There are black market currency exchanges run by Russian mafia in the third world. They are open to the public. I went to one this week. It's very funny to see because many times tourists and hokey expats have to use them too. So it's some kind of culture shock for them. They always think they're about to get kidnapped or to get shot. They think something will happen and other things too. And expats, by the way, can be some of the most annoying people you meet. It depends on the country, but I stay away from them. I stay away from expats. Usually when somebody tells you they live in a third world city for the weather, I like hot weather, you know, so that means that a nonce or an invert usually is one of these.

And I've explained to you before, this is what's behind much of the drive for illegal immigration in America, too, is what happens when you let homosexual rings and non-spurvert rings take over your country. See, they're mad as hell at Trump for he cutting the supply of fresh meat from south of the border. You know, they need rent-boy devaluation in America, because the only affordable pay available to the Pathics and the Sadamites in the United States are the Downlow Brothers, oh yes, yes, The masculine Downlow Brothers, you know, just like Tariq Nasheed, the black nationalist journalist. He's wise to this phenomenon. Ask him on Twitter about the Downlow Brothers epidemic. Actually this is why Buddy Gay, you know, the presidential candidate, he gets zero support

from blacks because they know boys like him, they're used to guys like him cruising their neighborhoods and trying to offer $75 or $50 this. And unfortunately, despite what you may have heard from your local Seltzer TV programming, actually homosexuality and sissy-dom is rampant in that community as it is in Africa. You know, it's a mammy on Jemima-run homo-society. That's what the blacks are in the United States. So a black nostril, he will go gay without much fuss. And this is what a lot of Pathics, Sadamites, and Nanses, they're used to this in America. Just like you see with that UPenn University, Penn State, I think, coach. I don't know if you remember the scandal with Penn State, with Sandusky or whatever.

Also if you see Alan Bloom, the so-called philosopher, I'm sorry if I offend you. Look into his habits in Chicago. But that's a very particular thing, I guess, so they're trying to expand their supply from Mexico and from Central America because maybe they're tired of the download brother market in the United States. So they're mad at Trump for stopping this flow of fresh meat. He should, you know, Trump actually, maybe he should fund rent boy subsidies and just get Janet Napolitano to head the sexual access department out of maybe housing and urban development and provide the red boy subsidies to the DNC and the neocon class and maybe also girlfriend experience prosthesis to the incels and many problems would be solved.

Many of his political problems would go away or he could offer cruises to Southeast Asia or Brazil and he would end the gay rights movement entirely. The gay right movement, you know, what is gay right movement is it's only about frustrated queers after World War II, okay, they were suddenly shut out of being able to pay working class straight gay for pay guys because of rising standard of living and became too expensive. So that's what the most homos were doing historically. If you read some book before 1950s about the habits of the homos, you know, and it's still what they do in much of the rest of the world, but the makeshift gay rights movement can never quite satisfy the gays, any more than you would be satisfied if you were forced,

for example, if you're a man to date only butch lesbians, or if you're a woman to date only, you know, feminine guys, you know, so feminism has entirely similar origins, okay? Just to give you an analogy so you understand what's going on with these social movements. Someone on the internet, this is not my idea, he rightly described feminism as a cartel of older women who are trying to deny access to younger women. They don't want men their age to date younger women, so they try to criminalize that. So all these movements are grounded in sexual access questions, and then they're closed in the language of rights. But feminism is the original fem-cell movement, just like gay rights is the gay-cell movement.

So if you look at the faces of the women who promoted feminism, Dworkin and others, you see it's a fem-cell movement. So of course to understand this psychology here, you must study Aristophanes. You read his play Assembly of Women. He understood the deep causes of all such things, okay? He saw beyond Marx, he saw to what would come after Marx instate is established. That's why the Marxists are so obsessed with polymorphous perversity, because they know that after Marx instate is established, the question of sexual access remains. This artiste's great insight, and you can use it to understand because the government in the cities are under the rule of these pervert, nonce, invert, homos, so that's what they're trying to do with mass immigration, okay?

But this kind of thing has already arrived within some classes and people today. So then of course among them there are more seriously disturbed types among the upper middle class, like Bottigog, who is rising in the polls, I did this show on him before I think episode number five of show, and he appeals to the deracinated, mind-fucked college edumacated shitleg whites, whose entire spirit is sublimated sodometry of various degrees. So it just turned out this week that Buttegog was vacationing in Somalia, and then inexplicably he gets, at a very young age after vacationing in Somalia here, so he gets a New York Times column to describe his experiences there. So what sense does that make? Aren't there laws against CIA-run nonces and pedophiles running for office?

So anyway, as you see, this is why I stay away from expats, because they're often these kinds of poisonous shit-libs to one degree or another, so it's even worse. Where I am right now, at least, it's all middle-aged liberal women into the brunch lifestyle, you know, the pretend-to-be cultured theater lifestyle, you know, and the fags who come, they claim for the tango and all of this, so there are exceptions, there are some exceptions, always among expats you meet interesting degenerates, whoremongers, sometimes expats is rare but they're still there, the depressive Graham Greene types, it's a breed that is being thinned out by people's inability to be hypocritical or to look bad to themselves but they still exist.

novelist Graham Greene, you like his stories of third world decay, I've recommended before the comedians, but also the quiet American and the armen in Havana, they're all so good and there are movies made of this, Tales of Humor. Graham Greene is very good, he's just a genre humor writer though, not a great novelist as some pretend, but these kinds of novels he wrote are very amusing to read, but there's still this contingent of the alcoholic expat, the eccentric-based sperm, and I may have one such man on my show in the near future as guest. None of you know him. He's not online in any way. You don't know him. He's an older schizophrenic who I met. I don't remember where I met him, but now he lives in Kenya, and he boasts to be the

most popular man on Afro introductions, so you know what Afro introductions is. It is a website to coordinate meetings of Western gentlemen and African ladies. And he's one of the original champions of the bleach right. So yes, I remember him asking me if I knew, he asks, do you know what the average number of women an American man has sex with throughout his life? So I asked, no, what is it? So he says, he incredulously told me, six, just six. He said, can you believe that? He says, I must have fucked hundreds of prostitutes in the Philippines alone. So yes, you see, I know Delicious Taco says this doesn't count to your number, but that's how this man thinks. He's a very amusing man. He knows more than anyone I've ever met about military history and about animals because

he's completely Asperger-centric kind of man, but he's a whoremonger and he's one of the very early innovators of the modern bleach-rite lifestyle. He was also in a prison in Vietnam for sleeping with the General's daughter. So I may have him on the show sometime soon if he will agree to come. He tell me, interesting statistic, the majority of expats are alcoholic, did you know this? And the figure goes up to something like 70% of expats in tropical locations are alcoholic, 70%. So anyway, I'll be right back to discuss more about this garbage life. Ex-pats are nicer than the French in France, and French girls are sluts abroad, even more than in France. Of course, you know, if you have girlfriend who says she travel alone to the third world,

I strongly recommend that you dump her immediately. But when it come to Americans, there are two groups, the... And then you have the ruche guys, the guys who go to find foreign girlfriend, and that's okay, the artiste guys, the crypto people, the people who make money, cryptocurrency, there's some overlap, they come and many are good people, interesting to talk to, but they're very rare actually and the bulk of expats, at least in places like Argentina, are the bodyguard shit lip type, or in Japan you get the middle aged professional woman who no one wants to touch. The western women you see in Japan, I think they live in this neighborhood of Tokyo, nobody Nobody touches them. They lead completely lonely lives. The Japanese men want nothing to do with them.

So you avoid them or they bring you bad fortune. But so I go into a money exchange and you have to understand almost all the big black market currency exchanges in third world are run either by Russia or a Chinese mafia. And it's funny because here they have the signs in Russian even. They say please wait, kindly wait, signs in Spanish and in Russian and a big Latvian gorilla man in a badly fitting ape suit, he's standing guard on street outside. I mean not an ape suit, actually a kind of man's warehouse type suit, but he's an ape, Latvian ape standing guard outside. So you have these Trump derangement cat ladies from Canada and America who have this look of shock, complete shock that they have to be there because it's hitting them, all the

Rachel Maddow nonsense resistor sister story is about the best white nationalist mafia underworld conspiracy run by Putler that put Drumpf into power. And you know who originated the Russia hoax, right? Speaking of this, you look up the background of Bruce Ohr and the people around him in the FBI who are behind this, including Chris Steele, the maker of the dossier, and his associates. all people who, after the 2000s or so, they were leading the Eurasian organized crime units in American law enforcement. So you have to see it from their point of view. They put all this effort, this is their career, this investment. They thought the American national security apparatus would shift or focus on the specter of Russian organized crime.

You know, and when it didn't happen, it's like they found they invested their education and career in the wrong field. So that's part of the story anyway behind the Russia hoax, but this tale has already been disseminated so far on the left in the neocon side that they're convinced Putler's mafia international state is behind everything noxious to them now. So of course they're in this Russian mafia two-bit currency exchange. It's nothing special, nothing bad ever happens, it's a normal everyday part of life for many people here, but where you have to go because otherwise the official rate of exchange you You just get robbed by the governments here. So you take out money in a bank and you lose money because the official rate of exchange is actually far below the market rate.

So I'm telling you this continent, Latino America, is more corrupt than Africa. But in this sense, the New World Africa, they remain spaces for the play of, let's put it, special enterprise, let's put it this way. And actually I think this illustrates a larger point I made in my book towards the end. Because okay, look in the port region here in Buenos Aires, it's full of skyscrapers. They're always getting built, these new buildings, skyscrapers. This is the so-called modern section of the city, everything new. It's super safe because they have its own police force just for their neighborhood. But in fact when you look at these buildings and everything, many of them are everything cheap, cheap fake marble, fake granite, worthless plumbing, fake walls, fake buildings, right?

Well, what they are, they were built to launder money for the Russian mafia, and in fact people stupid enough to buy an apartment there without an inspection, they got raped, okay, because a few years ago an apartment there went for about the same price as in Miami, and it's the same if you look in Panama, you look at Panama City. What is Panama? It's a construction project, masquerading as a country. Panama is a completely fake country. But you look at Panama City, the skyline is all full of skyscrapers. But you look inside, they're empty. Sometimes I think there are actually no floors in some of them. Nobody lives there. And it's all construction for the sake of money laundering by Russia mafia, Chinese mafia and other mafia, who knows.

It's not just me, okay, or pervert like me who likes these lawless countries, you sperms. You ask me why I approve of CIA operations in Latino America. So actually, I'm telling you, they're quite limited and incompetent. And the Bolivia coup, for example, was mostly done by the Bolivian middle class and military without much outside support. The CIA has been getting ass-fucked in this continent because there is no American mafia, there is no proxy. The CIA has not found any real local proxy mafia, so all of this underworld I'm talking about, all this underworld has gotten taken over by others. And like I tell you, and I keep pressing into you, it is the underworld that is the engine of modern states. It's only that in the cretino-American world the underworld is much more apparent, it's

easier to see than let's say in the United States. So you go to the casinos in Panama City even ten years ago, it's only Chinese playing Baccarat and Colombian whores, that's all you see. So on the streets of Panama City you see Arabs, a lot of Sunnis over there, of the Muslim Brotherhood type and Hamas. Whereas if you go instead to the so-called tri-border region South America, the border between Paraguay, Brazil and Argentina where Iguazu Falls are, that area is full of Lebanese so Hezbollah is very active there. That's a free port region in Paraguay. So actually what you're getting is not exactly terrorist activity, but mafias that run cigarettes and electronic smuggling throughout this whole continent. And it just so happens that the Lebanese are enterprising everywhere they go.

So Hezbollah and the Iranians through them could get a foothold there. That's why towards the end of the idiotic Bush administration you'd get lunatic neocons who wanted to bomb Paraguay. That makes a lot of sense, right? So you leave your southern border open in the United States. You allow enclaves of Hezbollah in Michigan, but you bomb a cigarette smuggling mob center in South America because you heard your enemies may get a foothold there. A good replacement for the fact that America has been getting fucked out of its own sphere of influence really by third-rate powers. I'm being sarcastic now. Of course it's not a good replacement, but this is what happens when you put people like Marie Harf and Pete Buttigieg and Obama and Comey Brennan in charge of your agencies and of this area.

So you're being completely shut out of the real life that runs all of this continent, the secret mafia life. And by the way, I'm not pretending I'm part of it, but I see what's going on and that Americans shut out of what really matters, of the sinews of the society here. And I have to tell you, this city in particular, Buenos Aires, you know me, I'm hardly a conspiracy Theorists about Mossad did this or Mossad did that, but this city is crawling with Mossad to a degree you can't imagine. For example, they're in the open. You go to some place, you have coffee, and it's four Israeli very rude, loud Sabra guys with a computer center in the open yelling at each other, almost making a show of it, or daring people to do something about it.

It's very disgusting to watch and breathes a lot of ill will among local population. They can't stand, they know what's going on in their own country. There were terrorist attacks here in the 90s, I understand that, but there's a back story to that you're not being told also. They didn't just happen out of the blue. There's a kind of hidden war here, you know, the Israelis in one cafe, this lawless place where you buy politicians for nothing, then the next place over it's Syrians or Lebanese and they have their own racket going on. So there's no hope for the new world, you understand me? When Steve Saylor makes his point about California, so yes, it's to the Oaxacan and Guatemalan invasion of Los Angeles, and it's not an invasion because they're being invited, but it won't

lead to Aztlan supremacy. If the WASP, if the whites get kicked out of California as it's happening now, it will just be the ethnic mafia of the Armenoids and the Azeris and the Uzbeks and these kind of unibrow supremacists moving in, that's all that will happen. It's very disappointing to see it. The Anglo used to be powerful. You ask me about pirates? The Anglo used to be a pirate. How do you think the fortunes of New England were made? What was the civil war of the United States but a Yankee pirate raid? That's right, the Yankees with a knife between their teeth raiding southern aristo estates. So that used to be the Anglo, and he laid claim to the Americas, all of them. He has a right to them. The moral doctrine, he has a right to them. So I hope he makes a comeback.

Because I'd rather have the Anglo pirate rule here than the Chinese running organ trafficking out of Panama and the unibrow and the oil-hair races taking over Latino America. Please come back, Yankee pirate. Please come back. One of the Greek kingdoms in India and Afghanistan, it used to be called Bactria. I can only make introduction now, as I see it, this show is still at beginning episode 17, so actually I could do an entire show just about this, and about one of their kings, Menander. But it's beginning show, so I can only do introduction now, it's very strange episode in ancient world. Alexander conquered that area, but he died young and he left generals, okay, the Diadochi, his companions who became his successors, and they divided his domains with Seleucus,

that was the name of an East. He ruled a huge swathe of land, basically from modern Turkey and Iraq to India. The Ptolemies, one of the highly-gender successor Ptolemy, his dynasty, the Ptolemies ruling in Egypt, the Antigonids eventually in Macedon and in Greece itself. The Ptolemies, you know, they had a racial apartheid system in Egypt and it should be noted that a weak production increased during their rule in Egypt by many thousands of percent I think compared to previous eras. But now they pretend Cleopatra was on Jemima. So Alexander's successor is the Diadochi, they ruled Egypt, Middle East up to North India. That is all Greek land and if the Greeks and people like Taleb weren't just a bunch of

of backgammon autist laufers, they would try to reclaim their rightful lands and reconquer their area. I believe this is the birth of the West proper, by the way. The idea of the West as it exists today, not ancient Greece itself, but this world left behind by Alexander, the so-called Hellenistic world ruled by these god-emperors with these vast domains where they tried to spread Greek culture and knowledge as far as they could and where they established a kind of self-conscious universal civilization for the first time that Rome later adopted and expanded upon. So there's a real disagreement here between historians, and I mean real historians now like Spengler, not modern academics, but a debate about what the West means.

So some say the West began in classical Athens with democracy and they see a line from that to the England of luck and to modern America, and I would call this the Whig interpretation of history. So I don't agree with this at all, and I used to be quite annoyed at Victor Davis Hanson, for example, for spreading this view. He was spreading this very much, especially during the Iraq war. He turned out, Victor Hanson turned out to be not so bad at all. He's a good guy. He has good instincts on immigration and many other things. He's pro-Trump, and he wrote book, Mexifornia, which I thought was quite good, but he held to this view. And then to rival this Whiggish view of history, you have something like Spengler's take,

or at any rate, the people who say that the West actually began, let's say, around the year 1000 only, 1000 AD, and that its proper meaning is in the residues of Charlemagne's empire centered on the Northwest Europe. They say that its historical consciousness as a West, as a concrete civilization, only dates from around this time, which coincides also with the declaration of the First Crusade and with a kind of a break from the Eastern Christian world, you know. So that it is a civilization distinct from the ancient as well as the Eastern Orthodox or Byzantine world. So I think actually this is a far more correct view than the wiggish one that I described between the two you'd have to go with this one, no doubt. And even someone like Schopenhauer, for example,

who is full of tremendous contempt for the Middle Ages, and for what he calls the Teutonic stupidity about the veneration of Christianity and of women, he concedes, nevertheless, that the ancient world ended, the ancient civilization ended, and that the West is an entirely new civilization that has its beginnings in a late Christianity and in the Europe of this time, of around the year 1000 and so forth, and he sees this as unfortunate because he thinks the examples of life to be found in the Bible and especially of the New Testament, the historical examples that they are poor basis for high art and for the metaphysical mission of the arts, and he thinks the Renaissance painters were in this respect very limited in their

spiritual and historical examples because of the plebeian, this altery character of the doctors of the church, the early fathers of the church. He says this, however, at the same time that Schopenhauer now extols the inner spiritual meaning of Christianity for which he has the highest regard, this idea of the state of grace for which he has a special interpretation, and which he sees expressed in the purest form like I've said before in some of the paintings of Raphael and some others. So in any case, I think this argument that the West began around the year 1000 in Northwest Europe is much stronger. But I myself, I believe in something a little bit different from both models I sketched out. I think origin of West and of Europe is in this Hellenistic world I just mentioned.

It's not in ancient Greece itself proper, which is quite alien to us and was its own thing, and nor can you say it's simply in Rome, because if you say that the meaning of the West is the persistence of the Roman dream, which is true, or of a Romanity as an identity, which is also true, but then you have to go a little bit back before then to the Hellenistic world where this consciousness of world civilization was already developed and Rome actually just adopted or extended it. You shouldn't make too much of this, by the way. In the cultural sphere, Rome did not copy Greece. a kind of middle-brow rumor. Nietzsche is right to counter this. He says that the Romans were not seduced by Greek culture, but only by the image of the Greek actor, because of

the Graeculus Histrion. But actually Rome was in many ways quite hostile to Greek culture, despite the fact that some elites, I believe Cicero for example, probably wrote Greek better than he wrote in Latin, but the Romans were their own thing, they had some contempt for Greeks and for Greek culture, but in this respect they extended the political horizon of the Hellenistic world, which I believe there is the origin of a Western mindset and that's what many of the leftist spurs, they don't understand about me and about many of us on the right, it's that we actually believe, or at least I do, or I could believe in the right circumstances in a cosmopolitan empire, it's just not their ahistorical and insane leftist version of empire that I believe in.

You must understand what I've told you before, the persistent historical problem that Jews have been a quarrel with Hellenistic world. It's not the Hellenistic world that started it, the Hellenistic world was tolerant and syncretic and accepted people and assimilated them without obliterating them the way that modernity wants to do, but the Jews have always opposed this model of universal Hellenistic cosmopolitan civilization, they've been opposed to it, not to nationalism. That's common misunderstanding, the Hellenistic Seleucid king Antiochus, for example, he tried according to Tacitus to civilize the Jews, these are Tacitus words now, and in fact he He was aided in this by factions among the Jews that wanted to join the Hellenistic,

syncretic civilization, but he was stopped from doing so by his war with the Parthians. So the story of Hanukkah that you see now everywhere, you'll see the menorah being put, it's a story about Jewish resistance to cosmopolitan empire, not to nationalism, it's about resistance to cosmopolitan empire, which I think is the more consistent theme of history because it is repeated in the tense relations that persisted versus Rome and later versus Byzantium and the Russian Empire that was organized along similar principles. All of these universal empires had very tense relations with the Jews who would not accept them and you can see ideologically going back to the Jewish philosopher Philo who lived in the Hellenistic world in Alexandria and who tries to reinterpret this Hellenistic

civilization in ways favorable to his tribe, when, for example, he says things like that Plato was a Moses to the Greeks and such things. Kadehi actually is very useful for understanding this. The persistent ideological quarrel here is not with nationalism, as some of you have been made to think, but rather with the universal ambitions of Hellenistic civilization and Hellenistic philosophy and identity. So incidentally I should mention that there is no historical record actually of the Jews existing as an independent kingdom before this time, the time of the Maccabees, and that I'm not the only one who claims that almost all previous history of Israel is a fabrication by the priestly class. Nietzsche himself says this and there's a Jewish historian, Merkin, don't buy his books,

they're enormously expensive, he's an academic but he's crazy, he makes the case that the The Bible was composed at Alexandria during this time, during Hellenistic times, in that the Jewish religion was invented during this time, and it was designed according to the program of Plato's laws, and it did not exist before this monotheism, he says. So it's an interesting and very unusual theory. It's based in part on the fact that Herodotus, he says nothing about Israel existing even though he was interested in all kinds of such exotic religions and things, but there's no record in the outside peoples of this existing, this monotheism before and in any case I think I'll come back to such claims another time, but for now I must repeat to you the importance

in any case of the Hellenistic world, of the world of Alexander's successors for Western self-understanding. Sometimes it's called Alexandrian world and so forth because in my opinion it is to this world that you can trace a concrete historical self-consciousness of the West, much as the The Whigs on one hand and Spengler on the other, they may disagree with this. But in any case, so you know, to go back to Indo-Greek kingdoms, what happened after Alexander died, yes, excuse me, I had, yes, I had a neighbor come to the door and she came completely naked and she insisted to give me a massage, so I, you know, I cannot, I cannot turn this down, you know, so, yeah, but anyway, so what happened after Alexander died?

is the Seleucid dynasty. One of his successors inherited that portion of empire. It stretched to the east from Asia Minor, modern Turkey, to north India. But this area is so large, it's enormous. So the local Greek rulers and what is now Afghanistan and India, it's called Bactria, they were essentially autonomous. And many times they went beyond autonomy and they actually rebelled against Sili Ussid emperor and they tried to rule entirely as independent local kings. And having eventually secured their independence, more or less, they gave birth to an entirely new offshoot civilization. They became Buddhist, actually. So it's a very interesting history. They ruled this area of the Hindu Kush into Tajikistan, Pakistan, North India, because

Apparently it was very prosperous a small civilization very urban actually you may not think of it that way now But it's very urban civilization with very rich cities because this area can be very productive Agricultural much farm you look at the fergana Valley today look up fergana Fergana Valley, it's the fruit basket of Eurasia Asia, one of them anyway, much the same way that Fresno is a fruit basket of United States. Much dates almond raising many fruit grown there. So now it's been turned into a cotton producing region. The Soviets turned it into Fergana Valley, into cotton producers. But anyway, these Greek kings, they weren't always united under one mega king. There was a lot of local warlordism.

Nevertheless, as happens in the Greek civilization, despite political rivalry, cultural civilization life kept on going, but it was a very wealthy area with many cities, one of them being Bagram. You may know America has a base there now, I think, and I have many fans among veterans who've been there. You've been there as a soldier. It's actually an old Hellenistic city in that area. It used to be called Alexandria, the same as the Alexandria in Egypt. This is the old name of Bagram, is Alexandria of the Caucasus, not to be confused with the other Caucasus. And the most interesting aspect of all this I think is the Buddhist conversion of much of the Greek population, including the greatest Indo-Greek king whose name was Menander, like the poet.

In this case, Menander the savior, he was called Menander the savior. He was a conqueror but also a wise man of the Buddha religion. He ended up ruling most of this area, he carried out campaigns into India proper and as a mega king he also doubles in Buddhist scriptures as one of the Buddhist sages and the defenders of Dharma. He flew under the flag of the swastika, I'm sorry to tell you this, but so you find images from that time with Hercules defending Dharma. Hercules on one side and the Buddha on the other, of a coin, I think. So you look at costumes also, and it's interesting, I think India, today even, is actually only place where classical dress, classical Greek robes and the toga-like dress has survived, and that's also inheritance from this time.

You see also old Buddhist images wearing Greek dress. I've posted on this, but the New World Order, they always try to delete this image of the Greek Buddha that I post. I've also put on my old account, if you look I think, I can still find the photos that I posted last year. The Stupa, the Buddhist monument in Sri Lanka, Stupa is basically like a Buddhist monument. But this very big one in Sri Lanka was built a long time ago by Buddhist monks, Greek Buddhist monks. And there's also Buddhist scripture literature written in Greek is very interesting. And even the one not written in Greek, there's a story I find fascinating about how Greek Buddhist missionaries, they were sent to the Mediterranean and they gained hundreds of converts there apparently.

So the question is what happened with those? What happened with the people that the Greek Buddhists converted when they went back to the Mediterranean? I think this very interesting history to see if those converts, if they led to anything else later on. It reminds me of this other syncretic story of Barlaam and Josephat. You can look it up. This is basically the story of the Buddha, but it's retold in Christian terms. Barlaam and Josephat are two Christian saints. I think they're celebrated both by Eastern Orthodox and Western Catholic world. So some see this story of Barlaam and Josephat, Christian retelling of the Buddhist story, which may have had precedent, as I keep telling you, in very, very old precedent, very old ground laid by Greek Buddhist missionaries.

But some say that this particular story was especially important in parts of medieval Germany and that it led to, look, I don't know, there are weird theories given the fact that major Christian theologians like the mystic, Meister Eckhart, he was a Christian mystic who actually has a very Buddhist kind of theology and speculation, mystical speculation, and he had quite a bit of influence on later secular thinkers like Meister Eckhart. So some say then that this idea of a European Buddhism is not so new and not as strange as you might think, but it might have an entirely different meaning from the most obvious one, the one let's say of pacifistic nihilism. There may be another side to it, just as there was in Tibet where Buddhism, like I said before,

did not take an entirely peaceful manifestation. And I believe I have a theory that following the arrival of the Judaic sect of Islam that was imposed on this region, on Pakistan and Afghanistan, I will never accept that. Never accept that. Afghanistan and Pakistan are Buddhist by right, and Buddhism will return there. I will make sure of it. But following this, I believe that the Greek-Buddhist monks from that area, they became refugees and they traveled from there to Tibet and I believe that they took with them many relics, many books, old Greek books that are still being hidden in Tibet by an order of blonde Greek monks who are black and green robes and who fly the banner of a green dragon. And I believe also that they took Alexander's sacred armor there, that it's being held

in a secret monastery in the Tibetan, in the Himalayas, and that if you should go on expedition and find it, Alexander's armor will stand like shield for your nation and protect it and bring it fortune and victory if it is found by the right king. I believe this. Let's talk now of conspiracy theories and of government's path to criminalization of believing in conspiracy theories. So basically, it's easy to see through. If you don't believe in government or media narratives about anything, say Syrian gas attacks that are one year later shown to be frauds, but many people knew so at that time also, or dietary advice that makes you guzzle soy oil, which everyone knows is really pure poison for a human, but if you don't believe in this, you can get soon placed on a law

enforcement list for dangerous individuals. Put aside this example of not-so-soft totalitarianism for a moment, consider other arguments often made against the existence of conspiracies to begin with, that big brain experts will inform you conspiracies don't work, you know, they know everything, you know, the guy who's been, his biggest decision during the days was to get a latte or this and he knows that political conspiracies don't work, no they definitely don't, so the thinking, the claim goes that the more people you have to involve in your plot, the higher the likelihood one of them will betray and leak, or even they will just tell their friends to brag, so the knowledge of the plot will then spread. So with this, they mean to tell you that conspiracies can't work.

In much the same way, I suppose, they try to convince people that walls don't work, that thousands of years of cities and estates and houses building walls, that was meaningless because there are always ladders that are bigger than walls and such things. It's nonsense, which you do hear in the case of conspiracies, too. It's the same nonsense because there are many conspiracies in history that were successful. And the reason generally is that even if the world gets out, people won't believe it, or they won't think it's important. So we see this all the time now, and I'm not even talking about Epstein, which may finally, you know, I doubt it, but some think it will finally awaken normies because unlike the JFK thing, and Mena said this, elites killing each other over who gets

to rule is Lindy. It's something of an established quantity. People know it's always happened, they are more likely to look the other way. But here you have a serial pedophile in Epstein, a blackmailer, who dies before he can spill the goods on anyone and it wakes people up, or it might, we will see, I'm not sure. But did you see the face of the two guards on watch for Epstein though? So it's possible that he did kill himself. So let me ask you, if you're about to get on a plane and you see the two pilots are two shiboons or dreadlocks laughing and drinking gin, do you get on that flight? I don't know. I just don't know. So, you know, but in many other cases like Fast and Furious or the Iraq war inception

are many other things you can think of, even Biden's son corruption stories, the whole inception of the Russia hoax maybe. I mean, we'll see what happens, but the truth has been out for a while. There was never any evidence of even Russian hacking of the DNC servers, but you know, it's not enough. It's not enough for the truth to get out, and in this case it's not enough for the truth even to be believed by many people. They continue with their plots nevertheless, and although I doubt that in this case they'll and removing Trump, in many other cases the derp state or other mafias have managed to carry out their plots and their conspiracies with large numbers of people knowing about it. But it does little good because you can publicize it even and it can even get to a large platform

and it makes no difference. So there are many historical cases of the same thing happening. It's known but either people don't care or they don't act on it. You take analogous story I mentioned briefly in my book. It's the story of Charles of Anjou, a medieval king. This is a French king who ended up taking over much of Italy. He killed Conradin, who was the grandson of Frederick II of Hohenstaufen, a great Holy Roman Emperor who Nietzsche celebrates along with Caesar as one of the greatest men ever. But he was hated, absolutely hated, this Emperor Frederick of Hohenstaufen, he was hated by the Pope who excommunicated him and so his heirs they couldn't quite take over after him. So to fully understand background of the story I'm about to tell you I may have to do a

separate show in the future on Frederick II of Hohenstaufen who was indeed a man of power. He was called Stupor Mundi, the wonder of the world. So maybe one of you will achieve this title, Wonder of the World, for real in the future I hope. But anyway, this guy, Charles of Anjou, he ended up deposing and killing Frederick of Hohenstaufen's heirs, his illegitimate heirs, you could say, and he ended up ruling a vast Mediterranean embassy. This was in the 1200s, so technically he owned Jerusalem, parts of Greece, much of Italy. He is a very ambitious and power-hungry king, this Charles, although as I describe in my book he was a disturbed and arrogant man with no joy in him and an almost autistic and he was hand-handed in his rule which of course led to a lot of resistance and it came to

it that he had made so many enemies in Italy and especially in Sicily but really throughout Europe that people started to think of ways they could oppose this king's power. He was He was an emperor, really, but Sicily in particular was a special case, because Sicily's special history, people think it's poor now, it is poor, but they think it's always been poor, but Sicily used to be phenomenally wealthy, historically it was at times very wealthy and it had been the personal kingdom of the Hohenstaufen kings, the people of Sicily, they loved them, they loved Frederick, they loved his successors that Charles had killed, So they, being distrusted by this King Charles, he gave all the local offices and estates to Frenchmen.

He imported a new elite and he dispossessed the local leaders and gave all the local offices and estates to Frenchmen. So they absolutely hated him and this kind of priggish authoritarian rule, a kind of mix of corruption and priggishness that is coming to this kind of, well, he was an integralist, okay? He was one of the first ones. This is what integralist Ruhr is. He was the last, however, of the kings of Europe who embodied this vision of universal monarchy in the name of the church. And here's why. I will tell you why it happened, why he ended and his vision of Ruhr ended. Because it was 1282 and Charles was planning an invasion of Byzantium, of the Byzantine Empire. So this would have united as a Christian world under the Papacy. So I don't know.

Maybe it's good that it should have happened. Maybe it would have brought unity to the West, I don't know. But Byzantium at this time, all of you know how Byzantium was conquered by the Ottomans in 1453, right? But it was really, even by the 1280s, a rump empire that was almost nothing like the original Byzantine Empire, because it was in fact destroyed. It was the Westerners, the Latins as they were called, or the Franks, who destroyed Byzantium in 1204 during the 4th Crusade. The Franks is what all the Westerners are called in many Middle Eastern oriental countries, Franks or Pharaengs in the Orient. It's interesting, the Pharaengi from Star Trek, they are named after the Franks, but the Venetians from Venice had a big role in this 4th Crusade, in carrying it out to its

eternal discredit, the destruction of Constantinople during this time. Constantinople was destroyed and occupied in 1204 by the Westerners and looted and the Byzantine Empire never recovered. This is longer story, worthy of its own show, and to be honest there is plenty of blame for both sides because the Byzantines had previously, before 1204, that is, dispossessed and murdered the Genoese community in the city, I believe. unjust actions. At the same time, it had an idiot stupid emperor, its retard emperor decided to give up, this is the Byzantine emperor, now just decided to give up its very long running naval tradition and essentially to outsource its navy to the Venetians, you know, who were its rivals. So they ended up doing the Fourth Crusade sacking the city together

with the Crusaders from the West, so that was in 1204. By 1282, the Byzantine dynasty had managed to recapture Constantinople, and this was the Palaiologos dynasty, and it was quite capable in its leadership, but again you know after this period Byzantium, as I keep saying, it never really what it had been before. So the Byzantine emperor, in 1280, he sees what is happening, he understands that Charles and the Pope are coming for him, and they're going to occupy Byzantium for good this time. Charles is very strong, amassing a huge army, a giant fleet in Sicily, in Palermo, so what's the one thing that Byzantines are known for? I mean, besides bureaucracy or corruption, it's intrigue, that they're very good at this.

Espionage was in their culture for a long time, read the Lutevac book, The Strategy of the Byzantine Empire. So what happens is the Byzantine emperor conspiracy begins. On the other side of the Mediterranean, in Spain, you have Peter III of Aragon, also called Peter the Great of Aragon. And he's a very ambitious, very capable king, small kingdom, but he's a very smart guy. He's married to guess who? Peter of Aragon is married to Frederick of Hochstaufen's granddaughter, Constance. So this is the daughter of Frederick's son Manfred, who Charles of Anjou had killed in Italy. So she has a claim to Sicily, and obviously she wants revenge for her family, for what Charles did, because he murdered both Manfred and Conradin, right? So you have the Byzantines, they don't want to get invaded.

You have Peter of Aragon, who's very ambitious, and whose wife she wants revenge. And you have the Sicilians themselves who feel bullied and oppressed by Charles of Anjou and the French occupation of their country, and they miss the Hohne-Stauffens and they just hate, hate, hate the arrogant French. And at the center of all of this, you have a very interesting character who I may cover in full on another segment in future. His name is John of Prosida. He's one of the first Renaissance men, a genius. He's a loyal servant of the House of Hohne-Stauffen. He was a doctor and a scientist. He was Emperor Frederick's doctor, and he was later the tutor of his son Manfred. And he was an amazing character, Renaissance man, doctor, scientist, diplomat, and it is

he who arranged this conspiracy and coordinated between Aragon, Byzantium, and the Sicilian nobles. So what happened is, on the Vespers of Easter in 1282, the pretext was that some French or a bunch of French, they molested, married a Sicilian woman, or a number of them. And this very quickly led to a riot and then a massacre of all the French in that town. And that's how the revolution immediately started across all of Sicily. With over 10,000 French who had come to live in Sicily, they were massacred, totally massacred over the next few weeks. Civilians, soldiers, everyone, they just killed all the French they could lay their hands on and they killed also any Sicilian woman who had a French lover or boyfriend. They killed them.

Meanwhile, Peter of Aragon, if I remember the story, he made a landing in Sicily. The war started and his armies together with Sicilians and with Byzantine money, they managed to kick Charles of Anjou out of Sicily. Charles lost this war. So the fleet that had been planned as invasion of Byzantium was destroyed, totally destroyed in the beginning of all of this, I think. Actually it wasn't just Charles was kicked out of Sicily, but his power was permanently broken after this, he barely held on to southern Italy, he ended his life in a very bad way. That was the end of the integralist vision of universal monarchy and the name of the church or of the pope as I keep telling you. Now they're trying to resurrect it for the Americas, Dowsett and von Müller and all these guys. They're jokers.

They don't even know what they're talking about. But why do I bring this up? Because this history, besides the fact that it's interesting in and of itself, it was Because during this whole time that diplomat John of Prasida, you have to understand this is story out of a movie, it's much better than Game of Thrones. It's a real John of Prasida was Frederick II doctor, tutor of his son, his own family I think was killed by Charles of Anjou and the French, so this is a story of revenge and political intrigue and international conspiracies like out of Dune, you know, like the story of Paul Atreides. But anyway, the point is, Charles, he knew about all these efforts, he had been told, he knew what John of Prosida was doing, and that's right, they couldn't keep this conspiracy

a secret, but Charles was autistic and arrogant, and he didn't realize how much he was hated in Sicily, and he knew all of his opponents were weaker, and this was true, they were weaker than him, but he miscalculated, like the historian Stephen Runciman says, he miscalculated that his enemies could be quite strong in combination. He was too sure of his own position. He was distracted also by legitimate things. He was running a huge empire, so all huge empires are inward-looking and autistic in that way. Ludwig makes this point about the United States and China. There is so much going on every day. The Chinese Central Committee, they get reports of riot here and shortages there. You forget that there's an outside world.

So yes, Charles of Anjou, he knew this was happening, but he didn't think it would come to anything. But it came to something. The story to read about this is Stephen Runciman's The Sicilian Vespers. That's the book. And in general, by the way, I strongly recommend to you this historian because he writes with a joy of knowledge. He's not a dour academic. He's like Norwich in this sense. His books are like movies. And he also has a three volume history of the Crusades I strongly recommend. He lived as the old kind of English pervert expat. He lived in Egypt, in Istanbul. He was a tarot reader, I think, for the king of Egypt. He knew eight languages. He knew ancient lore. If only such writers still existed. But you see, I mean to say conspiracies can happen. They can change the world.

The Soviet Union started as a conspiracy. Do not be a chump. Last segment, I talked to you about history conspiracy theory that interests me, this one's really crazy. Oh, you remember people were arguing recently on Twitter about the meaning of wine dark in Homer as a color term, because Homer describes the sea as wine colored, or wine dark sometimes is translated wine dark sea. Oi no papon ton, usually is the formulation which occurs in Homer, which describes the sea as this. People ask, how can this be? Because wine is purple, right? So there are all these kinds of autistic debates about how the Greeks didn't use color terms in the same way we do, but they referred in their words for color to other qualities like shimmer and such. And I really don't believe that.

I've seen the claims and I don't believe it's academics trying to be too smart. There are only a few legitimate explanations here. So please just wait a minute because this isn't even the real conspiracy theory that I want to tell you. I'm getting to that. There's something really odd about the Odyssey I'm getting to, about the world in which it takes place. But to get to the skeleton, there's one Nietzsche essay in his book, Daybreak, where he talked about how the Greeks could actually not see physiologically. He says they could not see blue or green type colors. And he says therefore they saw the world entirely in shades of red, of brown and such, of earth tones, so he has a very interesting idea about how this may have affected their thinking in general.

And I think this cannot be dismissed out of hand, is entirely plausible and is one of possible explanations for why Homer refers to sea as wine, color, and many other such things. But the other possibility is that wine actually does turn blue when you mix it with water. Did you know this? If you mix wine with water it can turn blue like the color we see as blue and the Greeks always drank mixed wine, always. So I think low key he has very strong case to make here because the words for blue and such the Greek words for blue they change when they meet other people later who drink unmixed wine and I think that's very suggestive. But anyway so yeah the second explanation is it was actually the words for blue except Greek wine actually was blue because it was mixed with water.

And then there's a third possibility, which I think is likely, which I'd like you at least to consider it, and it's part of a bigger case that, yes, the Mediterranean, when you look at the Mediterranean, it's actually overall quite a blue sea, and it's not very dark blue. Parts of the Adriatic are actually very light greenish blue at times, so where does someone go off calling it wine colored because actually there are bodies of water in the world that are dark like that or dark blue or purplish. So you look at the Atlantic Ocean or other oceans but the Atlantic Ocean can get a very dark color, gray or purple at times and even outright purple for large parts of the day when the sun is rising or setting and you go to the North Atlantic and you know how

is in parts of the year when the sun doesn't really set. So you see where I'm going with this, and it's that the Odyssey may actually be a much older story that Homer received from somewhere else, either from the Greeks themselves through ancient inheritance and passing along from bard to bard, or who knows, but it may actually take place in the Atlantic, the Iliad and the Odyssey, and not the Mediterranean. And this isn't the only reason, there are very strange things in the Odyssey that led someone to this conclusion, not just the wine-colored thing. For example, Homer often describes the sea as loud-resounding or loud-roaring, but the Mediterranean is definitely not loud-resounding, okay? The Atlantic or another ocean that would be a roaring sea.

And then there's other piece of evidence that in my view is very, very strong, which is that at one point Odysseus is drifting at sea for ten days or I think more than ten days without hitting land, and that's impossible to do in the Mediterranean. Okay, look, I understand poetic license, but what would the poetic license be in this case? It's not, you know, ten days. No, I don't care if you're on a raft. I mean, I don't know. I think it's five days sail from Crete to Israel, for example. That's how it's supposed to be that the, what do you call them, the ancient Philistines got there from Crete. So it's a five-day sail away, so I myself, I can get from Sicily to Corfu in two days with a pod of three dolphins, they carry me on their back, they know I'm their friend.

But so anyway, I don't understand how you stay adrift in the Mediterranean for ten days or I think it was more than ten days again, but you can't do that without hitting land. And then there are other things, the behavior of the tides, the way they're described. In one case, the ocean moves, or the sea, fine, let's have it the sea, it moves back into the river, into the river delta, Odysseus observed this at one point. But this is not a sea tide, this does not take place anywhere in the Mediterranean. This is an ocean tide, this doesn't occur in the Mediterranean. What kind of poetic license is that? It's very odd, right? So then you look at the eddy, silla, skilla from the Odyssey. It behaves exactly the same as the maelstrom eddy from the North Atlantic, which appears

three times a day, same as in the Odyssey, and there is nothing like that in the Mediterranean. And then of course there's the island of Ogygia, which Odysseus visits, and Plutarch later he says it's five day sail west of England. So what do you make of this then? So I like this theory. I think it's possible. So in fact, I think the weakest evidence is what you may think is the strongest. It's this Ogygia lying west of Britain, this island that Plutarch says lies west of England and that Odysseus visits. So I think that indicates something else, something else entirely, and I'll get to that in a minute. But this theory that I've just sketched out was promoted by an alternative historian who who claims that the original Iliad and Odyssey are set in the Baltic.

He claims that this is where the Mycenaeans are from and that they later migrated to Greece and he's not a Nordicist by the way, okay, Alessandro Boccacci, he's an Italian man I think. I'm not sure about this theory, I think there are very recent findings of Mycenaean Bronze Age artifacts in Scandinavia and a lot of contact in the Bronze Age between Scandinavia and the Mycenaean world, but I'm not sure about going this far, and rather I think this is really an old Atlantean tale. I think that's the conservative interpretation of everything I've told you so far. I think that's the moderate interpretation, that it is an old Atlantis tale that was transmitted, and that it does take place in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, because that's what Atlantis was.

So yes, I believe this knowledge from Homer is proof of Atlantean origin of at least some of the ancient Greeks, hyperborean Atlantean origin, the land of the midnight sun, and as for Ogygia, to get to the other crazy thing, the Ogygia lying five days sail west of England, which Prudarch, he says this, that brings up, it opens up entirely different crazy historical conspiracy theory I'll talk about in more detail another time, but which is that the ancient Greeks actually, they knew of the Americas, yes I believe they knew of this, that they chose to hide it, and that there are hints to be found not only in Greek writings but in European writings before the supposed discovery of the New World by Columbus.

In Renaissance writings, it's one of those things, you know, it's slowly actually being admitted by academics and historians without actually making a big announcement and without actually acknowledging it. But I believe this is being slowly phased in because, for example, to give you just Just one limited example nobody denies now, the Basques, the Basque people, okay? They had fishing settlements in Newfoundland for quite some time before Columbus. This is acknowledged by everyone, but quietly. They chose to hide this knowledge, the Basques that is, because it's financially important information. They didn't want competitors for fishing beds and such, so you don't just tell this to everyone. And there are many other similar cases.

The Portuguese explorers, when they were exploring the coast of Africa, they found that you actually have to veer west into the Atlantic and then go back in to make any progress. So it's very strange how they found this out, very strange. And they hid the maps for this and the knowledge, they hid this kind of sea navigation knowledge. This is acknowledged by scholars now. And supposedly this is how South America was found, but in my opinion they found this ancient naval knowledge in much older sources and they hid it from others. So I think in any case that Columbus was sent on his mission quite self-consciously to claim these new continents as a new public project, and the routes to Asia thing was an excuse,

merely a public excuse, but that the expedition was funded and supported because they knew exactly where they were going and why. In other words, the elites of Europe had always known about the Americas, and in fact had known this is ancient times. And I think Plato warns mankind not to colonize the Americas because it would lead to a monstrous new world of industry and such. So anyway, so much for conspiracies. They can get really crazy, you know, but there are conspiracies of different kinds. And in closing to this week's show, I ask those of you who are my listeners in Sweden To please, if you're listening to this, send me information about the homosexual lavender mafia scandal that happened in your country in the 1960s or 50s, I think, when a huge

homosexual blackmail ring scandal broke out. It was exposed. All mentions of this on the internet have been wiped clean the last couple of years. I can no longer find any English language descriptions of it. But it apparently was a huge story that shook Sweden of that time. It shook its political establishment. I don't remember, I think 50s or 60s, so do my many Swedish fans. If I send you greetings and I ask you to send me any English language sources or books on this, or even a Swedish website that I could translate, so thank you so much and greetings and it is now time for me to get drunk and to chimp at strangers tonight, Sunday night. Until next time, back out!