Please cut I kill you bitch. I kill you. I kill you bitch. Happy birthday to Nietzsche Philosopher of this stiletto October 15th in truth prophet of a new age time soon 2040 2040 turning point turning point Nietzsche 2040 turning point year zero the rebirth of a secret God will finally show himself the whisper of a dream of a culted sex muttering the poetry of forgotten language you will all see. Welcome this Caribbean rhythm episode 120. I was walking a street alone very late and I thought I saw from behind dumpster on back alley an emanation of purple magenta light from behind parking lot dumpsters in front of it on side street. I have to tell you it's absolutely forbidden for social justice movement and these limbs and squares who want to

pat on the head from teacher, this type, you know what I mean, political movement, to appropriate the color pink for example, which is a holy color, it's properly seen outside the cultural associations that you now have of it. If you can step out of that, you can see its true strength. These associations have obscured a secret portal color from you, and you would understand And if you actually saw it, it opens states of the spirits that are very obscure, certain shades of pink, they could even count as a mandala in and of itself. And one of the future flags of world clean and based world timeline will be a magenta color, more like a magenta light spreading through the cities at night, signifying the entry of the human spirit into a condition negrito, purification in preparation for our

great work, magenta. So I go by this door late at night, nobody on the street, I was not allowed inside, doorman say no big a private party, but it appears to be there are in fact, I've talked unusual sects in history still existing, Borges talk, I think he has stories of Alef and many other with secret societies of this type. I've talked about the Kaggots before, they are a mysterious social caste in Europe, nobody knows their true origins. They may have been pagan holdovers who were ostracized and whose status as outsiders persisted even after their conversion to Christianity. Or on the other hand, they may have been very early converts to Christianity before anybody else who were outcasts from pagan society because of that, but then their status as

outcast persisted even after everyone else's general conversion to Christianity. Nobody knows. It could be another thing too. There are many others, however, whose origins are better known, who have persisted despite persecutions and massacres, the Waldensians for example, the Anabaptists who became Amish, and I believe the Cathars must still exist in some form. This is most interesting. The early Christian sects that had persisted despite widespread Christianization formally through the Catholic Church, but I think some early Christian enclaves persisted in places like North Italy into the year 1000, they practiced this recorded, well-known, the same type of initiation conversions that you see early Christians did.

I've said, excuse if I repeat myself, with the Gospel of John opened on your forehead and repeat certain lines 17 times and many such things in dark rooms. Many of these became Manichaeans, so that it's not right to understand, for example, the Albigensian or Cathar as one solitary phenomenon. I think it became that maybe, kind of, but it was maybe in the beginning umbrella term or umbrella organization for many groups that had endured. Some early Christians of this kind who rejected the Roman church hierarchy. On the other hand, some crypto-pagans maybe who persisted in pseudo-Christian form. In the same way that the Mandaean Marsh Arabs, today they exist in South Iraq, they have a long-running relationship I think with members of British aristocracy, they practice a form

of gnosticism it is said, but I believe in fact they are pagans with a veneer of, just like the Yazidis, of only a veneer of engagement with so-called monotheistic or Abrahamic religions. I'd say that Assad sacked the Alawites in Syria, they are the same. Some think they are Christians in Islamic garb, but I think they are pagans pretending to be Christian, pretending to be Muslim. In Europe, there is also further complication that besides original paganism of the various peoples, there was, I believe, an effort during crisis of the third century, this is crisis in the 260s, 70s, AD so-called, to introduce a Babylonian state religion into the breakaway Western Gallic portion of the Roman Empire. this crisis, the Roman Empire briefly broke apart.

And that would be paganism, but would obviously be different both from Christianity and from again the informal, pre-existing paganism that had been there. The world's forgetfulness of this possibility of a formal state pagan religion in one of these, a breakaway, the Gallic western portion of the Roman Empire, this confused many things. It explains, again, excuse if I repeat myself, why the Nordic pagans in Europe have a seven-day week. This is not traditional European paganism. This is Babylonian, and it is known that it is not introduced by Christians or the Roman Empire. They named, in other words, the days of the week after their local gods Thor's day and so forth. precedes romanization and christianization so but it is a babylonian source so where

it come from because seven-day week babylonian in any case it this could explain some later heresies that were particularly aggressive they could have been hold over of this thing this religion of a state trying to break away from rome and it makes sense because the eastern breakaway during again this is when a roman empire briefly broke apart in third century But the eastern portions had a messianic nationalist eastern awakening, as easterner Semitic are often prone to do, under one Queen Zenobia in the 260s, 270s AD. She's a heroine, a heroine of the eastern peoples, of the Orientals, and she would have very much had an interest to proselytize her world-changing vision into other parts of empire as a way to organize, mobilize against Roman enemies. So this is just a wild possibility.

But as I say, some of these sects, whatever their origins have, plainly survived into the modern world. And I wonder what is situations in the East, I mean in East Europe, in Russia, where communism would have been keen to wipe out all traces of such things the same way they would extreme suspicion of Freemason, they didn't like secret societies and sectarian and so forth, but such sects would have been far more numerous in the Orthodox world actually than in the West. There is long tradition, even in mainline Orthodoxy, the oldest Slavonic Bibles have heavy Gnostic fairy tales, interpolations within them, reflecting multiplicity of very unusual heresies, sects, and traces still exist, if you don't believe me. You look up

Duchobors, who are nudists, nudist sectarian Christians, they ran to Canada, they still have a presence there, I mean in Canada, and there are many others like the Scoptsi, who practice self-castration, and other darker, still Rasputin, evil sect of the Christi, neo-Carpocratians, who then possibly had received fresh energy in 19th century from introduction of Siberian shamanism and maybe even many other such things. For example, the Maris, the Cheramis, the Maris are European people, nominally European because they are I think this side of the Urals and they are forest Finnic peoples. They were converted in the 1600s to Christianity but never really took hold among them and now they've reverted to their traditional ways which they had never abandoned.

In other words, paganism, they worship trees and everything you might expect, but I imagine that there was cross-cultural pollination between such things and orthodox sects of the type I've mentioned. And I say this because I was thinking today how communism absolutely could not tolerate many such things and try to wipe them out, but I imagine the response was such people occulted themselves still further in East Europe and Russia, I mean. And how would they look to some... Could they... I mean, it's not a question of could. I have no doubt they survive into Ardennes, the West, and many such places. And perhaps they have nightclub in Luanda, Angola, and many such places as a cover, and in parts of Europe. Neo-Druze, imagine something like a Neo-Druze.

I know that, you know, from Middle East, not East Europe, but something imagine Neo-Druze nightclub. Would you attend that? I am wondering this, I was not allowed into private party because of a medieval German splinter sectarian group. I believe that they had set up this private party under magenta light. And they had followed, and I'm not making this up, I can't find the reference, but it existed a group who followed a prophetic man in medieval Germany, again I forget the exact book I read this in, But this man said he had a long beard, and he said we are all naked before the Lord, quoting scripture to this effect. And I don't read African literature, so I don't know, and therefore he practiced nudism, and he threw this in the face of the cosmos,

and this nudist medieval German Christian sect was supposedly wiped out, but what if they weren't? They have placed people in the highest branches of some government, And what if they own a nightclub? And I was not allowed in this nightclub of ritual nudists, but they didn't know that I managed to sneak back door by paying gypsy to cart me inside catering container. And the things I saw, the people in underbelly of this city, man, they are into heavy stuff. They're into human on gray porn. I'm talking hardcore, alien grays. It only come back to this, the grays blasted on multiple screens. It comes back to this, the grays, gay marriage to grays practiced for decades in abandoned factories in the back alleys of Perm, of Pittsburgh.

I don't know what it is with these people, if it's an initiation, I'm talking out of control human on gray orgies filmed on multiple video tapes sold in black market reproduced in this underground swing club. What I can tell you, what is happening this week in the news, I don't know. Let's move to lighter, I want to move to lighter, the coalition of the wretched in the news is showing its cracks again. Everyone could see, but many a missing point on how, you know, when you put carnival impresarios on the level of Jerry Nadler in charge, they used to have more competent impresario or master of ceremonies for the two minutes of hate, weekly hate-whitey coalitions. This is what the lefties and they had, as Steve Saylor liked to say, they had smarter

Jewish guy on level of Budian and intellect and so forth. But now it's Jerry Nadler and their bonding through hate whitey isn't as competent. That's about the story of neo-communism since 1950 in America and therefore in the world through America promotion of global racial Marxism. As I keep repeating, these revolutions in fact since French Revolution, all of them have been racial, and the economic or the human rights, the rights verbiage is a thin veneer to mask the biological multiplication and rise of the wretched, people who have been allowed to reproduce beyond nature in the modern world by grace of the white man's generosity and technology. And very few of you, my audience, are white. There are maybe two or three white people on Twitter, online, Thomas777 is a white man,

The bureaucrat is white, Alex Forrest, the train master is white, most of you are not. The white race has been minority in Europe for a long time and all these revolutions I think are fundamentally racial. But since 1950s that is entirely an explicit form that Marxism has taken, in other words finally showing its true face. But the problem I see with building a hate-white coalition to expropriate him is, as is well known besides the incompetence of its current managers, the minorities so-called who are to be used as pawns in the left's game, the minorities in the left's murderous game, they are themselves at each other's throat and they are not uniform. And this come out especially this week. You see Los Angeles with the Latinx City Council, or whatever politicians they were, Latinx

saying naughty words about blacks and things about blacks and they are caught on tape. And as if you need that, as if the ethnic cleansing of traditional black hoods like South Central where traditional black way of life, as you can say, was carried out. But blacks were ethnically cleansed from there by Aztecs, as if that was not enough evidence for you that Aztlan and Wakanda are not, you know, natural allies, hate-whitey notwithstanding. You know, they have to intensify hatred of the white man to keep their increasingly rickety coalition alive. Miami as an emerging Latinx, Cuban city in that case, did not tolerate BLM clownery, you see. On the other hand, there is Kenya and that episode also misunderstood, it should have been received.

Oh, it's the pets of communist race agitators fighting among themselves again. How nice. But this is all the Kanye story is, sorry to tell you. It's Farrakhan 2.0 and Kanye's higher profile isn't going to change, you know, Kanye, speaking of high profile, he had already been saying odd things like support for Trump, for example, and many such things. come off as man on cusp of schizophrenia in the mind of Normies, so he's not seen as totally right in here to begin with. It's not going to lead to any big change in America, but the things he says in this case about Jews and so on, you can find among any of the high yellow mulatto bureaucrat class, any of the political class in a big city, black machine politics thing, you can just

as the bureaucrat or many other bureaucrats, they all believe the most lurid conspiracy theories about Jews already and many such things. You know, you want to talk disinformation and conspiracy theories, they are never interrogated about that by leftist journalists for obvious reasons. But so you know, Kanye broadcasting their thoughts to the whole world now is uncomfortable for regime media, but it's not entirely Death Con 3 situation as some of you imagine. We go on Descon, Kanye. Is it a minstrel show or is it turning point Kanye? Should I have Kanye on this show? Should I? I might invite him to talk. I want to know why no black leader, and Kanye is obviously very proud of his black people and he make pornography video and so forth, and I want to ask him why no black leader

advocate black separatism for a people with such a unique opinion of themselves. It's odd they want to remain minorities. In other words, bit players in someone else's land, bit players in someone else's story. It's a little odd. It's odd to me. Just to me. I is block peasant where you know national and ethnic pride means you don't want to share territory and in particular fate and future and be dependent on other groups. I mean both the nationalism you see now in East Europe, not just Ukraine but all of it, and then of course Zionism which comes actually out of this same time in 1920s, 30s, the dominant strain of it at least in Israel of Zionism come out of this kind of ethno-nationalist East European type thing that was also common to other East European peoples and still is.

Both are animated by this obvious conclusion that you want to chart your own path for the future. But for some reason, black leaders do not advocate this, at least since Marcus Garvey and a few others, but I wonder why. Even Malcolm X, he gave in, he stopped advocating for black sovereignty for their own nation. As black liberation movement exists now, its leaders are not really black. In Haiti, they would not be considered black, they are light skinned, and before that, as you know, most leaders of the NAACP when it was founded were not arguably black at all. They were in fact, let me put, polite men with East European origins and German names. But I suppose that's why a black nationalist movement that actually sought its own path in life and own sovereignty.

This wouldn't be as useful a tool of Marxism, in other words, terroristic expropriation of the white middle class. They couldn't, if they were separated, then be used really as domestic terror movement by the state and its media organs, which are not commanded by blacks but by another racial hostile elite, to commit senseless act of violence, as you saw this week again, where Two bantoid orcs shot handsome white football player named Elijah DeWitt, which everyone talking about the absurd spectacle of this guy's family performatively forgiving them, where there should be no forgiveness but massive state reprisals against the black community as a whole. If the Americans were a nation like the Nepalese, for example, who after two Nepalese aid workers

were killed in Iraq by ISIS or some equivalent, the Nepalese rioted and burned down anything that had to do with Arabs or Muslim, including Air Jordan, not the sneaker, but the offices of the airlines of Jordan, which is not allied with ISIS at all. But as nasty as such behavior is, that is what a common human reaction of a politically self-interested and self-awakened community might be. And then you can say, it's not good, the state should step in and stop that and take its own measures to make sure the people are satisfied. But that energy has to exist and for some reason, I don't know, it does not, it does not among the American white community, there's something brain fucked about them. And so you have this guy's family engaging in moral preening and publicly forgiving as

as if this were a personal matter, but it's not, it's a political crime. It took place with full blessing of the black community and of Michelle Goldberg and similar from New York Times and others of her kidney, and of Obama and Attorney General Holder, who keep telling people since 2010 and before, really inciting to racial violence, all such who call for political violence against their racial enemies. of what American state and media organs are, and you'd recognize that if a similar act had taken place in, say, Burma or India or Kenya or any other place where people can objectively recognize ethnic and racial violence for what it is. But in America, you are trained not to see that. So on one hand, you have the left with its language of economic motivation and about

historical legacy of disenfranchisement, which really I think is insult to poor people, everyone, because there are many countries and regions within countries, very poor people, where it's very safe to walk night and they do not attack you even if they see you're a wealthy foreigner. And that's what I'm saying, even in cases where there is wealth differential, huge inequality, so you know that side of it does not explain violence of the black community either. That's the reason a white girl can walk middle of night through a field in Bali and nothing happened to her or why an American could before walk through a market in Damascus before civil war in Syria. No one would lay hands on him because Assad regime say you do not touch Americans.

And in general, quite aside from that, it was very safe country to begin with, Syria and such places. And of course the obvious counter, also that very poor Asian immigrants in America have non-existent crime rate, or the other common statistic that highest black socioeconomic percentiles commit more crime than the poorest whites. And that should just invalidate this whole way of thinking. But on the other hand, you have NRX, the neo-reaction and the human biodiversity people, the right-wing so called, they are right wing, public policy people who argue this about crime rates and so on. And these are people who are my friends in some cases and I otherwise like them. But they make similar mistake because they misunderstand black crime in terms of IQ,

or in terms of black biological predilection for criminality, which I think is not really true. It's rather true that blacks go mentally ill in modern cities, they are not biologically primed for that, but even that wouldn't explain it. It does not explain the type of black violence you see in the United States or places like South Africa, where really, I repeat to you, it is a side effect of leftist and leftist ethnic political racial mobilization. There are places in the world with relatively low crime rates and blacks, for example Barbados, I think Botswana, Rwanda, okay that's a different type of black, but Rwanda there, and Martinique I believe and so forth. And this second group, the neo-reactionaries who talk about IQ and so forth that I am closer

to, they also make mistake again because they refuse to see again a United States political problem and almost every black and white crime, but certainly of this type that seems senseless, is not a political motivator, incited by a journalist, politician and state agitator who use black as weapons. So maybe Kanye can come on show and I can ask him why he not want to be leader for Wakanda or some other independent black state, but you know the answer and it does come from Spanish Hidalgo saying, unra y provecho no caben en un saco. Honor and profit do not fit in one bag. And for a people bred to slavery, there is no honor for all of their sensitivity about getting dissed. Excuse the attack throat. For, let's understand this word honor in primal biological terms,

because it's really not a matter of culture. You see behavior indicating sense of honor even among any mole. There is no real defense of sovereignty and territory, or even any conception of it, or whatever conception of it that exists among the black community is easily sacrificed for them programs. It's as if you had a territorial animal, which the human male is, and you somehow bred some of the territoriality out of him and plied him with sugar drank, grape drank, and they and become okay being somebody else's perpetual ward, you see. So this why I don't like such thing, I don't like to think it. I like to think of foods and of peoples and of history of peoples. And perhaps I become cuisine critic. Would Kanye come on show if I face fagged?

If I and maybe other celebrity could come on show, I start my restaurant review video series. Would you like to see this? Would you like to see me chimp a restaurant to flip plates and such? Restaurant review. Why Kanya married Kim Kardashian? What wrong with the Kardashians? Is this an Armenian thing? I want to ask Anna Kachin this. Maybe I go on a scarce show. What do you think? I want to ask Anna, Anna, what means, how you feel Kim Kardashian is with Ye? And this, is this an Armenian thing? I joke, I love Anna Kachin. She talk about my favorite radio show, actually, television show, The Shield, she talked this recently, I'm very happy. We will talk, I'll go on her show, I hope, if she will have me, and I do not mean to attack you with the Kardashians, you know, we can talk about

Lakhma Jun and many such things. I come on your show to talk arts, but I can't talk this, I want to do food reviews, I want to have restaurant of my own maybe, Gastrobar, where I wonder why restaurants, I would name things in an unusual way. I wonder why restaurants do not take some creative chances with food style. Food naming, dishes unusual and so on. I mean all these chefs, they... Chef, you see on show, chef. They prise themselves on groundbreaking innovations, but are very shy about naming. I've never seen on the menu. Okay, they have octopus provence style or whatever. They get a little bit more creative, they octopus in style of whatever small village in Catalonia that they name, but why not have something octopus faggot style, pheasant in Al Nusra Front style gastrique.

Hitler favorite coffee cake, I think that would be a big hit. Hitler favorite coffee cake, just name it this, with its eagle nest spice accompaniment. No one dares this. Forgiveness, you know, forgiveness for Hitler. A lot of big mouths from conservative cucks this week. How dare you question this family's Christian desire to forgive their son's murderers as if it was only about them. You know, I wonder if any of these people would proudly and openly forgive Hitler in the spirit of Christian charity. And you know what the answer is, which just about shows you that the language of religiosity by conservative pundits of Christianity, this language is used to moralize, to cover up in name, this dreadful communist regime, to cover up their crimes and to keep the American

people from a political awakening, which is why I only want to talk about stews and cuisine and movements of ancient peoples, lamb shank, cooked bath party style sauce in oven, do you like this? I will be right back to discuss an atrocious study on ancient bones, you will find interesting, I hope. I'll be right back. Music! Music's blood-blasted! You are the fuck-punch-hot bloody cunt! We are back, okay, we are back-punch-hot now. There is terrible study on ancient bones that came out since last week. The diverse genetic origins of a classical period Greek army. This title by, let's see, Alyssa Mitnick and Lori Reitsema. And David Reich is a contributor, although he did the scientific work on this project and I am not including him in my judgments.

And it's just horrible, the historical part, not the scientific part of this study. I won't talk some details on the study. The unusual thing about, they found in gravesites dated to 480 BC in north-northwest Sicily near Himera, mass grave, associated, as they think, with the Battle of Himera, which I've talked about on this show, when the united Greeks of Sicily, under their tyrants, they fought the Carthaginians, who occupied the very west end of Sicily, and they defeated them on the same day that Salamis battle took place, you know, famously naval battle against the Persians. And of course, the Persians got to Greece with Phoenician help, Phoenician ships. who was fighting at Salamis, the Greek as well.

So there was throughout Mediterranean conflict between Greek and Phoenician, there was this for a long time. And consider the story of how war in Herodotus started. There was massive, in other words Mediterranean, both conflicts throughout Mediterranean, both ethnic and civilizational conflict between Punic, that Carthaginian Phoenician, on one side and on the other side the Helene, the Greek, and this was continued later by the Romans as they were taking up the Greek side. Although it's interesting that at Athens there were some old Phoenician families that had become Greek and they had kept some of their own customs and shrines. This was allowed to them in the same way Thales, the first philosopher from Miletus on coast of Asia Minor, he was said to be from such Phoenician family.

But these interesting stories of multicultural assimilation back and forth do not contradict the civilizational, even racial conflict that existed. And it would be interesting to have some genetic evidence, actually, of these families I mentioned. They could be, if such corpses were found, they could be associated with Phoenician cultic or other grave goods, if they should ever be found, which they probably will not, as I will explain more in a moment. But this is a major civilizational world turning battle, right, 480 BC. And not long ago, in the late 2000s, if I'm not wrong, they found mass graves associated with this battle, and this study I mentioned found in this battle some bodies that genetically

cluster with contemporary northeast Europe, the Baltic, very clearly what is modern day Lithuania at that time, and some cluster with Caucasus, and two YA haplogroups that have so far only been found in China and Central Asia. And one group also show Siberian ancestry. So okay now, so my opinion, unless it had more to add regarding the origin of the bones or the circumstances in which they were found, in other words, more detailed description of the physical record, the study should have stopped here, and would have been already very interesting. It is interesting, the meat of it, what I just said. But the additional analysis they do isn't the historical one. They do do some further historical parsing, let's, excuse me, material parsing.

The historical part, excuse me, which I'll discuss in a moment, is precisely what is not interesting and bullshite. But they do do a little bit more material analysis, that's interesting. They do on the strontium and oxygen isotope ratios in the bones, and this indicate further that the bones were not local to Hemera. In other words, on one hand you have genetic study, it show ancestry in the DNA, but then the composition of the bones themselves, these isotope ratios, can tell where that individual actually spent his life, grew up and so on. And in these ratios I say these outlying ancestry bones, they differ from local bodies also. Although the authors add that while these isotopes are consistent with very different

climates and latitudes from that found in the Mediterranean, they are also consistent with other parts of Sicily itself. In other words, somebody could have grown in certain valleys or mountains in Sicily or South Italy and would have these isotopes also, doesn't need to be Denmark, they didn't need to have grown up in Baltic, this problem with isotope ratio studies. But more analysis of this type would have been very valuable, more description of the bones themselves, the situation in which they are found, even photographs. Instead, as I say, the historical analysis is the heft of the study itself as you read it and the verbiage and this is very different from these other interesting findings because they convolute themselves to fit all of this into a story, an ignorant vision of Greek

history and I say this is they do this in a very rash way of thinking where they jump from one conclusion to another and contort themselves to support what I think is ultimately a political tale that plays to presentist, presentist obsessions and concerns. On its own this should have been, oh this is very interesting, tell me more, tell me about what these bodies were wearing, if anything. And if they weren't, if they were unceremoniously plopped nude into a mass grave, that is also interesting information. But tell me otherwise what they were found with. Instead the stories of these are mercenaries. Of course they must be mercenaries. And then as I say, this ignorant background information is given then about the role of

mercenaries in Greek armies, and how this is supposedly underappreciated. Now this is what I mean by ignorance, or perhaps feigned ignorance, but I actually think it's laziness and ignorance in this case, because they have to establish that this is supposedly an underappreciated fact, that mercenaries took part in Greek wars and Greek armies. So as then to present themselves as the innovative appreciators of it, you know, they are enthusiastic debunkers of actually a strong man, in other words, because I didn't know it was an underappreciated fact. And I'm not really being coy, okay, I didn't know this, I'm not a classical scholar, and I've talked about mercenaries in Greek armies to you on this show, especially in Sicily for tyrants. That's what tyrants did.

That is even how probably tyrants came about in the first place. a local strong man, very ambitious, who hired foreign mercenaries, a bodyguard, see Robert Drew's excellent essay on this on the earliest Greek tyrants. In fact, the invasion of currency itself, of coinage, of coin, may have been a first a means that tyrants used to pay a regularized or standardized amount of precious metal, gold or silver or platinum, that tyrants could have standardized a regular measure to pay to their mercenaries, to help them take over and then maintain their cities or territories. That Sicilian tyrants use mercenaries in any case, again I've talked before and I'm hardly expert or a classical scholar, it's just obvious commonplace if you read the primary sources.

So where they get off saying it's underappreciated, but if they didn't say this they would have, you know, there wouldn't be anything to study because that's what most of the study is, You know, they wouldn't appear to be discoverers. And it reminds me of other thing in secondary literature, which is crap. You shouldn't read secondary literature. But some scholars of sexuality, for example, go around saying that KJ Dover book on Greek homosexuality was a watershed event for classical studies. I'm sure it was for them, but this book is nothing special, as Camille Paglia rightly says. read this book myself when I was 22 or 23, picked it out random in library, and even then at a young age I didn't know as much as I do now, but I recognized literally every

primary source K.J. Dover named in that book, and I could name more than he did even at that age, and I'm just a casual reader for pleasure, but nobody reads. The reason these things come as epiphanies or are presented as such to an ignorant audience is because almost nobody actually reads primary sources, the books themselves. You should just pick them up, read them for pleasure. Don't waste time with scholarship where you get this kind of posturing that I'm describing now and you get maybe one small fact that is interesting and then 40 pages of nonsense around it and it's a waste of time. But I found that almost no one, including chaired professors, I'm the chair professor of this, reads the primary sources for pleasure. Almost no one. If you read them, you are almost unique.

So in regard to KJ Dover now, who again, book on Greek homosexuality, his only innovation in that book, again Paglia point this out, was that he used visual record to establish what type of sex source was had in upper class Athenian style, which was called intracrural, And I can't get into this, just read what English, you know, boarding school boys, I can't get this, a family show, okay? But aside from this, I mention all of this to say why, because scholars like to refer to things as underappreciated or groundbreaking, either out of genuine ignorance, they pretend, you know, excuse me, either they pretend or it's out of genuine ignorance, and it's to build straw man in order to make themselves appear innovators of a consensus that doesn't actually exist.

And in this I've criticized before certain HBD schoolers such as Razib Kun, who many of you know, and Gregory Cochrane, Cochrane when they went around pretending, or actually I think in their case they actually believed it, that Maria Gimbuta's Kurgan theory, which This is the theory that large-scale folk of Anderung, of folk migrations of Indo-Europeans took place, let's say 5000-4000 BC, from the Steppe into Europe, and she formulated this I think 1950s or so, and these guys went around in the 1990s, after 2010 actually, but they were going around pretending this was some great forbidden hidden knowledge, and super politically incorrect that they were revealing to you the reader of their blog, right? underappreciated, they were resurrecting, when again, forgive I repeat.

But this was a post-World War II theory meant to supplant the 1910s through 1930s theories of Aryan language spread, which was theories of elite dominance, so called. In other words, through which Aryans were said to have expanded by conquering large native populations that were non-Aryan or pre-Aryan, and then the Aryans set themselves up as military elites over them, probably through use of chariots and so forth. This theory became associated with Nazis, some of the people, the genuine and highly competent archaeologists who promoted them were in fact Nazis, so then this Gimbuta's post-war version of large-scale folk migrations is whatever may be the case now, it was for its time actually itself a form of PC politically correct or politically motivated revisionism

and it was not hidden knowledge, it was the mainstream assumption for many decades, not to speak of our other feminist conclusions and so forth, but this is way of ignorant and arrogant scholar who wants to appear to be an innovator and to me it read a lot like journalistic positioning, which is all this study I'm talking to you about is. I don't mean against the material findings themselves, which are very interesting, but the story that they are then contorted to fit, right, so the article insists over and over again that they must be of foreign origin and that they must be mercenaries. And by repeating this and an unrelated history about it, what of course they're covering up entirely is the other possibility that these are not foreign bodies at all, but some

type of native or at least native Sicilian or at least born in Sicily, which would bring up all kinds of other questions, but I just want to say, I read the study and the footnotes and such and I followed some of the references to other articles and they never present any evidence that these are either foreigners or mercenaries, no evidence at all. Such evidence would have to be something historical or archeological, in other words, in the material record that was found, their grave goods and so forth, or some other material circumstance, And they never establish actually what these were, if anything. In fact, I want to read for you on this crucial subject when they reach this, just how cagey and vague they are.

So actually I take a break now, or after I read for you, I think musical interlude is called for. So I read now from this study, Diverse Genetic Origins of a Classical Period Greek Army, The section titled Identity Markers and Burial Treatments so that for those of you who don't want or don't have time you can see what such studies sound like and this in my opinion should have been the meat of the study, but instead it's three somewhat short paragraphs that to me read very vague. So I'm reading now, there are patterns in genetic affinities among the seven mass graves associated with the battle of 480 BC. All the soldiers who fall outside the Aegean genetic cluster are interred in mass graves 1 through 4, whereas all individuals from mass graves numbers 5 through 7 fall within

this cluster, a statistically significant difference. This result mirrors strontium isotope evidence showing more non-locals interred in mass graves numbers 1 through 4. Mass graves numbers 1 through 4 and numbers 5 through 7 are also spatially segregated and different size, with the mass graves one through four, these are the ones with the so-called foreigners, comprising significantly more interments. The correlation of burial location of individuals with their genetic ancestry suggests deliberate placement of soldiers with similar ancestral backgrounds in the same mass grave, reflecting the importance of identity in determining burial in this society. These results suggest that individuals in mass graves five through seven may have had

greater prestige among survivors who buried them, consistent with previous arguments based on mortuary context. If you follow this particular reference they give here, not enough is given, I keep reading. Individuals interred in mass graves five through seven are significantly older than individuals in the other ones and show no signs of having been dragged, as is the case for mass graves ones through four, or buried hastily, as is the case for mass graves eight and nine. Furthermore, individuals in mass graves five and six include grave goods, unlike the other mass graves from 480 BC. The fact these individuals also fall within the Aegean genetic cluster suggests a link between Aegean ancestry and prestige, as perceived by individuals responsible for burying the fallen soldiers.

of ethnicity in the ancient Greek world were chiefly a matter of common descent and ancestral homelands but were also informed by cultural traits such as language or material culture. Our data shows that the survivors who entered the casualties of the battle of 480 BC incorporated information on the social origins of the deceased as part of their social logic for respectful treatment of the dead. Individuals with so-called foreign ancestry, which by the way they have not established but okay, all of whom are also identified as non-local on the basis of isotopic evidence, were interred in larger mass graves, number one through four, and individuals with genetic affinities to other Greek populations were interred in the smaller mass graves, five

and seven. Nevertheless, it is not clear that the non-locals were considered as a homogenous group of others. It is possible that the more particular origins of the deceased were acknowledged than acted upon. For example, mass graves 1 and 2 contain both of the individuals with northeast European ancestry. Identification of the fallen might have been done by surviving fellow soldiers who knew them on the basis of their armor and weapons or on the basis of phenotypic characteristics. Many other soldiers have been buried in single interments, rendering them archaeologically invisible as soldiers. At Himera, some single interments do include individuals with perimort and traumas suggestive of being subjects of violence at the time of their deaths. These individuals could have

died in battle and been interned in single burials by those who knew them. It is possible that some bodies were repatriated, as is documented in classical antiquity, with a greater likelihood of repatriation to location elsewhere in Sicily than to more distant regions. Repatriation would have been achieved by first cremating the body, and cremation was commonly practiced at Hemera," more on the last mention of cremation in a moment, but what I've just read for you, which again should have been the meat of the study, more details like this, more parsing of the physical record, perhaps even photographs, rather than them relying on their own historical ignorance or assuming the readers, and constructing a false, a straw man that they then triumphantly

debunk, you see, and the baseline should have been, it is a common place that Greek armies and especially tyrants used mercenaries, and so what you are spending most of your study, which I'm not reading for you here, what these people, the historian side of it, what they spent most of this study arguing is just really a waste of time and an attempt to shoehorn and put these very interesting results to restrict them to their current day political concerns. But the passages I just read for you, if you look between the lines a little bit vague, they refer to these people's possible armor, but there are no words on that. Perhaps there wasn't any, perhaps they're just assuming. But the vagueness of the description, are they hiding something?

Or in fact, as I believe, do they themselves not know much about the material circumstances in which the bodies were found? There is some information in what I just read to you, but not nearly enough. Because if, for example, they are mercenaries, let me just say a couple of things about mercs in the Greek world. It was the Greeks themselves who most often served as mercenaries. for other Greek cities and also for non-Greek armies because they were the best fighters. They basically spent their entire life. If you were a Greek citizen, that's more or less what you did. Not everyone went as far as the Spartans to become pro and only do fighting and only be soldiers, but it was a big part of your life. Yearly training since before the age of 18 and from the age of 18 on, you received this

very heavy armor, so they had the best fighters, the best training, the best tool set and equipment, the heavy armor, the ability actually to bear such an armor for which you know you need years of physical training, that's what the gym was for. The experience to use it together in Phalanx form is not enough just to have the technology, you need to know how to integrate it on battlefield, how to use it together, this is why many middle Middle East armies, they receive Western equipment, but they quickly fall apart against a disciplined Western enemy who knows actually how to use that equipment. And in this case, they would have had to know how to fight in the phalanx, certainly by 480 BC. That was the style.

Interestingly, when the hoplite, or the Greek warrior you know now with the heavy bronze armor, large cowhide shield with bronze lining, this is a very heavy, thick shield, long spear, short sword, greaves, and other equipment that the signature helmets, some of which they had borrowed from the Carians on the coast of Asia Minor. But when this toolkit first appeared, probably it was not used as a phalanx, it was used by individual mercenary adventurers. So this very armor that you know now as the backbone of the Republican cities with their phalanx militia of middle class men, middle class citizens, that only came about later. In the beginning this was the toolkit of the mercenary, the wandering knight, the pirate, the adventurer. And actually this initial role never ceased.

If you read Xenophon Anabasis, the Greek mercenary army hired by Cyrus the Persian prince to be used against his brother Artaxerxes, from whom he was trying to steal the throne of Persian Empire. And to do this he went for Greeks for this reason. They were the best fighters, he hired Greek mercenaries. Conversely, the only significant threat they encountered on the opposing side of the Persian king were other Greek mercenaries. Otherwise they easily routed Persian cavalry and other native militias. The only difficulty they later had in their wanderings toward the Black Sea to return home was in the Armenian or so highlands when Anacacian's cousins, the Carduchians, these ancient people, the Xenophon and others called, and they used guerrilla tactics on them, shooting

from crevices in mountains and they were bowmen. But that was a kind of niche, local militia of a local tribe. These were not on the international mercenary market. And this was, by the way, well after the battle in question in Sicily, some 80 years after the battle in the study I'm talking about. But even so, Greek infantry was the only one at the time, only game in town militarily. It was undefeated. And my point is, any mercenaries likely hired to fight at this battle would have been other Greeks. And here's my question. Are these bodies that were found, were they wearing hoplite armor? What were they wearing? Because non-Greek mercenaries would have fought according to their native national style. A guy coming in from Baltic Sea, he had to offer something militarily.

And he would have had to fight with his traditional weapons and things from there. He wouldn't come to Sicily and fight as a hoplite. He wouldn't be able to. It's not like you see Star War, the recent episode with the Supergirl or Last Samurai Vanity Project of Tom Cruise, that you can learn how to fight in that professional way in one winter, not to speak of the fact that the armor itself was very expensive. It was given traditionally to a young man on age of 18 by his father as a kind it cost about as much as a car. It was really your entry into the franchise of the middle class. So any foreign mercenaries that didn't fight in this elite way, they would have been skirmishers, some of which were elite themselves, light infantry, and so forth. That's plausible.

But again, what evidence is there? Was there any signature object or armor or weapon on or near them to justify this? not in the mass grave, but nearby did they find bows, slings, traditional weapons that could have been used by a contingent of mercenaries from North Europe or Siberia. And it would have been interesting also, by the way, to compare these bodies in question in this study to the bodies of known hoplites. If such a thing has even been established, I am not sure that a baseline for what a hoplite Skeletor has been established because I imagine experience of carrying heavy bronze armor for years and maybe you can detect this in bone structure or signature bone wear or something like this. But in the same way that horses who have been ridden their whole life and have used the

bit or other thing, you can recognize that. But there's not a word about that in this study or as far as I'm aware in other studies. So the Athenians did hire Scythians, by the way, to use as policemen, but I believe that's a later development and it was not done because they thought Scythians were, you know. By the way, let me just take a break for a moment. In this study, I believe some of the individuals who have foreign ancestry, they were, could be classified as Scythians, but they also had interesting, some Aegean ancestry. So what does that mean? It could mean any number of things. They could have been Scythians from the Crimea who had some Aegean-Greek mixture, they had been somehow part of the Greek world. That's very interesting somehow, but it's not addressed in the study.

But anyway, why is it not addressed? I don't want to speculate, actually I do. Is there a political discussion that went on in how to present the results of this study to cater to modern sensitivities of various nationalisms? In any case, as I tell you, it is known the Athenians hired Scythians to use as policemen in Athens itself, but I think that's a later development and it was not done because they thought Scythians were, as I say, superior fighters, they were superior in some ways, But they were good bowmen, for example. But it was done largely for political reasons, as in we will have police force that's not native and not beholden to any local tribal loyalties and so forth. This is also the same reason many nations invite a foreign king or a foreign kingly house.

They can't agree among themselves who to put as king from among them, so they, you know. In any case, whether mercenaries from outside the Greek world were used as light infantry and skirmishers, the only possible positions they could have been in is this, what I tell you now. If they were mercenaries, they were light infantry or skirmishers. And it's plausible, even as early as 480 B.C. that they took part in this battle and so forth. And in fact, I'm willing to say that the suppositions of this article are entirely correct. But what offends me is the assertion, the repeated rash assertions to this effect. The multiple jumping to conclusions without any evidence, the total dismissal by silence of the possibility that this could have been actually local bodies or at least local Sicily,

and at least to consider what this means. I apologize to audience for my constant coughing, but they are using a specially grievous ray weapon on me today, it appears. But yes, so besides the fact that most of study heft is wasted to tear down this strawman of, oh, did you know mercenaries were used in the Greek world? Besides that, it's this rash string of assertions. Because here is my model for how I, Greek and also some other Indo-European societies in ancient world developed. For example, Mitanni in the Middle East and some other, but let's go with Greek. Around 1600 BC arrived Aryans in Greek mainland, probably by sea. They knew exactly where they were going and what they were colonizing, and in this case

it was the plain of Thessaly, which shows the earliest signature Mycenaean beehive-type tombs with, by the way, typical steppe grave goods. They probably came by sea from Caucasus, and this plain of Thessaly in 1600 BC was already thickly settled by a farming population that showed little interest in military matters. They were, in other words, longhouse pacifists. And the colonizer Aryans were after this resource, in other words, to farm people, to be overlords to serfs. In the same way that later Dorian waves, they were seeking in the south Aegean Sea, in the roads and so forth, they were seeking populations to farm as serfs. Then this later way of Dorian, they are called in their own midst the return of the sons of Herakles.

In other words, the second coming of the Aryans from reservoirs to the north in Messenia, where the Spartans were outnumbered ten to one by locals. And there is dialect evidence that the majority in that area, Messenia, the non-Spartans, that they did not even speak Greek into historical times. Now this is a later wave of arrivals, as I say, the coming of the Sons of Heracles, the return of the Sons of Heracles, these are the Spartans coming into Messenia, but as I tell you, outnumbered 10 to one. So I believe that what we now know as the distinctive ancient Greek culture was product of a non-native Aryan military aristocracy that largely maintained its bloodlines, at least in some places, into even historical times, which some Greek poets, they refer to, for example, as blonde.

The Pindar in Nemean Ode 9 refers offhand to the Danaians as a yellow-haired race. And Alkman, I believe, referred to one of his kinswomen, Dorian, as golden hair and yellow hair and so forth. And in other areas, they surely mixed with... Alkman is, as I tell you, of course, historical time. So even in his time, and in Pindar, and in some other poets, Bacchylides, but in Pindar, most certainly you see persistent evidence that the Dorians saw themselves and wanted to be seen by others as strikingly blond, you know. But in other areas, of course, they mix with local elites, this always happens. So by classical time, let's say 500 BC, there was already, I would concede, a Mediterranean-type mix in places like Athens especially. By the way, the modern Greeks, who are blond,

something like 10% of them also. But anyway, so in the Mediterranean, there was a Mediterranean-type mix in places like Athens especially. And there were also other types. There were Phoenician families, like I said. They became part of these cities and so forth. But I'd say to you that if you were to find the average bones in any one place, you'd find mostly locals. You'd find the common people. That's what you'd expect at least on a ten to one ratio and actually even more. I'll see why in a moment. And then to truly understand history, which is I think history is really the story of elite dominance. History only happens because of small groups of men who decide to do something. But you'd have to be able to carefully find the royal burials and equivalent.

And even then, if you find royal burial, you'd have to use judgment from what time frame is it. You'd have to pay careful attention to local history with gradations by decades and know how it changes. Because mixing, racial mixing for political and other reasons can take place at any time. And furthermore, it's possible that in some areas there were local reservoirs of original Aryans in either pure form or higher proportion pure, practicing some type of endogamy. In the same way as in Tolkien, who I have not read myself beyond, I read The Hobbit and a bit of Lord Rang's, O Lord them Rang's, but I understand he crafted his world very much in the spirit of the anthropology, archaeology, linguistics, and basically this is all just

deep history, but he crafted it in terms of practices and traditions of pre-World War II, German influenced anthropology. It's very interesting what I'm talking, the type I'm talking now, but he was deep interested in origins of people and their customs. And in some cases, in his book, The Men of Numenor, of the Dunedain, who had taken a refuge from Atlantis in some districts of Gondor, which the best map I've seen corresponds to, Middle Earth corresponds to ice age, just it's basically Europe with lower sea levels, and Gondor perhaps corresponds to North Italy, but whatever. In his story, in Gondor, there were local refugia or reservoirs of relatively purer Numenorean blood. Where he gets this from is because this is the type of thinking and historical investigation that was being done

at the time is very interesting, not just because, by the way, racism and pure blood. This concerns not so much the value of that, although I am interested in that too, but this, how you understand really origins of people and historical movements of people. So such patterns of settlement and dispersal are entirely possible, even likely in anything like Aryan arrivals, especially since, like I repeat, with the coming of the Dorians, it is known that this did in fact happen. In other words, there were two wave Aryan invasion of Greek mainland, and the second wave came from a local such refugium probably north of Thessaly or that area. They later re-invaded the south where they were widely outnumbered.

But what's interesting about Greek patterns of colonization of the rest of the Mediterranean, which this study confirms but is largely too ignorant to know that it confirms because They don't know the literature regarding how Greeks colonized, but how did Greek colonize in much the same way that Spanish and Portuguese did? A core of families that was not very large migrated and they would form the local aristocracy in the new place. So let's say a Greek mainland city sent out colony to Italy and the core families would then form the local aristocracy going forward, but many more unaccompanied Greek men seeking their fortunes. join this mission, and then when arrival at colonies, they would marry local women, and their descendants would form so-called the people of the colony.

So already there is marked racial difference in social classes of any Greek colony whatsoever, with the people including much more of native local ancestry. So this study seemed to confirm, for example, there's some mixed ancestry in different degrees for local men in these mass graves, mixed Aegean with local Sicilian ancestry. So far this is good, but here's my supposition, and I realize it's unlikely, but what if outlying individuals that cluster with Northeast or Baltic Europe or the Scythian so-called in the study, or some of them, were not in fact foreigners, but represented a local Dorian or Danian refugium in Sicily from one of these, from let's say an early Greek venture of settlement that is perhaps unrecorded.

What if that one of the original Aryan bloodlines was preserved and you're seeing here mercenaries or volunteers, they could have been, but they would have been Greek ones from let's say a Dunedain-type preserve in some unknown Sicilian valley. And that now in this study for the first time, maybe you're seeing a signature of an original Greek bloodline. I realize it's unlikely, but then consider also this other concern, there seem in this study and elsewhere in the entire field to be already a consensus as to what an ancient Greek or Aegean, as they say, genetic profile looks like. But I wonder this. Why? Because what exactly are these bodies they've been collecting to establish this baseline? There's a big problem with this. I'll say why in a moment. Let me just go on another tangent.

It is unlikely that the bodies they found were part of an endogamous local Greek Nordic, As I would say, Aryan, although I should take a tangent even on that and say that the Aryan, I do not claim that the Aryans were Nordic as such or that the present-day Nordics are their direct descendants, they are also mixed with local-type peoples. If you look in Scandinavia, there is enormous variation in phenotype and so forth, but these These bodies in particular that were found do not, they would show certain telltale signs if they came from an endogamous elite that had practiced endogamy for many centuries. That shows in a genetic studies and so I don't want to mislead you and tell you that that's what these individuals show. They do not show that.

On the other hand, there is endogamy and there is endogamy. If you read Nostromo by Joseph Conrad and you see Gould, he is local magnate, the local English in this fictional South American country, Costa Guana, and his attempt to restart the silver mine is what drives that story, right? But what does Gould do? He goes back to England and takes wife from England, you see. And this was actually practiced universally of many English expatriate elites in many other countries, including, I believe, in North Portugal, where the port wine houses are still owned by the English families, but they go back to England to study and they get English wives. And so it's possible that you could have a so-called endogamous Aryan elite that kept receiving wives from hyperborea, from abroad.

Many things are possible. I'm not saying it's likely in this case, but in any case let me return to what I was saying regarding the baseline that has been established for what a genetic profile of of Aegean ancient Greek look like, okay, you know. What are these bodies they've been collecting to establish what an ancient Greek look like? Because they think they have reached consensus on that. You know, I don't understand, however, because ancient Greeks practiced cremation, okay, which they would then preserve the bones, but I imagine that whatever such bones are preserved after cremation would be too damaged to study. And I'm not even sure if any remains of certified high status cremated individuals have ever been found at all.

Which brings into question, what are these ancient bodies that they're finding being studies? Is this high concern? It should be because you look at India, right, and in traditional India you take British accounts during British times, British rule times, high class women only were expected to commit sati, to jump on the husband's funeral pyre. In other words, the people's most revered customs are followed most of all by their upper classes, which means if you find an uncremated body in ancient Greece, it would probably mean it's an individual of different caste, therefore different race, which this wouldn't necessarily even be revealed in grave good because you often had very wealthy slaves. As in Greek, gentlemen would often leave like the Spanish Hidalgo and other historical European

and aristocracies that looked down on commerce and working, working for money I mean, they would leave commercial activity to be managed by their slaves and so some of the slaves became very rich. So simply finding opulent, even opulent grave goods would not be evidence that this was actually a high status individual or of Greek ancestry. Second it could be you're finding equivalents of what I said, families who may have actually been genuinely high status in the city, but were not cremated because they had deviant or unusual ancestry, and that allowances were made for them to practice different customs, as again the Phoenician families in Athens and elsewhere. So I'm actually not sure on their particular burial practices, but you see where I'm going

to with this, it could conceivably be that even after the fusion of Arian and local elites, special allowances would be made for local patrilineal descent families to not be cremated. For example, in which case even a genuinely high status individual, uncremated, would still give you a partial misleading impression of the genetic profile of the historical origin of the people we now know as the ancient Greeks, which is our concern, right? Or actually you can extend this kind of reasoning to any other people who practiced cremation or similar rights and so on, you see where I'm going with this. Even in cases where customs changed over time, and let's say some people, certain people practiced cremation at one point of their history, but not at the earlier or later one.

But you can imagine several ways in which this could lead to serious misunderstandings because a people's genetic profile can change very much sometimes very fast. And it's very hard to interpret a bone DNA data unless you have Tolkien level historical knowledge and interest and imagination, which the authors of this study most certainly do not. They have a third grade honky tonk understanding and what offends me most is the way they present this straw man as if they are its triumphant debunkers and they are innovators about something that is commonplace even to a casual reader like me. And then they jump from one conclusion to the next so rashly, and in what interests me regarding the theory of persistence of Aryan bloodlines through elite dominance model.

And by the way, there are many other wild ideas, as I say, you can entertain. For example, there are Greek traditions, meaning Greek stories, persistent, regarding the hyperboreans, which could indicate a long-running north-south trade route. And so individuals of Baltic or far north ancestry could represent an entirely different and wilder possibilities in that area. Were their bodies unceremoniously dumb naked in a mass grave, by the way? Because that sounds like something different. But anyway, that the authors do not even ask the question. And instead, listen to this, I hear from various sources and I may be speculating here, but I hear from various sources that there was a debate behind this study the authors debated among themselves, but it revolved around whether

these divergent individuals should be called mercenaries or not. And the study authors said they should be because they wanted to present an image of a multinational NATO-type pan-European army, whereas the opponents wanted them not to be classified as mercenaries because, again, get this, it's all about whether they should have the honor to be classified as combatants and as soldiers at Hemera at this battle or as civilians or whatever who happened to have been there for whatever reason. So the debate, in other words, revolved around this kind of medic political argument over who should have the honor of being considered part of a Greek army or not. In other words, it's presentist obsessions, nationalist presentist obsessions.

What I tell you, unfortunately, the study of ancient peoples, ancient origins of peoples is almost always distorted by political considerations of a very stupid type like this, of what is happening with the bones from Mycenae, by the way. They release some data on the ancient Mycenaean bones from around, let's say, 1500 BC or so, which would be very revealing, and they release some data on them years ago, which is consistent by the way, with the North European origin on the mother's side, because that's all they released. They released very little, and since then nothing. And if you think the people involved would not destroy samples if it didn't support their political positions, just look again at what certain mild-mannered nerds like in this study

are doing, the idiotic verbiage study and the dumb debates they had about it, and the kinds of concerns it revolved around. And I want to say something in closing in this segment about scholarship as such and what this study, it's not unique in this, but something seriously wrong, especially with historical scholarship in general. The reason study authors don't even mention the possibility that these are local Sicilian or Greek bones is because there is, they think, already a consensus on what Greek or Aegean bones of that time cluster as genetically. And even though these findings plainly contradict that consensus, they then erect this whole verbiage and kind of MySpace angles historical rationalization to explain away this divergence. That's what this study basically is.

But again there is no material or historical material or archaeological evidence in this study to support their doing so. Their entire motivation, in other words, is to maintain the consensus and build off of already existing knowledge base. And I say this exactly wrong with historical and in general humanistic study, scholarship, academic scholarship. I mean almost anything in humanities history, so-called social sciences, not to speak of literature or philosophy. In science, hard science and especially technology, there is a real reason to actually maintain consensus and build off a body of knowledge. If you are a geologist and you are designing new mining technology, for example, you would

be crazy not to build off already known technology that works or things that have been established with certainty about certain types of rocks and ores and so forth, although even in that case it's possible for errors to be built into the consensus and then to lead slowly to disaster in the long term. But anyway, it's necessary to accept the body of knowledge not only because hard sciences are built on a relative certainty by their methods, mathematics most so, there you can with some confidence build and erect this great structure of modern mathematics, some people say it's the most beautiful creation of modernity, and that can work because mathematics being a play of man's inner sense of space, every step can be fully certified, you know,

But in many of the other sciences, it's not so easy and as you move away from that level of geometric abstraction, it becomes harder and harder to get certainty. But as I say, in the hard sciences, in technology, you build on existing base knowledge not only because of this ability of hard sciences to achieve some certainty, but also because there is no virtue in starting anew every day, right? You can and you want to make progress and you can, for example, in mining techniques or prospecting or whatever. That's a place where progress can make sense. I design a new level of extracting natural gas or whatever. And similar in this field, in the purely scientific part of these ancient bone studies, the extraction

of DNA, the methods of its analysis by computer and so on, the field of genomics and so on, There is virtue there in that side of things in preserving consensus regarding methods and building off a body of technical knowledge. There is possibility of technical progress. By contrast, in history there is no such thing. Imagine the arrogance of saying, for example, in philosophy, we have made considerable progress in the last two decades in the field of human rights. We have discovered certain ingenious new techniques for developing the right to property. Of course they would not say right to property, they'd say human right to health care or the right to stick cucumber in rectum, but they do talk this way, and how absurd is that? And it's the same in history.

And I'm sorry, no, you have not made significant progress in the last five years in our understanding of the French Revolution, as if you are talking about mining or a circuit board, that's insane. And some of this is this type of scholar, they have a bad conscience about not being part of the enterprise of the hard sciences and they want to have their fields like my field, their fields have an equal prestige to particle physics and so forth. But a lot of it is even worse than that. A lot of it is emotionalism and rash moral and political assumptions that they want to sneak in under the pretense of a scientific consensus. of it is simply the human drive to conformism, long house science, a love of consensus for its own sake.

But a lot of it, as I say, is to sneak in moral assumptions under the language of science. I studied some things for a while myself, and I was taken aback when I was asked by people who were supposed to be studying Plato or Hegel, and they were asking me what my findings were, you know, as if this was the hard sciences, it's just absurd to talk that way in history and philosophy and so forth. And in history in particular I want to say there is no advantage in accepting a body of knowledge and building off it, none. In history this is simply a way to compound error and shared assumptions that there is no disadvantage to abandoning in the field of history I'm saying. It's simple laziness actually. You are supposed always to start from zero in your assumptions in something like history

and anthropology. I realize this is a possibility because scholars are like any other trade guild of vile professionals and they want a continuation of their own interests and so-called the debates they're having at the time and they're resistant to new assumptions. But objectively there's no advantage to knowledge in that type of thing. It's worthless consensus building for career purposes. Even in the hard scientists, by the way, there are serious dangers to accepting consensus and forcing scholarship to follow body of knowledge as if progress were always possible. But in history, it's almost always the reinforcement of error. And in this case, a modest and unemotional study would just frankly say we found these bodies, there were these divergences.

These two individuals cluster with contemporaneous genetic stock from very far away from such areas and we have no explanation. And here's how the bodies were found, that's what I would have liked. Here's what the goods were found on them or nearby. Here's what the makeup of their bones say about their origin. Here are photograph of body and their position in the grave because I don't trust you, I want to see photograph and I want to see what was around them. And here are maybe you can say at the end here are five possibilities of explanation and you know be modest and limit these to a sentence or to each and maybe take seriously the possibilities that you start from zero and in fact these were bones from some valley in Sicily that you know nothing about.

And not you know that you do the NATO mercenaries who are here to defend Greek democracy from Carthaginian illiberal menace or whatever they had in mind. Please excuse that. All I mean to say is that all people involved in this study were like David Reich is not like this. The people on the science side are very good and there are some genuinely as good as it gets people in study of foreign, excuse me, ancient bones. But most of the historical side of it is unfortunately as what I have described. Please excuse, I will be right back. controversy on Twitter last week as one Megumin, one of the genuine enemy Jugend, and he made posts, became super viral in the sense of, I think, thousands of quote tweets, angry

mobilization, mainly from the left against him, but some on the so-called social conservative or woman worshipping right, denouncing him because he called a girl fat. And this was regarding an ad for some new dating site app, and she go on saying she want alpha male, and he just quoted her image saying this fat pig says she wants an alpha male. Okay, and this led to more than a week of absolute blowout online recriminations. And he get called pedophile and homosexual because he said this, in America you don't like fat girl, you're a homo apparently. which tells me my focus has been entirely right. Entirely right, my focus on aesthetics and on the metapolitic of what Hartiest began to talk about, the so-called sexual marketplace. Maybe some of you don't like that particular phrase,

but this is still what gets to people, what touches sensitive spot. And show me where the anime account touch you. You see just massive blowout because some 20-year-old said he doesn't like fat girls, and this is actually much more important than pontification about economics or many such things. If that's your thing, do it. But this is also why people are wrong to criticize raw egg nationalists, others when they talk of food supply, the poisoning of air, water, places, and of poisoning foods and of our biology. He was featured on Tucker Carlson this last week also, and most people on our side are rightly celebrated, as you should, anyone associated with that sphere gets national exposure you should celebrate. It helps you even if their issue isn't yours.

It helps you even when you're not in good terms with the person. There's this guy, Jack Perfume Nationalist, he actually did a nice review of my book in one of his first shows. He doesn't like me. I have nothing against him much other than he lies about me and he is a little hysterical. But I retweeted and celebrated the fact that he had Brett Easton Ellis, I believe, on his podcast this last week. You know, it helps all of us when we insinuate ourselves. Let me put a reference on what we means. We means if a normie thinks somebody in this sphere or associated with it, something like And that includes a broad range of people that you may not agree with on fundamentals even. But it's always good when we infiltrate mass popular culture or literary culture in some way.

But it has to be done indirectly, I think, through non-political thing, right? Because there are some people, for example, a couple of national review online, so-called pundits and pundit wannabes interns. Imagine being a young guy and going to work for NRO National Review after 2016. This is kind of brown-noser type. People like this, the college republican type in a suit and so forth, I like to call it men's warehouse conservatism, let's play act pundit on television, and they all got self-righteous and they called raw egg nationalists being on Tucker to talk about raw egg and nutrition and so forth a distraction, which I don't understand, even if it were, how that hurts you from being an important serious thinker or whatever you imagine yourself as.

But to call it a distraction is a huge misunderstanding of the fight we are in, as if the only value is to talk endlessly about policy or this week's controversies regarding transsexuals or CRT, or even if you address race or ethnicity or immigration, which as you know I mentioned frequently, but you cannot approach that kind of thing in normie media because you get banned, you get excoriated. And even if you could, I say, there is a value, a big value to building camaraderie and energy around anti-establishment positions that are not explicitly political because we are in a long-term cultural war, you see. We're in a long-term cultural war, and much more so than a short-term policy fight. And people like raw egg nationalists, and even Sol Bra,

who many of you foolishly attack, you see, I don't care if Sol Bra is a so-called grifter, which is a dumb, annoying Yiddish word that you should stop using, you know, just let Let me repeat to you what Hakan says about this word. One moment. Yeah, okay, so here how friend refers to the use of this word grifter. Everyone uses its Yiddish gangster jargon. I cringe every time I hear it. It's literally dribblings from the fat lip muscles, excuse me, not muscles, muzzles, of gay Jewish gangsters from gay Hebraic, Jew, dork, shitty. It belongs to the same category of behavior as Bay Area rationalists who attempt to hack dominance hierarchy in quotes, you know, by casually calling people sport and little guy. And by that I mean retard addiction.

You know, I like posters who don't mumble in bris-nude, not bix-nude, but bris-nude. So this is what I mean, you know, maybe you stop using the word grifter and such thing. It doesn't sound good when you do it. It's like that woman senator who after some financial crisis she was asking these guys from Wall Street about a vig, you know, in their industry what the equivalent of a vig or a vigorish is. You know, she was pretending to be streetwise. It sounds stupid. You're not a Jewish gangster on the Buenos Aires docks. Stop using this argot, you see? That's what you sound like, okay? So Solbra, I don't care. He looks great, okay? And he presents a great image of us. And I don't care that he doesn't promote me, by the way, or our

ideas directly, Mangan, some of you may know Mangan, Mangan started as Sol Bradid as entirely so-called alt-right guy. He was a hard-right guy during the blogging years before 2015, and he then changed to a nutrition focus, and I think that's great. He managed to have bigger audience that way, and he's sneaking our ideas into it, even though, by the way, I don't agree with a lot of Mangan nutrition things, and his promotion of aromatase, I think it's aromatase blockers or something, is highly dangerous. You shouldn't take many of his recommendations. But his strategy, I'm saying, of affecting culture through a flanking motion like this, I think that's great. Not everyone has to talk about the same things.

And regarding Sol Brab, by the way, his marketing is not directed to frogs, but to normies. I thought that was obvious. If a normie wants to pay $60 for a cookbook with a basic sushi recipe, what's it to you? He's obviously selling and marketing his body, which, you know, he has a great physique and he's doing it in a smart way and people like him. And people also like very much my friend Latsbra, he used to be called, one of the internet original greats, the golden one, the Swedish bodybuilder. And these guys, the Latspra, the Golden One, he's doing a lot more for our... By the way, he has wonderful, also good book reviews recently. I will link his YouTube channel. He has good book and movie reviews. He has a good review attacking Lord Damn Rang's new series, okay?

But people like this and Golden One are doing a lot more for our side than dork in cheap suit with delusions of being important pundits on Talmud Vision and commentators on R-Series smiters going on television, which many of them aren't even. They are basically pundits who want to be on TV, but they go on the internet instead. It's a ridiculous kind of roleplay as a college republican archetype. And these latter do not threaten authorities really in the slightest because their so-called policy commentary is really just an opinion punditry. And they, as a persona, they play the role of stiff. They play the stuffed shirt, the type that the uptight conservative has played for the left as a cultural patsy of sorts for decades.

And there is, as I tell you, no constipated, trad path to winning in modern popular culture context where ideas and spirit, they have to be reproduced in an image or otherwise form that can seduce the people. And by people I mean even relatively higher IQ normies, by the way, who imagine themselves smarter or literary, who are susceptible to the status and feelings of wanting to join in that are associated with physical health and beauty and youth and vitalism, which I'm misusing the word a little bit in a pop context now, but this physical health image is basically the last thing. They can't really quite do away with this level of distinction like they have with many other kinds. There is a nice line in Musel's book Men Without Qualities

where he becomes despondent because genius is no longer discussed but the media refer to a racehorse of genius. And he's right, they have done away with that and so forth, But the racehorse with genius type thing, they cannot quite do away with this, because the normie can't be pried away from it yet. To normalize obesity and so on has been, they're trying to, but they can't. But it's possible they'll succeed eventually to normalize the form of the obesity and many such things, and to make having a physique like Solbra to seem uncool or weird. I mean there are people now who say that or even, I've seen people just deny, outright deny that such things exist. In the same way when I told someone recently online, I think I said I was in Hong Kong

and I was paying 80 something dollar for a large room in Wan Chai which is a nice part of Hong Kong with a nice view and a big room and this is after horror stories that you hear about Hong Kong or Tokyo and I was just surprised I could find this. I mean, imagine any, you know, New York, right, but really any American city finding a hotel room for that. And I have people in responses literally denying, you know, saying that this is impossible, that it doesn't exist, you know, as if I, you know, they didn't even say I was lying, you know, they said it doesn't exist, you know, as if I was there, but I wasn't, you know. But in any case, for now, that is not the case. They cannot make someone like Solbra or the golden one, or people like this seem uncool, you know, they are very good image

for our side, you know, which is, I don't want to attack people, but that movie, TFW, No GF, I didn't like it because it was trying to emphasize the opposite, it was trying to emphasize the media stereotype about us, but let's leave that for another time. But you can see it again, right, I say, in this kid Megumin, this controversy for the past week. And he cannot be over 22 or 23 if that, I think he's younger. And everyone pile on him an attack because he called this entitled girl a hog, and then they ask, what do you look like? I bet you are an in-cell basement fat neckbeard and this, you know, the usual thing they attack us with. So he posts a photo of his torso holding a beautiful, just spectacular anime doll.

And he says, this is me, I'm holding my waifu, and I will never fuck a fat hog. And they just absolutely exploded this second tweet. Also he make another week of thousands of deranged replies, angry that he didn't fit that Hollywood stereotype of what a shut-in loser right-winger is supposed to look like. And then trying to, you know, the same people who were attacking him in that way, then they tried to turn it around and attack his very nice physique, and to throw other Hollywood stereotypes this way that he is gay and so forth, which again convinces me that I've taken the right approach and attack enemy right on bullseye pressure point where it matters most to them. You see it in episodes like this, but also generally every time they reply to our side,

anything we say not having to do with this, let's say about politics or some racial matter or even a movie, we attack a movie or anything, anything we say breaks out of the media and and Twitter ghetto we're in and gets a little bit of national attention. The first and main attacks are exactly this. I bet you're all loser, the guy who wrote this, you're a jobless loser, neckbeard. You live in a pajama basement and you're fat and so on, you're a fat neckbeard. And they become quite agitated when they see this is not the case, you know, and when that That Fatbot, I think his name is, Fatbot, and he appeared after the 2016 election, and the only good thing he did, he was talking about Atlantis rising after Donald Trump won.

But I was approached by people supposedly on our side, they are on our side, and the part associated with the normie right, and he's like, oh my God, so it's true, all of the alt-right people, because they thought Fatpot was alt-right, and he was at the time, by the way, they say, oh, the alt-right people, they look, they're obese neckbeards and so forth. And I tell this person, well, this guy is like that, but you see people, I retweet, and my friends and the many followers I have and so forth who I retweet their physiques, and they look wonderful and they're not like that. And this person, despite that evidence, says, no, no, I don't want to talk about that, I I don't want to talk that. I don't care about that. But I was just surprised that I saw this fat guy.

So it's a one track mind, even on people who are on the right. They don't... It makes them very uncomfortable when their stereotype that's Hollywood implanted breaks apart, you see. They get very agitated when they see how many wonderful physique people and very manly men that are on the frog right. And by contrast, there is very little effort to deal with arguments or facts that are presented. Why? Because these people, they know what Ben Shapiro and those who want to be like Ben Shapiro do not know. That this is a fight to associate the opposing side with being ugly and decrepit, they don't use that word, they use the word uncool or some people on our side use the word low status and so forth. beyond low status or uncool, but this is what end up determining

cultural fate of a political position in longer term today, which, if you look at photograph of Antifa, as well as the coalition of the wretched, without which the left would be numerically very small, like the ugliness and the orc-like deformity has come much more so to describe Zen, the typical Bernie supporter and the Chapo listener, than anyone certainly on the frog right, I mean the hard right or the frogs, for many of whom have undertaken physical culture quite seriously over the last 10 to 15 years. But if you look on the other hand at the extreme effort the left puts into this, it's because they know this matter the most as a propaganda point. The original Frog Twitter group, me, Mena, Richard, Hollywood, many others, who are promoting

this image of the right and of Frog Twitter, it's not just having to do with this, it has to do with bringing environmentalism and care for nature on our side, attacking xenoestrogen and the poisoning of food supply and of people's lives and so forth. We were taking that side of things away from the left. It's not just with the physique thing, you know. But I'm saying this Frog Twitter group, the original Frog Twitter group, we were all banned on the same day together in 2017, for the first time, many of us have been subsequently banned many times over since, but we were banned for the first time 2017 in a spring on a Thursday, which in our circles is called the Handsome Thursday Massacre. It was actually done by people at Twitter for this reason, you know, to let's stick it to them.

Because there was at that time, this is mostly forgotten now, but there was at the time a a very blatant attempt to replace us with an astro-turfed leftist mirror of ourselves that they call themselves the Swole Left. And that never really went anywhere, of course, they keep trying to push it even now, it is this kind of fat type of leftoid and they do some power lifting and after they do the little power lifting they go to IPA with their friends and they want you to know they're They're having a beer, an IPA beer, a normal one with their friends, they have friends, you see, they're normal. And you see them now and you see varieties of this also, I'm afraid, on some parts of the astroturf to write, you know, when a homesteading real man comes on to attack my oyster dinner,

you see, and to call me and my friends a twink or something, you know. The mofoggan wholesome community-centered powerlifter, you know, real man, really sticks it to us frog twinks who care about abs and aesthetics. And I'd say this all sounds silly to you maybe if you're a conservative or you don't pay attention to online fights and popular culture fights, but more energy is put by the left and their orbiters into this kind of messaging than anything to do again with arguments or disputation of facts regarding the things we say and so forth. So I say I fit on the right nerve points because they are desperate really not to be exposed as actual real neckbeards and degenerate worshippers of obesity and so forth, and they know how destructive that would be to their side in the long term.

Nobody really wants to be associated with that, no matter how many ads of fat trannies and Calvin Klein is forced to put up now. And yes, people in fashion are forced to do this, by the way. They don't do it because they believe in it. I think most of them hate it. A lot of people in fashion world, I don't know Calvin Klein, but Dolce and Gabbana and so forth, that's well documented. They are far right or adjacent, and they admire Mussolini aesthetics and Hugo Boss-type aesthetics from 1930s and so on, and it was pretty much acceptable in that corner of the world even in 1990s and early 2000s, people, you know, they didn't take it so seriously, so they looked the other way and they considered it just an oddball, oh, it's an oddball fashion,

the fashion homotype thing, oh, they like Nazis and so forth, so fashion actually ended up being a small corner of the modern popular culture world that preserved in some sections a hard right sensibility and aesthetic at least, but now, you know, they're being forced not to. So regardless, okay, so they all pile up on this guy Megumin because he posted physique and he looks great and they had a pains to call him a homosexual twink with abs who's a pedophile and who has committed laisse-majesté against the eternal feminine, right? Because as is well known, the eternal feminine is the Willendorf nappy haired obese earth mammy, right? And there were even defenses, unironic defenses of this girl in precisely these terms by leptoids

And generally by simps of women, some of these beta social conservatives, I call them beta so-con, they simp for women, they, you know, it's called white knight for women, Schopenhauer makes fun of them, he says, he calls it the Teutonic Christian stupid veneration of women, but it's become something far worse now. But these guys who are unaware of my book, by the way, but they proceed to defend this girl, they say she's beautiful, this is what Earth Mother goddess from 20,000 years ago looks like, right? It's wonderful. The long house, friends, that's just something I made up in my book, right? Is that what you think? No, it comes from long experience of dealing with these people and of having, I have the best antennae of anyone and observe normie

so-called culture for a long time. I know where their nerve points are, you see. I understand why for years they were outraged that Pootler had posted photos of himself shirtless, which What she did as a joke one time, I don't remember, 15 years ago or more, and there, I would bet they're doing it right now, but last year, the year before every year, you have major United States public officials, State Department and Associated, who froth at the mouth about those photographs and say that, you know, they challenge him to a judo match and so forth. Despite the language of human rights, they are deeply insecure about this one issue. It's why they worship also special forces men and they really want to feel like those

men respect them and that they would be very surprised to learn I have many fans in special forces. How many of them have sent photographs of my book with their regalia and so forth. In any case, it's here, it's not discussion of economic trends long term and hyper intellectualized post-Marxism and this, it's here that the fight is. It's not in trying, for example, to sound like a post-Chumsky leftist where you are ranting about neo-liberalism and big oil, which Hollywood again has been doing for decades. It's not an intellectual conservative so-called who is trying to get eventually a pat on the head from the New York Review of Books as a thoughtful rightist thought leader or whatever. The fight isn't there, right?

If Megumin had blamed this app that he was criticizing, or rather this girl picture, if he had blamed it on hyper capitalism and on individualist alienation originating in the liberal anthropology of John Locke or whatever has become fashionable to safely invade again since 2017, you know, that's around the time when frogs were banned from speaking the truth. But if he had engaged in this kind of plausible obfuscation that has become fashionable also on the right, he would have been praised. But because he told the truth, he was excoriated, and then he was banned. And what is the truth is, today the fight has nothing at all to do with pseudo-socialist critiques of late capitalism or whatever, all due respect to Bannon and people who want to resurrect Ebola or whatever they talk about.

But it's where the fight rather was identified by Hartiste and by many frogs before 2015-16. It has to do with the denaturing of life itself, with the fact that young white men of high ability, high IQ and high ability, they are faced with a regime of lies, of anti-white racist invective. And on the other hand, and this is something actually all young men of all races are faced with, feminism properly understood as female entitlement. They are faced with this. Female entitlement manifesting itself in the obesity epidemic that lowers the number of eligible women into maybe the 20% of women range, if that. By the way, a quick word here. I don't mean to say that all men are beautiful in America and all women are fat. You take average

Kwan couple and it's a disaster, you know, you can go many sides of America, everybody's obese. However, it used to be, let's say I remember online fights, maybe 10, 12 years ago, a little bit more, and if somebody referred to obesity, often you'd see the reply, are you only around poor people? Because if you only see obese people, it must mean you live in a socioeconomic low area with only poor people and so forth. It used to be that as you went, let's say, middle class and higher, most people were not fat. But that's changed. That changed, already I was seeing it changed in the late 2000s, early 2010s. I was in Jude York City in New York and in hipster areas that were supposed to be very avant garde and so forth, I saw many girls who were already becoming chubby by then.

And conversely, again, middle class and higher, men back then did not used to lift weights so much, whereas in the 2010s, everyone almost in America started to do it. And not everyone, again, most, the average is low across the board, but many, many more started to do it. So it is true that in America, in different countries, it's a different balance ratios, But in America there is this imbalance, at least for the last ten years, where many men have worked on themselves, they are handsome and muscular, they work out so on. Many women in the same socioeconomic classes that didn't used to be fat have let themselves go in various ways, you see. And the ones who haven't, right, the subsequent entitlement, these ones who are not fat, let's say the 20% or less who are not fat or chubby,

and have their value artificially inflated, again, through this, through, you know, I'm the only, you know, I'm, it's like cutting the supply of women by four-fifths. And, but then also through cultural feminism, of course, that is implanted in them, and then through amplification of social media like Instagram and TikTok and many such things. So in other words, it isn't as normie conservatives or xer analogs in the post-left or whatever, Imagine that it's only an ideological battle. This particular woman in the ad, and I'm actually a nice guy, as many people know. I like to be kind to people. I feel a bit bad to attack her, but she should have never been featured in that ad. And the solution for her, if she listens to criticism of her and feels bad,

the solution to that bad feeling, girl, is simple. You know, use this as a learning experience and just put away the food. That's literally all you have to do as a woman. It's not about exercise even, although that's good. but just eat less, okay? And you will get normal body for a woman in time because what she was is not normal and what we object to is, we're not trying to be mean for the sake of it, but when that is presented as normal and good and you can't criticize it, it actually destroys lives of millions of people eventually when that gets normalized, you know? But she may, basically already has destroyed millions of lives. it can always get worse, you know, but this girl, I mean, she may not have been feminist

in her ideology, in fact she was on some site where the women advertising are not feminist or whatever the point of the site is, but she was a feminist, however, in her spirit, in the same way that if you read F. Roger Devlin essays, all of you should, I forget which one of them it is, there are four main ones, I think, and he's, F. Roger Devlin, reviewing this book by Wendy Shalit, I think, it's this Jewish conservative woman, I forget her name, socially conservative religious woman, and she's talking about Jewish conservative girls and the things they say. And you know, it's that that also is not technically feminist. In fact, it's nominally anti-feminist and socially conservative. But F. Roger Devlin

shows how it just, in many ways, it's worse. It's just another form of female entitlement inflated self-worth masquerading as traditional morality. And this is a rule, by the way, with ideological, conservative, and religious girls. They're enormously entitled. So for example, they don't sleep around, but not out of a humble embrace of the word of God. Right? Excuse me. Ideally, maybe you should, that would be good. A girl who wanted to sleep around, who enjoyed, you know, who enjoyed sex was not a frigid dry cunt, but doesn't do it because she humbly embraces the word of God and, you know, wants marriage and so forth. But it's not that at all. It's usually something like, they ain't good enough for us, the daughters of Israel, you know.

That's a direct line, I believe, from the F. Roger Devil article that I mentioned, definitely. And it's this mentality, female entitlement, under whatever name, young men are faced with this today and not allowed to say that even that you have standards of your own, right? Because the popular understanding is that men are dogs. They should have no self-control and that they will do anything for a piece of pussy or the prospect of it dangled in front of them. I've met girls like this who fronted as, oh, I'm a good girl, they use that phrase, and they dangled pussy, they were used to doing this in front of dumb men, and they became absolutely the rage that they presented was something out of this world when you didn't fall for it, you know?

But that's what men are expected, to become clowns for the prospect of pussy dangled, and that they should be eternally grateful when a fat girl like this with really no redeeming qualities and nothing to offer. I mean, I don't know this girl in particular, right? But most girls in much of the world today, but let's say America, do not know anything about art or singing. They do not play the harp, let's say, ancient women, they knew how to play the harp and to weave beautiful tapestries, but okay, that's Homer time, but women of middle class and higher were expected to know how to dance and to have some of the educations that formerly made women charming and seductive, and now they only have their gash as bargaining chip,

and it's all very mercenary, it's all extreme unromantic, and as a man, you are expected to be an incontinent, drooling dog who will accept this and do whatever in exchange for that. Because that's your job as a man, a man up, you know, it's something repeated even by Charles Murray and by, I forget the name, Kim something, but the older social conservatives who don't understand at all the horrid scene on the ground that a guy who is 20 years old faces today. And if you say anything about it, like Megumin say, you know, you're called gay or a pedophile and it's seen as just incomprehensible that a young man could have standards about what women he should accept, which, you know, extended, this is the thing, extended that what they are really afraid of.

That young, especially white, highly capable young men, that they extend this attitude to life as a whole and ask, okay, why do I have to accept life in this way when you go Go to work, usually shitty job with abusive boss who is misled by the general labor market with immigrants where they think they can mistreat you because there is a glut of labor. Even if there is not in their field, they believe because of cultural diffusion that empowers employers that they can mistreat you, right? Some employers tried to mistreat me once, they found out they could not. They got jizzed on the face for trying to mistreat me, let me put it that way, because they had nobody to replace me with. But you're expected to accept this kind of dreary job where you get abused by employer.

You get milk dry actually through taxation, sorry post left, the taxation is enormously high, especially for young white men entering job market, you see, enormous taxation. They don't need them programs and you to hold hand. How about you lower taxes for them? You know, you're not supposed to say that, you're a libertarian to say that, but white people are net contributors to economy along with Asians, whereas it's very clear black Hispanic are net takers. And so the whole post-left narrative about welfare for white, the first welfare you'd have to do is still lower taxes. How about you are able to do that first, rather than just take money and filter it through some shibun in neon-lighted office. This milk through taxation, the money goes to no honest public service.

So you get filthy subways, filthy roads, filthy buses with vagrants, shit air and food. You get sheep shared and scammed on everything from hotel to health insurance, while state and media bend over backward to hand over street to squatters from Chiapas or Kinshasa in tints and other racial hostiles. And I'm supposed to be happy with this kind of work camp life. You know, you go to work, you come home, you get abused in media, and you should be exceedingly zen happy when after ten years of slavery in your thirties you're offered a piece of outworn roasty pussy from some fat hog, and you're not supposed to question that that's not natural or normal, it's not a good deal, you're getting scammed, and it's really not anything but the existence of a slave, and unfit for a man of any standards.

And this is what most are afraid of, American men realizing, wait a minute, I'm getting scammed in this country. And if you complain about the woman thing in particular, you're called gay. But then if you form close friendships with other men, to get out of this situation I just called, which has, by the way, nothing again to do with what's discussed on the intellectual right now about late-stage capitalism or such thing. It has to do with the sexual and racial politics of deranged ruling class in the United Snakes. But if you form brotherhood or fraternity with men to try to get out of this, because that's what political ferment and organization is, that's also called gay. Right, you're gay and racist, and then a fat hog with fibromyalgia who gets promoted

by Yoram Hazony as a major conservative mind, who read some kind of post-left blog, she will come and call you a racist liberal modernist on top of it. Because for not accepting that of course the solution to all the problems that I've mentioned is you should pay more tax and ask to pay even more in tax because of lucky and selfishness or whatever, and you should pray. All the pain will go away, you pray in the afternoon, you see. This is what I mean, the intellectual so-called dissident discourse has not always, right, but in large part it's lately departed so far off course from the animating problems that gave rise to this in the 2010s in the first place. Sometimes this departure is out of stupidity, but mostly it's out of cowardice because again

Then you get cancelled and banned if you called out things like anti-white racism and female obesity and so on. And I'd like to add one more thing on this because this is a very controversial tangent. Please excuse. Don't misunderstand what I'm about to say. But a lot of these anime young with the young guys with anime avatars and who are some of the bravest posters now, they post anime and these photos of cartoon images of some young girls, right? They sort of, that isn't pedophilia and actually it's an insult to people who are victims of pedophilia to call an anime photograph or cartoon pedophilia, right? But these anime guys, they sort of, you know, they push this button of pedophilia and some do it stupidly but others do it smart and they know, they do it because it's a sensitive

sore spot for this type. I just want to say a word on that without endorsing everything that they do myself. But in 2016 we used pedophilia accusation against Hillary and in general political establishment and we used it with good effect. The good effect was why? Because a sizable percentage of Hispanics and blacks especially who are socially conservative even though they're not necessarily because of your allies, but a large percentage, large-ish percentage Hispanics and blacks in 2016 were freaked out by the rumors of pedophilia on Hillary's side, and they at least set out the election, okay, because that was the point of emphasizing that thing about eating Haitian babies and whatever. That was the demographic mostly that it convinced or was aimed at.

On the other hand, it's very plausible and actually likely that factions in establishment do use pedophilia as method of social enforcement, social control among themselves. In other words, mutual blackmail arrangements. What is sometimes now called Russian word kompromat, you may have seen, I have something on you, you have something on me, but that used to be done with gay stuff and other such, but since gay accusations have no real force anymore, so they've needed then to go to pedophilia, which is criminal, or probably even beyond that, to murder sacrificial cult role-playing and so forth, as Q alleges, or who knows what. And that's indisputable, given Epstein Island and Epstein, who was no doubt a Mossad agent

who was used, this kind of thing, to shore up support for Israel among the newer part of the Democrat parties that were not possible to be bound to the Israel cause in any other way. very obviously what Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell look up her father and what they were doing. So the accusation of pedophilia could in theory still be of use to our side in some way. On the other hand, it should be reminded that before 2016 this was a characteristic weapon of the left, and in particular of the feminist left, and it served many purposes for them. In custody dispute cases, still the case today, women are routinely encouraged by their rat lawyers and by the family courts who are anything but impartial to allege that the father is a molester.

They do this to get full custody and also sometimes they can reduce father basically to life of a prisoner if not actually get him jailed. And the image then of the man as molester of the family and this is central to the feminist and gay understanding of what the man is, the oppressor who penetrates the weaker. It is derived from Foucault and his cronies with their gay, sadomasochistic delusions of ancient Greeks indiscriminately penetrating everything and everyone has protocols and regimes of domination, okay? But it certainly rules this image, like I say. So they can denounce a 30-year-old man who wants a 21-year-old girlfriend as a pedophile, which is routinely done today. If you, you know, when you see both in Megumin case but also Leo DiCaprio,

who does not like girls over 25, which is perfectly normal in my opinion, but this makes perfect sense if you understand feminism as a sexual excess cartel movement. That is of older women who want to deny men their own age access to younger women. And this very obvious, especially in highly shit-lib environment like academia, where they can actually pass rules against relationships of older men and younger women. And then also, as you see in Megumin case that I discuss on this segment, they use it if you dislike fat women now. If you're attracted to a petite and thin girl, which is the only one you should be, tastes very, some of you like a little bit more robust, but petite and thin and hairless is the characteristic

sexual qualities of the female race. But if you're attracted to that instead of a meaty girl with the fridge linebacker build, then you are weirdly called pedophile organ. I say weird because many historically or many other countries it would be seen extreme strange that this accusation get made in America against you don't like fat girl. And in general it's also a way to criminalize potentially let's say 18 or 19 year old guy with a 16 year old girlfriend or even 20 year old guy. That's perfectly normal, but this is how it's often used, and they sadistically ruin the lives of many young men over a technicality like this. In general, it's obvious men have a natural attraction to younger-looking women, and the

accusation of pedophilia is a way to medicalize and criminalize this on the part of a sexual excess cartel of ugly, older, and fat women, and all women, of course, they know they'll become middle-aged, and their male orbiters. And a friend also remarked to me that the pedophilia craze in the 1990s, again especially pronounced among feminists and the left, it was a way to deflect from the more obvious social phenomena of abortion. And you know I'm not an anti-abortion activist, right? But abortion is murder, even if you think it's justified. And moms who commit abortion are moms who literally kill their own children. So there is this horrible primal archetype, right, the killer mummy. And a horrible thing, it's out of a frightening grim fairy tale, right?

But the modern world has revealed many women to be the killer mummy. And many actually openly celebrate it now. But don't blame it, actually, please, on hypercapitalism or Locke. Don't blame it on careless men. This is what Christian evangelical megachurches do, you know, they say they're against abortion but they never condemn the woman. But it's the killer mommy archetype, right? So the molester daddy is then a way to deflect from the frequent and obvious horror story archetype of our time, the killer mommy. I don't know if it's true but it's plausible, you know, when you get to call a guy who is not into Helga the Fridge a pedophile for liking thin women, it's a... This is why I say Americans are bringing fuck.

If you go, I was recent again in Madrid, if you go to Madrid, I had some frogs visit me. And we went out on street, there were pretty girls, I had gotten used to them and they were just amazed that every girl to them looked like a 9 or a 10, like it would be. You know, this is what I mean, you visit another country like this so you can see how you are getting scammed in America and it's female inflation. And it was amazing to me also to see how people who attack Megumin were saying he was corrupted by pornography. Now I'm against pornography, not as such actually, but the modern phenomenon of it where it can be blasted into the phones of boys who are 12 or 13, and then its ubiquity, the inability really of anybody to avoid it on the internet because it's everywhere, so young, very young

people who shouldn't see maybe any of it are flooded with it, and that's a very destructive thing in that sense because I see it as corrupted because it potentially warps and distorts And this is not in all cases, by the way. Many are not affected by it in a bad way. But for susceptible people, it can seriously warp or distort their sexuality, lead to certain forms even of masochism or of identification with the female and many such things. But for these people, a lot of the wholesome left and the better so-called right, for these people, porn is bad and corrupted because it makes you not like fat girls, okay? That's what they mean. They mean if you like hot, thin girls, it's because you were given an unrealistic expectation by porn.

And that's the sense in which they mean porn is immoral. Or expecting, you know, a woman to enjoy sex or, I don't want to get too graphic, but to engage in certain practices and so forth and many such things, as if that's evil and corruptive effect of porn, that is what they mean. So you know, again, my advice for that is to go to a country, you know, just jizz on the face of a gynocracy, go to another country, refuse to pay into the gynocracy, abscond on your obligations to them, and go to your country with hot sin of women who enjoy pleasing you, so you can understand this whole alliance of communitarian wholesome left and social conservative right who so pretend to be anti-establishment, but they are actually nothing but lackeys

who are there to rationalize you into accepting second-rate life in a regime of inflation. inflation. You want talk inflation, let's talk what money buys. Pussy inflation, literal, food inflation, everything inflation, in other words devaluation, denaturing of lives that you're expected to accept and then moralized about by all these fagged factions when you say I have standards and I say break them all, demand your standard be enforced, have high standards, discover them if need be through travel but also you can through read history or look at some older photographs or through simple taste or whatever means and then form barbaric brotherhood that say we want a vital life, a high quality life, we want golden thin young women, we are here to take your women and your gold and perhaps

do not sink into their complacent longhouse where a false morality make you accept slavery to inflationary devaluation of all life and you have to pretend that Helga the Fridge is a beautiful example of the eternal feminine. Form barbaric fraternities that will break them and bring about the ascension of based world timeline. North Korea, Juche. Until next time, bat out.