the neo-nazi american deep state is the american deep state this american security state founded by neo-nazis a very interesting question caribbean rhythm episode 62 welcome after short delay i am back although in the background you may hear the cause for my delay which is my infernal neighbors with a thick skull of cows, where they make terrible noise, and they try to destroy my sleep with banging on walls, I will have to move again. But very nice, exactly one year almost after Wuhan crisis, Wuhan flu crisis starts, it's almost one year to the date that it started, and just as the vaccine is introduced, simultaneously worldwide by the way, by the way, what are the odds of that alone? I mean, scientific innovation, when it's pursued by different nations and teams, according

to different methods, but it all results in the end products delivered at the same time. Am I allowed to be suspicious based on that alone? And all right, after the 2020 American election also, very odd, well, now they release COVID-2 one year to the date after COVID-1. So it is said COVID-2 from England, a cesspool, possibly incubated in Peter Savile's corpse, or perhaps the festering mass of obese Jamaican mammy nail shop owner, who knows, may the gods drown that island in a giant wave like Atlantis for what England has wrought on history, what England has done to the world, I mean especially all the worst ideas. Nietzsche referred to England as the source of all plebeian ideas, the plebeian sentiment

for comfort, the degraded so-called philosophy of luck or of Hume before him, the philosophy that glorifies the shopkeeper life, in which, for example, he mocks it, he says a seat in parliament is seen as the apotheosis of life, and everything of course comes from the English woman with the teeth and the face of a horse, but then also everything that came out of England after these loc-humed people. It's perfect in preventing a Franco-German union that would have provided Europe with a permanent rule of the world, a Franco-German empire that would have been the political basis of the highest cultivation of human nature yet. We would be approaching perhaps the level of the Greeks or the Renaissance Italians by now if it was not for the actions and the ideas of England.

But you know, okay, I love my friends, actually, the Anglos, I respect the Anglos, and I don't want to engage now in typical Europoid Anglo bashing. That's not what this show is about, especially, as you know, many of the powerful male models that I post, the frontier type of the Anglo is very vigorous, very handsome, virile people. You see, in Australia, as much as in South Africa and frontier America, like old California and such. So there are some good things about Anglo's fear and you have, even in terms of ideas, you have to give it to Hobbes, and not that it was his special innovation, but Hobbes who is otherwise himself a vile plebeian in his sentiments and his ultimate desires. But he is right in this idea that the mass of mankind is dominated by the fear of death

more than anything else, which is why I fear that there's no bottom to where this goes, this latest virus crisis. You look at China, at Wuhan itself this week, people were posting photos and video of, they have big party with many people in the open, no distancing, no masks, and of course you have the China booze and the cinephile cocksucker, the cinephile cocksuckers, okay, the schmearers of tiger bomb on dick people, you see, so these people, they all say China is at this point because of wise early containment and of strict lockdowns and this, and of course it's not true. The way China ended this crisis is simply by telling people that it was over and forcing their media to stop reporting on it, ending all measures and just pretending the disease is not there.

And that's the only way to end this because otherwise this hypochondria they've lodged into the many now, which is revved up by the most ghoulish types, the most ghoulish types of demagogues. I saw this week someone sent me the kinds of public religious condemnation. It's almost, yes, it's a medieval religious condemnation, for example, people who attended interview without a mask, and of the examples they supposedly set, so they say you're setting a bad example because you're attending interview on camera without a mask, and so there are denunciations on Twitter and so on of these people, and all of this obsessive compulsive Semitic-minded, Semitic-taste people, who in another life would be obsessing about the

contents of their dinner or condemning the local witch doctor of having gone to the bathroom the wrong way or this, and these kinds of disputations, and this is the energy driving the priest of the religious COVID OCD hysteria. But of course, the single middle-aged women, as the perennial hysterics and religious fanatics and the single middle-aged women, the forever accusers of the human race, they are the chief revelers in all these new rules, this culture of almost religious condemnation. All ultimately based, however, on what? On the fear of death, which can drive the many to infinite measures. In other words, as long as you can credibly put this fear in them, there is nothing that many will not submit to indefinitely, they would for the rest of their lives, you can

do whatever you want to them. And this is why I'm somewhat pessimistic at least for the near future. It's much easier to take advantage of this fear with a disease as they're doing now than with terrorism threat before. Obvious reasons why. Terrorism is sporadic, it hits the big city centers, it's rather removed from day-to-day life. By the way, what happened to our friends from Religion of Peace? Why haven't they made any big terror attacks in the last few years? Has their fanaticism lessened for some reason, or has funding perhaps been cut to the so-called counter-terrorism establishment? But in any case, terrorism, the 9-11, is big, ugly, spectacular, but it's sporadic, so people won't be made to submit because they don't think it can credibly happen to them at any

point, although you will see that when it comes to airports, for example, they will put up with infinite indignities and inconveniences, including a Surinamese Musulman dwarf barking orders at them like at Dachau. I've seen this many times, these TSA lines where you have the ghoul barking. And in that one case, they put the fear of death into them credibly and everywhere, so they submit easily. But now with the disease, it's ubiquitous all the time, worldwide, everywhere, so they'll just take it. And I wonder sometimes if this is not a global shit test by the grays, the gray aliens, who I've mentioned before, the gray aliens. I think Hakan posted about an event in South Africa where a gray alien UFO spacecraft crashed. It was either South Africa or Zimbabwe.

And the local chieftain, the local African chieftain, wrote a long essay about eating their flesh. You know, they tasted the gray meat and Masha Gessen, having married a gray alien in a gay marriage ceremony in 1993 in the city of Perms, this has been widely discussed, there are even photographs, but I wonder if the grays are not shit testing humanity to see how much absurdity and outrage than other kinds of lies they will put up with, any indignity. How many lies will you put up this year, burning cities and so forth, not doing well, it's not doing well, this mess of refuse actually. I don't think I'm the same species as them, I never did. I always felt I was sent as an emissary from Aldebaran. But thinking of the Grays, why not? Why not just do that, by the way?

Why not do what Paul Krugman suggested before and claim that the world is facing an alien invasion? Send men in grey suits to play act and don't even bother actually making it look real. Put them in refitted Chuck E. Cheese outfits and call anyone who points this out, call them a conspiracy theorist. Tell people there is an alien invasion and they have to stay in door another two years and they have to give Jeff Bezos and Paul Singer another trillion dollars and they can then become McConnell and Chuck Schumer's gibbs, have the joggers, riots in the street all while normies cannot visit their dying parents and grandparents in hospitals. They will put up with anything, that's what I mean, any indignity, anything to satisfy

their fear of, I hate this, you know, it reminds me of the movie, I think, Sanjuro, where Toshiro Mifune plays samurai, it's sequel to Yojimbo, these two of my favorite movies, you should see both of them. But at one point, he blows up at this husband and wife, I think, who are being taken advantage of by bandits or local corrupt officials. And Toshiro Mifune, Sanjuro, he saves them, and he tells them when they're cringing before him and thanking him, he tells them, I hate you. I hate seeing this kind of display of cringe weakness and submissiveness. And I agree with this. I hate weak people. I hate seeing this. You know, the bureaucrat says he wishes he could sleep for the next two years and I think sometimes the same.

I might, I might in fact go to mountains somewhere and stay in cabin and not see anyone for two years. Do not worry, I will still do show and second book will come soon. I will always broadcast for you one way or another but it's sad because I spent this summer in the mountains and the last two months I said I'm tired of being alone in mountains so I've been trying to go into the city, first I was in Lisbon and now I don't want to say where, I'm in a tropical city and I came to meet and talk to people and everyone scared to death, even in the third world, not completely everyone, but a large number of people even are afraid to come out and so forth. It's very sad to see and I wonder if, you know, given that we do not have governments

willing to pretend this crisis is over and to just do what China is doing, I wonder if It will not end for a long time. And so the only escape young people who don't want to live this way anymore, the only escape they will have is some kind of exodus, which I've been throwing in my head lately. I cannot organize this now, but I tell you, if you can leave by yourself and go somewhere where you don't have to be oppressed by lockdowns, then do it. Now Menaquino tells me, no, it's not like that. He says in much of America, there are no real lockdown, that many things are open. can go around without a mask and I'm sure there are places, maybe he's right, but in the big shit lib cities, what I hear from frogs and friends in Los Angeles for example

or Jude Dork or Boston, other big shit lib cities, they tell me of terrible closures, and of course what I hear from Europe is similar, and even in tropical place where I am now, I have to tell you people have been frightened, disgust me, I want to be away from them, especially if they be done in these measures will only get worse, they will spread. So perhaps an exodus of the young and of the vital, this will become necessary. Maybe it will be possible that we can get some government somewhere to look the other way as we take some patch of land, or a city even, and maybe the holes, if civilization starts to collapse the next two or three years, the holes in the security blanket with which America's mother's life in the world.

They call it peace, but they smother all life in the world with the so-called American peace. But maybe the holes in that as civilization collapses, maybe it will give us a chance to take some city or some island like Dominica, look up Operation Red Dog. Anyway, some refuge like that may become both necessary and possible. If they put bidan in, we will see. Don't talk to me about election, please. Trump now calling, he called for revolution on the 6th of January. And I hope this, but it's up to Flynn and Q and the MAGA movement to mobilize millions. You know, this is entirely doable with will, like I said before, which Trump and his allies, they have a duty to take things to the brink. I think actually they could succeed if they do this because the enemy will crumble under a real assault.

A civil war will come anyway, okay, it is just right now to be very mild, it would hardly even be recognized as a civil war, it could be quickly won. Later it will be much harder, much more brutal. So he has a duty to do this now. In fact it would be unforgivable for Trump not to do this, since the enemy has declared what they will do to him and to us and has shown that they will follow through on threats. Look what they did to Roger Stone and Manafort and burning cities and locking you indoors. So there is no choice at this point, but I don't want to talk election of Wuhan. I want to talk something else this show, you know, of an age that had no such American Zog security blanket to smother out all adventurous designs for takeovers, to smother the enterprise.

I want to talk about people, a race that had no fear of death, only a lust for conquest, for adventure, for travelers. And this is the Normans, one of the flashiest ruling heronfolk, master races in European and all human history. And in particular, I want to talk the story of their time in Italy and how they took over southern Italy and Sicily, which I will only begin to discuss on this show, this longer topic. I will be right back. Yes, Nazi deep state at Langley, far beyond brazen doors, there are thick brazen doors in the inner sanctum of Langley, Virginia. And behind the bronze doors there is a silver globe. It is alighted from within. And there the continent of fuel appears prominently near a North Pole while a sun and red flag hangs proudly.

I have to tell you, I saw a CIA woman, look this is true, I was on a date at a restaurant many years ago called Cafe Milano with a CIA woman and were bantering very nice over wine and suddenly she get this look on her face, right side of her face crunch up and she say to me, now this is before the internet postings I did, okay, so I had no idea what she was talking about at the time but she say, she say this to me, the posters who say that you should focus on optics and not action are federal agents, fly high, fly proud, the Aryan Sostika Brothers, 1488. This happened. A CIA woman tells me, this is the kind of person who works at the CIA, okay? But now look, okay, bada bing, okay, I kid, okay, but the bureaucrat keeps me informed

of the fantasies of the left now, the so-called conspiracy mindset I mentioned on last show. So you know, one of their latest innovations apparently is the idea that the Nazis took over the CIA and thereby the American deep state in the 1940s or 50s after Operation Paperclip, when they brought in the Nazi scientists and so forth, right, Wernher von Braun. I don't know what these people think, it would have been better for Wernher von Braun to go to the Soviet Union instead, I guess, I don't know, but Operation Paperclip was an evil neoliberal plot to get the Nazis to take over the United States. So you see this convoluted way to blame all the present excesses of neoliberalism as they call it, to blame this on the Nazis or Hitler, you know, Ford liked Hitler, right?

So Hitler was a tool of capital and of liberalism. It couldn't have been that he took advantage of some of the capitalists, no, global capital, No, it's omnipotent and omniscient. It never makes a mistake. It never gets taken advantage. So let's just go with that idea. It may be right that the American deep state is Nazi, far-right, neo-Nazi, billionaire, neoliberal CIA alliance. All the pieces fit together. Okay, I'm trying to copy it. I mean, look, they really believe this and some say now, and I'm told by the bureaucrat, Well, look, let me just remind you of the 2000s, in the 2000s the theories that were going around that Karl Schmidt was Hitler's lawyer, they said, and that Karl Schmidt was Hitler's lawyer and he was friends with Leo Strauss, and Leo Strauss supposedly was the

teacher of the people who did the Iraq invasion, so Wolfowitz, who by the way, Paul Wolfowitz, few people know this, he's nicknamed the Wolf of Fire Island. I don't know what that means. So Paul Wolfowitz and Feith are these people who supposedly were students of Leo Strauss and that's why the claim was there was a Jewish neo-Nazi conspiracy in the White House to re-establish elitism. Look, don't ask me what this means, but this is the kind of things they believed or pretended to and you just need to look up Shadia Drury, you can look her up and the kinds of imaginings she had. It's very popular on the left, this kind of conspiracy theorizing in the 2000s, and now they're trying to bring back basically the almost mainstream leftist media 2000s

messaging and pretend that it's some edgy new thing. Now in reality, if you meet the Straussians, as I may have told you before on this show, they're a bunch of people around at the level of an upstate New York yenta with a reading club, except they don't bake the pastramis and the briskets, okay? They can't even do that. But that's about the atmosphere and level of thought of their so-called movement. But of course it's far more flattering to forget that, what you actually are, and to be sort of as a Machiavellian schemer trying to re-establish the fourth Reich. So as I told you on the last show, I'm sure some of these people like Christel, they got a thrill, what the left was doing, essentially this public relations for them.

But so what you're seeing right now are attempts to re-establish the Chomskyite conspiracy tarred mindset, where the CIA is acting on behalf of Nazism and global capital, which of course must somehow be the same thing ultimately there. You'd think from a neutral point of view, if you were a rational person, it's much easier to make the opposite case, that modern so-called neoliberalism is actually just the old liberalism with some Marxoid characteristics. For example, I've heard John Rawls, his so-called thought, he's a so-called political thinker, but I've heard John Rawls is very important for the modern middling elite, especially those trained in law, lawyers, of course not just your average lawyer, but people who end up working for the UN and the State Department.

But I've heard him described as the inner victory of Marxism over liberalism, in what sense in that Rawls fundamentally is arguing for global wealth transfer from the global north to the global south, which is also Marxism and Leninism actually their ultimate intention, their only intention, except that Rawls pursues the same goal with liberal arguments, or rather pseudo-arguments in liberal garb as opposed to Marxist-Leninist language. That can be a debate for another time, but okay, let's go with this Nazi deep state alternative theory. I mean, I know where part of this comes from. When I was first online maybe thirteen years ago, now more, we were arguing with these tankies, Stalinists, in this case

genuine Stalinists, it was all in good fun, we were all friends, and the Stalinists were joking why should you Nazis have all the sexy conspiracy theories and mythologies about the re-establishment of the Reich. I mean, all the sexy theories are the Nazi ones, right? There's a secret Antarctica base where the fourth Reich continues, will return, and Rudolf Hess was the go-between National Socialism and the Stuhl Society, which is a mystical society founded in 1919 that had possibly Tibetan leadership. But after he left the Third Reich, you know, Rudolf Hess, he slept with magnets around his bed. After he left, the Third Reich lost its direction and crashed, but that the true spirit of Stuhl in the Antarctica base, you look up the novels I've mentioned before of Wilhelm Landing,

but they haven't been translated. So these were theories of Antarctic hounebu flying saucer, Nazi flying saucers, this is where it comes from. And even the theories of World War II never ended, it's very colorful, these wild theories. And the Stalinists were joking, well, why should you be the only ones to have them? We too as communists would like similar mythologies. So they said some things like that the Soviet Union never fell, but it faked its collapse to lull the United States into complacency and mistakes and overreaching, or even that it faked its collapse but thereafter took over the American deep state and high finance. So you know that ultimately they won and will soon reveal the true face of Soviet success. This is plausible too, I think, maybe.

But anyway, there's always this game of autism and one-upmanship between Internet, not jobs. But now it's been transferred, of course, to the podcast sphere with much larger audiences and such. So in our crazy time where you have national articles written about me and Bronze Age perverts is apparently a major player in Minnesota politics who knew and so forth, but now in this age these theories spread. So this is where some of this insanity comes from, the conspiracy mongering where you imagine your side or the other side to be of some decades-long Q-type plan that took over the American deep state. Some people on the hard right, by the way, in that sense, they also believed the fake Soviet collapse theory for their own reasons.

So then, sure, I can believe this, we can go with it, why not, that America is really a neo-Nazi power, skinheads, you know, that the CIA and deep state were taking over Operation paper clip, and yes, the real Antarctica is Washington, D.C., and Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, and the American Deep State is the real Antarctica of the fourth Reich reborn. Now, why not? In my view, actually, the biggest proof of that is, yes, of course they did this, and then they enacted a decades-long slow-roll plan to take their revenge on the Western powers on NATO and America and to utterly humiliate them by promoting SISI values, SISI them. In other words, the program of open borders, open legs, mass migration, tranny SISI values and estrogen shots, why not?

That's all done by the Nazi deep state as revenge on the West. Wouldn't you want to take revenge on your enemies, inflicting this on them? It can only be the descendants of Hitler who would do this, you know, the puppeteers behind So Hitler is the neoliberal mastermind watching from the sky, smirking as the Nazi American deep state infiltrates liberalism and turns neoliberalism into anti-white, anti-colonial, pro-Sissi estrogen world movement. It's Nazi neoliberalism taking revenge on liberalism, which is also neoliberalism. I'm trying to make sense of the leftist case, please forgive me, but this is the true final cause of neoliberalism is, as you can see, revealed. And of course I'm part of this.

I was sent by Cheney because when I post handsome, muscular, blonde bodybuilders, this makes many of the leftoids who hold these theories, but these leftoids, when they see some of the photographs I post, it awakens sissy desires in them. That's the effect it has, some of the things I post, it has this effect on them, so I must be part of the plot. fits together. Yes, it's the opposite of sissy, my message, but when you're a sissy that turns you on so it's all intentional. I mean, that's a big thing by the way of anger at me. This is real. I'm not joking. It comes from people flaming mad, whether they're fed cats, they all look like Russ Douthat. That's a psychology I will discuss another time. In fact, I might write something on that.

But whether they're fed cats or antifascist leftist hipsteroids, they're mad as hell. Because I post the kinds of photographs, it awakens certain sissy desires in them that they're always conflicted about. So you know what? I'm part of the neo-Nazi deep state plot because I interfere with their cuckold fantasies. And behind it all is Jim from the office and his facial expressions and his fascism. And Peter Thiel sent me, you know, it's neo-liberal, neo-Nazi, billionaire plan to promote racism and fascism online, continuation of Operation Paperclip. It all fits together. Very good. Now you understand left conspiracy mindset. I will be right back, thank you all. The Normans' Most Magnificent and Conquering Race.

And look, there's really only one book where you can read their wild exploits in Italy. There are quite a few others on Conquest of England with William the Conqueror in 1066, but around the same time, Normans took over also all South Italy and Sicily, which became their magnificent jewel kingdom of the Mediterranean. A very epic story of cinematic history is properly told, and in this regard you have only one choice for reading, which is John Julius Norwich's book, two volumes, but but very exciting told by a master cinematic writer and of course you know this is not book report I'm not going to do play by play for you so you just go read it but here I go on tangents that interest me so as the Normans they are maybe prototypical heron

folk or master race conquering people from England to Syria and Egypt to Italy whose exploits and character if you look at them closely I think it tells also the story of Aryan conquests of the Bronze Age and let me read a little from the book because at the beginning, Norwich goes into the Norman character, you know, this is really the core of history. It is the hardest to do, this typology of the characters of people, but to understand the character of a people is one of the most important parts of history, but really it's not just history, it's something very close to philosophy and science. It's likely the most important part of a true political science, if such a thing has ever existed. A practical political science, for example, that could guide your diplomacy, the Byzantines

understood this. They had very developed intelligence apparatus and much of it, the Byzantines, if you read Luttwak book on, Edward Luttwak book on Byzantium, they did not outsource intelligence to any one agency. It permeated all their institutions. It was part of their military doctrine, part of their diplomacy, part of Byzantine culture. And one of the most important elements was understanding the character of the various peoples they encountered. What this means, I hate this phrase actually, but what makes them tick? It's very machine-like phrase you must reject. But you can understand why such mindset for Byzantines very important because they had absolutely dismal strategic position, indefensible borders, enormous indefensible borders, frightful enemies.

And from the north, their enemies were ever renewed from the steppe, in other words, wave upon wave of hordes of different tribes, which, you know, you can't defeat militarily because there's more of where that came from. So another one could simply follow. So let's say that you waste yourself and all your resources and men you're fighting the Pechenegs, you defeat them, but then the Cumans come, or the Burgars, or the Burdas. Then you have nothing left to fight the next one, so you can't confront them militarily. And of course one keeps the other out anyway, so the point is to get them to fight each other for him. In other words, the genius of Byzantium, which lasted for more than a thousand years and

it lasted under the most dire dangers that never stopped, this understanding of the characters of peoples was an absolute necessity for their survival, and they didn't have the luxury to, for example, fag off about essentialism and how it's inappropriate to make generalizations. Now you shouldn't generalize, okay? They didn't have luxury to do that. They were not concerned. What was their concern? They were concerned with running a multinational ancient empire and facing off multiple tribes of frightful enemies and they were not grad-scrull hoes trying to get credentials like Jill. So you had to generalize and you had to engage in essentialism because nature and reality forces you to do that, to survive. They didn't have the luxury to flick their mental clit to post-modern mind games.

So this is why they're always intensely interested in continuing and in intensifying actually the ancient Greek curiosity and tradition, stretching to Herodotus and beyond the ancient Greek tradition of classifying peoples, understanding their characters, classifying their customs. But anyway, I told you I'd say about the Norman character. Well, they were Vikings, okay? Now you may know that story. What were the Normans? Norsemen who descended from Scandinavia, they raided various places, they went down the Seine to raid Paris, and then they were given Normandy in northern France as a fief by the French king to settle, and they quickly assimilated to French culture. The Norse language was lost by the end of the 900s in Normandy, but they never lost

the Viking restlessness in energy, and Norwich puts great stock in this energy, but he never quite explains where it comes from, and yet I think it comes from the blood, an expansionist wonderlust energy and a corresponding disassociation from any one place or country. But anyway, I keep telling you I will read from his book. So here is what he says about Norman character in one striking paragraph. I'm reading John Julius Norwich now. Materialistic, quick-witted, adaptable, eclectic, still blessed with the inexhaustible energy of their Viking forebears and a superb self-confidence that was all their own. The early Norman adventurers were admirably equipped for the role they were to play. To these qualities they added two others, not perhaps in themselves particularly praiseworthy,

yet qualities without which their great Kingdom of the South could never have been born. First of all, they were enormously prolific, which meant a continually exploding population. It was this fact more than anything else that had brought the first immigrants from Scandinavia. And 200 years later it was the same phenomenon that sent swarms of land-hungry younger sons still further south in their quest for Lebensraum. Secondly, they were natural wanderers, not just of necessity, but by temperament as well. They showed, as an early chronicler noted, little loyalty to any of the countries which at various moments they called their own. The fastnesses of the north, the hills of Normandy, the broad meadows of England, the

orange groves of Sicily, the deserts of Syria, all were in turn forsaken by fearless, footloose young men looking for somewhere else where the pickings would be better still." What a wonderful thing he's saying. And yes, prolific. They had many, many children, which you should have also, of course, but that's necessary but not sufficient like he said. But for example, one of the central figures of this story who never actually appears in it is Tancred, he's a Norman baron from, well, an insignificant actually village in Normandy, and it is his sons who will engage in great exploits and take over southern Italy and Sicily in the 1000s. But Tankard himself had no other achievements other than to have many, many sons by two

different wives, not at the same time, not polygamy, the first one died. But yes, they were a very fecund race, but that in itself is not enough. They had the other qualities that Norwich describes. And the other one he describes is very interesting to me. It has the same flavor, a very Homeric flavor, very much like in Homer Heroes when you look Look at how they did it, how they expanded. You think of Homer, there is this wonderful scene right before the catalog of ships and captains in Book II of the Iliad, where it says of the Homeric lords, they were rousing the Greeks to battle and they were assembling the Greek army. And Homer says, Athena appeared among them with flashing gray eyes, and it put into every man the lust for battle and conquest.

It made it more dear to them than to return to their loved fatherland. Isn't that a great line? and many similar others in Homer and other poets of this same spirit, and you see it throughout the history of the Normans. It's actually the spirit of all the early European aristocracies, it's very Homeric to me, how they thought and who they were, it's similar also to the Spanish conquest of the Americas, which I think if you look at origins of that, the Portuguese and Spanish who kicked off the age of exploration at the end of the Reconquista of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors, I believe it was the Gothic blood in them that drove them to such restlessness and the energetic search for new worlds and new conquests. And without this blood, what are we to do?

I'm not saying it's disappeared, but if it does, if it dissipates through mixing, as it did in Europe, you know, most of Europe is pre-Aryan. So in the history and character of these Norman conquests of the south, you know, I see only Only a replay, a retake of the ancient and original Aryan conquest of the Bronze Age, because it seems to me that history since 1500 BC is driven by the energy and spirit of this race, without which there would be only a morass of shadow. Mankind would be just a shadow mediocrity, obscurantism and ignorance is all there would be. But with each expansion of this Aryan people, their blood dwindles in mixing with the women of their new conquests, and much also is wasted in blood and duels, some of it of course,

but mostly it is the mixing, so that Gobineau model of how a master race ends, that is its expansive spirit and its universalism, its very greatness that it leads to its own end. This is poignant and it's a tragic story that seems to be true. The Norman kingdoms in Sicily, once established, they were very, you could say, very universalist kingdom, very tolerant, and they weren't so, however, out of respect for human rights or equality, but because you must have that spirit to build an empire. Many of you admire Putin and Russia, but you don't want to perhaps see that Putin continues Tsarist imperial policy and is remarkably tolerant and welcoming to all kinds of nationalities that live under the Russian banner. You have to do that as imperial policy.

The Romans were the same, they were Clement, they were universalists, and they weren't so out of a belief in human equality. Again, it is something almost inborn in imperial peoples, in the helenvolks, like I say, in the master peoples to have this tolerance. It's part of expansion, this is how it takes place. But Gobineau explains the downsides of this, that this very expansionist, universalist tolerant spirit is what ends the master races, and yet they must have this tolerance and this universalism or otherwise they wouldn't be master races. But I've always had this taste for this reason for what you might call petty nationalism because it's funny, if you read Gobineau and his description in particular of Haiti,

You will find one of the most contemptuous attitudes he has towards the ethnic parochialism and this kind of localist nationalist attitude which he attributes only to the most inferior races and making a special point that the African lives in his forest, he listens to his witch doctor, has a complete lack of curiosity and ignorance of the outside world. Read perhaps the book, you might have heard Edward Said's crap book Orientalism, well There is another book, Occidentalism, that explains how the Orient viewed the West, and there's just complete lack of curiosity about the outside world. Whenever you look outside the Western world, almost there's just total lack of curiosity about outsiders. And Gobineau talks this about the African tribesmen in Haiti, a complete ethnic parochialism,

And his only driving political principle in life is hate the outsider, gut the outsider, stick to home. And that is the mark of an inferior race. And you might say, well, what of the Japanese then? They're both a great race, but insular at the same time and close to outsiders. Well, I don't know about that. What of the greater Asia co-prosperity sphere? What of the colonizations of Manchuria and Korea, which aren't merely post-Meiji drives? expansionism goes quite far back. For example, at the end of the 1500s, you had Hideyoshi Toyotomi, his great Japanese warlord. He attempted to conquer Korea. They've in fact always had grand designs on Asia, and I believe the Japanese are a Polynesian island-hopping race, animists. Look even the kimono has a Polynesian style, pathes.

When you look up what Ariki nobles are, they're a trans-island aristocracy among the Polynesians. called Ariki, and the outfits as they were, they looked to me, the pattern looked to me like kimono, I don't know, but I need to say that the Normans as well, they looked out for each other, they had strong group identity, and this is not a no borders, no genders argument here, but simply that master races have this lust for conquest, for the outside, for the foreign, and the corresponding lessening of the love of any one particular home and they must be less tribal and clannish in the petit parochial sense, you know, and they are universalist and tolerant in their ambitions, which is, by the way, one of the main reasons Westerners are hated is for their universalism.

This dirty secret, I discussed it before and perhaps I do future show on it, but the quarrel, You could say that Jews have with the West is because they don't like Western Universalism. They don't like Hellenism. This attitude goes back even to Philo, a Jewish philosopher, Platonic philosopher in Alexandria. They always have a very fraught relationship with Western imperialism, Western Universalism. They prefer actually closed nationalist states. They can get along with those much better. They have bad relationships with universalists of Western empires, whether it's the Byzantines or the Russians or even actually the Romans, that's a more complicated story, but Nietzsche is right that they were the great antagonists of that.

But in any case, in the time of social decline, I'm making the Gobineau story here, the Gobineau case. After subduing a large enough territory, a master race of this kind, in a time of social or political decline, subject peoples from the periphery of the empire begin to move to the center and they mix, they mix with them and through this mixing the great race ends and the particular civilization collapses. So this is the story of course of Rome, where at the end of Rome there were hardly 6,000 of the original Romans left in the city. You know, they had the open borders, you could say, they got completely replaced in their own city. But, okay, Rome ended, right? I'm saying something different now. Rome ended, but new waves of the same spirit rolled in from the steppe, which, by the way,

steppe empires, steppe conquerors, they have similar mindset. And so the Germans came in from Asia into Europe and replenished the spirit. And then, as Norwich terms it, the fastnesses of the north, these were a reservoir for a later outburst of the same energy. You could think of the original Aryan race spread out from somewhere in Asia, let's say around 1600 or 1500 BC, maybe sometime a bit before then, into temperate Europe. And then, some of them got caught in this cul-de-sac, you could say, of the fjords of the north, while others of them found more fertile ground in the Mediterranean, in Greece and in Rome, which were near the centers of civilization, and these latter built empires. But then through the process Gobineau describes, they mixed with their subject populations

and the civilizations ended and so forth. But although that happened, there was this reservoir of Aryan blood that had ended up in these cul-de-sacs, like I say, which later for some reason or other when the right time came and often it had to do with things like increased fecundity. But at some point they reignited the same process of energetic international conquest and state building, so that the Roman and Greek civilizations ended, but the greatness of spirit and intellect that founded them did not, because there was always a new reservoir of the same conquering expansionist blood, whether in the steppe or in the north, to replenish this in new invasions and expansions. And the Germanic conquests are part of this story, the Norsemen are, and then the European

conquests of the new worlds of the Americas, Australia and so on, these are just extensions of this. But I've wondered if in each such expansion, if the blood doesn't dissipate a little, dissipate a little I mean. If there are no more hidden pockets of this pure Aryan blood anywhere now, not that we know of, everywhere now it exists only mixed, which doesn't mean that energy has dissipated from the world altogether because it may exist in certain individuals and groups with enough intensity to be a driver of great events still, but yes, my ambition, my most secret ambition is to have one day at my disposal the territory and resources of a state and its laboratory so that I can begin the great project, the greatest project of all, which through various

pairings and crosses to re-breed the original Aryan race, or as close an approximation as possible. some kind of a kind of a platonic special platonic lebensborn program but this is for the future i must take a break it is time for fruit break i have a passion fruit by the way a press with milks and glycine and sugars for calming effect i will be right back yes the norman very interesting my friend thomas 777 who i had on this show he will return in soon future, but he does not like the Normans so much, okay, I was going to say the Romans, but it's not that different why he dislikes them, why he dislikes both. He disagrees with me on this. The explanation for why he dislikes the Normans is interesting to me. It rests in another quality that Norwich attributes to these people.

He says they had a fascination or even an obsession with the law. Now that in itself isn't objectionable. Thomas is a lawyer. But they were a legalistic people in some sense. Norwich points out the paradox that the people so famed for lawlessness in Europe should have such a preoccupation with the law. But he explains this very simply. They were pragmatists. And they realized that the law is a magnificent edifice to build a state. And that is their special gift, they are state builders. But the law is this edifice and it's to strengthen their position in whatever enterprise they undertook, whatever conquest. They always found the legal pretext. He has a great line, they saw the law as their slave, not their master.

And their attitude to religion was very similar, pious, they are in some way famed for their piety, but they were concerned only with fulfilling the outward forms. never allowing a religious precept nor the priests or the papacy to interfere with their secular designs. And they happily even allowed the Pope to excommunicate them at certain times, not then as a people but individuals, knowing very well they knew these Norman barons that excommunications are later reversed. So some were excommunicated multiple times. Trad cats don't want you to know this, they all believe that they want to play this make-believe that European history is this ultramontanism that you have now, but it's not the case. Many times kings, nobles, they didn't care.

Even about excommunication, it could be reversed, they did what they wanted. Many times they threatened priests or the pope and taught them a lesson that you do not interfere in state affairs. Now in some of these qualities of the Normans, they superficially resemble the qualities of the Jews, or at least those for which the Jews get blamed, the so-called negative qualities. I don't believe this, but I'm trying to explain why Thomas dislikes them. I hope I don't misrepresent. But he dislikes them because they're a ruthless, universalist, hostile elite, materialistic and legalistic. And I would say the distinction between the two peoples in terms of war, prowess, courage, love of war and adventure, but most of all when it comes to political life, the ability

to forge and sustain a state, because again they are state builders above all. This is a very rare gift, and no other people, certainly not the Jews, medieval Jews certainly did not have this ability. But the Normans built states in England, in France, in Sicily, even actually in parts of Greece later and the Near East and it distinguishes them from, again, many, many peoples including the Jews who in fact do not have these qualities, but I understand Thomas' point because he dislikes elites of this kind. I don't want to call them international elites, but they were in some sense, yes, a kind of cosmopolitan elite in the best sense of the word. But Thomas has in this regard also special animus against the Normans because it's just

this point, you know, he believes they impose the centralized state Roman law on England, which is injurious to Saxon liberty and Saxon traditions of common law, right? Norman centralized Roman law imposed by top-down, by a Norman king, by centralized authority, as opposed to the Saxon decentralized common law tradition, and Thomas VII understands the foundations of America as an attempt for Saxons to regain their liberty and no longer to have to live under a pacious Norman norm. Now I've told this theory to Englishmen and they think it's completely ridiculous because actually the Normans completely assimilated everywhere they ruled, including in England, and so they built a common English identity and so the distinction between Norman and

and Saxon, according to Englishmen, if you ask them, it did not survive. Although there are later studies showing that people with Norman family names actually have a lot more wealth than others. But if you look at the Domesday book and you see the opacity, what the Norman lords did to England, but in fact, Normans did the Domesday book thing, this kind of systematic and heartless splendor in every land they ruled, at least at the beginning. And the point of bringing up the Jews in here isn't just to engage in, oh, well, you know the Jews are bad, but to make the case for the opinion of Thomas and other friends like Thomas who believe Normans and Jews, while not alike in all respects, that they share this kind of, you could say, common political, biological niche, that of a transnational

hostile elite, and therefore that this explains their occasional strange symbiosis. If you look at history, the Normans often invited Jews and so on, so that being said, I don't know if I myself believe in any of this, but I find such theories interesting, and in any case, the Normans in Italy, yes, look, this is just a long story I will need more than one show to cover, so just add it to the number of pending topics I have to do shows on, but they start to arrive in Italy in the early 1000s, and in two great battles of Enna and Cherami, these are in Sicily, they end up taking over Sicily from the Saracens. These are the Arabs who had occupied it from the Byzantines. And these are just amazing battles where the Normans were outnumbered greatly.

So that we're talking Rorke's drift type, you see the movie Zulu battle, where you have in this case 150, 200 Norman knights and they're facing off against thousands and thousands of Arabs, and they slaughter the Arabs, and they take almost no casualties themselves. Sounds unbelievable, but it's not. Because as Norwich goes into some detail, it's their courage and especially their discipline. Their discipline is something the Saracens were completely unaccustomed to. Well armoured and equipped knights with frightful weapons, so let's say superior firepower also, but it's with discipline you can break numbers many times your size. How were the Spanish able to take over gigantic empires in Latin America? It wasn't just gunpowder.

In many of those battles, they did not have gunpowder against the Aztecs, for example. They had Toledo steel, they had very good armor and weapons made of steel, whereas the Aztecs did not. But even so, they were outnumbered, there were maybe a hundred Spanish versus thousands and thousands of Aztecs and they won because of superior fighting discipline. Nothing can defeat that. You can think also of Rhodesians, they're ambushing armies of Africans, Zambia and Mozambique armies many thousands strong, inflicting huge casualties and then escaping with one guy with a scratch on his leg and this is constant in Western history. But of course you can't be stupid and think oh you win just because you're of Norman or similar blood.

It is rather the tradition of war practice and discipline that gets these results. So anyway, the Battle of Cherami took place in 1063, that's three years before the Norman invasion of England, and this is when the Normans really seized initiative conquest of Sicily. After that it was mostly, well it was easier, but Norwich is very direct, sober writer, but he allows himself occasionally to get poetic in this book. And I thought this paragraph where he introduces Sicily early in the book was very good. I will read for you, let me read for you what Norwich says about Sicily, so I'm quoting now. The island of Sicily is the largest in the Mediterranean. It has also proved over the centuries to be the most unhappy.

The stepping stone between Europe and Africa, the gateway between the East and the West, the link between the Latin world and the Greek. At once a stronghold, observation point, and clearinghouse, it has been fought over and occupied in turn by all the great powers that have at various times striven to extend their dominion across the Middle Sea. It has belonged to them all, and yet has properly been part of none. For the number and variety of its conquerors, while preventing the development of any strong national individuality of its own, have endowed it with a kaleidoscopic heritage of experience which can never allow it to be completely assimilated, to become completely assimilated, excuse me.

Even today, despite the beauty of its landscape, the fertility of its fields and the perpetual benediction of its climate, there lingers everywhere some dark, brooding quality, some underlying sorrow of which poverty, church influence, the mafia and all other popular modern scapegoats may be the manifestations but are certainly not the cause. It is the sorrow of long, unhappy experience, of opportunity lost and promise unfulfilled. The sorrow, perhaps, of a beautiful woman who has been raped too often and betrayed too often and is no longer fit for love or marriage. Phoenicians, Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans, Goths, Byzantines, Arabs, Normans, Germans, Spaniards, French, all have left their mark. Today, a century after being received into her Italian home, Sicily is probably less

unhappy than she has been for many centuries, but though no longer lost, she still seems lonely, seeking always an identity which she can never entirely find." Very beautiful passage, almost poetic, but of course good prose depends on not being poetic. It depends on upsetting the desire for poetry and coming short of it, in some sense, is very good. But Norwich, that's an especially poetic passage, he's usually more prosaic than that, but very fun book to read, I recommend. And I hear what he say about Sicily from many who've spent a long time there, there's something hanging over the land. That is not the case if you go Sardinia or Corsica, and I think, however, all people who say this refuse to consider the possibility that this is something much older.

Sicily, if you remember on my show on Timoleo, where I discussed the early history of Sicily, Sicily is a place where Persephone, the goddess, she was taken by Hades from her mother Demeter, the mother of the earth. And there is much mystery in this. Hades abducts the girl from a field near Enna, a place of battle I just named. In any case, so their kingdom, the Norman kingdom in Sicily, was only established sometimes after these battles, and the Norman kingdom in the south did not last that long, let's say if you count the various duketums and principalities, it lasted from the beginning of the 1000s to 1194, which is when Frederick II Hohenstaufen, he is born at that time, and that's when the Norwich story at least ends in that year, because although the life

of Frederick II, he's called the wonder of the world, is itself, it's an amazing tale. He's one of Nietzsche's supermen, one of the flashiest, most amazing men of history, a renaissance man before his time, a philosopher king. This is Frederick II now, and he also wrote the book of laws for Sicily and he was a falconer and a crusader and many other things, and he was also descended from the Normans. That's why he inherited the kingdom as a personal possession, but only on one side of his family. On the other side he was descended from the German emperors and so he became Holy Roman Emperor and also King of Sicily, King of the Romans, the title they held. He was also excommunicated by the way. But anyway now as to how the Normans decided to come to Italy in the first place that is

itself a very interesting story which I don't want to repeat all the intrigues and details of how it is they came. there is one important part of it that interests me because it shows again their great political skill, a very rare trait for people, political skill. In their travels to Jerusalem as pilgrims, many young Normans undertook for fun. They loved to travel, as Norwich says, and they went there partly for the pilgrimage for piety, but they enjoyed the journey, and on the way back some happened to come to Apulia. This is the heel of the Italian boot, right? So this part on the way back from Jerusalem, on the way back to Normandy, and in Apulia there is a place called Monte Sant'Angelo, which is itself one of the great pilgrimage

sites of the Christian world, very important site at the time, one of the three most important sites in Christendom, where the Archangel Michael was said to have appeared some centuries before in full armor, and in truth, this part of Apulia had been sacred to the ancient world as well. But anyway, so this group of Norman pilgrims, they come there, and they're already famed as a race for their battle prowess, and so they're approached when they visit this pilgrimage site. They're approached by a Lombard lord who asks them for assistance. He says he wants to free the Lombards from Greek rule. He means Byzantine rule. Remember, Sicily, although it had been part of the Roman Empire, it had really been part of the Greek-speaking world, as I described in previous show.

Much of the population were Greek settlers, then others came, Carthaginians, Phoenicians, and so forth. Well, Phoenicians before that, but Carthaginians, don't tell Taleb this, but well, okay. So anyway, the Lombards, who were they? Another Germanic people who had come into Italy some centuries before. They came from northern Germany and they stayed briefly in plains of Pannonia, presently Hungary, and it's very interesting why they invaded Italy. They invaded Italy because a Byzantine general who had been disgraced by the emperors, the Byzantine emperors, he didn't like being disgraced and discredited in his old age, so he invited the Lombards to invade Italy, which he had won back for the Byzantine Empire.

And they invaded and they took over much of it so that Byzantium was set back considerably. And it's interesting, the Lombards, unlike the Normans, who again, the Normans very quickly assimilated for example into France and they lost their language, but the Lombards had not assimilated into Italy even by the year of the events I'm describing, by 1000, just several hundred years after they came, they preserved their own customs, communities and laws and so on. It's very interesting, there have been some recent studies done on Lombard burials, I may discuss some other time, but they seem to have had a kind of cased structure, the Lombards, and they brought in, wherever they went, their subject populations with them.

So they were not themselves a homogenous population, they had masters and slaves and so forth. But the Lombards established various dukedoms and states in the south of Italy, and they were hoping to unite these and to free themselves from encroaching Byzantine Greek rule. But at that time the political situation in Italy was very much fractured. Again, I don't want to get into all the details, it's very complicated. But the main outlines of it is the Byzantines, the Papacy, the Western Empire, and also then Then newly the Muslims or the Saracens, the Arabs in Sicily who had taken over Sicily from North Africa and they were raiding and causing very much trouble. So in this total chaos of all these powers vying and it was fractured even more at the

local level with city-states that were independent and duchies always fighting each other. But in this chaos the Normans found great opportunity. You know, there's the nice scene in Sanjuro, the movie I named before, where when Toshiro Mifune, he comes as a traveler in this village that seems deserted. And the villager, the innkeeper, he's telling Sanjuro of all the troubles of this town, all the feuds, all the awful predatory officials that are destroying the life of the people of the town. And Sanjuro, the traveling swordsman, he says something like, the villager tells him, look, this place is terrible. It's in trouble. better for you to leave." And Sanjuro says, I'll get paid for killing, and this town

is full of people who deserve to die. I always like this line, it's Sanjuro funny movie. I like this, and although he arrives as a mercenary, or maybe I'm mixing up Sanjuro and Yojimbo, doesn't matter, you should see both these movies. But although as a traveling samurai, Toshiro Mifune, he arrived as a mercenary, he proceeds to play them off against each other, is the point, and come out the winner in every conflict he gets in. So he's playing on one side, now one side the other, and this is what the Normans arrived they came as free-booters and mercenaries, but they played their hands so well so that they always chose the winning side. They now switch from one side now to the other, and often they fought against each other even

because sometimes bands of Normans would end up in the employ of opposing sides, but whenever that happened, fighting wasn't all that intense and they treated the defeated group of Normans with much consideration and kindness, and they had particular leaders who looked out for Norman interests in general, even while they were freebooters and mercenaries spread into these different bands. Steve Saylor likes to tell similar story about Ireland, how local petty disputes between kinglets in Ireland led one of them to inviting the Normans to fight on his side and the Normans of course just decided to stay and eventually to take over. While in Italy is much more amazing story than that because when they came they were

much fewer, they were just a handful in number and they were in no position to take over but over many decades of careful mix of military prowess with diplomatic political skill they managed in the way I said to take over the whole region and Sicily finally as the crown. And I will talk perhaps next time or on future show, why not, I will have man of power episode on one Robert Guiscard, very famous Norman warlord you could say, the leader of this movement to take over southern Italy, Robert the Fox, Robert Guiscard, who really he established their fortunes and who's one of the greatest conquerors in history. Norwich considers him on par with Napoleon and Caesar. What Robert Guiscard means, it comes from viscard, the name for fox, from Latin viscardus,

is the same root as the English word wise. This is what the wise man meant in the beginning, the cunning fox-like man, the man of stratagems, who was not only brave but wily and foxy. In other words, like Machiaveri say, he knew how to use both the fox and the lion as animal avatars. You need both. And it wasn't any particular ruse or stratagem. He used many unusual ones to take over this town or to break this or that siege. He once took over a fortified monastery by having his men impersonate a funeral procession and in the coffin there was, of course, a guy with weapons. They had all their swords inside and they took over the monastery and so forth. But it wasn't these small tricks. The ultimate and miraculous trickery was just this.

They're managing to play off four great powers against each other for decades and slowly to take over, to navigate all the tangled alliances and feuds of the local barons and empires and to come out as the sole and sovereign victors when really they started as humble free-booters, humble mercenaries. And so like I tell you earlier, it doesn't matter who thinks is using you. They may very well use you and they may be stronger even in the beginning, but with careful maneuvering you can have the upper hand, and in situations of chaos mercenaries very often do this. And it's painful for me to read this story, very painful, because at first sight so few similar opportunities seem to exist now, right?

We are reduced to system and bigotry and there seem to be no such wonderful adventures possible, but I think they will be possible. Neo-Norman attempts to set up kingdoms have been tried actually recently, many times by by Bob Denard, who I've mentioned the French mercenary in Africa in the 20th century, by others in Africa for example, but always what we call the New World Order, whether it was through the hand of France or of the United States, they come in and they stop all such adventures at the last minute. American so-called international system is actually smothering all the fun out of life. But how long can this stagnation of degenerate stability last? I think maybe you might see already ending, and I am hoping, like I always keep telling

you for the return of chaos, because it is in chaos and disorder that great fortunes and new sovereignties will be established. It is in this condition where the blood of power can once again rise to prominence. May this time come soon. I think it might. I think we might live soon in the most interesting times of all. I will see you next week, and I say to you, happy solstice on Monday. you will drink chimp wine and I say to you also Merry Christmas I will make next show maybe on Robert Guiscard but in any case new show will come a day after Christmas I say to you until next time BAP out.