Yes, Velkamai is here, I'm here, I'm back, even though this is a very difficult time of year for me because the persistent light of summer, and I hope you all had a mid-summer solstice with sacrifice and land and everything, but this very difficult time of year for me, I cannot sleep, my nerves are on free point because the energy, even at night I feel the radiation of the sun. It oppresses me and I don't know if, let's say, I walk five in the morning and I feel like the footstep behind me in this plaza, I walk alone at night, and it could be the demon of the sixth hour, this is a big part of orthodox Christian mysticism, or it could be Nietzsche he talk about dwarf gravity dwarf and I think someone could do very important

papers to study whether what Nietzsche talk with this gravity dwarf is similar to clockwork elves look up Alex Jones clockwork elves but in any case I am back this will be calm show very calm show light political matter continuation from last time episode 79 many thing here happened this week in news, Alien Invasion preparation continues. I see a moment, but first, SoundCloud banned me, so it's okay, I am surprised they let me stay this long. It's very sensorious, SoundCloud, they had actually removed my first show, my pilot show, long ago, about two weeks or so after it came out, and this was, I had 20,000 views within a few days. They removed it even though as a friend said when this someone I had not

known before but as soon as this come out he say humor like Lazarus is born again. This was big compliment for me and this a work of art they censor and you will allow for me a moment to talk about censorship. I very rarely do it. It is my conviction that you You should keep talking about censorship to at most 20% of air time if necessary, or writing whatever medium you use. This is also advice for info wars, by the way. I like Alex Jones. I like info war. I think Alex Jones, one of great voice performers of our time, I would ask him to please fix his info wars website so I do not have to click four or five button to be able to listen to audio. But my other thing is when you spend half or more of your time talking about how you're

oppressed and censored, the other side wins in a way, right? Because people don't as such tune in to hear you talk about censorship. It's the content that's being censored that they want and that they cannot get anywhere else. They want the truth because truth nowhere else are allowed to talk to them because we We say naughty, unusual things because we speak the truth when no one else does. We get targeted. And I understand that you want to complain this or you get targeted not just with censorship but also with lies and other kinds of attacks and it's outrageous. I get attacked every day. You get beyond any few thousand followers or any attention on the right and you get viciously attacked in perverse way and you want to defend yourself.

But if you do too much, then you let them win, and this is my advice, not just for Infowar, but any so-called dissident thinker, or I prefer truth thinker, or the German word Selbstänker, self-thinker, or if you are a performer clown like me or whatever, you must mostly not talk about censorship. But that said, you will allow me occasional indulgence, and in my case, especially absurd but as I am, listen, I'm comedy show on SoundCloud is listed under voice performance comedy. And it's not just done for self protection, okay? Okay. I'm told by many people that they get belly laugh on every or almost every show. And I don't know if you realize how rare this is. A standup comic will spend months preparing the one 30 minute show and he will maybe get two or three chuckles

is considered a good stand-up comedian. So I think I have actually very good comedy show, which does not, it's not that I don't mean what I say, you have to figure out what I mean, but I use humor. And traditionally, a society that is not a batshit crazy will give people who can make you laugh some allowance and freedom in words and in ideas that they are allowed to use, right? So the jester was only one allowed to insult the king and to commit less magister, this, but today, no, no, no, you cannot be funny. Funny is bad. Funny, blasphemous. What a strident yokel comes, you know, comes from the upper middle class office, Morris. That's where this all comes from. Nearly all American ills come from this upper middle class. They're cultures, they're customs,

so you read any shit lip hit pieces on me that cater to this class, and they are always trying to make it that I wrote a manifesto, okay, I never called it that except, okay, so they always use the word like, as if I wrote Al-Qaeda manifesto on management of savagery or something like this, the impression they want to give. And they want to hide any hint that it's a box that makes people belly laugh because, okay, this very sore spot for them is what I need. And I read somewhere, it was recent that Norm Macdonald and Patrice O'Neill, famous comedians, they were on some radio show together. This was not 1970s or long ago. This was very recent, even in our extremely censorious time, and they were calling each other faggot and nigger and kike and all this. It was taken.

Okay, it's no problem. It's what comedians do. Now a treatise would be written about it if they did on a show today, how it's the epistemic preamble to Kristallnacht. Then you would get David Frum. He would share it, and David Frum, when Trump was running, he was on a debate stage saying it is Kristallnacht. He said the Trump campaign is Kristallnacht. That's David Frum. So that's a conservative for you. That's a conservative. Tell me more please about critical race theory. What is? Maybe as David Frum, but so in the case of SoundCloud, which again, I was expecting this for a long time. It's just the free portion of my show, which from now on is going to to go on Libsyn, but I talked to Menaquinone4 the other day and he thought I had already

been banned long ago because Soundcloud is just one of the worst. It's run out of Berlin by Germans who, you know, Germans today, they're in tight leather outfit, peeing in each other's mouths doing Soundcloud editing. This Berlin scene, quite a change. So they happen, however, to host rather unusual musics, did you know this? It's called rap musics, hip-hop, and apparently the standards go out the window for rap musics. Is that, uh, okay, so let me read you this. I will do, uh, rap for you. I will hip-hop. Okay, listen to this. Els the nigga that crime follows. I'm hittin' fine models and stabbin' punks with broken wine bottles. I beat chumps till they head split, then break em' like breadsticks. I sex chicks I'll even fuck a dead bitch Always spraying TECs because I be staying vexed

These are the, this is what the text says okay Some nigga named Dex was in the project laying threats I jumped out the Lincoln, left him stinking Put his brain in the street Now you can see what he was just thinking Okay so this apparently a classic of the genre by Big L You like this hip hop? Big L is one of the classic he's based and their Thing like that. Okay, so sound cloud about fucking dead girl Like you just saw but I cannot say she boom he can say that but I can't say the word she boom And of course, there's much worse than that There are open calls for racial violence and death threats and the detailed depiction of how they will kill the beaches and this But comedy show not allowed. So anyway, this is my rant for you on my persecution. I

persecution, and it was likely reported, I think, by censorious trannies, after my show revealing the meaning of the gay movement, I had a double, I think, 75, 76 episode on the gay movement, it hit them like a rock, or it was the furries who I mentioned. The furries are extremely powerful in technology world, and they may have reported me, or it It was the DC lavender Fed, Fed rallies, the so-called post-Trump right, because they keep exposing their rent boys. So it's one of these. I don't know. We will see. But anyway, lots of news this week, recount going Arizona. So if you need more confirmation that the election was stolen, what do they do? They come up with more evidence now for normal fags. Tell me what will happen. Will Trump send out another communique? Nobody will read this.

It's hopeless. I am saying they have this Trump, they're extorting him, they have him locked in a room in White House. They say, we will feed your daughter to Masha Gessen and this. I don't know what they have on him, but there is major revolver piece show FBI involvement in the events of January 6. Maybe I talk a little about this. Biden regime, which declared its campaign at Charlottesville, and it will have as its theme the so-called white nationalist or white supremacist terror and since 1990s at least you see the government always somehow able to uncover plots whether it's 80 IQ Muslims or it's militiamen in the 90s whatever government is in power they will contrive their enemy the only one you will

notice who did not have mass terror attack was Trump because he cut I think attention and funding to counter terror establishment, but now that they are ramping up this fake industry again, I would suggest to some of you that are enterprising, maybe you make an organization that combine, explicitly combines the ideologies of Christian identity, Zionism, jihad, something like this, Zionist Christian identity, jihad, patriot militiamen, Then to get all the sources of new world order, deep state funding, they will just throw all the money at you from all departments, something like this. Maybe add also Red-Brown Alliance, National People's Front, combine all of those ideologies and the state, the counter-terror establishment will throw money at you.

And the difference in this case, however, what Biden regime doing now compared to what Clinton was doing is the enemy is declared to be tens of millions of people. And I think people in government who are doing this are stupid enough to go ahead with insane plan. But this is all to show absurdity or severity of our situation, which is why I find many of so-called post-Trump right, these intellectuals, whether they write Washington, D.C., or some write online, they say, I am a leader now of post-Trump right. I carry forward. I'm the true nationalist intellectual. I often attack them because I think they are, to say they're silly is much understated. It's beyond stupid, beyond surreal, the things, including Coulter, what all the things he was saying.

Yes, Coulter, who was wrong on Iraq, by the way, when Trump was right, and now she is the nationalist purist. But beyond her, many of the things that are being promoted now by pundit and DC freaks who pretend to take leadership of the right, I cannot stand. I will talk on this show on next segment, the foolishness, in other words, of nationalist or populist neo establishment, the Catholic also so-called intellectual. I'm not saying if you're a religious man, Catholic, but people who go to D.C. and convert to that specifically so they can get into this reform conservative movement, whatever it is, you know, these are people who are seeing a decaying monstrosity like 1980s East Bloc. OK, but some regime imagine 1980s Soviet Union or East Bloc.

That's what America is now, a decaying monstrosity. But in its death throes, it's about to lash out around the world and at its citizens. And these reform icons and other nationalist DC intellectuals, they want to propose surreal wonkish measures. Some of them also have this half-baked pretense to socialism, with a real socialism now, with a real anti-establishment, you know, to pretend that this is all a pretense, that minor cosmetic thing like tax credit or for work-at-home mothers or boutique concern like pornography ban. This is all senile. It's like putting Band-Aid on gushing blood wound. It's worthless in my opinion even to think about, but I will say briefly why wrong and then maybe a section after that later and show I will address matter of censorship some

some more, not really my own censorship, but how censorship in general has led to this, how it has degraded the discourse over the last two years, degraded the right to this condition where we have half-baked memesters and precious, soft-handed nobody, 19th century kind of ultra-mountainist role-players from fake think tanks, they are pretending to run some is that thought, but they have none of the energy and insight that frogs had before we were censored, essentially, starting 2017 to 18. But really, these people are just reducing our insight and vitality to fantastical abstractions that no one in America cares about. So in any case, I will be right back. This is a shorter show. You can also tell from my voice calmer show you will forgive but a new world order

Grievously attack my nerves this summer. They put through the light. I think Nanoparticle into my ear. I am unable to sleep for some days I think my it may also have to do with my all milks and coffee diet. I go on this die I only have basically sheep and goat milk with coffee. Maybe I need to reconsider this. I will be right back I have for you a news clip from some years ago. I believe this 2010 around Mark Faber was on CNBC. Please listen to this on Situation of America today. Very insightful. I posted before online. I mentioned it on previous show, you must listen to this. It's almost like our central bankers here feel pretty confident that they shouldn't be doing anything other than flooding the world with money right now because of 8.8% unemployment.

Are you sure we should live through five years of misery just to make sure that we don't inflate too much? It depends whose misery. It would take me a very long time to go into details, but basically today, actually in the US, it's not an issue between Democrats and Republicans because there are many Democrats who are well-to-do people and there are many Republicans who are not so affluent. It's a question of essentially entitlements. The majority of people, obviously, is not particularly well-to-do, so they want larger and larger entitlements, transfer payments, and work less. And the people that have money are the ones that usually work very hard, and they don't want to have these transfer payments. So the people that have the money, say the 10 percent of the population that is affluent

in the U.S., or maybe just the 5 percent of the population, they are outnumbered by the poor people, and therefore they have essentially no votes. So the one way to get back at the masses that all get these entire movements is to print money. Because by printing money and by outsourcing production to, say, China, you disenfranchise the working class. And by printing money, you let then asset prices go up. It could be real estate, it could be stocks, it could be commodities, whatever it is. And so your asset value increases dramatically and there is wealth disparity that is increasing. But Mark, you make this sound like a conspiracy theory. You think that this is intentional? Well, it's not conspiracy, but look, if you clearly think about it, if you are well to

do in the United States, you have exactly the same vote as someone who doesn't want to work that is born illiterately because in America close to 50% of babies are born to women that are not married and most of them are actually poor so what kind of education these people will get you have to ask yourself but they have the same vote than someone who has say influence and affluence and has worked very hard all his life so these guys who worked very hard to say to them that the system is cheating us we're going to cheat the system as well. I guess that's one view on what's happening. It's a very complex issue. We're at 50% of the people here do not pay taxes. Now if you're 50% and yet those same 50% will write in and call people that make more than 250 that

they're getting a free ride and that they're... Working very hard is one thing getting money back because of investments you've inherited is another. I mean, there's all kinds of reasons that people wind up in good positions and not so great positions. And, Mark, actually, you've just laid out a very good argument for making sure that we have strong public education, to make sure everyone receives a strong education. What I really wanted to say is the tragedy is that the system has become dysfunctional. And the other day, CNBC interviewed Mike Steinhardt. He said it exactly the way it is. He said, we're not leaving the America that America used to be. Something changed along the way and everybody wants to rip off the system.

And that leads then to essentially and has also been encouraged by money printing. But basically, the well-to-do people in America, they benefit from money printing as well as elsewhere in the world because they can shift their assets overseas. the ordinary man doesn't have that potential. Yes, Mark Faber very good. He can take a step back as only a man of greatness of mind and practical experience and see he can provide great compromise in which both sides appear to be self-interested pricks as inevitably people appear in situation of system breakdown which what America is now. So you just had Mark Faber dealing with moron CNBC woman newscaster type, you should see her face, look for that clip. She simply cannot grasp the level at which she speaks and she keeps wanting to bring

back to what she knows, which is them programs. Can we talk about them more education? And this is how I feel often much on Internet when I am listening to post Trump so-called right, when they list policies or measures, many of them with a slight, it gives them a free zone to think of, oh, a slight socialism edge, you know, for, really, how do they propose this as solution to system of failed incentives that cannot be reformed, meaning really again this system breakdown, a society on its last legs, and their cure is, well, I have this Right sort of populist socialism for you. If you have any concern right now, other than we win, they lose. Our side wins. Our side get power of government and wield it to crush enemy or at least to save our

lives or to save from being flooded by 100 million African mass immigration, you are a full cretin or you are playing for the other side. And so there are some reasons why especially this push to have the nationalist right embrace socialism is idiotic. And let me say before, this is not a problem that exists in Europe. In Europe, nationalist parties, whether you take the Boomers or the youth wings of them, these are the generation identity type youth wings of European nationalist parties. In Belgium, it's called Schildud Vrinden, they are the youth group of the flams Belang, Flemish nationalists and unlike American nationalist young intellectuals, they actually contest elections and win and one is an MP.

I think the leader is an MP either in, I don't know if it's Belgian parliament or European, but it doesn't matter. They are quite different and they are not so idiotic as to try to adopt the brand or language of socialism or class talk or this because they're aware the mass immigration Push, for example, which is our main issue in the West. This is a keystone issue of nationalism. And where does mass immigration come from? It comes from openly socialist and green parties, which are really, of course, nothing to do with the green environment and everything to do with the beige and mud of the favela, the German Green Party and this, right? Because the nationalists in Europe are aware the scheme is, the scheme of the opposition is we bring

in these voters through mass immigration, we tax and oppress you, the natives. You work for us and we pay them to have this base of support of foreigners. They give us votes and we pay them. We also use them as for intimidation, as a battering ram against you and for other things. And we will get some of the business and oligarch class to go along with it because we will intimidate them and they will get cheap labor. We will deal with them later, as the left, by the way, will. Who comes out on top of this scheme is the left, and most of the oligarchs and plutocrats will probably get hung eventually. This is what happened many times in third world Latinx America, this same alliance of the left with the plutocrat, but very often the plutocrat gets hung or his property gets

taken anyway later, and there are these savage cycles of revolution and counter-revolution. And I think this probably future of West Europe and America as well. But nationalist parties in Europe who are trying to stop this, they know their base of support is, broadly speaking, the middle class. You could say the middle and working classes, but when you think working class, it's not 19th century factory and Oliver Twist and this, they are quite different. And that the language of socialism is implicated in this scheme I just said, which is the same scheme again in America and even Latin America, slightly different form, Latin America mostly uses internal migration to cause this same phenomenon, but you're not part of it, you're

a dummy if you think you're part of this socialist scheme or that you can be. It is designed to pilfer you. And there is one exception in Europe, which is very telling, one party that attempted to engage this, specifically the language of socialism, of anti-neoliberalism, of, you know, let's say Marxism, it's not quite Marxism, but it's the same type of language that the DC reformicons and post-Trump right is trying to use. And this is the washerwoman Marine Le Pen, the bundler, in the last election against Macron instead of making it a referendum on immigration, which she maybe could have won, but she did exactly this post-Trump writer trying to do it. She adulterated that Keystone message with many other extraneous program and proposals

and this fake kind of pseudo-socialist language, you know, with the focus of we against elites, which is fine, but then adding elites are neoliberal international capital and therefore we socialist marxists and i am leading a vanguard of socialism against the elite establishment and this was the kind of rhetoric she was using and the reason she did this she had an advisor Florian Filippo he's basically an avowed marxist or excuse me a socialist as if there is a difference he is also a chevalier de la manchette please look up what this mean in russo confessions it's It's basically the type of man who likes to go to public restroom and have a sergeant from the French Foreign Legion use a toilet plunger in his rectum.

In other words, the homopathic and part of a well-known homopathic Lavender Creek in France. And this was her advisor in her last election. In other words, this was the one place in Europe where they really went with this we We working class party, we vanguard of socialism, this so-called socialism nationalism, and she lost. She very much lost in general election. Now maybe she would have lost anyway, but we don't know because she failed to make the election about immigration, which is what has made nationalist parties viable and strong in West Europe and the United States. And instead she turned it on question of economic and what she missed, what the DC post-Trump reform icons and so-called nationalist intellectuals missed is that the solution to problem on account

of which this nationalist worldwide uprising or populist even take place, it has little to do with economics as such. It's very little. And whatever does have to do is not in the way they think, but maybe even quite the opposite. So if you look at places where there was a nationalist or a populist uprising or a populist reform, populist political movement, but where immigration was not an issue. In other words, the only such places are outside the Western world. You look at Turkey, Philippines, Japan, Brazil, they all had strong populist and successful populist movements. And you look at what the core of it is. If it wasn't immigration, what was it? Well, Erdogan in Turkey is the Trump candidate, Trump extra, a successful Trump who's willing

to take down the centralised, you could say, Kemalist state, and I'm sorry if I'm offending my Turkish friends here because I support that Kemalist state. But Erdogan's achievement has to be considered in context of understanding what makes populism work, what makes it win. And you look at Erdogan's base, his base is small business owners in Anatolia, religious religious people, small religious, small business owners who did not like that the secular central, I don't want to say socialist because Turkey was not socialist, but the centralized secular managerial state of Turkey was many regulation on these people. They didn't want that. They wanted freedom of capitalism. And it's same in the other places I mentioned in Japan. It's same with Orban in Hungary.

He did not use language of socialism, but quite the opposite. It's same in Brazil, where Bolsonaro base of support is very similar to that of Erdogan in Turkey. It's small business owners and also ranchers in places like Mato Grosso and Brazilian south. And these are the people who brought all these, excuse me, all these successful populist candidates to power and who preserved them in some security. I don't know if Bolsonaro can make it. see. But in same in America, the core is the small farmer, there are not many left, but people of their type, the small business owner. And there are many small business owners, but it's not just that there are many, it's that other voters around them in the community, they take their cues from them.

And that is the Trump core, the MAGA core or populist, whatever you want to call it. And it's actually more or less the same in France, because, you know, in modern developed world there simply is not this mass of urban factory workers that can be mobilized. This is a slightly different question maybe for future show, the question of the manufacturing worker in America, for example, who was often put out of work by globalism, his job off shore and is a bit complicated because these are actually high paying jobs when they exist. These people, you can call them working class, but then if you're a DC pundit, they make more money than you. And when these jobs don't exist, again it's a bit complicated, Trump by the way brought many back.

But it's a bit complicated because this is not really the constituency that you can mobilize in any case with this language of socialism. The only people who you can mobilize with this are some of the Bernie voters, who you're not going to win. Because they are hot, they are very hot for mass immigration. They like walking the rent boys and scarification, as I said before. I don't want to repeat myself, but you're certainly not getting the small business owners or the salaried employees that make the core of the populist uprising and who are people who are crushed, actually oppressed by socialist policies of the modern mega state and its coastal, let's say, upper middle class staffers and clients. And they are targeted with especially violent, even eliminationist language by the left and

by the media that belongs to this state. As Frog put it very well, you want to use this language of socialism, you're going to win over the, let's say, small business owner from Midwest who is get clobbered by coastal elites and the sons and daughters of this coastal elite are all in democratic socialist of America and Antifa and Antifa-friendly organizations and media groups, and you're going to adopt their language and essentially shit on the head of the populist coalition, but then also pretend to be its leader. It doesn't work. And you come at them with this class analysis is your friend talk, I'm quoting directly Sohrab Amari, the chaiwala of the vermula. And why do I pick on that guy? Because he's a fraud. What a fraud. He wrote a book, Support Arab Spring, Soram Amari.

Now if you support Iraq war the way Coulter was a booster for Iraq war, that's excusable. Many Americans did. They learned their lesson from that. If you did not learn your lesson by 2010-11 and you support Arab Spring, and whenever that was 2009, there is no hope for you. That guy is interloper and people around him are too. These people are frauds. Okay. And at the high level, they know about the Florian Filippo fiasco in France, about the guy who ruined the chances of the Front National for Marine Le Pen in the last election, because he persuaded her to follow this path that maybe sound good on paper to claim, oh, well, we're against the establishment. Well, I saw Hollywood movie. So that must mean we are socialists against establishment now, right?

Because Paul Ryan and McConnell are the establishment, they don't like socialism, so we are socialist against establishment. I saw this in 1970s Chomsky, so it must be true. But in practice, what happened, she alienated huge chunk of her own supporters. Some of those people went for Macron, then they revolted against him in the yellow vests and this because he did not deliver. But for example, Macron in France and Macri in Argentina, they got elected because they were promising to end the regulations of the managerial, socialist, modern French state that just crush the productive people in France. This is what some of you refuse to accept. There are those among us who like this kind of systemic analysis, they embrace systemic analysis, which to me is a form of magical fantasy thinking.

These are people who believe the opponent is this vague abstraction of global capital or global neoliberalism, that therefore you face the same opponent everywhere in the world and you are allied against techno-capital with scrappy nationalists, socialists, I don't I don't mean National Socialists, but probably Socialist Nationalists, the type you see in PKK or the Basque parties who are left phenomenon, not the rightest one. Also you're allied with Evo Morales in Bolivia because he talks against international capital and he opposes the IMF, so therefore you must surely be allied with him. This is the kind of thinking, or in France, this kind of thinking would make you allied with a statist, so-called socialist policies, right?

In other words, this is what I mean, it's a kind of, it's not religious, but it's magical thinking. The Satan of the modern radical, this so-called global capital or whatever name they use. Today it's called neoliberalism, tomorrow it's technological capital, the next day is the cathedral. No offense to Mollbach, but the people copying him have turned it, again, into magical satanic entity, all-powerful, pervasive throughout the world, and the point of which is that this homogenizes political life worldwide in the holder's mind, the people who believe this. It makes you think in terms of policy orientations, which is big mistake, because in Argentina, the people you are actually allied to, the concerns of the white middle class are actually

somewhat different than in America, and so on and so forth. In Argentina, they are groaning under even more enormous regulations that crush them. In Argentina, they successfully set up national system of leftist nationalist populism. I'm not attacking Bannon, he good man mostly on our side and so forth, but what he tries to establish was established in Argentina by Perón. And the natural clients, however, of leftist nationalist populism is not the productive white middle class, which is why the Peronist party in Argentina imports clients from Bolivia and Peru and so forth when it runs out of Argentinians that it needs, in other words, this underclass. It can mobilize with propaganda and with, oh, I'm going to give you a fridge on election day you vote for me.

Essentially, it's more honest, at least in the United States. But I guess this is what happens when you have a country that is equally populated by Spanish, Italians, and ISIS. You get fridge and washing machine distribution on election day. But they have a system in Argentina that make them. Just to give you example, a brown bus driver make a lot more money and have a lot more sociopolitical prestige than a white educated professional. And let me ask you if you think that's a workable thing long term. It's as unjust as what goes on in America now, which is not that different from what I'm saying is. My point, the constituency of this worldwide populist uprising against so-called elites, they're not elite. To me elite is a good word, I say occupational class.

But the only vehicle for reaction against this occupational class and these failing states worldwide is the middle class, the productive classes, the working middle class. And in some countries like Argentina, that is the professionals, in others like America and France somewhat, and certainly in Turkey and Brazil, it's small business, it's contractors and so forth. But in all cases, you are shitting on these people's heads when you engage in this language of socialism and so-called class analysis. In all cases, what you're dealing is with people who are caught between odorous taxation and crushing regulations, actually. In America, so much of the Trump movement came out of what? Out of the Tea Party. It was the Tea Party that tried to rise up in 2010.

They were intimidated, including by using IRS against them, which is, by the way, exactly what was done in East block against dissidents. So America not free society from well before Trump. But after Tea Party get crushed on one hand by IRS and co-opted by a figured leadership of Republican Party, then they turn in desperation to Trump. And the core of Trump movement is still Tea Party. And what was core of Tea Party? It was a lot of women with our own small business, the MAGA moms, the MAGA moms. And then many other people from Trump movement come out of Ron Paul supporters. And very few come out of any so-called socialist leaning constituency. The Bernie voters that you could have won mostly have already made the switch.

And I'll get to a moment what that means in America, so-called socialist-leaning constituency. But these people who are part of the populist uprising in these various worldwide places, in these various failed states, they're caught in more of a dysfunctional state that pilfers them, takes from the productive, gives to the parasitical. And whatever money it touches, it turns to corruption and graft and waste. And it does all of this under slogans of equality or equity or redistribution and paying your fair share and this. And you want now to double down on this language. Why? Because in worst case, I'm saying in worst case where you do not assume good intentions of people doing this, attempting to co-opt the Trump right to fold it into the left.

So I'm saying in worst case, it is an attempt to introduce division within this nationalist uprising, to have in this case the frogs, which is to say the intellectual, humor, artistic and so forth shock troops, to have them become alienated from and hostile to the MAGA populist MAGA mum base, to have intellectual discourse around nationalism become something odious to the people who could be mobilized, and never forget that for all the protestations and the fake dismissiveness of the online left, the powers that be at large are and They were terrified by the frogs. This is why Hillary had her Pepe deplorable stock, destroyed her campaign. This is why Homeland had 4chan antagonist for a whole episode. They do not stop because they are terrified of idea that a counterculture position gets

taken away from the left. So if they can fold you back into left, not back into, but they want to fold you into left and to have you adopt a label of socialism so they can manipulate and marginalize you and I keep repeating this but it's necessary to repeat this. So that would be, let's say, the worst case when you take the cynical interpretation of what these people are doing and the second thing they're doing is they hope at the more institutional higher levels of this to attract Latino and other brown immigrants with this This thread socialism talk, because I tell you the thread socialism, the natural clients of that are Latino underclass immigrants, precisely the people who nationalist movement in America is trying to stop influx of this.

But I actually believe this is not necessarily so planned out, and the most frequent reason is not cynical for, I'm saying, for this kind of I'm a serious thinker policy proposal talk, right? explain what motivates it. I think in the best case, it's just you're an idiot and you have a one-track mind like Marco Rubio. So, you know, you think that Paul Ryan, bad, therefore socialism got this, one-track mind. Paul Ryan attack socialism, therefore I socialist. And if anyone criticize this, they're going to, don't tell me the frogs don't know what they're doing. They know exactly what they're doing. In other words, the short circuit, it's Marco Rubio, okay? this Jeneda Ruben on television in 2016, she was sketching about this. I'm not exaggerating at all.

There is a clip with her how the Rubes are not buying, they weren't picking up on Rubio and she was very upset. And her whole language during this clip is, the Rubes are not buying our advertising agency, PR perfected, you know, our colored fellow working class guy act. They're not picking up on rent boy. They've been doing this for a while, you see, now they call it post-Trump right, right? But they've had this in mind for many years, the one-track robot program mind, Paul Ryan say free market, therefore we populist socialists now. Well, maybe more on this later, but on the Paul Ryan pretense, if you wish. But overall, it's not worth getting in the swamp of argument and casuistry with such people. both commit is to believe that okay you have a patient who's bleeding, he's not

just bleeding, it's a Kurosawa samurai neck cut bleeding like fountain from two places from the neck and vomiting and you're going to use a band-aid and ibuprofen to cure him. Like Mark Faber, the clip I play at the beginning of segment, you have this functional corrupt system. So for example I'm not a peacenik, right? Like you know me, I love war like any disciple of Nietzsche, but I realize that you could have the most awesome cause and the best soldiers, but they will be dishonored and turned to toy soldier props for someone like Samantha Powers or other gender confused in a pants suit from CIA or State Department. Because right now occupational class, anything they touch, they will bungle. It doesn't matter how noble the foreign cause, they will ruin it.

They will turn it into casino scheme for another Biden family, or even if not corruption, they will, they're just incompetent. They will ruin it. So if you know this, why, if you would not let them manage a war, why would you trust them with a high speed choo choo or train or anything else? You know, I liked Trump plan for infrastructure. I say on last show, it wouldn't go to infrastructure, however, even during Trump when he was president, he was not in charge of bureaucracy, it would have gone to Gibbs for various of the managerial state clients, and Robert Reich and company would make sure it would not go to white contractors, you know, it would go to their clients, our friends would get nothing, nationalist supporters would get nothing.

And whatever would go to white contractors, the white contractors would also pilfer and pillage it as much as anyone else as they should, okay? Because in Japan, you have video, it takes 24 hours. It was amazing to see, one of the most amazing, it's really like science fiction to see this, where they build a subway station in 24 hours in Japan. But in United States, a very small section of road will take weeks or even months. But that's the point. You cannot throw money and programs at system of dysfunctional incentives, which is really a fancy way of saying it's a broken nation. It's a territory that actually lacks a national community. How do you form a national community? This very big problem, how do you reform the

American national community? It's not the Constitution. It's something that precedes the Constitution that no longer exists. How do you reform that? And that is a problem in America now. And even the white contractors will steal it as they should, right? Why should Should they sacrifice the well-being of themselves or their families for a state that cheats on and abuses them? This is why I say that all this talk of policy, wankishness, whether you take Paul Ryan wankishness or the new post so-called Trump nationalist, intellectual socialist wankishness, or we will do this or that once we get, it's pointless because America is Russia in 1980 scenario And our side needs and wants to see that you are ready to take regime down and to wield state power for us to defeat our enemies.

No one saying, no one who is not mentally ill or delusional in 1985 Soviet Union was talking about tax credit or some specific small scale economic policy and you're going to bridge the chasm with a two inch bridge, right? So nobody thought some small-scale economic policy would make things better. The only people doing this were delusional, senile, Chernenko-type people or as people who are as delusional as UFO worshippers. Really the Richard Spencer-type white nationalist, I was talking to Menelquin and he's right on this, the white nationalist crazy is less crazy than this kind of nationalist intellectual post-Trump person from DC who talk about tax credit for single mother or whatever. And I mean all, I mean by the way, when I talk about regime change, let me just say

I mean it in a peaceful political process ways and so on. I believe in the rights. I'm a liberal. Very good. I will be right back. America has already achieved socialism much more so than any Scandinavian state as a level of luxury at which, for example, blacks are kept up compared to what their natural level of life would be, when now they are kept at a higher standard of living than a middle class in many European countries like Portugal, and all of this at public expense. In other words, America gave up greatness, gave up colonization of the Moon or Mars or solar system or great scientific enterprise, exploration of the ocean floor, and gave everything up so it could handhold a kind of underclass, babysit them to perpetuity.

And the fact that McConnell and so forth, that they are weird imbeciles and that they misuse the word free market, it does not change the fact that socialism in America means paying through your nose for Shaniqua kids and hair extensions. And that when you tell, for example, a young guy on first job who is making maybe $40,000 50,000 a year and you say we are going to raise taxes on you for the common good and in America that go to Shaniqua's fat yap it goes into feeding Pedro family of seven children now Pedro not that Pedro I'm talking another Pedro the abstract the platonic Pedro come from Oaxaca and he may work hard but he's got seven children at home who don't work and a fat wife eating totopos and you're paying for them all for their health care, they don't work.

And none of your academic language about class analysis changes these demographic realities. And yet this was what mean socialism in America. And the obscenity that the person I named, for example, someone on first job is often living only to work and to pay rent because wages are low and taxes are actually enormous for that person, when you put together local, state social security payroll and so on, there is nothing left over. And at higher salary rates, they might have a little bit left over, maybe, but not in a place like New York, where basically over 50% of your salary go to tax. And the Republicans, for all their rhetoric, they never care to lower or to end taxes for such people in any significant way. Trump did it a little bit.

Why you don't talk about lowering taxes for working class or for working middle class who I talk about now, but the relief such people need is, yes, primarily one of tax cuts. Does this offend you? I am sorry. Would you feel better if you called it tax credit? It's not a tax cut. You don't want to sound like Paul Ryan, maybe called tax credit, right? Or maybe you would feel better if you tax this money from them and then ran it through some government worker Shaniqua, which, by the way, this government employment is an extension of socialism. It's a redistribution payment. Small business loans to inner city minority, that is also a distribution payment. Affirmative action to white women who are by volume and numbers, they are the biggest beneficiaries of affirmative actions.

It is also socialist redistribution, the total costs of redistribution in America, including all of these make-work government jobs is tremendous it's a majority of the economy no doubt so retard supposedly on our side see this situation and because they are embarrassed to use the word tax cut right asking for tax cuts for middle and working class you want instead to what to launder this money through government so Shanika takes cut you see this stupidity America right now is actually the biggest sheep shearing operation redistribution skin. Higher taxes, of course, will never touch oligarchs or plutocrats. They have various ways around that. And it's a huge redistribution, however, to an unproductive underclass. And

the existence of oligarchs who use these people as their clients does not change that this is what socialism means, which includes, by the way, some white people in this underclass. In other words, people are not denied benefits because they're white. I have to address this point because it's common on the, let's say, the five percenter Trump rejectors and some of the post-Trump intellectuals and so forth who say that they want benefits, that they know what I'm talking now, that it's a redistribution scheme, but that they also want benefits for white people because supposedly white people are denied these now. But they're not denied this as white people. There are many white underclass who are on these benefits, and when it was suggested

that white people be denied these benefits on basis of race, recently I think it was in Oakland, it was a big scandal, and it should have been a scandal of course, even though by the way I think that was through some kind of private entity, that was their excuse. But no, no, the government is very happy to have a white underclass, and that white underclass is not part by the way of populist uprisings, they did not support, you're not going to win them mostly, I'm saying mostly. But the government would gladly accept you as an underclass client, and there are quite a few already. So this changes things somewhat when you realize, oh, this is the middle class getting pilfered. So you know, then maybe first step if you want to give middle class relief, let them keep more of their money.

I know it's unfashionable. It is so bourgeois, you know, you get it. It's very funny, these people want to lead mass political movement, but they also use bourgeois as a form, as an invective, as if they were 1960s with Michael Savage uses this image. I can't get it out of my mind with a tuna-stained coat and talking like Marxist adjunct professor. So the other thing you could do is you let their wages rise by not importing competition. You get rid of H1B and many other such things. But this is in no way called socialism, right? Even if Paul Ryan insists notwithstanding, why do you have to agree with that? When you use that word, you alienate such people. You send a signal to them, you're going to increase these onerous suppression of them. And that's the thing.

A lot of these post-Trump right people, they accept either the leftist frame or in this case they accept the GOP frame. So if you are one with Jonah Goldberg and you believe, and I think I'm quoting here, Jonah Goldberg, the great intellectual son of Lucianne Goldberg from, okay, I think he says something like, socialism is this thing, what it means, we're all somehow in it together. This comical thing is what it means for him. And for people like this, Joseph de Maistre is a leftist. I'm sorry, Charles Murray. Charles Murray mostly I like, he's mostly a good guy, but he praised Jonah Goldberg as an expert on fascism here. Jonah Goldberg knows nothing about history of fascism and he believes Joseph de Maistre is a leftist. That is how twisted these people are.

If you remember part of this intellectual right believes Joseph de Maistre is a leftist. If you accept these premises here and say, yes, I'm a leftist socialist because I believe in the national community and Jonah Goldberg and Paul Ryan and maybe even Charles Mirrier, they call this socialist, you're as stupid as they are. But the point is, America has some of the most severe redistribution in history right now. It's already a socialist state. And one of the dumbest names spread related to this was somehow living in laissez-faire regime. Because, for example, they got rid of Glass-Steagall Act or this, you know, which nobody's experience in the real world that we live in laissez-faire regime. On that point, if I want to get into argument, Peter Schiff is correct.

what Glass-Steagall Act is or the regulation that was meant to correct an earlier regulation, which is that banks are insured by FDIC. So when you insure deposits, people don't care what you do with the money. So then to prevent banks from being irresponsible with that money, they had to introduce the second regulation of the Glass-Steagall Act and so forth. But of course it should be brought back, but it's irrelevant because overall things like Frank Dodd Bill, which added regulations that you might think hurt financial institutions. In fact, they are the ones who wrote it. This is well known. It's called regulatory capture. In case you did not know this, if I have to repeat it over again, but these large financial

institutions, they like these regulations because it put competition out of business. Same with Monsanto. They like environmental and other regulations, which do not protect environment but put their small competitor out of business. So then the reply from advocates of this rhetoric I'm criticizing would be, again, yes, we know there is redistribution for black and Hispanic, but that there should also be for us, for the middle class too then. There should be programs, social programs from middle class. Okay, very good. I also think there should be a Lebensborn program. There should be colonization of solar system. There should be many things. The question is who will give this to you? What is this stupidity where political message or action becomes this set of demands, policy

demands. There should be. Who will give this? The point is you do not run this state. They They will give you nothing. You are not part of the scheme or equation of so-called socialism. Like I said, you do not control bureaucracy, the government. And so let's say a post-Trump-based right politician proposed this based socialist measure for the middle class. The others, they would say, thank you very much, we will take this too. You will not get anything from that. And you're not going to punish corporations with this or with a tax rate, with a raising corporate tax. this, they will avoid it. Smaller, unconnected companies will pay it instead. So regulation in America supported again by the FDA work with big pharma. You see this now. The FDA

work with Monsanto. Paul Ryan and DC entrepreneurship bunch are very much for Monsanto. They do not believe in free market. In many a provable case, they want, for example, to shut down small organic farmer who advertised that they don't use genetically modified organisms. They try to limit free speech of companies who say that they do not use RBST, the bovine growth hormone, which really the milk in America, milk production, disgusting, sorry if I repeat But Paul Ryan is very much against, let's say, private property rights and free speech of companies that are opposed to his donors and cronies. So you could say he's a socialist then if you want to get into this, but you cannot win any of the problem today with policy proposal because it's a rigged system on either side.

So this whole debate is nonsense and this other lie that is being toiled now by the post-Trump right and again the intellectual populist faction, they tell you for example the 1950s were better because more regulated, this is complete lie, the high tax rate you hear about from 1950s, nobody paid those rates, people pay far more tax now. The write-offs and loopholes were much bigger in 1950s. In the 1950s, more important, an employer, for example, could hire based on an IQ test. And this one fact alone is so big, this is not allowed now. But if you allowed, it would revolutionize day-to-day life for a white middle class, if companies were allowed to hire on IQ test, in other words, on merit again. But this is literally not allowed. It's a regulation.

So these white companies have to use the expensive proxy of college degree and this with all old evils that come from that, but the credentialism economy actually goes beyond just what I said now. Let's say you're a student, you want to get a job on the side as a swimming instructor or some other kind of martial art instructor, but let's say swimming in particular, you cannot do it. You have to go through months of certification for swimming or for anything else. Many oyster fishermen cannot afford, for example, insurance that you need to farm or fish oyster. There is no end to it. There is no end to these regulations that crush day-to-day life in big ways and small. A big part of why Boomer could get job on handshake was this, the lack of certification.

Think if your employer looking to hire, would you hire someone on street who could pass your test, even your standardized IQ test or whatever test you designed for them? That is not legal now. Or would you go through the whole thing then, looking at their resume for experience, degrees, certifications and this, which is much less reliable. We live in subdued, defeated society of feminized creatures. The credentialism economy is a woman's feminized economy. It's the opposite of laissez-faire. And you do not run anything. And these are people proposing all this crap on the so-called populist right, are not addressing any matters that would make any difference. In large part because they are not allowed to say it in public. You don't run anything, this is the problem. You are subjected.

The problem is escaping the subjection. And by the way, the rich are not running things either. Not as such, by the way, the rich as the rich are not running it. Some rich people are, but not as the rich is not, in other words, a plutocracy, which is why rich do things like offshore wealth and offshore production line and promote inflation, the things Mark Faber was talking about and many other such thing to get back it. But you don't have the means they do, you have nothing. So until you capture the state, this talk of economics of socialism versus capitalism is one of the most useless. You could even call it quaint, right? To be charitable, you could call this debate quaint. Look, I'm not telling you in all of this to take the capitalist position.

The reason I'm going through these arguments, and there are many more I could go through is it's useless. It's a useless argument. Either side, it does not touch a subject that vital to problem in America now. In many ways, this is the old leftist line that's being pushed. The economy and the corporations and plutocrats around the world, so you should promote socialism to raise them in. No, sorry, they are junior partners in this case, actually a socialist-run managerial state that already exists at your expense, an emphasis on junior partners. Corporations don't govern anything, they do not call the shots. And I ask you again regarding, for example, you hear much talk of big tech barons. Every day you hear, can we let corporations run our media?

The corporations are not running your media, you know. Zukerface or Jack from Twitter, they would not be able to ban Pelosi or Schumer or Obama or whoever who says that we do not let BLM. If they did any such thing, if they banned leftists, FBI and other government agencies would smash their doors, they would find things on them. They were brought before Congress and questioned, or do you not remember this, when they were intimidated in questioning before Congress. Alex Jones plays this clip, right? They were put back against war. They were asked, why do you allow Alex Jones? Do you want to be investigated for diversity or tax evasion or this plea's response? This happened. You saw it. The government, they were neutered by the state.

I actually think Zuckerberg and Jack probably believe in free speech, but they are cowards. They were intimidated into doing this. So then what happened, they are made to hire a large compliance department and then it's out of their hands. But fundamentally, it's not Jack or Zuckerberg. I think, honestly, they probably do like techno-libertarianism or whatever. Jack probably fundamentally believes in free speech, he's just a pussy. All out of cowardice. They do not call the shot. I have such disgust for people who see this, you know what's happening, but you continue to talk in high word about techno-capital, transnational boundless capitalism. But as you know, these guys are cowards and they got a gun put to their head and you saw it on television.

You know, if you're in media and you go against the state in a big, significant way, you see what happened to Conrad Black. Look up Conrad Black, his big name, his big family background, his riches, his wealth. Nothing protected him, not his peerage. He spent two years in jail, at least, I think, because his secretary forgot to file a paper. You know, look it up. He did nothing wrong. Basically, they have laws that are so vague that if Jack really went against them, he would go to jail so fast. You are always in breach of a law. So a lot of what you're seeing on manufactured discourse online on the right and in Washington D.C. associated publications is a resurrection of all the leftist tropes. The corporations

or CIA in dark panelled wood rooms and secret society with twit jackets and this the WASP establishment sinister the old Anglo conspiracy of the British Empire. They're still running the world, they're oppressing the free and vital masses in the name of soulless capital. It's an old trope, they repeat these clichés, united fruit company and colonialism and this basically their world view come from watching The Good Shepherd and two or three other similar Hollywood movie or documentary. Now you think why Hollywood would be the voice of the left since 1960s or 70s, right? the anti-establishment and think how pathetic then is this pretense that this view, in other words entirely distilled from Hollywood images and fantasies, what are chances that it would

actually be threatening to occupational class? I mean if nothing else, by the way, besides this, don't you feel dirty repeating the counterculture industry claims about what problem is? Aren't you tired of it, this focus on JFK assassination? I'm talking about, these are the Chapo and the leftist podcasts, and they repeat this. But for some reason, again, nationalist intellectuals adopt this language, want to interact with these people. They repeat this tiresome image of, you know, again, if you watch The Good Shepherd, this is very good insight into the mind of what is counterculture. The message of the movie, you should watch it just as an anthropological document into the mind of the left and of this fake counterculture.

But the main character in The Good Shepherd, who is mother of James Jesus Angleton, he's played by Matt Damon, the entire movie is to take the blame off of JFK for what happened at Bay of Pigs in Cuba. And the fault instead, according to this movie, lies with the frigidity of the Wasp, with his damaged relations with his family and his distance from his son. And because of this, you know, this is message of the movie, this psychodrama, the frigid Anglo and his taciturn devotion to higher causes. This is the problem. You know, and JFK is not to be blamed, no, no, don't blame Ellis Island hero JFK not to be blamed. It's the Anglo establishment and also the perfidious, icy, subversive Russians. These are to blame for the damage done to America and to brown people and this.

So you know, this really is a world you want to be stuck in because this is way much discourse on the right is heading into this tormenting restatement of all the platitudes of left for the last 40 years, which of course led to further consolidation of the occupational class position. It was not threatening to them at all. And this is because this poster, Mikasith, I like this poster very much. He come in different forms, keeps getting banned but come back, I will promote him again. But he is to be praised because he put it this very clear way. You see, the entire view of Foucault, as well as the Frankfurt critical theory school that you hear so much now, but their entire frame is that on one hand you have vague structures

of state and corporate and economic and technological power, and they are opposed by an equally vague counterculture of artistic and other such freedom. So you see, it's an entirely fantastical political model, in other words, that if you buy into it, you're getting trained to think not politically, to have political reality actually disappear from in front of you. You know, political struggle and action gets replaced instead with this simulation I just mentioned of power versus counterculture, which it doesn't matter if you embody it where the wood paneled rooms are with Matt Damon playing Archibald Wasp the third, or whether you imagine it's populated or embodied by Shlomo. It's the the same clichés that are running through both models, and the actual managerial socialist

state, which is a demagogic and genuinely socialist state based on opposition against the only hegemony that it considers a threat, which is that of the white middle class, but such a state continues unopposed while you talk of entirely fantastical model of, oh, okay, I'm making progress because I called out the Rockefellers and the CIA and this. I was accused recently of being a disinformation account for the Rockefellers, you know, because I mentioned them in book and I don't say that they are Satan. Online full of mentally ill people, I say once I like this tea called 1837 Specialty and then I was accused of being an agent for Singapore Big Tea. My entire account is a psychological operation for Singapore Tea East, you know, I'm part of the East India Company or this, okay?

I'm part of the Dutch East India Company now or something, I don't know. But yes, I should stop, I should not pay attention to people who attack me. I was told, don't stop, throw stones at old dogs who bark. But I swear, you know, 40 or 50 years of what you just heard now, this fantasy critical theory model and no results, at least not the results that the left claim they want to see, and the leftists will just continue on this, and the servitors who are promoted to lead the right now after Trump leaves this vacuum, they want to continue this talk. Why? I don't know. Mostly they do not know better. I think this is why. And it's worth it now to say, please pressure him to come back, tell him I will beat him.

But he rightly point this how much censorship has hurt us and how much it has led to this sorry situation I describe. You know, many good people have left. The poster Carlton, they chase him off. Ricky Vaughan, of course. They spent two years trying to dox Ricky, and now they arrest him. That's hardcore censorship, cyberpunk style. They chase Ricky Vaughan for two years on electronic interwebs. And then many other posters who were wonderful in 2014, 15, so forth, they disappear. They know to come back. You have good, funny posters like nigger in a chair. And I don't know how many of you knew nigger in a chair. He make wonderful, funny videos, not even necessarily explicitly political, just absurdist, but very funny. But he leave, okay? And I don't think I'm saying anything sensitive,

but a lot of people leave because they had to get jobs, in many cases good, but demanding jobs. So they had no time anymore to post or jobs plus family. So that's no time plus risk is very great. There is no insurance if you get doxed and others again, they get tired of being banned so they don't come back. So in the end, you only have hardcore few who decide to stay despite all these advantages and that's very good. But whereas with the weight of creativity and humor we had, if we had been on the left, for example, some Soros or others would have supported us and would have allowed many like this chair poster I say to continue. but because on the right, we don't have any Soros. We have maybe some very few libertarian, Nabob, but very few, and they run risks also.

But generally, they refuse to fund anything that does not obviously make money. This is a big weakness on their part. The effect, you know, this poster chair, he might go to libertarian heaven now because he proved he can get a good job. But we are deprived of his, America is deprived of his wonderful videos. So in the end, because of this, the censorship and the lack of support we lose, America lose. And the right has very little presence to exert cultural power over time, there are fewer and fewer of us. Censorship in other words, really taken us apart to point where again, the ones who stay, the ones who have, you know, who decide to come back after being repeatedly banned, in order not to get banned, they have to speak in code and face fags even more so.

And I'm sorry but conservatives are wrong on this, it's not a good thing, restraint and to speak in code. Persecution is not actually good for art of writing or video or especially in modern world where on our side we need actually not theory because Nietzsche already had last word on theory and philosophy. We need on our side instead artistic cultural production as well as effective propaganda, very high quality propaganda and you can't have effective if it's forced to speak in code about these abstractions and cannot talk about scientific truth, which we can't, is illegal, right? Things like, so instead people talk capital, neoliberalism, you know the words and to avoid even entire spheres of conflict and to talk about, to pay timidly and talk about these

economic things when America problems now are very much not really economic but much worse than that. And to talk to these problems in a vital, direct way was our strength. What was our strength of this thing of ours, of the frogs, from actually well before Trump 2016, but from before then, from early 2010s and even before. And I repeat to you, it was two things. It was on one hand the trolling, the humour, the wit, the raucous humour with which we put regime loyalists like journalists and politicians on the defensive and we knock them down quite a bit. We can't do that anymore. And then, on the other hand, it was the factual basis of our knowledge. The scientific orientation, human biodiversity, but not just that.

To speak truth on race, on the nature of women, the truth, the uncompromising truth on sexual relations today and all such things. The orientation toward biology and human population. This entire factual term that we were promoting, including on things like nutrition, the poisoning of our food, of nature. It's not that this no longer exists, some of us continue it, but in the large visible part we're beginning to be replaced by these face fags and these other who will not talk these things but will talk instead about Hegel, puritanism, capital, neoliberalism, alterities, I am gay, socialism versus capitalism, this as if it's the 1950s, and actually they don't even know the arguments used in these debates at that time, but this

repetition of academies sounding, you must know class analysis or various kinds of mysticism also. I don't think it's good, this endless religious talk, which I'm sorry, many Catholics love me. So if you're a religious man, for genuine reasons, this is very good. But there are all these other people who try to reframe their satisfaction, excuse me, their dissatisfaction with modern world, and they pick up religion instead of going for what I've been talking about for science. To deal with their dissatisfaction, they pick up religious garb as a coping mechanism. They convert to Catholicism or Orthodoxy and again, all our wit and all our lively interest in biology and the sciences is gone. Everything that made us unique then becomes gone.

It becomes replaced with this mystical theological doctrinaire crap or the other doctrinaire political academic garbage I've mentioned so far. So look I suppose besides me begging Kalpen, Mena and others to return, I am also saying this because to ask those of us who are still around to hold to what made us different from what came before. Really for a time we were and maybe still are the only corner of a world of mind where there is a freedom of thought where uncomfortable truths can still be spoken. Tell me where else heretical truths are spoken. So then for those of you who are around and continue this jester scientific revolution, I ask this then, take this as exhortation for us to be the most jolly heretics and not

to move from this path of science and its, the little retarded sister of science, humor and clownery. Do not move from this path, ignore the pedants, the face fags, the strident socialism lovers,