On the last show, I discuss the pervert French philosopher Rousseau, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who I must talk about again because he very important thinker according to Nietzsche and also to many other on the hard right. Rousseau is a spiritual father of the left and of the socialists. So you must understand his thought even if you disapprove, but he is a pervert philosopher, Mr. Beiter, born 1712 and he died 1778. He live in Geneva, Switzerland, but he's completely a Frenchoid, totally, totally Frenchoid. And how he is enduring inspiration for the lift, this was my point on last show. And because of this, I got a few complaints from Russo fanboys, and they exist, and they are much better people than Marxists, and some are actually on our side. So you see, this is why I do not discuss

philosophers so much on the show, because I don't want to enter this whole nerdoid world of disputation of doctrine. But it is true that some on our side genuinely like Rousseau, and they didn't like that I implied he was left-wing thinker. They say to me he is also right-wing, and some people say he is also in particular the inspiration for a certain kind of nationalism, and I think that all of this is true. Rousseau himself, for all of his faults, he is a great mind, and therefore he is not strictly classifiable as either left-wing or right-wing, at least in a low sense. But I still say that Rousseau in his public effects is, above all, the inspiration for the left, for the reasons I said.

These reasons being his doctrines of the malleability of human nature and his particular understanding of how a man is corrupted by civilization, namely with a special focus on inequality, on private property, and so forth. And to this last is connected a deeper spiritual reason that I will talk about on this episode. But it's worth mentioning an enduring conservative criticism of Rousseau at this point, which is that his philosophy has convoluted the rationalization for some terrible choices that he made in his personal life. For example, he abandoned multiple children, gave them to orphanages, and many other such things, cruelties that he, or indifference that he engaged in in his life. Plus, I believe that he was heavily into femdom. He liked to be dominated by female.

By the way, they say Hitler was also into this, that he liked being dominated by strong woman. This is probably New World Order lies. It's same when they say they found child porn on Osama bin Laden computer. And no doubt next they will say on Hitler's computer as well. But in any case, Rousseau was influenced. Excuse me, I must have more coffee before I make show for you. Not influenced, he was conflicted, I mean to say, about these things that he did in his personal life, these terrible things, and also conflicted about these desires, these elements of his own nature that he was not at ease with. And the thinking of this criticism of Rousseau is that he tried instead to blame his failures on society, which of course is a very common move. You see it all the time now.

It's a very nostril thing to do, of course. And I'm indebted to Zero H.P. Lovecraft, the NRX poster, for the following quotation I will read to you from Gaetano Mosca. Mosca is Italian thinker, 20th century, and originator of so-called elite theory of power, and he later became a fascist, Mosca. But she say about Rousseau, you know, awareness, I'm quoting Mosca now, awareness of the moral degradation into which he had fallen in his youth must no doubt have been one of the keenest torments to the Genevan philosopher Rousseau in his maturity. Being unwilling or unable to blame himself, his father or Madame de Varens, he blames society. That, in our opinion, is the real psychological explanation of the fundamental ideas that

serves Rousseau as the basis for his whole political and social system that men is born good and society makes him bad." So this very common criticism of Rousseau I read not long ago, an Anglo conservative, just normally conservative, I think an essay in New Criterion a long time ago make similar point that Rousseau's whole philosophy is a justification for a series of miserable things that he did in his life and so forth, so of course, you know, I don't like this kind of psychologizing of great thinker, especially when it was Rousseau himself who admitted and told the world about these failings in a book like his Confessions, his famous book, and is not easily classed as left-wing book, I think, when you look into it, but the point

stands that going back very far, the right wing has always viewed Rousseau and his philosophy as a mortal enemy and as the source of the evil. So if you look, for example, at also Joseph de Maistre, who is a monarchist, a religious monarchist and one of the first and the great so-called throne and altar or traditional reactionary right-wingers, Joseph de Maistre. And here's a whole series of insights that he is titled, you know, Against Rousseau. You can read this. And one of my favorite quips from the Maestra is, I'm quoting him now, he says, Rousseau says that man is everywhere in chains, but that he is born free. This is famous line from Rousseau. Man is born free, but he is everywhere in chains. Which is like saying that fish are born to breathe air but are everywhere living in water.

This is famous witticism against Rousseau, and I've always liked this quote. So the right wing, both the traditionalist right wing and fascist, has always seen Rousseau – and I might add by the way also as a normally conservative tool to this – has always seen Rousseau as a left wing because he's been the inspiration for the left at the deepest level, on spiritual level. But I think, on the other hand, on some sense, rightly, Rousseau fanboys complain to me they are right in a way, and I come back in a minute to explain why. Now you see, on the so-called hard right, or whatever we are, whatever you want to call us, Rousseau has fanboys even on the hard right who write me that I am insulting or or diminishing their profit by saying that he is exclusively a leftist thinker, which

I didn't really say, so I think they're right in the end in some way. Because the truth is that Rousseau himself, in being a thinker able to penetrate to that depth of the spirit, is beyond political affiliation. Which is to say that he could in some sense also be a right-wing thinker or at least be apolitical. And when you have a thinker who, for example, like Rousseau, he attacks commercial bourgeois men, who attacks before the fact maybe this avoid spending commercial civilization, and who does so in the name of ancient virtue, of way of life of Sparta even, and who talks of corruption of nature by civilization or the city life, and who in some parts of his books extols immersion in purity and calmness of nature. And this is famous phrase of Rousseau

when looking from a boat on lake, I think. He say to feel only the sweet sentiment of existence. So then you have many points on which he touches things many of us believe. So it's not so simple to dismiss him as just a lefty. You see, for example, also a Stendhal, Stendhal's great novel, The Red and the Black, which you should all read, a 19th century adventure novel of a great hero, Julien Sorel, who comes from French provinces and rises in high society in Paris. It's a very good story you should read, but Stendhal says the Koran of this hero in the book of Julien Sorel, his Koran, were three books, Napoleon's Memorial of Saint Helena, the collection of the bulletins of the Grand Armée, the Grand Armée, this is Napoleon's army, and also Rousseau's Confessions as the most important

of the three for this hero in the book. So, you know, this is not a left-wing character, he's Napoleon admirer, this is not left-wing book, and these sentiments are important also for many artists and writers in 19th century who were on our side. If you read and like Stendhal, who was Nietzsche's favorite psychologist and novelist, you can't really imagine the heroes of writers like this admiring, for example, Noam Chomsky or other doctrinaire modern trash. I mean to say that it's very unusual for a leftist philosopher or thinker, call them whatever, to be an influence on the great artists the way that Rousseau no doubt was. Even when it seems, for example, that some artist is a leftist in history, for example,

Marxist or something, and this is quite rare, but even in the few cases where you see this, it's not true. For example, I say before, Picasso was in superficial sense a socialist or a Marxist, but in fact in his concrete actions and behavior, he was nothing of the sort, and also I would say in his art, he was nothing of the sort. There is nothing especially leftist or Marxist about Picasso art in any way. So this is case like Nietzsche said of an artist often misunderstands himself, puts on masks, puts on affectations and dresses. Every artist is in some way an actor, histrionic like a girl. So in this sense, Rousseau is a founder. Let's be fair, And it's not just Rousseau, he is one of the founders of a spiritual and artistic movement

much larger than leftism, which includes many aspects of romanticism. You can see this especially in books like The Confessions of Rousseau and in his other book Reveries of the Solitary Walker. So I don't mean to drive you away from Rousseau, to the contrary, you should read him. And there is also interesting idea that Rousseau is inspiration of modern nationalism, or at least one of its sources. For example, in parts of his main political book, which is called Social Contracts, this is very clear, where he says that you must fashion a state or a constitution in accordance with the capacities and character of the people in question. But he wrote similar ideas in other work, other political work.

He wrote, for example, Constitution of Corsica, or also thoughts on the Constitution of Poland. This is all 18th century before French Revolution, and in these books there is strong element of respect for the particular advantages and disadvantages of the populations in question, for their particular ways of life and needs and such in history, which is more sensible than Marxism or Trotskyism or the Trotskyite modern neoliberalism that you all know as globalism. In other words, it's very hard to reconcile Rousseau and his own political thought to modern or Marxist-leftism of the internationalist type, and I think he himself would have opposed globalism both of capitalism and communism. His ideal might be something like ancient Sparta or the Swiss republics. He was from

from Geneva, and the austere Swiss Republic is something he saw in part also as model for Corsica and the other political suggestions he made. Again, he tried to write the kind of constitutional suggestions for Corsica, a small island, and he used Swiss Republic as his model. So if you read his treatise on this constitution of Corsica, you see all the amazing things he has to say about Swiss history and how a harsh landscape in Switzerland made the people self-sufficient, made them good without even having to think about justice because merely the necessity of life forced them to a simple and frugal, hardy way of being, Republican or Democratic, but a forthright and candid in assembly, courageous in battle, and so

so that the common hardships they experienced over time taught them all a very healthy common love of country. And he even compares the Swiss to the ancient Corsicans as they were described by the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus, Diodorus the Sicilian. And he adds furthermore that the Swiss began in this way but were later corrupted by wealth that wealth diminished these hardy characteristics that made them tough and enduring of hardships and wealth replaced love of country with love of luxury and that it weakened them. So that he has a very nice line in this, it's not quite a book, this treatise, Constitution of Corsica, he has a very nice line, formerly an impoverished Switzerland laid down the law to France. Now a rich Switzerland trembles at the frown of a French minister."

It's very interesting, probably true, and it reminds me of even worse condition that Switzerland has fallen to in our day. In other words, this process accelerated some time ago and has only accelerated in our time. For example, in World War II, the Swiss were able to defy the Germans. The Swiss told 700,000 men to go into these bunkers in the mountains and to fight to the death if necessary. So the Germans simply could not do anything, could not invade, because let's say they invaded, maybe they could have won the war against the Swiss, but they would have lost millions of soldiers in doing this. And Switzerland, in other words, has potential to be like Afghanistan on steroids, on steroids, completely impregnable. So Switzerland defied Germany but is now easily bullied by America

simply because America makes a threat of shutting them out of financial markets. So now Swiss have broken their tradition of banking secrecy because America holds this over their heads. They have abandoned their ancient advantage as the gnomes of Zurich and they have bowed down to the elder of the of Zion by playing this game and by the way the Swiss national bank is completely over its head right now in risky debts and investments and all this so if you think it's a safe haven it's not but the streets of Zurich are also full of bindis look I'm sorry to say this I'll be right back anyway so in this nice street is on the constitution of Corsica Russo So, Rod's trying to give advice to this people from which Napoleon, by the way, is also descended, and you might also know the singer, Alize.

The singer, Alize, very recent French singer, Corsican, actually. I was obsessed with her for a while, but she really hit a wall. It's one of the most depressing things to see what happened to Alize. All the beauty of youth is completely lost on her, and she really should have disappeared from public view as a matter of honor. She was going to demoralize people like this, and you compare her to Monica Bellucci, who remained pretty and elegant of will into older age. And I also have a long obsession with Monica Bellucci, but New World Order denied me the love of this partisan, and this is why I engage on, I go on warpaths. But anyway, so in this treaty's constitution of Corsica, Rousseau also complains about the forests that are being cut down in Switzerland in his time.

So I'm telling you this, he does not fit the mold of the modern leftist as we know it. And regarding his views when he gave real and political advice to Poland or Corsica, I think perhaps not international revolution on behalf of workers or as now on behalf of the less void power, but instead an egalitarian, stern, luxury-avoiding, and money-avoiding republic. This would have been his ideal, maybe, to put the best spin on it that I can. And through this second strain of Rousseau in philosophy, he has sought to have influenced the development of modern nationalism as well, although, in fact, the actual inspiration for nationalist movements, both in 19th century, for example, 19th century Germany, and also 20th century nationalist decolonization struggles.

The actual inspiration for that is the German thinker Fichte. And there are some people who say Fichte learned much from Rousseau, but then I think this gets too much removed, because I think there is much in Fichte and in modern nationalism that is not in Rousseau. You can't just trace things you like or dislike back to your favorite or hated thinkers. And also, I should say that nationalism is not necessarily itself either right or left wing. It could be both. It seems right now that is right wing because of the struggle in which we find ourselves. But very recently, and actually even now, there are varieties of left-wing nationalism who are not your friends. for example, ETA, the Basque separatists, or the PKK, the Kurd separatists, on behalf of who, by the way, Christopher Hitchens

wanted America to go to war in Iraq. I say this before, he was a loyal socialist by his own admission, and this is the reason he stomped for America to go to war in Iraq, to save his socialist buddies from the Nazi Ba'ath Saddam, or whatever he thought. Or you see a left-wing nationalist, even left-wing tribalist now in Bolivia with the rat man Morales, Evo Morales, who was just deposed in coup. And I would add also to this list Julius Malema, who is a South African Zuloid leader who wants basically openly, he say he wants to genocide the whites of South Africa, but he is a classic left-wing nationalist type. He is definitely nationalist. So, as a matter of fact, the PLO, Palestinians Before Hamas, this was also left-wing nationalism,

as was a main branch of Zionism, labor Zionism, the kibbutz and all of this, so you know, if any of these can get traced back to Rousseau if you want, but regardless, the point is, you can have left-wing nationalism. And if you had to define it, or what left-wing means in this case, let me play the nihilist for a moment, forget policy questions, forget economics, although all of these are in some cases Marxist or certainly egalitarian. But the left-wing nationalist movement is left because it is allied, spiritually and operationally allied, to leftist and socialist networks. In other words, they are not your friend, they don't like you, okay, they think Whitey is the man, the oppressor, they don't like Whitey.

So all I'm saying is that just because something is called nationalist and can maybe trace its intellectual history back to Rousseau directly or indirectly, that doesn't mean it's not part of the international left in practice, and it doesn't mean it is your friend. So I see again that Rousseau's thought for all of its greatness, when it enters politics, it inspires things like Robespierre and French Revolution, or Marxist socialism, or the hippie movement – moralistic, egalitarian, left-wing movements – because of the two main points – his emphasis on the infinite perfectibility of man, which is a way to say the malleability of human nature, and also on, he believes, the particular emotional direction of his

rejection of modern civilization, which is again an over-concern with inequality, with Resentment against domination and hierarchy, these are the things emphasized and these are the things that remained, at least for doctrinaire followers. Rousseau, for all of his subtleties and his greatness in the realm of the mind or the spirit, when it come to political life, he is a left-wing figure and must remain so. And I end discussion of Rousseau for now with an amazing passage from Nietzsche, who considered Rousseau a vengeful plebeian. a precursor of all romantic socialists driven by revenge, a precursor of modern democratic socialists. The elevation in the end, despite all the quibbles that I just made for you, in the end, Rousseau is the philosopher of the return to nature, yes,

but a return to the filth of nature, to the republic of pigs, to what is low in men. And I give you instead the true idea of the right And this is from Twilight of the Idols, aphorism number 48, Twilight of the Idols from Nietzsche. I am quoting now at end of this episode, I'm sorry, at end of this segment, not episode. So I quote Nietzsche now, progress in my sins. I too speak of a return to nature, although really it is not a going back, but a going up, an ascent to the high, free, even terrible nature and naturalness where great tasks are something one plays with, one may play with. To put it metaphorically, Napoleon was a piece of return to nature as I understand the phrase, for example in Rebus Tacticis, even more, as military men know, in matters of strategy.

But Rousseau, to what did he really want to return? Rousseau, this first modern man, idealist and a rebel in one person, one who needed moral dignity to be able to stand his own sight, sick with unbridled vanity and unbridled self-contempt. This miscarriage, couched on the threshold of modern times, also wanted a return to nature. To ask this once more, to what did Rousseau want to return? I still hate Rousseau in the French Revolution. It is the world historical expression of this duality of idealist and rabble. The bloody farce which became an aspect of the revolution, its immorality, is of little concern to me. What I hate is its Rousseauan morality, the so-called truths of the revolution, through which it still works and attracts everything shallow and mediocre.

The doctrine of equality. There is no more poisonous poison anywhere, for it seems to be preached by justice itself, whereas it really is the termination of justice. to the equal, unequal to the unequal, that would be the true slogan of justice. And also its corollary, never make equal what is unequal, that this doctrine of equality was surrounded by such gruesome and bloody events that has given this modern idea par excellence a kind of glory and fiery aura so that the revolution as a spectacle has seduced even the noblest spirits. In the end, that is no reason for respecting it anymore. I see only one man who experienced it as it must be experienced with nausea. Goethe. End quote, end segment. I will be right back. I feel like talk Russia again, Russia.

Transition from communism to whatever it is that came after in the early 1990s is crucial time because we live now in political ferment and huge shifts happening now, where categories of left and right wing are widely acknowledged, either no longer to hold or to be realigning somehow. This is obvious. And like Alex Jones say, Russia is the first to throw off the globalist yoke with putler in early 2000s. But the reason for this is that Russia was the first really to be hard sodomized by the globalist cabal in the 1990s. So it's important to understand what happened there at the time. So you have many of the same people who loved the Soviet Union for decades and who defended it, most of the American media.

Now you see they suddenly switch to considering Russia as the source of all world evil. And I think this faction is maybe even more important than the other Cold War holdovers for who Russia was and always will be the devil. But much of academia and the shit lib press that normally covered for the Soviet Union for all these decades during communism now is frothing at the mouth for war with Russia even. It's completely insane because the provocations they're engaging in right now within the borders of the old Soviet Union itself. For example, Ukraine, or putting army in Baltic republics or in Central Asia, you must understand when you put artillery in Estonia and you have NATO there, that's within shooting distance of Leningrad, excuse me, Petrograd, whatever it's called now.

So you can't expect the Russians to just accept this. When you help Chechen Jihadists, this far exceeds anything that went on during Cold War, is my point. When during the Cold War actually you had conflict far away from the borders of both superpowers, it was happening in third world, Angola, Nicaragua, whatever, but this would be equivalent to Russia being invited to Mexico in military alliance or within shooting range of New York, and you would not accept that either. So I think these maroons in State Department and CIA can possibly provoke Russia to a kind of a hot war even, which would be a disaster. But the same American media government complex, or derp state, which is actually communist. You can see this from open communists who serve in derp state now, like Brennan or Comey.

They were open communists, Brennan Communist Party member. But they were pro-Russia, pro-Soviet Union before. They turned very anti-Russian now with coming of Putin. So this way I think is very important to understand Russia after transition from communism. So like my earlier show introducing Putin, this will be part of multiple shows on this subject. I want to read to you from Paul Klebnikov book again, The Godfather of the Kremlin, I want to read to you an amazing paragraph to show you how colorful time in Moscow was in the early 1990s. Let me read to you, reading from Krebnikov now. As a young man, Otarik, to give you a brief background, Otarik is the main operative of one of the Russian mafia in Moscow in early 1990s.

As a young man, Otarek had been a talented wrestler with a good shot at making the Olympic team. But in 1966, when he was 18 years old, he participated in a gang rape. He was treated leniently by the authorities. After four years in prison, he was diagnosed as a schizophrenic, transferred to a psychiatric hospital and freed soon after. In the early 1980s, he got a job as a wrestling coach for the prestigious Dinamo Sports Complex in Moscow. He trained many of the boxers, wrestlers, martial arts specialists, and weightlifters who would later join the various crime gangs of Moscow. End quote. It's amazing, no? It's amazing. And I already posted on my account, but I remind you now that the murder rate during

this time in Russia in 1990s, early 1990s, was many times that of the United States with something like 70,000 people murdered annually in early 1990s. Wars with machine guns, bombings, RPG on streets, murder rate something like four times what it was in America, which was itself experiencing apparently a climb wave at the time. to a city near you, maybe, if American empire ends. Because this is what happened. A lot of the criminals, the gangsters, so-called, were actually soldiers and athletes, like I just read you, who were out of work. I made a post about this. The Soviet and communist sports programs were tremendous, the best in the world, you know. They had and still have complete dominance almost on some sports.

I mean to say, by the way, it makes me think what is with these guys, Valuev, the boxer, but now you see also a Bulgarian boxer, Kubrat Pulev. And so you look at these two faces, Valuev and Pulev, and you see these kinds of ebbos, aboriginal, aboriginal nignogs, but I don't even want to say Neanderthal, but they are definitely mixed with some kind of unknown humanoids. These are hairy Slavic apes from the hidden hills and nooks of Heartland of Eurasia. Pulev is some kind of a Balkanoid cave ape. And I don't even want to think what Valoev is, by the way. Look at that face. But insert your favorite Russian boxer or East Bloc athlete is my point. These programs were very much supported by Soviet and communist states, very powerful. And then you have this empire collapse.

So these cadres of bodybuilders, they must find work, and what do they do? But beyond this, once the Soviet Union had to pull out of East Germany and out of East Europe, and there was demobilization of military, you had also so many unemployed soldiers, who soldiers, military men, had previously had a very high status in Soviet Union. So now they become security contractors. the soldiers, the athletes, you have this unemployed samurai ronin situation, bodybuilder failed state, as online friend said. You have bodybuilder pirate warfare developing in Russia in early 1990s. I must take break and then continue via Talusius. Russia, early 1990s, streets of unemployed athletes and soldiers doing complete havoc as security contractors, so-called.

But this is only the beginning, because you actually have a complete mafia takeover of all social and economic life. A mafia turf landscape that is split between Slavic mafia, gangs on one hand, and Chechen, or more broadly, Caucasian, from caucuses. The violent peoples of the caucuses, the Georgians, Abkhazians, Armenians, Dagestanis, Azeris, lesbians, not lesbians, but Lesgin, by the way, the ugliest language in the world, if you want to know, is Avar, just look up Avar language. Disgusting. It will stick in your mind for days after, but the Chechens are the most fearsome of this collection of Caucasian Caucasus peoples. If you want to know what Russia opinions of that region, you must read novel by Lermontov called A Hero of Our Time, which is about a dastardly Russian officer

in 19th century gone AWOL in that region and he has adventures. So how did this happen? How do you have this mafia takeover of Russia after collapse of Soviet Union and what is meaning? Well, it goes back a long way because Russia actually had its own mafia organized crime traditions, secret societies, or manner bonds of criminals, similar remotely to the yakuza and playing a similar social role. I keep telling you spurgs, nobody listens, but that mafias play normally an important role in human social arrangement. This is why governments and societies almost always tolerate a mafia somehow. But the Russian ones, they were called thieves professing the code, they had a code. professing the code, and they go back decades in the Soviet Union, organizing themselves

and initiating recruits in Soviet jails. This is how they organized in jails, but they played many functions outside of jail, black market trafficking of Western and other goods and so forth. But these Slavic gangs became enormously powerful in the last years of the Soviet Union because of a mistake Gorbachev made. And this was to try to do a kind of prohibition light. He tried to do a kind of a ban on vodka, Gorbachev. He did this. A little remembered fact, but what was that it brought down the Soviet Union in general? It is a big subject for other show. What brought down the Soviet Union? But in short, it was the collapse in price of oil. This was big reason. Steve Bannon talks this now on his podcast War Room, keeps bringing up this event from

the 1980s, how the Saudis, with Reagan encouragement, helped bring down the Soviet Union because Saudis let loose oil production and the price of oil dropped something like 60%. And this was a disaster for Soviet Union because then, as now by the way, much of their state revenue was from oil and gas. So this is one big reason the Soviet Union fell widely known. But other reason less known was that Gorbachev, who came in as premier on a reform platform to modernize technology, modernize industry and society, he had a crazy idea to make war on vodka. You cannot do this in Russia. This is completely insane. The only other time this was done, by the way, was Tsar Nicholas II. He tried to ban vodka. And this was without doubt a big reason for Russian revolution of 1917.

The first attempt at prohibition. You can't ban vodka in Russia. There is all jokes that the Russian military comes to a complete halt when either the petrol or the vodka runs out. No way you can ban it. This is the fire water of the red men and the Nordics, the Scandinavians, as well as the Nordoid Slavs like the Russians. You know they're related to the red men and alcohol is their weakness and their vice. You cannot ban it. But this is true. One time Argentinian-Italian girl, she tells me, oh BAP, I like you, I like you BAP. You look like India. She tells me you're an Indian. And I say, what is this? You call me India? She say, yes, Siberian Russia India. She told me, you look Russia India. So this is known worldwide. It's the same peoples, the same vices.

Scandinavians and Native Americans share 10% DNA, this is well known. But this was a big mistake. Gorbachev did it. It made him absolutely hated to ban the fire water. And he didn't quite ban vodka, by the way, but he made it hard to get expensive. So I believe this is the way it is in Sweden now, but the Swedes are used to it. But it hurt state finances in Soviet Union at the same time that oil or petrol was hurting too. So apparently Klebnikov says this, unless I misremember, but I couldn't believe it. He says something like a quarter of all state revenue over some years in Soviet Union came from sale and management of vodka and alcohol. Is amazing if true. But so whatever it was, it was huge and the Soviet state lost this money.

And meanwhile, of course, bootlegging took off, and with bootlegging, the distribution fell into the hands of the already established organized crime and various gangs, which grew much larger during this time. This is when the power and wealth of organized crime really grew, and it infected even before the fall of the Soviet Union. It infected all of Russian society, beginning with local government and moving up to the party and even central committee itself. So this is one reason for a rise of mafias in early 1990s. But another, which is a danger for any collapsing empire, is that, again, the soldiers had to be recalled, for example, from East Germany. That was very significant. So now, in the United States, you see American generals who whore themselves out to China or to corporations.

It's very common. They all hope for a Raytheon contract after, and they do incredibly corrupt things while they are in the military, grift and graft and so forth, corruption. Well, Soviet generals also wanted to make money, and one way they did this was to sell off armoured vehicles and other equipment on the black market, but especially armoured vehicles in East Germany, and also to distribute drugs, and Soviet Union exported drugs massively and heroin to the world. That's no longer the case, I think, but it was at the time, and they did so both from the Far East, Vietnam was starting point of Soviet heroin trade, and also from Afghanistan-Pakistan region. So now indirectly is how this led to the rise of Chechnya.

Which is, you know, Rousseau predicted that Corsica would stun the world, and it did. Very soon after Rousseau's death came Napoleon, the Corsican. Napoleon was a Corsican, and Nietzsche said that he had such an easy time of it to rise up through French society because Napoleon, like all these great men out of time, he was older than his time. He came from an older and more powerful culture, the gangster corsair state of Corsica. And you can think of Chechnya as the same way because Chechnya is this tiny territory no one had heard of. The Chechen gangs within a few years, they stood poised to take over entirely the mafia seen in Russia in early 1990s, and therefore in theory stood ready to take over the whole

Russian state, which, do not let anyone fool you, it was and is a superpower, spanning I think 11 time zones, nuclear and ruthless military with very advanced technology in metallurgy, propulsion systems, and so on. But so how did this happen? How does a small society of tribal mountain dwellers like the Chechens do this? Well, I only begin the story on this show, but this international drug traffic I just mentioned, which was initially carried out by the Soviet military itself, it was essentially outsourced to the Chechens, so that Chechnya became the major hub through which heroin flowed to Europe and even in part to the Americas. And second, because of the fighting prowess of the Chechens, the Russians used them in in various theaters during period of collapse of Soviet Union.

For example, you know conflict recent between Russia and Georgia. This happened during a Bush administration. Bush completely messed this up. But the nation of Georgia broke away from Soviet Union. But in north of Georgia, there is small territory called Abkhazia. And the Abkhazians, like the Ossetians, they are minorities who did not want to be part of Georgia. They are mostly loyal to Russia identity, they are kind of, same as the Romans had minorities within Roman Empire that were loyal to the Romans especially, in the same way Russians have these. The Ossetians are one of them, the Abkhazians I think another, but most importantly they did not want to be a part of Georgia. They were in fact gifted to Georgia during Soviet times by Stalin, I think, who was himself a Georgian, of course.

And these small territories wanted to secede from Georgia. This is after breakup of Soviet Union, just after. So Russia, of course, wanted to make trouble and help itself. So of course decided to help them, and it did so by sending Chechen fighters and Russian weapons and logistics to help them. But the Chechen fighters did much of the fighting in Abkhazia on behalf of Russia. So I mean to say that in the beginning of the fall of, let's say, end of Soviet Union period, post-collapse period, there was, as there is now, a kind of corrupt alliance of convenience between Soviet authorities in condition of Soviet collapse and the Chechen entity. And once this alliance of crime began, some Chechens of course moved to Moscow, the center

of things, where they quickly infiltrate underworld, and they take over now, after collapse in early 1990s, they take over casinos, nightclub, prostitution, drugs, all of this, they almost completely take it over. Not completely, but they make great inroads this whole world of crime, at least half of it. And how were they able to do this? A small nation. And on one hand, it's through absolute ruthlessness, they were willing to be far more brutal than the Russian mobsters. And the Russian mobsters were not soft, by the way, but the Chechen levels of perfidy and brutality far exceeded anyone, anyone, except maybe the Colombians, but that was too far from home, from Colombia, and that was their only competition. The Italians had no hope of competing in this cauldron of dragons.

So the Chechens, you know, very ruthless, strong people, they invite heads of all mafia families, leaders, and kill all of them, and seen out of, you know, the godfather of this. The Nak peoples are very powerful. But that was the, Nak is another name for the peoples of the Caucasus that the Chechens make part of. But that was the other side of it, the solidarity. The Chechen, they fight among themselves. The Chechen villages in Chechnya, they fight among themselves. The Chechen mafia factions in Moscow, they always fought among themselves and each other, but they always united whenever an external threat showed itself. Their clannishness was extreme. So for example, the Russian police never managed to close in on the leaders.

And also in the world of intrigue with other mobsters who aren't Chechens, this is a great advantage this double energy of psychotic courageous brutality that even Steve Saylor admires and on the other hand the immense clan loyalty it makes for almost invincible combination this is also how another mountain people by the way the Alawites in Syria a minority that came from a mountainous coastal region of Syria and they were able to take over Syrian state through exactly is the same means. This another mountain mafia people, Assad's people, the Alawites, although maybe without the same kind of crazy fighting spirit that the Chechens have, but that clannishness and ability to do intrigue. Also, by the way, all the leaders of ISIS were Chechen, is interesting.

But this persistent phenomena is something that the British also noticed, and they use this in are the classifications of peoples that help them rule a big empire. For example, the Gurkhas, they are a mountain Nepalese warrior people that form a legionary auxiliary unit in British military, also in other militaries. But the British, they had this classification martial peoples who were often mountain peoples, hill peoples, amazing special operations feats attributed to the Gurkhas during Falkland's war infiltrating Argentine positions at night, killing everyone with their Gurkha knives, the Kukri, and leaving just one survivor to tell the story is very old phenomenon. This is very old phenomenon. You see it in ancient Greece.

You see Xenophon Anabasis, this book, when he leads mercenary Greek army on march from interior of Persian Empire back to Greece. So there's mercenary army in late 400s BC, at the very end of century. Greek mercenary army is stranded in middle of Middle East, in middle of Iraq in Persian Empire, and they have to make their way back to the sea to return to Greece, build ships get back. And at one point, they pass through the land of the so-called Carduchians, who are located somewhere around the highlands of present-day southern Armenia, but definitely a mountain people, not ruled by the Persians, not ruled by anyone, independent and very hardy archers. And Xenophon says that the Greek army lost more men passing through Carduchian archer

territory and fighting Carduchians than they did the whole time fighting the much larger the Persian armies on the plains for much longer. Warrior mountain peoples, very powerful, this persistent phenomenon of the power of the mountain folk. The examples are endless, and I will talk more of this another time, but in any case, long story short, the Chechens almost succeeded through these means, but you know, there is also a scale problem, and ultimately, you can't win against the Russians. The Slavic gangs fought them back, and that war between Slavic mafias and Chechen mafias, early 1990s Moscow, it ended in a stalemate, I think by 1994 or 95. So that both the Slavic and the Chechen gangs, although they could, I think they could have taken over

Russia for themselves, but they wore themselves out in this very brutal struggle. And both of them, really they had to slink away, both mafias had to slink away or take a backseat in the Russian power system after 1994, they took backseat to the businessman oligarchs to whom they had previously provided protection. And Russia also at this time, end of 1994, invaded Chechnya in the First Chechen War. So that also complicated things. Actually, this Chechen War is really a kind of outsourced localized civil war within Russia. It represents the end of this cooperation, initial cooperation between Russia mafia society and Chechen mafia society. This invasion of Chechnya in 1994 led very difficult two-year war that ended also in a kind of stalemate, enormous destruction wreaked on Chechnya.

The capital of Grozny was destroyed, But Russia was mostly unable to capitalize on this and unable to root out the Chechens in the mountains. So this war should be understood, you know, the perception might be of this first Chechen war that the Chechens revolted in a separatist struggle, that they wanted a nationalist independence from Russia, to break away from Russia, from Russian Federation. But in fact, it is, as I tell you, related to the mafia conflict in Moscow and in general to Russia society. For example, one of the big claims is that Russian generals in East Germany had been, as I said, selling of armored vehicles on the black market and the invasion of Chechnya and the war. There was a way to launder that, to come up, in other words, with an excuse for where the

The missing vehicles and weaponry in general had gone to say, oh, they were lost in the war instead of, oh, I sold them to whoever. So just in general, the invasion and war on both sides was motivated by similar concern, a fight for turf between thieves, a fight for spoils, shares of the oil revenues, shares of the drug trade and so on, shares of the black market. So by our time, by today, Putin has mostly brought the Chechens to heel, they are again a junior partner, or rather a client of the Russian security state, with Ranzan Kadyrov who is head of Chechnya, and he's essentially a local client warlord of Tsar Putin. But I close show now, I just remind you of the immense power of mountain races, of the

The immense energy that comes from this combination of psycho ruthlessness and clannishness and how in conditions of imperial decline, imperial decadence, decay, you have such people they easily take over much bigger nations, whether it's the Corsicans in French revolutions or you could say maybe even Georgian and Russian revolution, I doubt that, but the Chechens now at the end of Soviet Union and much of what I talk about over time to you is how I wish the same for you and for, how should I put this, I wish the same for the frogs or one part of the frogs. It's very difficult because you probably don't come from gangster mountain corsair clan culture but I believe a similar bond and maybe even a stronger bond can be created by a true manner bond, a true secret society.

But you know, I can only say so much on air, except that I am planning to found eventually Club Tropical Excellent. Someday I will found it, and I will tell you that soon, very soon, I plan to go scouting for location, regardless of whether this worldwide hysteria shutdown ends or not. I plan very soon to go, look, location scout, location club tropical, excellent. Until next time, Bap out.