right are thinking that there is going to
be deputized right wing militias that are going to happen
now and nine times sho, yeah, yeah, that wouldn't be that,
that would be if that happens. We're in a lot
more trouble than.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean that that happens if you have like
widespread civil disorder. I mean, look, there are plenty of
things if you wanted to really drop the hammer, Trump
could do right, But he also wants to get real.
Like at the end of the day, he is no
longer outside the party insurgent. He sees himself quite appropriately
as the leader of the Republican Party. As tragic flaw,
and as tragic Flaw has always been. He wants to
be liked at some level by the institutions that he respects,
even the things like the New York Times, even though
he never will be. But he doesn't want to be
liked by these people. But he's also already doing things
which other people didn't do. And I don't just mean
on immigration, but I mean even in things like these
anti DEI executive orders, some of the things that we
were very frustrated with in the first term, he's already
acted on, like the executive order on birthright citizenship. Now
it's going to be fought out with the courts, but
at least he did it. I mean, the real question
we could ask is where is Congress on a lot
of these things? Even popular things like making English to
the official language. I don't know why they don't just
do that, even out of cynical partisan reasons, but they
won't do it. And I've given up expecting or hoping
that they'll ever do something like that. But we are
we are, and there are a lot of things that
we can dream about. There are a lot of things
we can fear. There are a lot of things that
we can say, well, we could do this, or we
could do that, or you know, hypothetically, if I was
in charge, this would happen. But until we have people
on our side, like fully on our side, people who
would say, yeah, this is our guy in state legislatures,
in Congress actually getting elected, actually campaigning on these things,
then frankly, I don't see what the alternative is. I mean,
I'll say this, we were talking about foreign policies, specifically
Israel before. Certainly, if we talked about who constitutes the
pro Israel lobby in Congress, I think we both agree
that it's probably the vast majority of Congress, right, I mean,
if you give him a binary choice. But certainly there
are a couple who shed at t Lee being the
most obvious example that we could consider the pro Palestine lobby, right,
I mean, she flies the flag outside her office. There's
not a single pro white member of Congress, not one.
So I mean if you said, you know, Palestinian activists
are having the way that the state brought down on
them in a remarkable way, you know, the Trump administration,
I'd be like, yeah, that's that's true. And yet the
pro Palestine lobby in this country is stronger than the
pro white lobby, even though whites constitute the American majority. Now,
until that changes in any way, until we have a
single person in Congress who is explicitly pro white, I
really don't know what people expect.
Speaker 1: I guess one of the hopes that I see there
is I think Tucker Carlson has a lot of sway
over people in power. I think that probably I noticed
that a lot of the episodes he does are almost
they're not really for us there for, but he's communicating
with elites, and I think he's getting more and more.
I think the qualifiers are disappearing. Where he used to say,
you know, I'm not pro.
Speaker 2: I remember I would I would curse out people call
me pro white, and this kind of thing. Let's look
at the right side here. I mean, when I started
out the idea that a president of the United States
would specifically call out things as being anti white in
an executive order, that was unthinkable. That is remarkable progress.
That's not nothing. And if people who are coming in now,
well that's not much, okay, but you don't remember what
it was like just eight years ago. That wouldn't have
happened during Trump's first term. We are now in a
position where if you say something is anti white, and
I oppose it because it is anti white, that is
a mainstream political position. You can get elected running on
that kind of position. President Trump just got elected running
on that position. He is now guiding policy based on
that position. So this is within the Overton window. This
is actually at the part of the Overton window that
it's fully accepted, the part where it says policy. That's
where we're at. Now. What comes next is being pro white,
and that's a much tougher thing in some level. But
one of the things that I always hammer away on
X and I think it's very critical to understand, especially
as we see these dueling India Pakistan protests kicking off
in the United Kingdom and maybe in America and Canada too.
Is everybody's a nationalist for the nation they actually like,
there's nobody on the line. I'm beginning to question whether
there even is a left or is it just a
collection of nationalists for other nations? Because everybody sounds like
a blood and soil mystical member of the SS when
it's comes to talking about their group. But they get
really upset when it comes to white people talking about
our group, even in the most moderative terms. I mean AOC.
This is when she first got elected, gave a speech
where she said American Hispanics or Hispanics I should say,
are descended from the indigenous people of the continent. Therefore,
in migration laws do not apply to them. Now, this
is a remarkable statement from a sitting member of Congress
that federal law doesn't apply because of the mystical blood
within your veins. Now, is that a less right wing
position than saying, hey, white people found in the United States.
I don't think so. I mean it, it is a right
wing position, but it's a right wing position for them
and in getting our people to not just be I
don't like being discriminated against because I'm white too. Yes,
I am white, and it is good and just to
act in the interest of my group. That is where
we need to get to. And that is my line
for the people, you know, moving in that direction. That's
my line for what is productive and what is not productive.
And I think once we get to that point, and
I really do have faith that we are getting there,
and not faith, I have good reasons to believe that
we're getting there. Once we do get there, I think
a lot of things become politically possible. And I also
would say keep your eye on Europe. I've always had
more faith on in Europe in some ways than the
United States, because I think the Europeans they're more repressed
than us, but it's quicker to flip, and they have
a much more bone deep sense of who belongs to
the nation and who doesn't, whereas I think for Americans,
as you say, I mean, this civic nationalist cult has
really taken root in the Anglo world in a way
that you just don't see in France or Germany or
even the Netherlands or places like that, and that creates
new political opportunities.
Speaker 1: Let's leave it there. What do you got some promote.
Speaker 2: Well, I'm going to be setting up a streaming show
with American Resaisurants pretty soon. It's going to be called
Identity Politics. I hope to have that going this month.
We're going to be doing a lot more podcast We're
going to be doing a book club, We're going to
be doing a lot more multimedia content, and obviously we've
got the conference coming up. I'll be open to hearing
anybody who wants to hear about speakers or some of
the topics that we want to address. But I think
that and I'm also working on a book right now,
which I hope to have out this year. Now, the
big thing, and I do want to hear from you
from everybody else, is I do think we are kind
of at this crossroads and the movement that I think
a lot of us are sort of feeling where whatever
happens after this Trump term, I think it's going to
be a final answer one way or the other is
the question of America yes or no. And there's a
debate that needs to be happening about where we go
from here, which we almost can't really begin yet because
we have to see how things play out. But it's
going to be upon us a lot sooner than we expect,
and I think people really need to consider hard a
lot of the things that you talked about that when
the left comes into power, if we let them come
back into power, we're going to see repression in a
way that we've never experienced in our lifetimes. And frankly,
the distinctions that we have amongst each other on the right,
even the people who absolutely hate each other, we're all
the same to the people who matter, and once those
people have power again, we're going to feel it. So
we need to be ready to figure out how we're
going to respond to that. Our time is running out,
and the hours later than to think, and it's time
for people to start taking this seriously. Thank you very much,
real pleasure being on. Thank you.