Welcome, Caribbean Rhythms, episode 76. Please, no children for this show. This is sometimes unpleasant, dirty matters I have to discuss. It's part two of a presentation on gays, the gay movement. Hide your children, and it's better not to let a woman listen either, as they may get ideas. Women should only listen wholesome thing, old television show, Bonanza, maybe church and sermons, and this is interesting. Another thing I think is old attitude, by the way, if you read 19th century books and older even, it's not a modern thing. For example, Joseph Conrad Nostromo, one of my favorite novel, the old Italian guy at beginning, say he always considered the church and this is something for women. So it's not of this Redditor and atheist materialist attitude only today.

It's actually very different from that as well, but it's very old in the West. This view that the church and the whole involvement, I mean, in church life with the bake sales and sermons, and this is something more appropriate for women than for men, which isn't to say that men did not believe in God, but that there is a difference between, for example, Christianity and churchianity, and in fact, excessive displays of this last are really much closer to what used to get called Pharisaism, which is something more naturally suited to women, as Otto Weininger rightly noted, women are Jews. Anyway, so this is my short way now of telling you to reject most of the fake thread cats, the ostentatious ones, I mean, like Vermula and other of the federal hangers-on around

him who are all, by the way, strangely enough, recent converts, supposedly in 2016 and around then, because what they are peddling is something that will never work. Never! Never work. Long time testing, beta testing of what messages work, and I can tell you most intelligent energetic men, the kind who can change things politically are not interested in this churchianity religion and politics thing. They find it in fact very demoralizing, which I would guess is the intention of this federal push for Catholicism because it is foreign to the desires of men, the whole stuffy, incense church thing, the whole life centered supposedly around the family, but really around the needs of vain women, the submission spiritually also to effeminate males who preach morality and this.

And I'm sorry, Trach, but this is not actually what traditional Christian, Kirishitan Catholic society was like. This is just your gay and woman-centered reimagining of it. And when I told men, for example, I was speaking to them, they understand modern problem and And I tell them of the slowing in birth rates in the West, and the inability of technological civilization to continue itself with this demographic trend, and they were upset and they asked what could be done. These were very intelligent young guys, and I said in traditional fashion, in trad fashion, I say religion is the only answer. And I could see them just completely turn off to that, deflate, you could see energy leave their eyes. They become disinterested. And these were not coumers, okay?

I don't want to say who they were because I don't want to give doxing fuel to detrimental robots. I would just say they were all in one of two sports teams competing at a high level, and also they were very intelligent, open to what I was saying. So when I saw that reaction, I then gave them the other alternative, my alternative, but I watered it down in public somewhat and I said, there is Putin option. How Putin turned Russia's birth rate around, which was with some promotion and normalization of religion for sure, which helped the women and the others, but especially though with inculcation of national confidence, national pride and enthusiasm, the freeing of manly energies. And immediately I saw excitement for this comeback in their faces and eyes because they

knew this was what was really suppressed, not the other thing. And I had similar experience over and over, and I can tell you this whole thing with let's put a big cross and church and bells and whistle on the modern cage is not going to solve any birth rate or other social problems. It's meant to appeal really only to women, and furthermore, it's meant to inflame old sectarian fault lines, which is why all the so-called thread cats, wannabe e-boys, they They joke, so you hear this, this is a joke apparently, but they joke about how they plan to subdue Protestants along with the liberals. So that's a wonderful message, right? Let's just have heritage American community get into theological fights between Protestant and Catholic instead of fight establishment.

But in any case, I meant to say this mix that is being promoted now, and actually it originates in DC at very highest level of the Repoop Party, which is why it's not just being promoted by e-boys, it's promoted in variation, and not only even by Vermula and his chaiwallas like Sorab Amari, but also by Rubio. Even Romney has started to mouth some of these platitudes, this so-called post-liberal sort of Catholic communitarianism which they misname integralism. It's a fake alternative to modern degeneracy that will not go anywhere, this mix of woman-centered community, this brow-biting man to go to church ostentatiously, engagement with light socialism. Third world is really socialist, variation on liberation theology mixed with denunciations of moral degeneracy

that often in some cases, especially on internet quarters, they veer on incel rage, incel-joker-rage-tradcast-socialism. It's regressive in the spiritual sense. It deeply turned off a red-blooded American man. It will only appeal to some women and to some strange kind of stay-at-home man. And it's meant to kill off manly energies and will be entirely ineffective in addressing the political and the social-cultural crisis. Okay, because if your son is in school and they're trying to racially humiliate him and tell him he's from an evil lineage and that his only historical redemption is to self-sacrifice for minority or others, the last thing he needs to hear when he come home is to see this kind of a demi-morality-centered, woman-based ethos of submission,

this thing the integralists so-called are promoting, which offers nothing in terms of hope for future and merely energy and pride in oneself, nothing about these things. He needs instead to hear about Achilles and Alexander. He needs to hear about Homer, or if you wish, about the great heroes in the Bible, about Samson and this. He needs to see Jesus stand like superior man in front of the mob, and this is how Bach presents Jesus in Passion of Saint Matthew. You can, it's beautiful music, so you can hear it on YouTube, but you can also watch the play of the Passion of Saint Matthew with subtitles. He does not need, your son does not need to be browbeaten by a prude woman and a fat gay man like Dostat and his hangers-on who all look like that, okay?

Tell, he doesn't need to hear such people tell him what he must do with his sexuality, which is, it's a grotesque scenario to begin with if you think about it, but you know, he must not have this, how he must subordinate to the dictates of Chaiwala Amari and to believe that the race is paganism or this other nonsense they sell. This is last thing that's needed. All of these people are subgenated sodomite of some kind. Or James Lindsay, the known homosexual intellectual. He's one of the best homosexual intellectuals of our time, in fact. Never stop calling James Lindsay a known homosexual, so a known gay. Anyway, so, you know, church community and sermons, that's a woman thing mostly. And even medieval Christian knights and champions of the faith, they knew this.

Don't confuse it with faith or even with religion. You cannot win this fight just with negative, regressive retrenchments of this kind and moral lean. And that's what the whole fed-cath thing is, assuming it's even meant genuinely and not some kind of GOP federal joint operation, which is what it really is. But if you're Catholic, I recommend the real Catholic men take back their churches and religion and households, there is no alternative to that. And that's just my opening tangent to say, don't let your woman listen to this show, put on for her a sermon of some kind, you know, if she has to hear this, or encourage her to take ballet or tango lessons in this. So anyway, I was at so-called dinner party recently. I am uncivilized, you see, I don't normally go such things

because I cannot help saying, doing outrageous things, not so much to draw attention to myself, I cannot take the pretense that we live in a civilized society and I cannot tolerate this kind of affected social frivolous discourse. Of course, I never get invited and, you know, at one time it's all it takes for people to... And then also there's the way I dress in this, so people find it unacceptable and so forth. But this was organized by Grille, I know, with Artsy Pretensions. She's a very nice person. And she insists, she invites me and she's nice to me, she insists I come. So, anyway, I was there and it was as gay as you can imagine, because such girls collect their homo pets in the same way that fat girls collect boxes of candy and cakes and this.

So, I was just there eating my schnitzel, okay, and there was this gay or bisexual guy, he must have been 19 or 20, and he was, okay, no homo, but he was normal and good-looking and so forth, and not full gay manner and this. without the voice, but otherwise entirely part of the gay drugs in six so-called underworld, whatever is left of it. So not the kind of assimilated polite gay, but the kind into what I'm guessing was coke and gay sex fuel parties and this with the tattoos. He started talking about chem sex. Okay, chem sex, not chemex, not chemex. Kenex, or Chemex, I don't know how you pronounce it, is a wonderful American company from Massachusetts. I think they make the best coffee maker contraptions in the world for true coffee connoisseurs. But not that, but Chemsex.

And this just threw me into a perplexion. I was perplexed. He only briefly talked about it, so I start to call people and ask them, what's this? What's Chemsex? I called a number of friend acquaintances, a couple of them in the gay world, other who know of such thing, you know, they go to club or this, ask them, what's this? Because okay, I know straight people use drugs to enhance sex or experience as well. In fact, it's quite common, but straight people, what they do is they don't have a separate name for it, like a practice apart with its own name, so why do the gays, why is this such a separate fetish or whatever among gays that it has its own name. And I'm sure you can think of several answers even without knowing.

For example, that although homos are highly attracted to men, yet the act of sodomy is so disgusting that to be able to get over this they have to be heavily drugged up. And second, that this act is inherently not pleasurable for the recipient or the passive partner aside from the psychological charge they get. But to get there in that psychological state of mind or to get over the pain, they need this chemical enhancement. And furthermore, the act of sodomy, and this is true with a woman as well, by the way, but it takes so much preparations and the things that besides the disgust, it's often difficult and inconvenient almost not to be worth it. But because they have a habitual or ideological commitment to this practice, they get used to drugs as part of the preparation.

These are plausible explanations, but I believe not complete. And the third possibility that is therapeutic, sob story, moralistic interpretation, which is that gays are oppressed and they still have false consciousness of society despite their desires. And so to be able to get over their oppression and internalized feelings of guilt, they need to take drugs. This is totally false. This is completely, anyone who believes this is an innocent. This is propaganda directed, most propaganda of the gays and their supporters is directed at the nice middle-class, middle-aged white woman, or the affluent white woman, the AWFL, affluent white femoid liberal, okay? Just the old church-going lady transplanted to secular shit-lib society, same pinched face, a pious idiot, okay?

And most of such propaganda and gay rights talk is directed at them to convince them to put social pressure on other parts of America and the West. Because such female aides, again, have no idea what gays really get up to. They can be convinced that it's just Andy Sullivan who wants to have a gay marriage celebration in the church and this. Now one interesting answer to this question came from a friend, Mena Quinone, who pointed out that the specific drugs that gays use actually potentiate the desire for cruelty – you know, methamphetamines, nitrates, and such things. For straights, instead they use – straights use ecstasy a lot and weed, and it's different. You never hear gays talk about how these drugs help them reach during sex or some kind of

mind-blowing mystical or spiritual experience or union with the other, which is very common to hear from straights and hippie straights who use drugs for sex sores, but again you do not hear this from gays. Gays use the Einsatzgruppen drugs instead, the drugs used by the SD liquidation squads on Eastern Front. You know, methamphetamines that is now sped up, if you look, YouTube, I don't know if it's on YouTube, but there's very funny video of Hitler, World War II footage of Hitler at some kind of event and he's basically swinging back and forth like a Hasid davening for a religious practice. He's going back and forth because he's all amped up on methamphetamine. Hitler was the first online sperg, the spergoloid artist on drugs become leader.

And some say that the Nazi party itself started as a gay movement in a gay bar in Munich. I don't know if this is true. It's very interesting. Do you think that this is so? But then I think there are even worse or darker explanations for Kim Six, and actually quite revealing about modern condition, about meaning of the gay movement. So I will talk this on next segments of this show. Some I will be right back. I have actually Vinizwill and Prosti here to help me relax, she give foot massage, I will be right back. Every man against the other is spiritual foundation of modern life, even if it should be sublimated, Maybe this is a bad word, but you understand, even if this impulse is transformed into a security state or into a state of pursuit of individual wealth rather than to kill somebody

else where each man maybe will not plot to cut the throat of his neighbor, but is nevertheless in perpetual competition with him and exists only in a state of antagonism to other men. And I say individual wealth because very revealing, it's actually much harder to preserve generational wealth in modern world. Capitalist world after 1800 is more hostile to this than what existed before. This is not my discovery, this is stock point of Bertrand's juvenile book, On Power, that under a modern state rhetoric of freedom and capitalism, in fact, you have quite a great retrenchment of property rights and the preservation of property within families when compared before 1800, and Hans Hermann Hoppe also developed these insights, when in medieval time you

had a manorial estate that could pass unmolested within families, and where the law of the king had very limited reach, so within your estate as a baron you had almost private law. And this is argument you find as juveniles that wherever capitalist system came, despite Despite the rhetoric you now know of wealth accumulation and private property and all this, in fact it was an ideology to break up the great manorial estates, to break generational wealth, and to turn men into individuals who of course can acquire much less wealth in one lifetime and also can do much less with it. So modern democracy and its individualistic, supposedly, ideology actually hampered capitalist growth even. It was not the cause of it and the point I'm trying to make is that the atomization many

of us complain about, I have a friend who just read a Willa Beck atomized 17th century shake poster, he had thread on this I think, also known by title Elementary Particles which I highly recommend because it's ultimate slap in face to the modern individualistic project, but this atomization is indistinguishable from individualism and individualism as an Modern ideology is actually anti-individual because it reduces all men to the same cipher, the individual with capital I. And it demands an atomized and homogenized society where actually not only individual distinctions between men are deleted and denied, but in very practical terms you are left alone on the sea. You are left powerless and without the various supports that used to exist in traditional society.

We're in a traditional society, even if you are low-cased, because besides family, there were several other so-called intervening institutions between you and the power of society. This word from Rousseau, intervening institutions, who pretends to be against the liberal project, but who also would like to homogenize society and to get rid of these traditional means that the lone man had to buttress his privileges in pre-modern time. But you had guilds and other such things to look out for you. And even if you were a minor noble, you could actually enforce your rights in that case by gathering 50 friends and taking care of matter yourself. And this is really the only basis, the only true basis of a right, which is to say a privilege,

the two are the same, which can only be secured by a claim of force. And in Anglo world, in 1600s especially settlement colonies, a man actually had ability, physical ability to defend his rights. And the law only codifies this. But a constitution, a philosophy, or a religious belief even can never actually be the source of any right. And so otherwise, all the mechanisms and theories developed by modern liberalism to protect this anonymous abstraction of the individual are ineffective and fake, all the measures they take. example, the division of powers and this. Why? Because, okay, you take separation of powers, but you can't actually have real division of powers if you have a homogenous society. If the people who populate decisive positions in the three branches, judicial, legislative,

executive, and you can design others too, but if they come from the same social classes, same opinion, same aspirations, same interests, division of powers does not work. It is not the division into powers formally that brings restraint in government. It can only do so if it formalizes real social divisions. In other words, it would work if the Senate in fact represented the interests of landed gentry, for example, or the house really that of the people and the judiciary of some other faction of society and so forth. Then it could really do something, it could give a mechanism to keep these real interests in balance. But division of powers as well as guarantees of rights mean nothing in a socially homogenous society of cipher so-called individuals.

So you are left both stranded, atomized, and at the mercy of the state, which if it does not have the formal means to impose tyranny, eventually it will just do this through mobs and selective stand-downs of law enforcement, which is what you are seeing now. But why I say this, because this desire, maybe unwitting desire, or maybe it's not a desire, just a mistake of liberalism to reduce man to a powerless cipher under the guise of liberating him, it always had to contend with the remnants of traditional institutions, of forms, manners, and this held over from pre-modern times. So I'm saying it took a while for the final intention of liberalism to really show itself. By 1880 or 1900 or even after, before 1914 certainly, there were plenty of remnants of

the old society, intervening institutions and so forth, that delayed the full face of liberalism from showing itself, the full atomization. And the nobles and the noble instinct most of all stood in its way. Even while liberalism at times used this noble instinct to promote itself, because nobles like warfare, so they embraced liberalism at times. So Hobbes, of course, is one of the great proponents of this view. He absolutely hated the nobles of his time. Why he hates them? On one hand, this is easily recognized because they do not fear death and because as a kind of spiritual bug man before his time, although he was very intelligent, he was outraged by their carelessness with regards to death. But also, why he hates them?

Because they form within the state and society a separate supremely effective traditional factions that, owing to its long-standing inner loyalties and esprit de corps, could never be homogenized under the individualistic contractual model and so on. And this hostility to such faction continues, like I say, very much under Rousseau and under French Revolution. It is the noble faction, and also a priestly faction, who are both targeted, they're blamed for so-called, they didn't use this word, but their understanding was similar for the false consciousness of the French peasant who does not want to accept enlightened rule by intellectuals, so the peasants of the Vendée who made counter-revolution. They did not want to accept the enlightened lawyers of the revolution in Paris, and in

turn actually what they did not want is rule by the mobs in Paris and by their desire for revenge. But although the nobles were gradually eliminated in the West, sometimes violently with revolutions, But mostly it was gradual process where modern liberal world tries to erase the holdovers of these factions and to delete these divisions in society inherited from, let's say, before 1700 or 1800. And I'm saying it took a while for the true face of liberalism to show itself. At bottom is this because liberalism is communism and vice versa, they're the same thing. They just differ on tactics and path and not even always on that. they will always unite against a common enemy. But by 1950 or so, the process was complete in a decisive way.

So although well into the 50s and 60s, you get various kinds of political and fraternal organizations in America that are apparently independent. In fact, with World War II and its aftermath, the West, America, Europe, was mobilized and homogenized both as a practical matter of having to fight the horrible war. And then after, during the Cold War continuation, in both cases there was severe, excuse me, ideological, spiritual homogenization as well. And so in supposedly oppressive, fascist, pre-modern times, a peasant, a craftsman, they had a lifestyle a lot more laid back than modern man. Not just freer in terms of political and ideological surveillance, you know, and continuation of his privacy and this, but in the rhythm of his life, in the requirements of work.

Whereas with 1930s and 40s, Western societies mobilized on a mechanized model. Life became regimented. Society became something approaching mass concentration camp, which is something that's never really stopped, and I'm exaggerating only a little. You find explanation of some of these developments in Burnham's great book, The Managerial Revolution. What happened afterwards was kind of managerial socialism in the West as well as Soviet Union. And in the United States, this regimentation was papered over somewhat by apparent flashy freedoms. You know, the diners with the milkshake and greaser rebel culture in the 1950s and after. Although all those high school students you see in the old movie and pictures, they were

being groomed by the state basically to die in the Fulda Gap in Germany if necessary, to stop Soviet advance to the Atlantic. And so Orwell's vision is only slight exaggeration, Orwell's vision in 1984, only slight exaggeration of world as it really is after the 1940s. But of course I have experience of East Bloc where even now if you go, let's say, to a resort, an old commie so-called resort in any of the East Bloc state, I say this before, but Mountain or Sea, it doesn't matter, it has very unsavory flavor of, look fellow citizens, this is a rest and relaxation camp for you. You may now engage in fun. You must engage now, risk relaxation, see you back at work soon. You know, and over there this is very ham-handed and obvious in how, even how the camps are laid out.

But in America, same thing, just a bit covered up, but with cities and suburbs organized like work camps, here you have your dormitory neighborhood and here this, and so it's only lightly papered over. And them bringing in actual shantytowns and tent cities of migrant workers is only one of less step in this decade-long trend, whereas medieval serf, even the serf had about one third of the year dedicated to feasts and holidays. And life really was merry in merry old England. It's not just a matter of the free time they had compared to now, but that life was oriented around that, around the joys and festivals of an organic community living in ancient attunement to seasons, and to their homeland to which Christianity added expectant hope

of salvation, but otherwise did not disrupt these rhythms and integration with nature. But to the modern cipherage, you know, its variation on Bergen-Belsen, Bergen-Belsen with many ornaments and a few extra comfort. Now this is a long way for me to finish a section with this point, which is that I say in book there was something left over in all this, whether this society was consciously designed or whether it developed through a series of accidents and good intentions turned bad, and I'd say both probably, but human nature will not abide it, will not tolerate this kind of ornamented concentration camp. There was something left over that couldn't in its design be completely controlled and that many of the smarter managers very quickly saw no need to control and this is to use

a loose word, it is underworld. And to understand a new underworld after 1950 you can see that as the modern western city started actually, what am I saying so far, that the modern western city started to approximate as the Oriental city, as it has always existed, which was always also highly regimented, historically, with individual being nothing more than an anonymous, powerless cipher, a worker, a life directed toward this kind of drudgery and backstabbing commerce and this. But there was in the Oriental city an exception, the pleasure quarters, or more accurately the vice-quarters, the floating world, this was called the floating world in certain Japanese for example, is the floating world, which is a place where vice could be, if not managed,

given a space free from total oversight, and human nature, its unruly side, or unruly men and women, could find this kind of out, like a pressure valve, it's a cliché, but it is a place for vice and also for flowering of certain arts, certain kinds of theatre and so forth. Much like Gulf Arabs now go to Lebanon to Beirut to enjoy themselves, this is their pleasure and vice-quarter, and there's song and song styles that develop there. Nassim Taleb met me at Bar Zero overlooking the sea, and I can get quite grabby with the big Levantine milkers, with Buba, Nassim Taleb like Buba. Anyway, this serves quite a few other functions besides it, because in a world where power is exercised in a passive-aggressive way and in secret.

It is in this vice world or underworld or floating world that you know it's not about just kompromat and Epstein and this. It's about information gathering and the maneuvering that's always necessary for political action when political power is covert. If your political system does not allow organizations that way openly as it did in Greece and Rome for political action, it will take place fortively within these vice sewers. So now what are the gays? The gays were a big part of this underworld. You know, cinema used to be a very common place for meeting of spies, for dead drop or brothels. There's a reason for that. I come back to it later. But the gays were a big part of this underworld, maybe a big decisive part.

And this way in book I called gays after 1950, not now, you understand, but at the time, at the birth of so-called a gay entity. It's something relatively new in human history. It's the formation, conscious or not, of this kind of exception to the mobilized, managerialized world after 1950. It's again deeply connected to all other levels of vice and underworld, so it's not really correct to call it the gay world at all. It's part of the vice world. And there's one other crucial part here that really in some way, one of main point I try I tell you on this show, this is that the gays, again at this time I'm talking in 1950s, the gays were a kind of exception to the individualistic atomized war of all against all. That is otherwise

the rule for the modern liberal state. By 1950s this state, as I tell you, was almost completely achieved and the individual was left alone, powerless and hostile, hostile to each other I mean. And the experience of most men in today's world when encountering another man, you don't know him. It's one of hostility and antagonism and competition. But this was not the case in the gay world. I'm not defending it, you understand, but quite opposite. I'm telling you why gays were especially able in 1950 world and after to take over political organizations and many other institutions so easily. There was nothing to stop that. Because among the gays it was basically only place at any scale I mean now. Of course you had small religious groups in this and some small cabals, but mostly these

were not as effective as people think. And it was instead amongst the gay world that as a rule and at any scale, I mean, men could meet each other in a spirit other than hostility and antagonism. And at the group level, this is source of great power. It averages out the other disadvantages. It allows for the formation of many cliques and cabals, whereas for the most part, non-gays did not have ability to do this in their world, the liberalized, mechanized, robo-state had completely ravaged all channels for them to do so, as well as promoted vile ideologies saying that friendship was wrong and gay and all this. And this is also what stops, by the way, ethnic groups, many, most of them, I would say perhaps

all, almost all ethnic group modern world are stopped from forming true cabals in this same way, because even within a relatively tight-knit ethnic and religious group, in modern world the ethos and daily life is switched to being woman-centered, and women rule household and the woman breaks up, it changes the loyalties of men who would form a cabal or a union, whereas gays do not have this break on them. And militating against what I'm saying is the gay character, of course, it's, you all know what it is, it's catty, it's jealous, it's contentious, often mentally unstable In a normal time, these character disadvantages might be enough to have left them ineffectual, plus the normal persecution and distrust they face.

But in post-war time of social desolation in a general population, liberalization, again at the group level, it averages out in a different way. And the mere fact that here man could meet initially without hating each other, this was on the whole source of great power, great access to power. Think of difference between feel at straight and gay nightclub, okay, if you've ever been. The latter can often be extremely disgusting, of course, in terms of physical and dirt elements and so on. But anyone who visits straight nightclub will tell you how viciously the men are pitted against each other, okay? On the other hand, you ask any gay or you go to gay nightclub yourself, you might want to try it with girl.

It's one of the secrets of PUA world, pickup artist world, is how easy it is to pick up girls in gay nightclub. Girls go there so as not to get hit on too much, so they are actually much more open to get hit on. But you see a total difference in atmosphere. I'm saying that on the group level, this is enormous advantage for formation of cliques, which were created in this underworld of vice, and they were built, of course, around often demented sexual practices, but that's irrelevant. They did not meet in spirit of hostility initially. That is the point. And such cliques managed to take over industries, even governments. In a movie about Roy Cohn, which is not very good movie, James Wood starred in this.

I think he has Roy Cohn ranting on the phone about how the gays are taking over our cities. Okay, so in the movie, again, it's not great movie, but in movies they do this to show you that, you know, the cliche is a closeted gay man who's hypocritical because he's against the gays and so forth, but the effect is different when you see it. Roy Cohn was not being hypocritical either in real life or in that scene. Roy Cohn, an underworld gay lawyer who also was a Trump political mentor, but he was just an honest perverted invert, and in this scene, although it's written to make you morally scoff at him, he's right. They do take over cities in the modern world, which is why you see so many scandal from

1950s to 70s about lavender mafia infiltration of all kinds of city councils, political group in the streets. Most of the Wikipedia pages even for such well-known scandals have been completely deleted. I mentioned on show before in Sweden there was major scandal in 60s I think, I keep forgetting the name, but Wikipedia page completely wiped out in the last few years because basically they have infiltrated every level of Swedish government and I think the Swedish noble royal house as well. Now, you might say, Bap, what about the Jews and Zaganses, you know, you're saying, Bap, you sound like that. We believe in that. But I don't think it's exactly the same. I just told you why a second ago, the role of women cannot be denied.

But in principle, yes, the general atomization and weakness caused by modern mechanized liberalism allowed all various ethnic and religious groups a comparative advantage. For example, the Chechens after 1990 took over Russia underworld in this way, not only because they were willing to be far more brutal, but they also had a lot more trust between themselves compared to their Slavic counterparts. And certain cabals from within Jewish world, no doubt, have been able to do similar, but But I think anyone who like Kevin Macdonald assumed some kind of a great brotherhood between Jews as Jews does not know what he talk about, okay? I have very good friend, he a bit crazy, he is genius level in hard science, I don't want to give more detail, he Jew, he had ideas about Israel.

He went to Israel with high hopes, he had read in books, he wanted, you know, he was feeling like most people today feel atomized and alone in this, and he went there hoping to find some kind of community and solidarity and brotherhood. He did not find, by the way, this tells you he did not find it among American Jews, right? So he went to Israel with these hopes, and he found the opposite. He found people who backstab each other, who are vicious to each other, who do not have any regard toward each other just because they are Jews and so forth. So he came back to United States saying, you know, I hate this and I'm going to convert to evangelical Christianity. I'm not making this story up. He had visited some kind of evangelical church before just to look and he found a great spiritual

brotherhood there and I don't think he went through with it, but at the time he came back from Israel he came back anti-Semite and he wanted to join evangelical church. I'm not making up any of this. So there are Jewish kibals that are allowed greater freedom by modern mass democracy and modern liberalism to operate in its weak spots, but it's harder to form these than you think. And mostly I think they represent holdovers of subgroup loyalties from before. So for example, mountain Jews, which is the Jews from Georgia and Azerbaijan, they can do this. But I'm telling you that if an average Jew meets another average Jew, they are meeting in as much hostility to each other as your average Christian to Christian today, there's no brotherhood in the Jewish world either.

It's an especially absurd situation when you have Soros and these other types who use anti-Semitism word essentially to turn average Jews into their human shields, so they can escape criticism and many average Jews, like most other people, they have vanity enough to let themselves get used in this way. They do not understand that they see no benefits from Soros or Blankfein, or maybe they do understand but they don't care. But they see no benefits from oligarch Jew cabal maneuvering, instead they become human shields for it. Don't criticize the oligarch cabal because it's anti-Semitic, you see what I'm saying? So it's not the Jewish knish salesman who is part of it, but when a Wignatt or a similar claims it is, or when the guy from Gab, you know, the nutjob, he went and he shot up a

synagogue of random people, or when Hitler, he kills off poverty, Orthodox, schlub, Hasids from St. Shtetl, and he lets the Rothschilds escape, that helps them, that helps the kabbal, because they can see, you see, these people are ridiculous, our opponents are ridiculous, because they say, well, you're saying your ophthalmologist is part of the Jewish conspiracy They plan to kill the pickle sorter at the deli, they plan to kill all of you, so you have to protect us. You see? So the Jewish sheister cabals and the dumb Wignatt are working together and they have similar interests, and the average dumb Jew is led by his vanity to give protection to a Soros. Anyway, this is long tangent, but in some, I would say, modern world with very few exceptions,

maybe among especially people like the Chechens, and even then, who knows? Now, aside from the gays, most men today meet other men in spirit of hostility. Part is the atomization, the philosophy of war against all, part of it is the influence of women in the home and on society. The gays, as a result of their fetish, they meet each other in a different spirit with different expectations. And unlike those ethnic groups, they're drawn from all quarters of society, another huge advantage. The information exchange then when these different classes and background meet, this information exchange alone is incredible. Incredible advantage. I mean, okay, I hope the frogs can create something like this. Maybe this is colored by my experiences in frog world in the last year.

But the amount of information that comes to me without asking for it even is incredible. I have eyes and ears in basically every city in this world, in every part of society, high I am low, right and left. I am thankful for this. It is a great good, the information that come to me, and I imagine that for gays, or certain of them, it was similar when they live in hidden world. It's gays who manage really to subvert numerous government after 1950 in Europe and so forth. Many of the intelligence agencies, some of you blame, really, they were coteries of gays within these agencies. And all of this it managed to do because of a weakness of modern men, a weakness self-promoted by their false belief in a natural antagonism in which the gays, even with their parody

and even besmirchment of male friendship, but even with whatever there was left over from that, they could nevertheless so easily take advantage. And so you see how in its beginnings the gay movement, or rather it was not really a movement yet but an entity. It was a central part of the underworld that was exception to the liberal anonymous mechanization of life. So you see why it was something much bigger than first appears because it first appears to be just a fetish which of course it what it fundamentally is but this fetish allowed because of modern condition for these cabal bubbles to form in the under seam of modern state but in time and I mean within let's say two three decades It became something else entirely.

It was transformed into what you see today, which is a weaponized foot soldiers actually of the same liberal state. And I will talk on next segment about how this happened. I will be right back. A funny slur that gays used against each other in Brazil, it's to call each other a bread and butter faggot, Viado Paucomantega, Bishop Paucomantega, which means roughly, you know, a poor and basic gay who cannot afford Gucci and the latest style or to go to clubs in this, and I think it's funny slur to use against the homo intellectuals on Twitter, for example Josh Barrow and this, to accuse them of drinking cheap wine and whatever. It hurts them a lot more than if you allude to their, excuse me, than if you allude to their supposed sexual debauchery, which actually they take some pride in.

Now sexual debauchery is the religion of this fetish cult. It became this, at least, in which, you know, as a religion, it's mostly done out of duty and principle and therefore joylessly, and so if you want an understanding of their life, I suggest very famous Salo forum thread on patient zero, Gaitan Dugas and origin of the AIDS epidemic, is very popular Salo thread by Nick Salo. It's spread throughout the internet by now and documents in detail the things that were going on in this world in the 1970s. I'll get to it in a moment, but of why I bring up as a poor gay because basically after 1950s as a result of rising living standard in developed world Almost all gays were reduced therefore to a bread-and-butter faggot existence

And now let me explain this and forgive me if I repeat myself sometimes But it's been many shows over 70 shows by now some repetition is inevitable So, what is feminism? Feminism is a cartel of older women who want to limit men's access to younger women. And it may also be many other things, and there are, of course, all kinds of manipulations that take place at the top levels. Why is it introduced there? For example, the desire to bring women into the workforce, to lower wages and expand consumer society, as Alain Soral says, and all of this is true, but the only reason it has legs, Its fuel is 30-something and somewhat older women who are resentful that men of their age go for younger women, and this is the psychosexual fuel that it lives on.

Without average older women being susceptible to this sexual jealousy drive, feminism would not have anything to go on. So then it takes these sexual desires and frustrations and claims, you are not frustrated because of this, but because of legal oppression and systemic oppression, and it manages to channel these sexual desires and frustrations into political and social action and all this. And my theory about the gays is similar, that if you look at pre-1950 gay society, you see actually it's mostly gays that are paying working class straight men, which is really what they are interested in, and it still works this way in the third world, where the living standards are low, and I heard a gay once say, you know, he was saying, oh us gays

don't really want civil rights, we would be happier if government just gave us rent boy subsidies so we could hire more rent boys. So I think this was a rare moment of honest self-recognition, but it's also, by the way, why gays support mass immigration into America, it's entirely for this reason. So otherwise, again, because the very dramatic rise in living standards after 1950 in the West and also a change in the culture, my point is the vast majority of gays were simply priced out of the kind of sex wars they wanted after 1950. So there were a few exceptions. The rent-boy-gay-for-pay culture continued among blacks, okay, where the previous poverty continued. Also some of the cultural elements from before 1950 continued.

But although the gays always used black men for this, and please alert Tariq Nasheed about also the epidemic of the down-low craze going on among brothers, but this was never enough for the gays. First of all, not all of them like blacks. Gays are very racist in this regard. And at any rate, they always desired, even if they had blacks, they desired handsome white men, which they couldn't have, it truly bothered them. But they were priced out of that. So otherwise, gay for pacing also continued among bodybuilding culture, which generally is very corrupt. I'm not talking about what's happening now when everyone has picked it up, but what existed if you look at movies in the 70s and 80s and this, but even then it happened at a much

lower frequency, and again it was usually too expensive for the average gay. So then out of this sexual frustration, lack of sexual marketplace options, I believe the gay movement was born, it was a successful attempt to convince gay men that their lack of sexual options and their lack of sexual satisfaction came from oppression by straight society as it could be solved with legislation, with demands for equality, and so on and so forth. So another was very similar to feminism, a misinterpretation of desire and its warping and twisting into political and social action instead. To the extent it found expression in sexual behavior, it was channeled into joyless debauchery, which was done again out of political principle, where you will show them and this.

And it is joyless not just because of this, but because two gays can almost never find satisfaction with each other. For the same reason you would not find satisfaction, for example, with a butch bulldike, right? But imagine you were told your liberation and self-realization as a human depended on that on sex wars with a butch bulldyke only and also that you should find it enjoyable and that if you do not it means that your opponents win, well what you'd get are repeated attempts at copulation with dozens and dozens of bulldykes and this is from all accounts what the average promiscuous gaze experiences, repeated bad sex and failed attempts to find sexual fulfillment. This extends also somewhat to the straight world by the way.

An Orthodox Jew once told me, and it's the only time I heard this explanation for why being promiscuous is bad, but I think it's half true. He was a normal man, he was a soldier in fact, and from all what I saw, girls liked him, he had opportunities. But he told me why he did not want to engage in sex wars before marriage, and now keep in mind that marriage for that community is often in early 20s or so, but he explained By saying that people feel compelled to engage in sex wars, they expect very much from it, then they are let down, and then this forces them to keep trying. And he was referring to, by nature, you know, men and women couplings, of course, but this was his reasoning, and it could be right in some ways, that the more people expect from

sex wars and the more self-consciously, at least, that they pursue it, the more let down they are. And then they need to keep trying it, okay, this time I'll get it right. I don't know if this is true in general for straight people. I don't think it's true, maybe, not all. I heard of very different stories from successful Casanubas who have different experience, and even you can hear different stories from some grills. But for gays, I think it's almost always true, because of really how unsuited they are for each other, incompatible sexually. And because of the difficulty of their preferred practices, difficulty also in finding each other. I mean, they claim 10 percent of population, but that's not true. It's actually one to three percent. And so imagine the difficulties in that.

It's a much smaller population. The people you have to choose from are much less in this. So this frustration, like I tell you, is very easy for the modern state manager to demagogue it into activism. Now what is the modern demagogue state? Remember in Machiavelli, he recommended to the king to ally with the people against the nobles, to present himself as the liberator of the people from the oppression and pride of the nobles. And what happens though when you run out of the people, right? The modern state is just this principle but systematized and extended without any breaks. So after the people are liberated, the demagogues that run modern liberal democracy, they try to find ever newer client groups to revolutionize and to, quote unquote, liberate.

The more oppressed groups it finds to liberate, the more this can be used to attack the middle. And that attack on the middle is ultimate desire for modern state and its factions, the control over the vast middle, its political and cultural hegemony, and especially over its vast aggregate of wealth and all this. So in the multiplication of identities, especially now of sexual orientation and fricaries, it can always find new clients and claims to use these as weapons against the middle and its way of life, which is, by the way, the ridiculous Wignat, Richard Spencer Roy desire to become another pressure group cannot work because the pressure groups exist to be used against you. The liberal state will not accept your claims as another identity group.

And if you could organize white people as a group that way, you could just take over the state. needed them to lobby for Gibbs from a centralized authority, anyway, that's for another time. But whether it was by chance or design, I do not know, maybe it does not matter, but I believe the immune system of modern regime that I just described to you, after 1950, it saw, and certainly by late 60s, it saw a real threat in this leftover underworld I mentioned. It's so, here is outside our control, it's so here men meet each other, okay, yeah, sexual, but they meet each other not in a spirit of hostility. And although the basis of their association is merely sexual, they are forming a kind of underseam to modern life where men can meet both outside our view and also not in

a spirit of mutual antagonism, and this is very dangerous and we will stop it. And how did they stop it? stop it with gay movement, with the bringing of the underworld into the mainstream and normalization, and with this it managed also to recruit the gays, who were hurt by sexual frustration and the pressures of various kinds, managed to recruit them against the middle in the way I say. And when the second way this underworld was destroyed was with AIDS, that was just a biological bomb that ended the gay world in the 1980s. And if this was not designed by the modern regime, it would have had to be. But it was probably just the consequence of the forced, again, forced principled gay debauchery of the 1970s. Again, read Sallow's thread.

A remarkable world in its absurdity, even if the HIV virus had not existed. I doubt the immune systems of those men who engaged in the bathhouse world of the 70s, I doubt their immune systems could have withstood what they were engaging in. They listed STDs they got as a point of pride. They got gonorrhea syphilis, they listed them. They collected STDs as trophies and notches, and their beliefs they could all be cured and that this represented their liberation also from the strictures of heteronormative society but quite aside from already known STDs and unknown ones which I believe also exist but quite aside from the STDs destroying their health. They also live the lifestyle of, excuse me, I told you I might mention some untoward things

on this show, but semen itself is an immunosuppressant. It has to be immunosuppressant because to facilitate fertilization in the foreign body of the female has to tune down the immune system of the receptive female. But that means no one is actually meant to take hundreds and hundreds of different semen loads, okay? So, men or women, okay, question, does the accelerated aging of the modern roasty, is that because they're taking dozens of loads of different men in 1970s San Francisco style, and thereby confusing their immune system? I don't know. But there was this going on in 70s, plus drugs which weaken immune system also, and party lifestyle and this, so I believe these things alone would have been enough to destroy the immune system of any community engaging in them at all.

And the HIV virus probably does exist, and it probably does cause long-term immune breakdown and this, but even if it exists, I believe it was probably initially a harmless retrovirus, as retroviruses always were, by the way, harmless, but it was memed in this highly diseased petri-dish society. It was memed into becoming a killer, right? Any society like this that existed in antiquity or before modern time would have ceased existing, existing, would have disappeared because of these practices, and I believe probably, again I say on last show, there were cults that did engage in these practices and disappeared. And by the way, Fauci, Dr. Fauci, he refused to close down the gay bathhouses in the 1980s

when it was known this was spreading in the gay bathhouse, this disease, and instead Fauci was key in spreading propaganda that you know it could be spread to the straight world, which was a lie. He was spreading the propaganda that if you're a straight high school guy in Kansas in 1987 and you road dog your girlfriend that you would both get AIDS and die, which is absurd as transmission among straights continues to be basically zero. There is book, The Myth of Straight AIDS or something like this. But you recognize the tactic, yes, the tactic of Fauci because here these friends have been doing the same thing now with mass lockdown and mass vaccination with this Wuhan flu instead Instead of targeting the vulnerable populations in this, everyone has to suffer, because it

increases their prestige and power as virologists to have the pandemic go on and to pretend the same thing. And of course, today the gays are some of the most severe enforcers of lockdown and mask hysteria, while in private they continue to meet on virtual bathhouse grinder, which again, strangely, Fauci and company did not call for the shutdown of this sex app. It is a vector of disease spread, no doubt, but just like they did not condemn BLM riots in the spread of Wuhan Flu, instead it's normal people only who have to suffer and someone who cannot visit their grandmother in hospital or old people are isolated, but these others get a break. But okay, I've gone on tangent again. The point is the gay world was transformed by the gay liberation movement and then by

by the nuclear bio-bomb of AIDS, which was itself a consequence of the fake liberation. And as a result, by 1990s, the gays had been fully recruited as foot soldiers of modern regime to be used against the middle. Now, for this show, I discuss the most recent developments with a frog, who knew this world quite well, relatively recently. He left it. I don't think he regrets his participation in it, but he sees it as completely filthy and demonic, and he left it, and I ask him the same question I started with, of what is this, what is Chem Sex? Why separate word for it? What makes them engage in this? And he tell me, BAP, once they open the door to the kind of behavior that is encouraged, there is no closing it, there is then just a rush to find ever deeper forms of degradation

and self-destruction, whether it's fisting or they formalize drug use by calling it Chem sex or whether they collect other fetishes and display them, again, with formalized language. You know, you might have seen this on Twitter, bear culture, otter culture, they call themselves this. It's always a rush to find unique new ways of self-identification by fetish style. You tell me this is what the furries are most of all, really initially a weird fetish to to fuck each other in Disney skin suits, but it developed into a community based around this fetish and finally a complicated, quite developed convoluted parody of identity politics itself where furries form a kind of pedophilic subculture cabal seeking to steer mankind into this new world of transhumanism. Many of them are tech dorks.

Who knows if Elon or whoever is into furry in private, I don't know, but people of his stature absolutely are. But it's not something to be ignored. As for example, the furries, they have plans to comprehensively and preemptively take over the virtual reality world, that whole marketplace. Right, so with virtual reality, many think it's the next level, beyond cinema. But you go into some of these virtual reality rooms that already exist, or worlds, and they're already furry controlled. And of course, when children will join that world, they will not know this, they will People just see a man in Donald Duck or the Wolf suit and Disney suits, and these perverts will prevent themselves as their friends, and they will call you a criminal if you point

out there's something very different, you see where this is going. So the first thing is maybe the next level of intellectualized gay identity. It's an abstract and conceptual fetish, even if many of them are straight, supposedly. But it's not about the mechanics of intercourse, it's about the denial of human nature. about control, a kind of power trip, the use of sexual energy for control expressed through transgression and technology. In many ways they are the antagonist and the opposite of the frogs. They also use technology, they also mock modern identity politics, but from different direction. And now the other direction of the modern gaze that they have taken, you are all much better acquainted with, and this is the tranny.

The transsexual, the tranny online, we have all interacted with trannies, they're mentally ill, they're driven actually by a masculine rage, by a lust to dominate. If I had to say what characterizes emotions of a tranny is a rage, they are so quick to just fly into a rage, all of us have seen this. But if you've ever talked in person to a drag monster and nightclub, you know what they They are, in them, as a gay fetish developed in new and demonic ways, right? Always try to find a new way to self-destruct because the last sin and vice does not satisfy you anymore. So where the lust for self-destruction and despoilage was really given free reign is in the Thrani community, the gay, you know, right, who normally you would expect the gay to worship manliness, yes?

So Paglia says this, but Paglia, who believes this, she's a bit behind the times. Because the ethos of the gays as a whole is no longer to worship manliness. That desire was warped by the developments, I tell you, and by the never-ending frustrations and degradation of the modern gay men, it was warped into the desire instead to despoil and destroy anything healthy and beautiful. And you can see how easily it can be turned into this right. I mean, this is the claim they make about incel rage, that the incels exist out of inability to get women, that they want to go on a shooting spree. Well, what about femcel and gaycel rage? Because that's what these modern movements are. Well, because they cannot get Aryan water polo team, they go on political and social shooting spree,

and sometimes not just political and social. And it does nothing to say, well, not all gays are like this. Of course, not all are, some are very different, but on the whole, the gay movement is a movement of incel hatred, actually, a desire to destroy what you cannot have, to despoil. So if you've ever talked to drag rage monster in a nightclub and turned down their advances, you see once their voice drop, a couple of register, and demonic look on face, and they make violent or death threats, and I've heard the same thing from others, they threaten rape, so you know fucking for them is not an expression even of healthy lust. I'm not going to even mention love, but for them it's something to destroy. And the drag outfit is the clown outfit of John Wayne Gacy, right?

He dressed like a clown. John Wayne Gacy's serial killer is the same thing, exactly the same thing. John Wayne Gacy is prototyped for the trans so-called men and trans movement. And that mentally deranged Kardashian creature in California, what's his name, Bruce Kardashian Jenner, right? The energy you get from him is precisely this. He want to fuck California. He want to fuck it to despoil it from Fresno and West Hollywood, okay, to give it facial. He want to fuck California. And the dumb, gay, McShawn, Wellbanger, Kennedy, and other dumb Republicans, they have these mentally ill, destructive, demonoid men on the show, and they demonize, excuse me, they normalize him and promote him in public. But don't forget that if your son hits on a girl now, it become national viral story

and they call him a pervert. Are American parent mentally ill not to see what they're doing to your children spiritually? I don't know. I am tempted to say we should all move to Argentina or even Gabon. But maybe you use these repeated outrages and failures of normie society, you use them to motivate you to form your own cabals and mafias driven by a different spirit and to hold the line in what is surely to come, the total social disintegration and mass spiritual warfare. But there is opportunity always in chaos, so very good. Until next time, BAP out.