articles out this week on my book it was surprising to me this mainstream attention is surprise and I'm not sure how to feel about it I'm not just saying so out of false modesty I am not modest but I was spreading plenty before this in the so-called frog world in the gamer world even and my aim was to have PewDiePie plug my book, and never really to come to view of the normie world. It's good in a way, I suppose. I'm enjoying the show, and I'm enjoying, of course, my message spreading to new audience, but mostly it puts a target on my back. I was spreading before like a cryptic tropical STD, sexually transmitted venereal disease, not diagnosed. But now, even if these treatments of me are friendly or fair, I will be right in the target

of the international left, which is very well organized, and it works according to the Fuhrer Princip, the Fuhrer Principle. Never believe the left, the protests, when they say that the various attacks are organic. I will cover on the show today several examples of what lyftism means, what it is a political and social disease, what it's been called a disease but it's more like centrally administered poisoning and I will talk this today as well as quite few other political matters. But of course the question is why, for example, they would seek to dox me. I mean the left and quite a few people actually on our side, so-called on our side, who are of course, not really on our side. You know, I've met some of you, including some posters

you've all liked and admired for a long time. Ryan Landry, Nick Salo, the Croatian fascist lunatic, the train master, the train cell train master, Alex, delicious tacos, also the bureaucrat, quite a few others you've loved who are very esoteric and currently in hiding. It's not like I really hide who I am from friends, or that I have a different agenda in my normal life from the one I have here. I've been doing this for over 10 years, long before many of you were awakened, before you started your memeing. And although I am a little bit modest in public regarding my influence, I'm also proud to say I've come up with many of the memes that have spread for some time. Other friends like Loki Julianus have to, you wouldn't know it, we don't toot a horn so much, of our own, too much,

but why am I saying this? Because I'm thinking why, let's say, a leftist with the anima of a scurrying cockroach, or a verminoid journalist, might want to dox me, just to start with. What purpose would that play? Think it through. I've already made it clear that I won't stop doing what I'm doing. And I can't really be intimidated in other ways either because I'm not in America where a ham-side, woke white female can threaten to sit on me. Nor am I dependent on America's now crazy Chinese commie-pinko social credit system. So think it through in my case, or even Ricky Vaughan's for example. What purpose is there to doxxing? What did Ricky Vaughan's doxxing reveal about him that was so important? How did it change his message?

She was a normal guy, which is why after his doxxing the media doesn't really dwell on it because he's actually a good looking normal guy. But the entire reason that journalists doxxed him was to direct violence against him. And that's the reason I believe they would also doxx me because then they can pass along my name on their Antifa lists, including in other countries, and physically target me. I mean actually I'm pretty safe from doxxing in a way because so far a lot of disinformation has been spread in public. But so much attention is focused on me now that eventually I suppose it will be inevitable. But when it happens just be aware of why the person or persons doing it are doing it. In my case where there is really so to speak nothing new added in terms of revelations

about my message, the naked purpose of doxxing would be revealed, which is to make me available to harm and in particular to physical violence. This is what they want when they doxx people, to make them available to physical violence by their goons and if you look at cases like Michael Hastings or Epstein or some say also Jonathan Bowden or Breitbart, although to be fair these last two they were not especially very healthy people, but some say they too were targeted physically. Henry de Monsterland, one of my favorite novelists, wrote Chaos and Night, which I've recommended to you before. He was blinded by a leftist attack in 1960s Paris. This is what these people do, what they've been doing for a long time.

But I have to tell you, they, the people who would eventually contemplate doing me harm. And before that, the potential doxers or such know that if you are a potential doxer, it will be traced back to you. If you know enough about me, know I have friends, you might realize this. You will be found out, no matter how you think you launder a dox. And after the dox, those who contemplate doing me physical harm know that I will have protection beyond what you think, that it might not work out so well for you in the end. Just remember who some of my followers are and how they like me is all I will say. Take care. Also, if you do dox me successfully, I don't see how you could do this, but I will have consensual, sexual relations with your mother. Completely consensual.

She will be very well treated, no worries. often praise me for my sexual power my sexual superiority which you must concede and I want your mother consensually also to feel my passion but anyway the left has gone completely insane internationally for decades now and I want to get a little bit in this show in a few quick examples and what they do and what this eruption of the lower orders of the human console means coordinated. There is always leadership. It is never organic, which is why they think always the same about the right. They thought, for example, the Tea Party must have been completely coordinated from above. It was not, at least not in the beginnings. But that is how the left operates and has operated for decades. There is election in

Argentina on Sunday, tomorrow, and it's a crucial election for Argentina and actually all of South America and the world. But it doesn't seem that way, even to the Argentines themselves. It's one of those events where there's an atmosphere of indifference, a gray and a black pill apathy, and the people don't see they're at the edge of burning pits. The current president of Argentina, Macri, he's a complete doofus, and ultimately it's his fault that he hasn't done what he said he would, that he let down the people who voted for him as the reformers they voted him in, and that now his own supporters, because of his dithering, they might sit out the election or vote for his opponent. But his opponent, Fernandez, wins, I'm afraid, Argentina's decline.

Now over 100 years in the making will enter its most dangerous and terminal phase. You don't know what's been going on in Argentina the last 10 to 15 years, which is really different from its previous political dysfunction. So I must do mini history talk, but the takeaway I can tell you now at the beginning is that if Macri, the current president, loses tomorrow, Argentinian whites, its European population is going to start emigrating en masse. Many are trying this already, and have been for the last ten years, and that's pretty much irreversible. It will turn Argentina, a country with first world potential and in large part already with a first world way of life, into a human landfill from which there might be no recovery ever.

And it will give in the short run a secure and actually very well funded land base to the international left, from where it will continue its work around the world and in particular inside the rest of South America. That is the most certain short-term outcome of the election in Argentina tomorrow, which is why it is of interest to people outside as well. You know when Bolsonaro was elected in Brazil, all the marxified robots on this continent were shaking with fear about how bad this will be for South America. It was one of these lines that you heard all of these South American leftists repeat it all the time, not just about Brazil, but they kept repeating how bad this will be for South America. And the reason is because the previous party in Brazil, the commie so-called workers party,

which was really the robbers party and not the workers, the workers, the people who work for living in Brazil, they turned out for Bolsonaro. The non-working people who live on social welfare in the northeast of the country, they are the strong base of the so-called Workers' Party, which is a communist party. But this Workers' Party of Lula and then Dilma, they had turned Brazil into one of the firm bases of the international left, and they were exporting revolution and trouble to other countries. using Brazil money to do this. They were using Brazil's great wealth, extracting it to advance the cause of the international left in Venezuela, in Ecuador, in Paraguay, in Uruguay, and many other places. Do not be fooled, by the way, by GDP per capita.

First of all, Brazil has a huge population, I think 140 or 150 million, that many of them live at an African level quality of life. So the other wealth, the actual wealth, is concentrated in very few hands. But they're still the sixth largest economy in the world, I believe. It has great natural resources. It has also enough human capital to support genuinely first world economic ventures, like the plane company, Embraer. This is a very good airplane company that until relatively recently, I think, they had no accidents. It managed to build a very good reputation for itself. And it has, like Turkey, Brazil has a class of very smart people, engineers, and others of Italian or German ancestry mostly, but not exclusively actually.

It's got Japanese, it's got many, it's got native, and there are plenty of English-descended people in these countries still, especially Argentina. In Argentina they have their own community in school. They have actually their own accent, somewhat similar to the South African accent, but they've been in Argentina as a self-conscious community for about 150 years at least. The Bullrich family, very well-known in Argentina, it's of Anglo-Argentine descent, I believe. And very recently, an Anglo-Argentine girl refused to kiss me after pursuing me for two hours around Party Hall and clinging onto me and then I leaned in for the kiss and she came up with excuse that she doesn't do this in public, this was a great outrage for me. But I do not hold it against her people.

However, I don't know, I might go to the Tigre boat club tomorrow and make a scene. I might flip some plates. I will find a pretext to get extremely plastered and go into a rant about the Anglo-Judaic world commercial civilization and how it's acted as a vehicle for Satan to enter the world. I might do this. Careful! Anyway, you see what I'm saying? There's great human capital in these countries, and the left, in the case of Brazil, was plundering them as a tax base to support international leftist adventures. And now, after the failure of their Brazil project, and after they lost access to that franchise, and now to that funding, they moved into another phase, which I must go into some detail for you. Please excuse me, it is time for a sandwich.

Yes, I had a sandwich of a leftover sausage, cured, so I also put olive oil, it will give me great energy for the day. Nietzsche had his mom send him German sausage in a mail to Italy, I think, otherwise he was estranged from his family, I think it was a great humiliation for him to have to be in his crazy sister's care. I mean, yes, his spirit had transmigrated in 1889 into Giorgio de Chirico, the artist, so he was free from that in a way, but he was humiliated by this. He should have died in 1889. You know, they did a study on him, the doctors, after his so-called breakdown, and he was actually very muscular and fit. He was a man who hiked in the mountains eight hours. He lifted weights. He was the first gym cell, philosophical gym cell of the modern world.

Schopenhauer also, very stout, strong man. Anyway, he was one of the first to understand the meaning of this left. And to refer to the socialist projects of the 20th century and how as experiments they would have an educational effect on mankind. They would show the evil and the carnage of the left. But of course this was far too optimistic because you see much of the youth in America and the Latino America embrace the same murderous socialism. Well you know, they just need to make their own mistakes. They just need to kill their own 25 million kulaks. Like Bill Ayers, Obama's teacher, he called for this, he's on tape calling for it. But talk some more about the nihilism of Bronze Age perverts, you trads.

And after that, I guess the peoples of the New World will be safely inoculated too from this disease or so the thinking goes, I don't know. But to get back to what's going on this weekend in Argentina, you must understand there is something called the Grupo de Puebla, the Puebla group. What is it? It is named after a city in Mexico, Puebla, which they chose for a very special reason. The left chose this city as a forum and conference to strategize its next actions. This year, 2019, Puebla was chosen after the loss of the Brazil cash cow with the Bolsonaro elections. That's how this so-called Grupo de Puebla, Puebla group, you should look it up how it was formed, and they've decided yet again on a multi-pronged form of political warfare

to destabilize the region, a kind of political Maoist-type insurgency. You can see its effects already. The protests in Chile that many of you have seen, which you are trying to understand, this has been stirred up by this new convocation, a coven of leftist witches that met in Puebla, the Puebla group. It's promoted by elements from Cuba and from Venezuela, by the leftovers of whatever oil money that is still in Venezuela for this kind of thing. I will say the names of the main player on air. Why don't we start doing that too? You know, we can have our own lists too, you know. Cuauhtemoc Cardenas from Mexico, Rafael Correa from Ecuador, Fernando Lugo Paraguay, Ernesto Sampa, Clara Lopez from Colombia, Marco Enriquez Ominami, Alejandro Navarro from Chile, and

from Argentina, the next chosen ringleader, Alberto Fernandez, who is poised to win the presidency this Sunday, along with the head of which herself, Cristina Kirchner, the presidency of this country and thereby of the Ibero-American left, because you know the Spanish socialists from Spain proper are involved in this group as well. None of the protests you're seeing, the burning down of Santiago, Chile, or what's going on in Quito, Ecuador, none of this is organic. These are part of a multi-platform means of political warfare carried out by this group and the people backing them. They have also considerable help from China and unfortunately from Russian media as well to destabilize this continent. And before those of you on our side who will instinctively support anything that Russia

might do, take a step back and think it through. Because in this case, the people being targeted here are the traditional elites, the Europeans in South America, without whom there can be no civilization here. I frequently defended Russia, but very often Russia today is not actually on our side, on the right. They are just interested in raising trouble, wherever possible. And in this case, they're on the wrong side. The fact that they're historically aligned with America, I mean the traditional elites in South America now, that is an artifact of the Cold War. And you all know me and how much I oppose the CIA and all of those things. But in Latin America, they supported, maybe against themselves, but the CIA supported the cause of white civilization. because the Soviet Union was promoting

worldwide colored revolution. This is the chief evil, I think, of the end of the Cold War. The Cold War did keep America on its toes, although it did so not quite in the way neo-cons claim. Rather, it forced America to support white or Western civilization despite itself, despite its innate leftist and anti-civilizational instincts. It had to support white or western civilization simply to oppose the Soviet Union. It was forced to support the western elites of South America merely to oppose Marxist revolution or Maoist revolution promoted by China or the Soviet Union. Now certain factions of the CIA for sure were also aligned with this international left And the mask is off completely when you see Obama do a dorky gang embrace with the Brazilian

commie Lula, the goofy Obama, the cipher of the CIA. You see America can embrace the cause of colored revolution now too, no problem. And yes, Obama is the example of that. But right now, in the case of South America, should this guy Alberto Fernandez win? And I want you to go look at his face. Look at his face, please, this presidential candidate in Argentina, Alberto Fernandez. See what you think, because if you don't see the face of the murderous subhuman left, of the vicious brutality of the last man of the gutter, you have no eyes. And compare him especially to the noble Roman visage of Macri, who looks like he comes straight out of ancient Roman Caesar busts, come alive. Well, he's a disappointment in what he's done, I'll say in a moment.

But if this rat Fernandez, the leader of the international left Puebla group wins, look up also Brisa Bolivariana, the Bolivarian breeze or wind, the post-Castro, now Venezuela-based left plan to spread social terror and racial warfare throughout this region. But if this guy wins tomorrow, it's curtains for any kind of high civilization in Argentina. And the beginning of the endless night of Calcutta slums here as well. And you know, they chose the city Puebla in Mexico for a certain reason, 30 or 40 years ago. 40 years ago, in 1979, this city, Puebla, Mexico, was chosen for a Catholic church conference for the Americas, headed at the time by Aloisio Lorscheider. At the time this was a bishop from Brazil.

The purpose of this meeting, or synod, I don't know what you call it in church words, but it was to spread liberation theology through the Americas, which is really Marxism with a Catholic faith. And this man, Lorschieder, was its champion at the time. He was also a supporter of Pope John Paul, I think. But an opponent of Rattinger, who's ousting from the church, I think still has to be studied. But Lorschieder was the Papa Francisco 1.0. He would have been the church's first liberation theology pope, and he came close to it a few times. The church, of course, formally condemned liberation theology in the 1980s, but this had no effect. Liberation theology has advanced relentlessly, both within the church and in the Americas,

including in the United States itself, where it is now promoted under a few names you might not expect. The left cats, the leftist Catholics online, of course, are all liberation theologists. You know this. But in fact, so are the so-called integralists, the people you think are Catholic conservatives. Not all, but many of them. Vermula, for example, Sohrab Amari, all the so edgy, Catholic so-called conservatives you see, almost all of them, and I'd include Ross Dostat in this, they are promoting liberation theology under a different name. It may not seem so, and maybe in the case of Dostat, he doesn't even realize it himself. But it doesn't seem so merely because they know how to adopt a traditionalist look, an aesthetic window dressing to fool you.

To make you think they are a Chestertonian gentleman with bow ties and this kind of thing. But when you look closely at their program, they support all the main goals of liberation theology including most especially mass third world immigration. They all support it. And mass third world immigration. What is it? It's like Rawlsianism in academia. It's merely an update of the old Marxist dream of wealth transfer from the first world to the third world. People forget something, they think Stalin stopped the plans for world revolution, which of course is only so when you compare him to Trotsky. But Stalin of course began the troubles in Spain before Mussolini or Hitler intervened to help Franco. So he wasn't very completely nationalist either, you can think of it that way.

But when you look back before Stalin, Lenin had long been an advocate of colonial uprising and understood the need to spread anti-Western revolution globally to the third world. That is in Lenin. And this plan was resurrected after Stalin, of course, in the communist world, in the Soviet Union, and it was pushed to do it in part by East Germany, in part also by China. But aside from its reinstatement, you could say, as a policy of Soviet Union, it had various peaceful manifestations also in the First World, in America and Europe as well, various ideological masks, this same program, of which the doctrine of Rawls is one, and this fake left CIA Catholicism, this CIA edited Catholicism, is another. It's a cover for liberation theology, even when it's often sick-headed advocates don't

realize so. Aloisio Lorscheider, the archbishop from Brazil eventually, he was its first great champion and this covert ideological warfare was launched in the city of Puebla in Mexico 40 years ago and it was reignited this year with a secular Bolivarian manifestation. It is the cause of the protests you see in Chile again. And if the human sewer rat Alberto Fernandez should win in Argentina tomorrow, one of the The last great outposts of European civilization in the New World will be slowly erased, much Much like Rhodesia was, and now like South Africa is in the process of being also erased. I get bored with talk of modern politic, let me do interlude. I want to bring up a different matter for a moment. The problem of the family life in ancient Greece.

There is Xenophon dialogue on this very interesting, but also a bit misleading. Because you must remember Xenophon, Aristotle, Plato, these big names, you know, the students of Socrates, they weren't really popular with Greeks in their own time. They were mostly rightly seen as charlatans, and what they present for you isn't really Greek life and Greek spirit, but something rather foreign that was introduced into the Hellenic world and that distorts it for us. This Socratism in many ways distorts our own understanding of who we are, because we have inherited in fact from the ancient world not just Socratism, but the Hellenic spirit in a few different channels, including through Rome, that express themselves at times directly

in our lives and our passions and images and perceptions, except that for mysterious reasons Socratism has been chosen to be a rational representation of this world to ourselves, but it's not an accurate representation, it's a distortion, and therefore a self-misunderstanding. So Xenophon has a dialogue called the economicus, literally on household management. That's where the word economy comes from. You hear these economists? Economy was originally art of household management. And of course at the time a household or an estate was also an agricultural production center or a workshop where the husband and wife worked in partnership. So it had, even in modern terms, this purely economic function. But I think the point is this decision of modern economists to focus on the individual

as a cipher of consumption or labor, this is itself a political decision and not inherent to economic life as such, economy not being anyway a science, it can never really predict anything. It's always been in its modern manifestations a pseudoscience. But anyway, I mean to say it would be more accurate to test the fruits of an economist's theories by seeing how these result in flourishing households in a nation. How are the households and families of your nation doing? How about using this as a metric, and yes, I'm aware that some economists do use this, but because you see where I'm going with this, conservatives, modern conservatives, are stuck in a hard place. They have a rhetoric of the household and of families, but then at the same time they

promote or they have to promote or they wouldn't get any donor handouts, they have to promote this distortion of modern capitalism that Paul Ryan and Romney promote, which of course is completely disruptive of any kind of family life and in fact makes it almost impossible that a Ludwig article I keep retweeting about GATT from the 1990s, the precursor to so many modern free trade agreements, and about how socially disruptive and ultimately even economically backwards it would be, it makes the same point. So modern conservatives are forced, as a matter of career and social milieu, for example, to be toadies to usury with a capital U, because how much of the economy now runs on loan payments? Some of that is always, for sure, part of a normal capitalist economy, but not when,

for example, most of the revenue of the car industry is from loan servicing and interests, as is now the case. But in fact, the entire American economy has been running on usury for a long time now, and the debt under which the young are placed puts them in a condition of extreme insecurity. And in fact, they cannot plan for the future or to have large families or any families. So choosing between family formation, the health of households on one hand, and usura On the other, conservatives try incoherently to promote both. But of course, they only ever have a rhetoric in favor of families, but do nothing. They do something only for the other side, for usury. So it's all fine to say that a Bronze Age pervert is a mean guy on the internet who promotes unbridled lust.

But it's not me who makes family life impossible in modern conditions. And, of course, with the usury of the central-bank-run modern economies, with this there go also certain sexual mores as well that have led to modern infertility and that, again, do not come from me. They do not come from Nietzsche. They do not come from nihilism. They come from the banks and the central banks who support conservatives. books for men from Hardist Russia went into details on this and how women have been butt-hexed by Bernanke, how they've been turned into addictive anal sex goons and fagged cocksuckers because by debauching your daughters you see and having them delay marriage to their thirties they have a long life in their twenties now as faithful cogs to a labor and consumption machine.

They are no longer subject or partner to a husband, instead they are whores to their bosses and employers. They generate labor, they lower wages, they lower job security and the bargaining power of employees. They introduce a weird sexual tension and anarchy in the workplace. They destroy male camaraderie, they destroy labor unions therefore and most important They delay the formation of families that would remove them from this consumer system and would place them instead into the role of family mother. And that's what Bernanke and company don't want to happen. It's not me that did this. Then there is also the other aspect of this that you are all familiar with, that a woman who has been asfacked by Alphas throughout her twenties isn't going to make an especially good mother and wife.

She will have only the most mercenary loyalty to her husband and will often divorce him. F. Roger Devlin points this 70% of divorces initiated by women. And of course, the real figure is more like 90% if you include the women who make life hell for their husbands and force them into filing for divorce. Once she does this, of course, the family courts, which are another arm of the extractive pseudo-capitalist state, the family courts move in and have a claim on half the men's wages indefinitely with the threat of jail if he loses a job. So this is outright slavery of the most brutal kind that many American men have been reduced to. And often they are under gag order from gangster judges of family courts, and they receive

no sympathy because the average stolid American burger considers such a man to be a deadbeat if he complains about his subjection. There are cases even where a wife can cheat on her husband, she can get impregnated by another man, she can get her husband to let's say sign the birth certificate and foolishly to be the father for a year and then after she can leave him and she can live with her boyfriend, the biological father. So now the poor fuck has no legal recourse. Even if a paternity test should show this fraud, he is legally bound to pay child support and actually under threat of jail, he needs to have a job to support a biologically intact family that is not his own. Such things have happened. And even when it doesn't get that extreme, there are many, many other cases that approach

that level of injustice. But of course many single men too are reduced essentially to similar slavery and cuckoldry today because let's say if you make 40 or 50 thousand a year in a modern city in America you barely have enough to pay rent and food, that's it, that's the life of a slave. The taxes you face are enormous and they go to support shibun single mothers and the medical care for the families of mud-spirit-worshipping wahakans that Dowsett and Vermulo want to import for their noble, integralist Catholic monarchy. That will never happen. And if you live in New York, you can make $80,000 or $90,000 starting and you have to live with roommates and you have no money left over after rent and food. And this is the life of the so-called elite now who work in banks.

Sometimes they work 60 hours a week. that's average sometimes it's 80 hours a week and something like 10% of their pay or more goes to the upkeep of Harlem oh how branch the life of a slave no money left over after food and the rent so this in any case is family life or the lack of it now and then after you are secure in your 30s when your children let's say will be born and you can family you can finally have family in your 30s but they will be born weaker and the germline mutations they enter the bloodline. When you can have only one or two kids let's say with woman in late 30s with a very special woman who's seen in her 20s as much action as a courtesan would have in previous ages or actually more so and gotten less for it, even less pleasure for it.

You can marry a special over educated lady who decides to tell you one day that you have to accept a polyamory and she will break up your marriage with kids and everything. And this is the special future that social conservatives stomp their feet about. Why aren't you embracing that special lady and becoming a family man? It must be because this weird Russian asset posts photos of muscular men on the internet and encourages you to read Ernst Junger and Mishima. That must be why. Many of you know from ancient Greece just talk of sexuality supposedly and especially as it relates to the gay thing, which I've discussed on previous shows and it's of course quite distorted by the modern left. The liar Foucault had a lot to do with this misunderstanding, which has infected the academic

lies about ancient Greek sexual matters at large. Paglia does a good job of destroying these lies in her essays, but I want to forget this for a moment and say a few words about ancient Greek family life. Because while it is true, as you can see from Paglia or from another book I can recommend for you, look up by Bruce Thornton, a book named Re Eros, it's true that the feminist and Foucauldian twisted sadomasochistic fantasies about phallic ancient Greek cult or men penetrating women and boys as a show of political power and all this, it's crap, it's garbage lies. That's false. But then on the other hand, patriarchy was a very real thing, and the basis of Greek as well as Roman family life, without which there can't be family life.

Remember F. Roger Devlin, crucial fact, observation, that under patriarchal, early Roman republic, It was illegal to be a bachelor. Think through what that means. Family doesn't make sense outside of patriarchy, which is presented as an inducement for men to accept family that otherwise they would not want, they would have no reason to want it. And this says to be somehow impressed into the minds of our conservatives who live in a fantasy from 30 or 40 years ago, more than that, and have no idea about the world we We inhabit, have no idea the extent to which relations between the sexes have collapsed. And therefore, you know, the so-cons, the social conservatives, they promote very destructive fantasies of family life. There is one in particular attacking me now, Hazoni.

I have nothing more to say about him and you should ignore him too because although he has many supporters among the donor class and the other grifters and fake influencers, He's astroturfed, he's largely irrelevant, his conference was a dud, and it doesn't matter how much they try to promote him, no one's buying what he has. I did an article on him and that's all I have to say. The Karl Rove evangelical neo-con thing has already been tried. That doesn't carry anything anymore, and as I keep repeating, if your plan is that for a country to close its borders, that it has to convert first to your weirdo ideology or your niche religious belief. It makes no sense and you will lose. Japan and Hungary manage to carry out a nationalist plan and they're not really religious countries, no matter

if their leaders invoke religion or culture in public, as of course they should. You don't understand that I've tested and re-tested these messages in front of various audiences many times, you will lose a crucial portion of the public if you insist that submission to religious life is a prerequisite of nationalist policies, whether just closing the borders or more broadly a revival of confident national life, including the formation of healthy families and of promoting fertility. You should not require religious life for that. I'm not saying you shouldn't have religious life, but you should require it and force it on others who don't want it. I've seen it on the face of very powerful and talented youth.

When I first said that religion is the only way to that revival and then when I made the secular case for it with Putin or others as example, and yes, I'm aware he invokes religion as well, but that's not all he does. And you have to be able to appeal to many different kinds of people. But of course our social conservative spurge nerds don't want to appeal to let's say an Anglo-Alpha type who in another life would just like to make a lot of money to play tennis to go sailing or get a tan and there are still a lot of good men like this in America and And your dark, dumb message of you have to submit to the rosary of Guadalupe or whatever, or you have to wear a huge wooden cross, or in case of Hazoni, that you have to submit

to some weirdo, Tel Aviv, Noahide, a revision of Christianity before you're entitled to a vigorous public life or to a healthy nation. It's these types I'm talking about that you are turning off. I've seen it on their faces. They get turned off by this. They get turned on when you make the secular case for nationalism. And there are perhaps four German nihilists or whatever the hell you think I am in the United States. There are four or five of us. Stop focusing on this. This is not Germany of 1930, you dumbasses. Wake up. People are tired of this soft-handed, hand-wringing type of pious homily conservatism. And if you add nationalism to that, if you add anti-liberalism to that carriage, I promise you will lose.

Not because I say so, but because you're not appealing to that very important demographic that you have to win. And to a large extent, like I keep saying, that's the intention ultimately. To replace a nationalist populist uprising against a corrupt transnational ruling class, to replace that with sectarian bickering among ourselves and with theological foppery. Now back to the ancient Greeks. Well, I'll have to cover their family life on a future show in more detail. But basically, a Greek citizen at the age of 18, let's say, in a democracy like Athens, you would begin your military service, and then after that it appears you had quite some time in your twenties for various public and private adventures, in the sense that there

is a text that says the right age of marriage for an upper class man was 37. Of course I'm not saying that should be done today, but that was the age it was customary for an upper class man to marry. Of course the wife being much younger. And I think this is appropriate because early marriage will have a deleterious effect on the intellectual and political life of a man. I'm talking now of the best case scenario, an almost ideal objective case, which was available to the Greek aristocracy and of course not to us. Probably you should marry in your 20s, I don't know. But don't ask me where you'll find a faithful wife in case you, I don't like seeing men in their 40s or 50s who've never had a wife and kids. You know, many of my friends are like this,

but it's generally not a good place to be, I think, for that kind of man. There's something missing naturally from his life, and he ends up having weird habits. I don't even mean it in, for example, nasty or sexual sense, but just ends up having unusual personal quirks that are unbecoming. This is in the case of most men, not everyone. Some, in my opinion, are not made for marriage. But in general, if you don't plan to die young, I would say an early marriage today is better, but again, hard to find. And also, it's more eugenic. I am very worried that late marriage trend and late kids, in particular the women all having kids now in the second half of their 30s, and the defects from this will not show in the kids, but the grandkids. And it's potentially a biological catastrophe

that will end civilization entirely. There's already some evidence that autism is caused in the grandchildren. I mean to say, when the grandparents have the kids, they produce intermediate generation too late in their own lives. The grandchildren are the ones who exhibit autism and other terrible things. Although lately, the poster of Loki Julianus is compiling good evidence that it is pesticides that are causing autism. In any case, this is another extremely important matter to realize about ancient Greek marriages. That like I say in my books, they were conceived eugenically and not only with respect to personal or family utility. The famous story of Hippocrates that you all like, Hippocrates doesn't care.

That was basically a eugenic contest in which the father judged the suitors on biologically eugenic terms, and the girl to be married had some say too, of course, but the Greeks did this many times throughout their history in all of their practices. When you see also the story of mythical suitors competing for a wife to fight monsters or even to fight the father himself, as in the case of Hippodomeia, but many others. This is often the reason why Nietzsche mentions that Cicero remarked how beautiful were the Athenian youth still in his time, and the harshness and self-discipline and the eugenic breeding that this took over many generations. So in their courtship, there was much that the Greeks undertook that would seem very

strange to traditional societies, where marriage is rather a clan social decision or a father-in-law decision, and that has entirely political or financial meaning. But not so in the case of the Greeks, and in fact I would say it seems less strange to us than it might seem to a traditional conservative from a traditional society. And the trad conservatives, the people like Charles Murray, but many others, who recommend marriage to you under the old terms, they do not understand this. They do not understand this either about us or about the ancient Greeks, or about me and what I'm saying. And after marriage, the life of a man would be as teacher and guides for his wife. This is in the Greek case now, in which they would be partners in a family business running

an estate or in the case of the middle classes maybe a workshop of some kind. And the husband would basically teach his wife both how to manage the estate but in so doing would civilize her. And the purpose of marriage is to civilize women, which are a chthonic and anti-civilizational frantic and savage force. The Greeks knew they were fuck crazy, okay? It's not like our dumb, deluded, modern so-cons, the social conservatives, who start from the lie that marriage is meant to civilize men, which is an inversion of the truth. They all say this. It's always some weirdo, Nebish, who, one of them wrote a book about this, I forget his name, but you know, Jonah Goldberg, right? He says this too. So it's like, Jonah Goldberg would be in a leather jacket in bars, he would be getting

in wild bar fights and smashing hot gangster mall pussy, right? He would be smashing pussy, Jonah Goldberg would, if it weren't for his fat Yenta wife civilizing him, right? Him and Rich Lowry would be Vikings pillaging villages and raping if it weren't for their piss-dry Yenta wives taming them, right? Wow! So true, but, well, sorry, the Greeks had an entirely different view and a truer view. It was that the men, through the economic life of the household and with the weight of the state, the dignity of the law and of religious fear behind him, that had the job of civilizing these main ads, these jahikas, you know? And some of us, I don't care, we still want the jahikas. I don't care for myself, I mean, I don't care, I would want one.

But the point is, if you want family, you need patriarchy. These conservatives, they don't care about you. They just see you as breeding stock to produce consumers for their paymasters, and slaves, and boys to die their wars. But not everyone likes to breed in captivity, you know? You hear that? So cons, not everyone likes that. They forget this. And I want you to have a family, but to have a family as a free man, not because some bizarre faction wants to grow you like you would grow sheep or pigs for slaughter. I suppose I didn't get today to response to the articles about me. But what is there to say? Some are good, some not so good. But a lot of these people are not moldbag and not second-city bureaucrats.

But the others, maybe not Anton, I don't know, not Anton, but the others, some of them, they have this way of understanding things that they inherited from the main thinkers of the 20th century, where there is a specter of nihilism that haunts modern societies. And of course, they think the most dangerous variety is right-wing nihilism, which they They say that I count from that intellectual milieu anyway and that I could inspire people to that mistaken path. I think they are wrong, but it would take too long to explain why. To some extent, sure, at times it may sound similar, because both have a kind of provenance in Nietzsche or Schopenhauer, but I would add that no one has been able to see beyond these thinkers since they've existed, absolutely no one.

And to the extent you pretend you're able to transcend them, you will always find out eventually that you're not. And someone will awaken you from your illusion eventually and show you the world that you're trying to deny. This is a spiritual, not a political argument. But they're trying to make it political because that way they think they can back me into a corner. Again, I'm not talking about all the responses to me. I'm not talking even about Anton or Moldberg or Second City Bureaucrats, but some of the others. You know, there is no state power behind me or what I'm saying or any faction even. There is no party anywhere in the world right now actually that promotes anything remotely like what I'm saying.

So when they're trying to claim I'm behind some collectivist or statist form of authoritarianism that will take away your freedoms, really, look around, am I doing that? Am I the cause of that or anyone like me? The truth is I'd support a variety of political solutions. Real traditional Catholic like Franco or something like Salazar, which is a bit different. or Lee Kuan Yew, who everyone recognizes as a benevolent dictator, but I also support real liberalism or classical liberalism, if you could bring it back, I'd support pretty much anyone who will put a stop to the madness of the left and who will demote the current corrupt ruling class. But nothing like this exists so far, and I would do so even, by the way, if it meant my exile.

Like, you know, you can get your Franco in America, and then he says, no weirdo Bronze Age perfect pagans allowed, and I'll be, I'll say, okay, I'll continue to live in the tropics as I do anyway. I just want the left's madness stopped. To some extent, I also want the opportunity to spread my message to the public and not be hindered. I'm not asking for promotion, but just don't hinder me. You know, in the long run, I know I will without. I don't have to be a prophet for that. Nothing really can stop my message for spreading if it is given a public hearing. I meant this in my article and I mean it because nothing really has gone beyond Nietzsche since he existed. Nothing can get in the way of my revision of him because it is the truth and the truth is always evergreen.

But maybe I should stop naming him outright because he means something rather different than you think. And my message works because I have digested his truths and I present them freshly from the point of view of objective truths as I see it and I don't do theory. But as long as I'm allowed to make my case, I will have an audience. That is my message to the many responses to my book. Your problem again isn't my book, but the way you let a demonic evil fester in the world for the last few decades. And I'm not the one in charge of any government. I'm not the one taking away people's rights. My message is one of freedom and of liberation, and I understand how this is threatening to people whose job really is to be apologists for those who either have a boot on others'

necks or who want to have one, or who suck by diddling themselves while a 300-pound beige Janet Reno spiritually took over Western civilization. I mentioned earlier how the international left within the Iberian world after a temporary setback because of the Brazilian election, but now it is militant again behind a wild protest in Chile and stands to take over Argentina as a strong base again now, tomorrow, Sunday, today actually. You have to understand what's been going on in Argentina is a slow process of denationalization. What I mean to say is there are many European-descended people here, Italians, let's say, of this third generation, who longingly see themselves as Italian, not Argentine, who long to return

to Italy or to leave Argentina at any rate, and who are trying to get Italian citizenship. I knew a guy, far from a poor guy, he was a doctor who did this, and I saw how elated he was when he finally got noticed that he would be granted Italian citizenship. It was one of the best days of his life, I think. Can you imagine third or fourth generation Italian-Americans doing the same? But it's like that here, and not only with Italians, who are the largest maybe self-conscious ethnic group in the country, but with many other European nationalities as well. What like I say, they're abandoning Argentine identity and trying to leave or to return to Europe. And I'm afraid that a win Sunday for the Wernand Kirchner leftist party will mean the acceleration

of this process beyond anything that can be stopped. You have to understand the true evil of the Kirchnerist system. It's a form of leftist Peronism. But now, what is Peronism? Peronism in its inception by the General Juan Perón in many ways is a successful form of Trumpism. Around the 1930s to 1940s or so, Argentina, like many places, stood at precipice of communist revolution. It had actually a very large industrial sector centered in the capital, with a large pool of discontent workers who were mistreated by a traditional oligarchic elite. Since the inception of Argentina, as in many other parts of the Spanish world, you had huge landowners with large latifundia. These are enormous farms that made use of cheap

disenfranchised landless labor. It's basically the model that's been stupidly imported to America now, where the small family farm disappears and is replaced by large latifundia, corporate latifundia in this case, but it doesn't matter. It's the same thing that leads to social decline and it took social warfare. France, for example, took centuries of strife and warfare to escape the late Roman imperial Latifundia model, but the Spanish world has always spread it to its colonies. And I'm sorry, but you can't just go around talking about a free market and such in a place where you have a gigantic landowner and then a mass of disenfranchised, uneducated day laborers. So when industrialization came to Argentina, it was an explosive possibility because the danger now of communist revolution

was very real and I think in the case of Argentina would have led to really murderous regime on early Soviet model. I mean, very bloody. Instead, Perón came along and as much as conservatives may want to stomp their feet at someone like Perón, what can be said is he stopped the possibility of communist revolution in Argentina. I may cover that history in detail in another show, but know that Kirchner, which is a form of leftist-peronism that has taken over Argentina since the 2000s or so, it changed things dramatically because they started to import new clients. They import Bolivians, Peruvians, and others for votes, just like in the United States. And I can tell you, in 10 years, it's changed the life of this city drastically.

changed the population, even to the point of bringing African migrants that only started to trickle in 10 years ago, and yet now they are spreading their sort of disgusting markets downtown that are now Brazil type slums out of Elysium movie nightmare, and not necessarily far outside the city, but on the other side of a very elegant boulevard you get Genghis type slums now, and really things of human horror, these very short, dark, fat dwarf-like creatures with a dead look in the eye eating out of garbage cans, and you know, the fact is they get enormous social welfare benefits. Their votes are bought, in a way, even more shameless than in America. Perón started vaguely, I call it Trumpism, it's not like that, vaguely as a Trumpist-like

figure to chastise an oligarchy that had gone out of control. But now it's been taken over by the new left here as well. They use vaguely Trumpist nationalist rhetoric to justify themselves. But it's the same model they have in America where they import votes. And the white middle class here has even less recourse to any solution. They tried to elect McCree as a reformer, but he's a goofy technocrat and he couldn't really change anything. Any reforms that he made actually backfired, and if he was going to make any real restructuring of the social welfare system, it would lead to a revolution in this country, because the entire country runs on maybe 30 percent of the population that actually works and pays enormous taxes and is humiliated and oppressed.

That's the future of middle class in America too. Anyway, it's even 30 percent, I'm not sure. So you tell me why these people would want to continue to be the cash cows for the social classes that despise them. Of course they opt out. McCree, the current president, is a neoliberal. And like Macron, he came in with high hopes as a neoliberal reformer. You know, I supported him in an Argentine context. He would have been good if he had done what he promised. But he let everyone down, and now people are demoralized, they're black-pilled, and the The left stands to win with catastrophic consequences that I mentioned, which would be the permanent change of the population with a drain of the civilized and productive part of Argentina

leaving the country, and thus would slowly continue to receive European civilization from the edges of the world, and the eternal slum would continue its slow return. But you see, I'm supposedly a nihilist right-wing evil pagan for pointing this out. Nothing, however, in the end is irreversible. The left knows this. And I'm the only one who has in mind an international right, a true right of international character modeled vaguely on the old communist international party that is able to act in concert for the opposite ends that seeks, much like the forces of Catholic reaction did by the way before in Argentina, that an international right that seeks not merely to play the role of a clown in the theater of the left, but that seeks to change the conditions for the social base of leftism,

so that it becomes no longer possible, so that a society of manliness and vitality instead is reborn. I may cover in some detail the history of island Southeast Asia, of Indonesia and the Philippines, but I wanted to say something quickly now about Philippines in this conclusion. The Philippines were also a Spanish colony for a long time and followed the same pattern of Spanish settlement with large latifundia, huge tracts of land owned by, first by Spanish landowners and worked by, you can't even call them serfs really, they were day laborers really with no status. You have to remember the titanic murders and hatred of the Spanish Civil War. The Spanish left was born from these day labourers with nothing to lose. That's why they were so strong in Andalusia, for example,

in the south, were the biggest farms I think they were. And the reason they attacked the church with such ferocity is because the church was seen as ally to the previous feudal regime that they saw as the oppressor. In the same condition is what leads to spread of Maoism in the third world, especially where you had this pattern of Spanish rule, whether in Latin America or in the Philippines. Now, in the Philippines case, very interesting, because it got transferred directly from Spain to American rule. And under American rule, it had a period of education in the American system of government. America tried its hand at nation-building in the Philippines, and it had some limited success. That's why many people in Philippines, the ruling class, they speak English, for example.

It introduced, America introduced a lower house elected by the native population in the early 20th century and then soon after an upper house as well. It separated church from state. It introduced quite a number of other liberal reforms based on the old American model and again this seemed to have some success for a while. But after America left in the second half of 20th century, the Spanish pattern reasserted itself. how nature do that. Strange. Oligarchic, large landowners returned or were always still there in some way. Sure, now with Filipinos ruling, not Spaniards, not the white devil, it's always preferable to be oppressed by one of your own. But even the dysfunctions of post-colonial Spanish life appeared there just as

surely as they appeared in El Salvador or in Central or South America after the Spanish left, where they appeared in the Philippines too, after America left, namely this struggle between the rich and the poor, the landowners and the poor landless peasants, the entry of the church back into political life, the reliance eventually on the military for political power like during the Marcos dictatorship, and then of course horrible Maoist leftist political movements carrying out multi-pronged political warfare and insurgencies. In the case of the Philippines, this is carried out still by an organization called the NPA, the New People's Army, an organ of the Communist Party of the Philippines, which actually grew

to a very nasty and persistent insurgency, always low level, but nevertheless very destructive in the 1980s. They assassinated quite famous American military attaches as well. They're supported by the Chinese and in fact the NPA, this commie Maoist insurgency was always covertly supported by the Russians during the Cold War. Maybe not directly with financial or weapons support but in other indirect ways and on top of this you have the Muslims in the south, the so-called Moros. You know, the American gun, the .45, the big caliber Magnum, I think .44, whatever you call it, I'm not gun aficionado, I think called Colt .45, it was designed because these Moros from the Philippines, they would get into a complete frenzy, a complete berserk frenzy

and they would charge the Marines who you could shoot them and because the adrenaline filled body, they would not come down. So you had to shoot them. They would design a caliber where that could actually shoot them down completely and kill them dead. They also had, I think, very heavy wooden shields. That's another explanation. But in any case, this very heavy gun was designed to stop the moral Philippine crazies from charging the Marines. And they, too, have an old and endless guerrilla war running there as well. Still, what all of these guerrilla insurgencies show is the Philippines is in fact not a real state, not entirely a workable government, you know, the NPA, this Maoist insurgency, they started very small time, but what they would do is they would tax the local villages,

they would tax the villagers, which of course would prevent the government from taxing them because there would be no money left over. So it ended up that the Philippine government was dependent on outside support, on foreign aid. And aid became its tax base, because this Maoist insurgency denied it its own tax base in rural regions. This is an example of a half-failed state, and it's often given as an example of successful nation-building by the United States. But it's not, as you can see, it's not even the exception that proves the rule. Even with decades of actually owning the place, of imposing American values and government, The old Spanish patterns of life reasserted themselves after America left, and the long-running

insurgencies of the communists and the Muslims show how it's not even existence as a state in the full sense. This is quite questionable because long-running insurgencies such as these, or the Hook Rebellion, that originally began against Japanese occupation in the Philippines, actually they show something much different about the nature of government. It's temporary. The government of Philippines is not very strong, is not a real society, and this problem of insurgency almost has no central solution. You could make a case for that, or the solution is not something you could carry out in the modern world anyway. After the war, America continued to exert its influence in the Philippines, it tried to.

And one case I may cover in the future, maybe next show, is that of a very special politician named Magsaysay, very strange name, Magsaysay, this is guy that America promoted as a popular and in essence an anti-communist politician after World War II, someone who was able to rally the Filipinos, otherwise a very diverse and troubled bunch, but he was able to rally them and to prevent maybe a communist takeover in that region. But again, you know, like I keep telling you, these half-smart people misinterpreted this event, the CIA thought that it was responsible for Magsaysay, and it underestimated both his own immense gifts as a politician as well as the Filipinos' choices and their agency in promoting him, and it wrongly imagined itself as the puppeteer, when at most the

CIA had the role of a public venue impresario, nothing more. And this overestimation of their role in the success of this Filipino politician Magsaysay, who was a man of considerable political genius. But this overestimation of the CIA's own abilities led to overconfidence and subsequently to disaster not only in Vietnam, but elsewhere, where they kept promoting politicians that the local population did not want, that they wouldn't buy. But the CIA and associated parties, I don't know the inner workings of the American government, There may be agencies, the names, we don't know their names, but they're overconfident. And they thought they were so smart and so good at marketing that they could get people

to accept something they didn't actually want, and they're stupidly still trying to do this with Arab Spring or with Russia. And they've been trying it since the 1990s in Russia, in fact. They convinced themselves that you should ask Steven Saylor about this. He's very good on this. But they've convinced themselves that they can put Kasparov or this lunatic Masha Gessen eventually in charge of Moscow. We can't let these pedestrian IQ people, these self-important midwits, many of them are compromised too. We cannot let them take us down into the hole, into the toilet with them any longer. Trump must, and from what I hear he will, appoint me as head of a commission during his second term. I will enter the White House.

head of the Special Operational Group on Anti-American Activities, a research group with subpoena powers and with special forces and rangers, nude rangers, unit attached. I will choose personally select soldiers as part of this bodyguard. And he will say, Trump will say, BAP, BAP and his friends. I will invite Loki Julianus, by the way, and others. And Trump will say, BAP and Loki are the sword and shield of the American people. So it will be.