Imagine an earth with 70 billion people and I know at least you say the horror and I've said this myself, welcome Caribbean rhythms, this episode 137, welcome back, number one sex show. I get this kind of nausea looking at expanses, even of farms, from airplane, there was tweet recently neoliberal claiming England is empty and to make his point he put photos of plots of farms that maybe from airplane he confused for wilderness and empty, Neat Square's demarcation of land from airplane photograph. But driving in that, if you're on the ground and driving, this thin expanse of upturned land with really not a place almost, not a place to be on your own without evidence of men's rape of land, which it's worse than in a big city because excuse if I repeat myself,

But this isn't being alone with God in wilderness. Agricultural land also is highly polluted. Rural is not wilderness, and you can never really be alone. There's always, you know, in the city at night sometimes you can be alone, but in the rural less often, but it's polluted with pesticides. So anyway, as you know me, the things I often see on this show, I've written about the horrors of overpopulation, the inability to escape other people, a nausea to me. But lately I've been considering the possible upsides of a world with 70 to 100 billion people or even more. There is a thought experiment aphorism in Nietzsche considering that the earth is a stem, a stem of a kind like when there's a flower, and the flower is the purpose of the stem.

could be humanity, and maybe it is humanity's destiny to totally consume up this matter of the planet and stem that the true purpose of this earth is to give rise to these voracious piles and piles of people. You can almost see the attraction of that in two ways. First of all, if you're not as big a misanthrope as I usually am, if you like certain people so much that they redeem humanity maybe, and you start to love people in general as such, And even more, although Nietzsche complains about his own time and the kind of people in it, the lack of genius, but if you have before you at least men of the quality he had met, like Wagner and Burckhardt and such, or imagine if you had Renaissance Italy or Greek mens, and even more so, imagine if, I mean at least a reasonable quality baseline

population, then who wouldn't want the potential creation of at least another few Archaic Greece or a few Renaissance Italy and such in the future, and in the odds of that right would be increased in a world of a hundred billion or a trillion people over a hundred years. Think of the variations and shades of genius that would arise simply by chance, and it's true that the tiny Athens produced many more such men than much bigger states of our time. I mentioned in the recent episode Galton, Darwin's relative, he is a modest and reasonable researcher into intelligence metrics, Galton, and he mentioned this disproportionate flowering of genius among the Athenians, who probably outpaced us according to him in IQ, in the

same ways that let's say normal human population today outpaces Africans or so it is said. But even so, a huge population can provide the basis for any number of planned or unplanned eugenic episodes, not to speak of a more colorful and dramatic history on this stage, a coruscant world, one giant multi-level New York or Tokyo everywhere, would you like this? And on the other hand, there is the argument from purity. I love unspoiled land more than anything else, but where to find this now? I read thread from a friend recently that governments and scientific bodies are now harvesting lead and steel, other metals from pre-nuclear testing times, metals produced before era of nuclear testing because even the very limited nuclear use mankind has engaged

in so far has infected lead and steel produced after that, after let's say 1940s, infected it with small amount of radiations that can get in the way of scientific tests. And it's things of this kind that just revolt me and make me think there's no point anywhere. There's almost no place in the world that's not unspoiled somehow. Microplastics, of course, everywhere, or discarded condoms in a forest. So then you think you see unspoiled land and there's an unseen vibrant layer of trash right under the surface. Once you know that it's there, radiation, pollution of microplastics or whatever, this This is also a problem with arguments from genetic purity, by the way, and I mean the ones against genetically modified organisms, because in nature you frequently get a random

bizarre splicing, I think some random snake DNA into the cower, vice versa, plus, please be careful, cockroach. I'm sorry to mention disgust creature on the show, but they spew out mRNA or some kind of bizarre thing that changed, you know, the retarded recombination, and this sounds demoralizing in one direction, I think it can energize in another, because you can think rather than fight a losing rearguard battle to preserve the purity of nature from mankind's grubby and stupid designs, maybe just go in the other direction, accelerate it, allow the full consumption of this world by the human hive. Maybe this is the purpose of every planet, to be the material for a higher species, but you know, the species has to be actually higher, then this is an extravagant thought experiment, okay?

Nothing. I don't remember what made me go on this tangent. I meant to tell you about another recent chimp-out, that you know how easily you can cause chimp-outs now just by presenting either verbatim quotes of great philosophers like Schopenhauer, or For a paraphrase in this case, I made a paraphrase of Gobineau and Gobineau's great idea and that I will read for you, I'll read for you the tweet I made that calls Chimp out. I can't name any civilizations that survived racial mixing. I can't name any that ended because of a change in religion, irreligion, corruption of morals, lost wars, changes or collapse of government or economy, low birth rates or any of the other causes usually blamed for this. And this very novel idea at the time, I didn't mention his name, Gobino, if you put it in

your own words it's better, they freak out, but I think this idea he has is great innovation, I think it's very hard for almost anyone to accept. I am not a moral faggot, it's hard even for me to accept this, right, because nature is unjust or has a different justice, indifferent to human one, and human justice is more like a wish and a prayer than something real. But then the true justice of nature appears alien, dark and harsh, and almost all classical philosophy agrees that it is moral decline that ruins states, nations, and peoples. But I wonder if they ever had the examples of civilizations and peoples that had ended and not mere governments that had ended, but entire peoples, and I can't think of any.

I mean, I'm sure local genocides had happened, and it was even many times a matter of course in war that you would just kill the men and take the women into slavery. But that's different. It's on a local, smaller scale of this one small tribe or city. So Egypt, whether independent or ruled by Persia, was still there always as Egypt. They had not an example, I think, of something like that that had entirely disappeared from memory. Egypt was actually never changed locally, no matter who ruled it. When you were Greek or a Roman and you saw the Greek rulers of Egypt, the descendants of Macedon and the Ptolemies and others across the East and even the Far East, because the Greeks had kingdoms in Bactria and India, and as they adapted themselves to local custom

and adopted local religions while also continuing in parallel Greek civilization and Greek culture. But this isn't, this didn't transform actually either the local people they ruled, not so much nor even the Greek elite when they pretended to adopt these local customs. Greco-Roman civilization was always a souvenir. It's only a tiny elite participated in this across the empire. And meanwhile, local peoples remained more or less unchanged and indifferent to that. The people it did change actually was the core population, the Romans themselves, whose capital as well as their other major centers of civilization and ports, it attracted people from all over the empire, and this did lead to a mixed new population, let's say a default Mediterranean syncretic population.

And then so much so this happened by the end of the empire, there were no or almost no original citizens of Rome left, I mean of the founding population. And so at the end of Rome, there was an end of antiquity and the beginning of a new civilization. But I think that, I mean, the total end of one civilizational cycle maybe had not been seen before or any way it was not remembered and maybe go be no he means this and see how he describes this in this passage is there a very nice passage I will read for you now the great minds of Athens in Rome formulated the theory accepted by later ages that states civilizations and peoples are destroyed only by luxury effeminacy misgovernment fanaticism and the corruption of morals these causes taken singly or together world would be were

declared to be responsible for the fall of human societies. The natural corollary being that in the absence of these causes there can be no solvent whatever. The final conclusion is that societies more fortunate than men die only a violent death. And if a nation can be imagined as escaping the destructive forces I have mentioned, there is no reason why it should not last as long as the Earth itself. When the ancients invented this theory, they did not see where it was leading them. They regarded it merely as a buttress for their ethical notions, to establish which was as we know the sole aim of their historical method, to establish those ethical theories. In their narrative of events they were so taken up with the idea of bringing out the

admirable influence of virtue and the deplorable effects of vice and crime that anything which marred the harmony of this excellent moral picture had little interest for them, and so was generally forgotten or set aside. This method was not only false and petty, but also had very often a different result from that intended by its authors, for it applied the terms virtue and vice in an arbitrary way, as the needs of the moment dictated. Yet to a certain extent the theory is excused by the stirred and noble sentiment that lay at the base of it, and if the genius of Plutarch and Touchtus has built mere romances and libels on this foundation, at any rate the libels are generous and the romances sublime. I wish I could show myself as indulgent to the use that the authors of the 18th century

have made of the theory. But there is too great a difference between their masters and themselves. The former, the ancients, had even a chaotic devotion to the maintenance of the social order. The latter, the moderns, were eager for novelty and furiously bent on destruction. The ancients made their false ideas bear a noble progeny. The moderns have produced only monstrous abortions. Their theory has furnished them with arms against all principles of government which they have reproached in turn with tyranny, fanaticism and corruption. The Voltairian way of preventing the ruin of society is to destroy religion, law, industry and commerce under the pretext that religion is another name for fanaticism, law for despotism, industry and commerce for luxury and corruption.

Where so many errors reign, I certainly agree that we have bad government, so called. I have not the least desire to write a polemic. My object is merely to show how an idea common to societies and the Abbe Reinal can produce quite opposite results. It makes for conservatism in the one, for an anarchic cynicism in the other, and is an error in both. The causes usually given for the fall of nations are not necessarily the real causes, and though I willingly admit that they may come to surface in the death agony of a people, I deny that that they have enough power, enough destructive energy to draw on by themselves the irremediable catastrophe. And he ends there, and it's interesting that his next chapter is titled, Fanaticism, Luxury,

Corruption of Morals, and Irreligion Do Not Necessarily Lead to the Fall of Societies. He's trying to disprove this moral theory, which as he points out, both conservative and radical leftists, they share this moral optimistic theory about what causes a society to continue, what causes it to crash. Well, look, whether the ancient peoples had example of civilizational end to consider or not, Greek thinkers, at least the main ones that are taught now, they did focus on these moral matters. Maybe under the wrong impression that good behavior can be taught. Maybe they have to keep up the pretense that this can be taught. If you look Plato, I think maybe he knew that the true cause of degeneration of a group

is the intermingling of blood, and that these others are, the moral things are not even symptoms of that, but just when they appear they do lead to the end of a people or of a state of a civilization, they lead to that end, it's because that people had already been biologically exhausted, biologically changed. So these would be just the opportunistic infections, the occasions. Whereas in his book, Gobineau gives actually many examples of how nations that were vigorous, nations of all kinds, withstood all the problems usually blamed. But actually not only weathered them, but in the case of Italy and others, had their greatest periods, even for example under bad government that leads to civil war. Let me quote it, he writes very well on this.

A little before that, Italy was in such distress through the division of the supreme power and the quarrel over the fragments between the emperor, the pope, the nobles and the communes that the masses, not knowing whom to obey, often ended by obeying nobody. Did this cause the ruin of the whole society? Not at all. Its civilization was never more brilliant, its industry more productive, its influence abroad more incontestable, or see what he says about Spain. Government is especially bad when the principles on which it rests become avitiated, and it ceases to operate in the healthy, invigorous way which it did at first. This was the condition of the Spanish monarchy. It was based on the military spirit and the idea of social freedom.

At the end of Philip II's reign, it forgot its origin and began to degenerate. There has never been a country where all theories of conduct had become more obsolete, where the executive was more feeble and discredited, where the organization of the church itself was so open to criticism. Agriculture and industry, like everything else, were struck down and all but buried in the morass where the nation was decaying. But is Spain dead? Not at all. The country of which so many despaired has given Europe the glorious example of a desperate resistance to the fortune of our arms. He's talking, I assume, about how they resist Napoleon. And at the present moment, it is perhaps in Spain, of all the modern states, that the feeling of nationality is most intense.

But he gives many more examples, and this is just on the matter of bad government, which is often blamed for the falls of states or societies. But Gobineau also treats the others as usually given causes, moral looseness, irreligion, or on the other hand religious fanaticism and many such things that I mentioned in my paraphrase to show that no, none of these are the cause. The cause is only one, it's a racial mixing, okay, which I think maybe I should do full show on Gobineau soon because he explains in some detail, not just by association or correlation of events, but the cause, the mechanism, exactly how it happens, how great people gradually erases itself by incorporating others and then that civilization eventually disappears because of this but so I won't get into

those details now of what means exactly degeneration which has nothing to do with moral turpitude but with just this the self erasure of a people which can actually often be done out of religious impulse or moral impulse or in any case under the cover of these and you can imagine friend tell me he imagines with great sadness that this great filter could be this could be great filter in other planets it must have happened many times because the empathy so he put it but I wouldn't use the word empathy I wouldn't but the humanity and clemency needed to create for example big political associations that go above let's say the clan level and then the curiosity and its cousin xenophilia that you need for technological and scientific wonder and for discovery and

exploration. And then I would add also along with Gobineau more broadly than the imperial and universalistic instinct of all higher peoples have this this inevitably leads such a people in the process of forming global or semi-global empires but it leads them because of this into mixing with their precursor races or in any case races even if they're not precursors of a other races that don't have these same instincts or abilities and maybe it is Is this that is great filter for all intelligent life? That after a brief period of success, all brilliant races are amalgamated into the equivalent of the yellow dog you find on every street corner in the world. Okay, I love dogs, I love doggings, but you know what I mean. Every higher race eventually gets ended because of its higher instincts.

That's the tragedy. And so this may be why you don't see spaceships and so on from alien. the truth is maybe counterintuitive, at least in so far as both racialist and anti-racist discourse go, it is in fact a mark of the lower races to find racial mixing completely abhorrent. This is one of Gubbino's most important and tragic insights. And this is also why all lower peoples are screwed, screwed into a kind of perpetual, mediocre, low-energy existence, where not just materially, but also spiritually, intellectually, they're unable to rise above the village level. And so the future of mankind is by this reasoning, because of the higher races instincts for expansion and building of coalition, and their thirsty search for others, but because of this, the fate of mankind

may in the end be the beige, perpetual, and mediocre future of mankind is one of the various squabbling, ethno-nationalist, tribalist dullards. So, you know, one slight shade of grayish beige frothing at the mouth against each other, you know. This is Gobineau's image of Africa, by the way, and in his description of Haiti, he shows how the hatred of the outsider, the hatred of the foreigner is, aside from torpor and laziness, but this is the most marked instinct of that people. And it's a depressing idea, not just to moderns, maybe also to ancient men's, it's depressing that mankind has no way to improve the bad, not through teaching of doctrines, not even through practice or training, that your moral hopes are not so relevant.

I actually disagree with a lot of edgy right-wing consensus that's emerging now on the subject of races in the United States and the world, and on black people in particular. As a natural reaction to the negrolatory in America and the negrification of its culture, It's understandable, but its premises, its tone, and it's false because in fact there are black countries that are relatively well-functioning and not as dangerous as it's claimed. For example, Botswana, Barbados, plus also I have a friend living in Kenya for the last ten years, so he might come on show soon, and I think just as in the case of Brazil, example where hard-right racist frog friends like maybe some who listen to this show who have all the opinions of Brazil that people get from online or

from casual discussion even you know even libtards in United States are quite chauvinistic if if I knew a libtard he was not feeling well I told him go you go Argentina there are good doctors there they're smarter than American doctors, and he chimp at me, he goes into a chauvinistic rant, and, you know, America number one, and Argentina is a shithole, and it's very, you know, he sound like stereotypical yokel, but even libtard swipples think like this in the United States. There's a kind of chauvinism. But so, there are people of all the, let's say, right-wing opinion of Brazil that people get from online about it's this miscegenated favela slum mess, right? So this frog friend was reluctant to come there to see me, but when he visit me he found

out it's a nice surprise, the people are not as nasty as in America, the racial tensions are not as bad, the first world services function better than in many first world countries, certainly better than in America, there's a kind of genteel respect even in a country like Zach, which is actually quite dangerous and dirty and so on, but the upsides of life there are actually enough for me to choose it to live much of the year, despite everything else I believe in. But anyway, the problem with all these places, what I mean to say, is not so much that blacks are irredeemably criminal and so on, because in certain situations, as even Steve Saylor recognized, they can be relatively docile. The problem is that none of these nations, no matter how much social order they may eventually

achieve or not, none of these nations are ever going to be capable of greatness. None have been ever and none will be. None will fly into space. None will produce great scientists or inventors. None will produce explorers. None of these nations will have anything more than local chieftain, a big man, or at most it's kind of a pale copy of Western technocracy that they will cargo cult as a status symbol. It's going to be all Obama everywhere, good librarians at most, with a pedestrian intellect, with varying degrees of delusions of grandeur. Gobineau isn't being fair, I think, though, claiming that ancient thinkers didn't know that greatness comes from blood and that the end of greatness is the adulteration of blood. I think they knew.

You remember, Plato Republic fails because the – and by the way, I don't mean to pick just on Africa, because pick any other region of the world, Central America, India as it exists now, Southeast Asia, it doesn't matter where, the future of mankind is, it doesn't matter if you establish social order, this is what I meant earlier about the general consensus online that you see even Dinesh D'Souza, the HBD consensus, even Elon remarking on black crime. It's this focus I disagree with because even if you solve that problem, you would just get these kinds of states where nothing ever happens again anyway. It's a matter of the draining of potential of greatness from all mankind. But look, you remember Plato Republic fails because the guardians there are unable to

continue producing eugenic breeding scientifically. They forget the science of eugenics, and this is the reason Plato gave for decline of that state. And at other times, Plato and Socrates, they tried to conceal all of this under moralistic optimism, which is trash, and maybe they eventually come themselves to believe it, to believe this trash. But I think they knew, and certainly the Greek aristocratic poets knew what Gobino was talking about. Here, I read to you from Theognis, this very ancient poet before Plato, you know, in rams and asses and horses, Cirdnus, we seek the thoroughbred, and a man is concerned therein to get him offspring of good stock. But in marriage a good man thinks not twice of wedding the bad daughter of a bad sire, if the father gives him many possessions.

Nor does a woman disdain the bed of a bad man if he is wealthy, but his fain rather to be rich than to be good, because its possessions they prize, and a good man weds of bad stock and a bad man of good. Race is confounded of riches. In like manner, son of Polypaus, marvel you not that the race of your townsmen is made obscure. It's because the bad things are mingled with the good." So I think they knew well what builds the fame and glory of cities and states and peoples. I think they knew very well. On the other hand, it's only for my amusement that I ever paraphrase Gobineau or any such thinker or tweet. It's for my amusement I don't imagine that it's edifying to anyone you know I know on a big account like I have now it inevitably attract moron who start from

distorted premises it's always going to be misunderstood whatever you say but I wanted to say a word now on the particularly stupid way this could be no idea as being misunderstood let me reread it well let me go to break first I go to break to relax for a moment you please enjoy musics until I come right back any civilizations that survived racial mixing I can't name any that ended because of a change in the religion irreligion corruption of morals lost wars changes or collapse of government or economy or low birth rates or any of the other causes usually blamed for this so that that was the tweet and how people responded to this a very revealing because of both right and left chimped at me and the left also both have deep politicized assumptions deep

politicized ways of feeling. I mean they're trained for birth, not to think politically and to judge every statement as a kind of personal claim, a claim on individual behavior. It's all very feminine, feminine in a bad and petty way. Some are just stupid, you know, pointing out that empires like the Romans race mixed and that all empires have this in common. Yes, thank you very much, that's part of the point. It's not just empires, by the way, because if If you have a very sensitive definition of race, you see that even something as small as ancient Greek cities were on one hand quite race-mixed or intermingled ethnic groups and in fact Aristotle mentions ethnic and race faction as one of the chief weaknesses of any city. It's in Politics Book 5, I think.

But quite aside from this stupidity or inability to distinguish cases where a crisis like lost war or collapse of economies easily weathered by a civilization and even cases actually were being conquered outright didn't wipe out the civilization but the conquered overcame the conquerors which happened frequently in Chinese history you know the Manchus they had seen what had happened to previous conquerors of the Chinese as they tried to put in place all kinds of laws for example intermarriage with Chinese after the Manchus conquered China This was the last dynasty of China, but intermarriage with the Chinese that they had conquered with the Han Chinese was forbidden. The Han Chinese, they were not allowed to enter the Manchu homeland, and they were treated like serfs.

On the other hand, the Manchu kept reciprocal, noble, feudal relations with the Tibetans, the Mongols, and the Uyghurs, which I repeat to you is just what makes outrageous idea that China should have its present borders. It would be as if the British Empire had not fallen apart, but India had become the center of it after England and others had become in feeble. And then India was going around saying things like, well, Australia has always been part of India. That's the sense in which Tibet and Manchuria and so on have been part of quote unquote China. But look, while I attacked the Chinese, these things that happened, they repeated conquest by steppe tribes or by the Manchus or such. In the end, it didn't matter.

In time, the Chinese overcame their conquerors, overcame them actually through mixing, you see. So this is not a civilization I respect, but losing a war doesn't mean the end for this. And it wouldn't have meant the end, for example, in the case of Rome either. At its height, Hannibal could have taken over Italy, and I think Gomino is right that in the end the result would have been the same anyway. The Romans had intense vitality that they kept wasting themselves in wars, the death toll in the so-called social wars, you look this up, but it was enormous by modern standards, it made no difference. Whereas at the very end of their empire, Rome was easily toppled by much weaker barbarians than the Carthaginians or the Parthians, it was because Rome was no longer populated by

Romans and their institutions and outward forms and names that were just superficial signs and zombie constructs. So anyway, yes, quite aside from this kind of stupidity of misunderstanding the basic point, you know, the signature response, Chimpow, to what I said was to forget that it is a political civilizational statement and instead to interpret it in this purely personal and petty way as if I was saying, for example, that racial mixing is bad in every instance or as if this is about personal or social bigotry or that I quote-unquote blaming or attacking interracial couples, which is absurd. I mean, the alt-right and the fascists are famous xenophilic race mixers. I'm sorry to tell you if this offends you, but ask my friend

Nick Sallow. Look at the Croatian Ustasha. These are the World War II fascists in Croatia, right? They all ran to Argentina mainly after the war at the very southern tip of the world. Tierra del Fuego is basically a Croatian colony. Punta Renas. I don't know, is that? But they're in Buenos Aires, too, and without exaggeration, I think that without exception, every single one of them was either a Michelin or married to a Jewish woman, and I'm talking about the leadership of that organization now, the Ustasha, the Croatian fascists. And then the stereotype of our time is that the neo-reactionary almost always married to an Asian woman, and that's quite aside from the large number of other kinds of frogs who have non-white wives of various kinds, but looking away from the xenophilia and the,

maybe you can say, fetishes or preferences of the hard right, but more generally racial mixing in certain cases can have quite good results. Even Nietzsche famously says this, giving Al-Sabaidis and Frederick II Hohenstaufen as grand examples of such type, so that even if in the common run of cases, the outcome may not be so good and it can lead to certain leveling, it can occasionally produce very grand specimens. And Gobineau has some odd statement on this too, I will read it, why not? It would be unjust to assert that every mixture is bad and harmful. If the three great types had remained strictly separate, he means, you know, white, Asian and black, the supremacy would no doubt, if the three great types had remained strictly

separate, the supremacy would no doubt have always been in the hands of the finest of the white races, and the yellow and black varieties that crawled forever at the feet of the lowest of the whites. Such a state is so far ideal, since it has never been beheld in history, and we can imagine it only by recognizing the undisputed superiority of those groups of the white races, which have remained the purest. It would not have been all game. The superiority of the white race would have been clearly shown, but it would have been bought at the price of certain advantages which have followed the mixture of blood. Although these are far from counterbalancing the defects they have brought in their train, yet they are sometimes to be commended.

Artistic genius, which is equally foreign to each of the three great types, arose only after the intermarriage of white and black. Again, in the Malayan variety, a human family was produced from the yellow and black races that had more intelligence than either of its ancestors. Finally, from the union of white and yellow, certain intermediary peoples have sprung, who are superior to the purely Finnish tribes as well as to the Negroes. I do not deny that these are good results. The world of art and great literature that comes from the mixture of blood, the improvement and ennoblement of inferior races, all these are wonders for which we must need be thankful. The small have been raised. Unfortunately,

the great have been lowered by the same process, and this is an evil that nothing can balance or repair. Since I am putting together the advantages of racial mixtures, I will also add that to them is due to the refinement of manners and beliefs, and especially the tempering of passion and desire. But these are merely transitory benefits, and if I recognize that the mulatto who may become a lawyer, a doctor, or a businessman is worth more than his negro grandfather who was absolutely savage and fit for nothing, I must also confess that the Brahmins of primitive India, the heroes of the Iliad and the Shahnameh, and the warriors of Scandinavia, the glorious shades of noble races that have disappeared, give us a higher and more brilliant idea of

humanity and one more active, intelligent, and trusty instruments of civilization and grandeur than the people's hybrid a hundred times over of the present day, and the blood even of these was no longer pure." He's talking about the Iliad and so forth. However, it had come about, the human races, as we find them in history, are complex and one of the chief consequences has been to throw into disorder most of the primitive characteristics of each type. The good as well as the bad qualities are seen to diminish in intensity with repeated intermixture of blood. Yes, end quote, but you see lack of intensity, tempering of passion, it's not what is claimed often about this, but this is the truth, not judged by any individual example which vary

widely but in the long run the trend of mixing would be to this a low intensity, a kind of exhausted kind of street dog human type. But so yes when Gobideau say the mix of white and black led to artistic genius, which he puts much higher value by the way on technological, civic strength and imperial genius which he He thinks he's much more rare, by the way, in mankind, and he has a good case to make for that. But when he says this mixture of white and black lead to artistic genius, it doesn't mean that every artistic genius is a mulatto, okay? That he believes, he's saying that he believes at some remote point in the past there was an introduction of black blood. I think Schopenhauer says something similar, not that you have to agree with these men,

But I need to say, even 19th century racists aren't saying, okay, so Gobineau and the French actually like the mulattas, I've said this before, I'm sorry to repeat, but it's a peculiarity of the French nation. As it is of the Portuguese, they are addicted to mulattas, is this okay? But anyway, the examples of Alcibiades, Frederick II Hohenstau from Nietzsche, as examples of fortunate racial mixing are very telling because he sees these two as lucky combination that come from a confusion of race. He's talking about the races of Europe, which you have to have a race radar a little bit more finely attuned than what you have now to understand that Europe has always been a confusion of races. Anyway, but this confusion that Nietzsche's talking about that produces men like Alcibiades

in certain times by chance, but this confusion of races follows a democratic or a proxy democratic turn in affairs, in political and social affairs. So it doesn't need to be formally or openly democratic, but a loosening of aristocratic standards. And so what Gobineau is saying is not a matter of personal bigotry or of calling out instances of race mixing or trying to attack or shame individuals for who they marry or in our case who they date or sex ores, which is again I think absurd and petty and really a losing position as in you are in no position to set up social systems of shaming that make any difference on this account, you see. But Gobineau's book is a political book. It's not this petty thing that both right and left are chimping at me over paraphrasing him.

His book is directed against the French Revolution, okay? It's directed against democracy and its principles. Once you have democracy and the moral and ethical ideas of the French Revolution in a society like Europe that was very patchwork ethnically to begin with, then a mixing of races is inevitable. Everything else is cosmetic measures, pointless. You know, my own rephrase in this tweet was also meant as an attack on mass migration. So it's these two things that concern me, mass migration and democracy. But you know, you say mass migration, again, it's not tourism, it's not visitors, it's not limited resident foreigners, which every great city has had in the past, but mass migration. And once you have political developments like mass migration and democracy.

Racial mixing then is an inevitability. You can no longer fret about individuals or to judge instances, you see. It's again a type of petty bigotry and impotent kvetching, and it didn't even cross my mind to think that when I repeat Gobineau and Nietzsche. I mean, you're not going to shame and prod people out of race mixing with appeals to personal morality or to group loyalty once you have developments like democracy and mass migration you see but but it's not a surprise that it gets interpreted this way that whatever you say gets interpreted in this cramped myopic sense now it gets interpreted this way by both left commies and libtards and then large part of the right because again none think politically everything is seen

only in terms of one's own petty horizon of familial personal social relations every statement is judged as a type of species of self-help a statement of personal morality or personal preferences and someone say recently I'm not endorsing anything but I think it's a good sociological reflection that the pause you see now you're seeing worldwide pause for quite a while in political assassinations and I think it's related to the same I've been talking about to this depoliticization depoliticization on a spiritual level just means a lack of greatness a lack of striving for greatness and so even when When you see violent chimp outs now, they are always directed against random nobodies. You don't see things like Franz Ferdinand's assassination or what went on late 19th century

with all the political assassinations or what was happening, Buenos Aires in the 1970s even. You had daily attacks by the left and then reprisals by the right and even going after economics professors, or after they ran through major politicians, they went after economics professors even, or business executives and so on. But now it's always some retard going on a rampage in a school or a refugee center, or black nationalist moron shooting two cops, this is what I mean, it's all this low-level moralistic petty lashing out. I'm just using this as an analogy, it's as if entire populations have been politically castrated, they no longer think in terms of political dimension, and then the distortion of Carl Schmitt that I discussed on the last episode has made it so that even referring

to the political or the political dimension in this way is seen as, you know, oh so you say friend enemy, you saying I gotta do whatever it takes against the opposing group, right man, and not worry about neutral standards, this, so it's, yes, it's just this endlessly, You know, please forgive my complaints on these opening segments now, but the state discourse on Twitter and elsewhere in commentary and magazines, commentary pundit magazines is very bleak. You know, Elon, for all his good, has been turning Twitter into a moral outrage porn model that Facebook apparently also used. And every day this is what is encouraged to become, what you're encouraged to become. Let's denounce some random corn whore. Let's have the daily outrage at the tranny.

Let's put videos of blacks misbehaving and chimp at blacks. Let's chimp at double standards. Why isn't there a white entertainment television? Get Dinesh D'Souza to ask this and you'll move that needle. You'll construct the overtongue window. I think this. Yes, I think the right wing should just become, you know, in 20 years of internets now should It should be easy. Just every day after 20 years of internet, you can find a new example from the past of degeneracy that some random porn whore may have done 10 years ago, and you can denounce it. You can call it out. You know, and you do that by yelling at it, by showing moral outrage. That's how you win, you know. Hand-wring some more instead about Avocado Toast did Sacramento what she said at her DEI job meeting.

You know, have another, you should have an anti-woke panel. I think this can help. A panel. Yes, to discuss the woke mind virus. It's a new religion. Did you know this? Did you hear that one? Dang, did you see what this porn whore did today? It's degenerate. She's a whore. Christ first. You know, just have a retarded mystery meet the beige wiggers with sideways baseball cap on panel, scream things like this, and then you will of course win, you know, any day now. Very good, I will be right back. To number one sex show on sex episode because I want it for some time to rate, to give ratings of the women and men of different nations based on sex appeal or manly and womanly attributes. I know this is a lot of this matter of personal taste which vary very much and I maybe like

you dislike it when people try to impose their personal tastes or preferences arbitrarily often with dumb reasons given. example is Aleksa Dugan, Alexander Dugan, when he attacks, for example, surfing as a specially bad expression of his political enemies. When it's obvious he simply doesn't like the feeling, the aesthetic of it that he associates with, the way he describes the surfer vibe with the tan and the beach easy living as such, he's smart enough to bullshit and can make plausibles that, yes, this This aesthetic stands supposedly opposed to the Eurasianist land-based aesthetic, and that the two somehow stand opposed in spirit as very revealing styles. He doesn't show actually what the Eurasianist aesthetic is. But when you consider that, I remember the east block quite well.

There was a love of beach in the east block. There were communist beach resorts. And in Russia, places like Crimea and Sochi, where the Winter Olympics were held, these These are especially beloved by Russians in the same way that many northern people who live in cold climates have always loved and anchored after the south. The Russians are absolutely in love with the image of Crimea and Sochi to them is very important and the whole aesthetic that goes with that, which is not as different from the western beach style as you think and all the associations that go with it. In fact, it's very old tradition, the Yalta tradition in Russian culture. One of my favorite stories, The Lady with the Pet Dog of Chekhov, and understand intense love story of adultery and romance.

It's set in Yalta, which of course is 19th century, so it didn't have modern beach style, but it is a thoroughly westernized beach aesthetic for its time. And if you want to talk about, well, you know, so much of the American hippie style is not Atlantean sea-based creation of the United States, but is inherited from German naturism. There is a book, Children of the Sun, that tells this story, how German late 19th century nudist and naturist culture inspired the hippies, as well as the Nazis, which they both shared a certain aesthetic. I mean, Feidus, I love Feidus, you look up the artist Feidus, well he was beloved both by hard nationalist circles in Germany, but then also he had rebirth in 1950s and 60s

California hippie culture, and not to speak of, of course, German propaganda posters strength through joy and such, many of these have very much of the aesthetic that Dugan derides after he, it's not quite the same, but he runs it through a filter of arbitrary negative associations and words like consumerism and so on, but many of the strength from Joy Boy's posters have exactly the surfer aesthetic that Dugan dislikes, but this word consumerism, by the It doesn't mean anything, it has become shorthand, certain types to throw a slur. I'll talk this some other time, but really what consumerism means, commodification, you're a good consumer. You've heard these phrases thrown around in dissident commentary, pundits use this, what are they saying?

They always want to contrast this somehow to community, to say that consumerism is a product of late capitalist individualism that goes hand-in-hand with atomization, the thread community destroyed by the Lockean individualism of capitalism. I don't see it. What is connection? Consumerism, if it means anything, I mean really what does it mean literally that you consume? All animals and plants have to consume to survive and to thrive. A form consumes matter from other forms, the word is so broad that it can mean one thing one day, something else, most often it's used in context of, you may have heard this line, you do nothing but go to work, you come back home to box apartment, I'm paraphrasing now, the Dutch

pundit girl, you are all promoting this girl, Eva, who should be going to Buzio's beach resort, marrying a handsome rich man, she should be taking vacations to Gstaad, Switzerland, beautiful children. She'd go shopping, do her nails. I really don't want to hear from somebody like her trite platitudes that we've heard for 15 years now. Do you understand what she's doing? It's porn. It's more manipulative than porn. It's actually worse than porn what she's doing. Okay, if she was with her tits out and doing outrageous right-wing shock things, that would be actually something something directed to the outside world that could cause outrage, maybe move things in some funny direction. It would be funny in any case, but as it is, her propaganda is actually just parasitic

on the hopes of delusional right-wing men plus other lonely men. It's not directed outward at, let's say, our enemies or people we're trying to persuade. She's trying to farm an audience, a market share she sees that's ripe for the taking and pandering to. And I said in response to some absurd photograph she posted where she was on the beach and she had this romantic, this silly romantic look in the eye. You would call it cringe if a girl looked at you that way. This look in the eye and she was dressed in half formal outfit, looking at camera, reaching out with her hand, flower dress, something like this. So I said, she should be doing porn if she does this. It would be less of a lie. It would be less manipulative. And I was asked, well Bap, why do you say that?

I mean, don't you post photos of half-naked Mediterranean bodybuilders? Why isn't what she's doing the same? I mean, she's just aesthetic posting physique. Well, no, she's not posting physique, okay? She's not posting physique. The equivalent for a man of what she's doing would be to put on some role-play military outfit or a virtuous peasant outfit, to dress like a muzik, a Russian peasant with traditional dress, or a Viking historical role-play dress, and then to take a photo of yourself looking into the distance with a hottie squint look in the eye or something like that. Okay, it's fake, it's pathetic, it opens you up to ridicule. I'd laugh at that as well, it's just terrible propaganda. It would again be something not directed toward the outside world to shock and awe and to

seduce but it's something rather that panders to the delusions of certain online perceived market share audience and that in fact would be indistinguishable from parody of their delusional hopes, and if you want to promote this, you do what you want, but I will always laugh at it. I will remind you that these things make a laughing stock of the right. And by contrast, Soviet and Nazi propaganda, by the way, it wasn't quite doing this for its time. It was posting naked men for one, okay? They posted Handsome Thursday. They posted men with good physique, shirtless, as did the United States for a while to compete between them, because actually that is what awes and sedutes and intimidates outsiders. And aggressive militant regimes have almost always taken this approach, but you consider

it gay because you refuse to see the power of manly allure, which includes to some extent also sexual or sexualized allure. But you think that if you're responsive to that or if you celebrate or extol it in art or propaganda it makes you gay, but what happens isn't that that disappears then, it just means that you leave it to others to exploit as a fertile psychological realm. Conservatives are just so stolid and stupid. It's all up to me, unfortunately, and as you can see I'm too lazy and indifferent to make good use of it. But anyway, this is a tangent. This girl, Eva, repeats these platitudes that are well known by now about how a bleak life of being a wage slave and then going to an apartment alone makes you a perfect consumer.

This is her words, but she's repeating a dialogue you've heard for many years now, and she blames it on consumerism, which doesn't make any sense to me what the connection is because that kind of life that she describes would be just as bad if she did not have many brands of detergent available. If you said just one brand, it would be the same thing. You know what I mean? What is she saying? The life she's describing of being a wage slave and atomized from others has nothing to do with consumerism. If consumerism means anything, it means love of brands, right? That's what it means if, you know, it's a brand chasing. Love of material goods and opulence, which frankly, although maybe not admirable or especially

noble, but it's better and more honest than the fake IKEA-style Silly Zog Valley, the kind of American striver, schoolmarm, libtard, upper-middle-class professional moralism about being a good person who doesn't desire flashy goods, but it means love of brands, and some of the peoples who are most in love with brands and chasing after them and the most conformist in this regard are the Brazilians and certain other third world places, that in the scheme of mind we are talking now, these are often considered communitarian and religious and not atomized by Duganists and other dissident right varieties and they are always considered many such opposite things, you know, communitarians, you know, but they're in fact not opposite, they're not.

The Brazilians are both consumerist and they also, you know, it's easy to talk to strangers, they're friends, they congregate on streets, they drink and they dance, it's easy to make friends there, they like friendship and they are self-conscious about it in a good way. They say, you know, here friendship exists and you can make friends and it's not like some of them may have lived in Europe or America where they found the atmosphere much too cold and I understand them, but they also have relatively warm family relations. But there's just no connection between these things. If lately they have become somewhat less outgoing in this sense, it isn't because they're busy working to consume designer brands, but because they're busy working to consume to survive at all.

survive they can afford the brands less than before. In other words it's the difficulty of life in general and of jobs now that has exhausted many of them it's taken away them joy for life and sociability to some extent it hasn't really I'm saying in so far as people's like this experience recently any lessening in that direction it's because of the difficulty of work not the desire to consume brands. In fact, if they had more money, they would get more brand goods, and they would go out more with their friends and family. Tokyo, there is now less so-called consumerism than there was 20 or 30 years ago, but it's because they're poorer. It hasn't made them more communal or whatever, or less atomized either. But this is also the reason

there are several Italian restaurants, by the way, in every block in Tokyo. Now instead of French as they used to be 20 or more years ago because Italian food is cheaper to make and they've just been getting poorer as time go on. Every lady in Tokyo, and by lady I mean woman of even professional means, had Vuitton bag or any such good, every lady had that bag at that time. It's the city in the world with the highest density of such stores. If you go to a big European capital like Madrid, maybe Rome, whatever other capital, there's maybe Lisbon, there's one or maybe two streets with a whole family of Versace, Gucci, Fendi, Vuitton, these types of stores and such. But Tokyo, there are at least three or four distinct areas, okay, with the whole, not

to speak that it's the biggest luxury market in the world for every type of good. There are certain fruits from other countries that you don't even see in the local market. They only go to Tokyo. And this people, yet this people, the Japanese, they love to queue as a social matter. They love to congregate in crowded, steamy restaurants. They like to drink together and despite the supposedly inhibited Asian personality type, but it's one of the easiest places in the world to meet and talk to strangers. It happens to me invariably when I go out by myself and I give autist vibes. I'm told, you know, but aside from my Ville Brecon swimming shorts, you see, but maybe these invite comment, but so Japan is this odd thing that if someone like me praises them in a right-wing book

Then I am lectured to my leftoids or this kind of pundit dissident right type and they lecture you that no actually Japan Wouldn't like you. They're a communitarian country and they so-called put the group above the individual though I doubt that the Japanese themselves think of it that way. But then these same people who say this, they will go on geramias about how Japan supposes capitalist consumerism and capitalist alienation. So you know, this, what I'm saying, these words have shifting meanings. In the East block it is also all about materialism. The anthems are about the tons of butter that were produced that year. Is that consumerism? It's not consumerism because if you go to the supermarket there and on shelves, if there's

anything at all, there'll be one brand of detergent and one chewing gum instead of 40 brands of chewing gum. But that doesn't make your life better or social relations warmer, you know. Or you take another approach in Seattle, I hear. No one talks to anyone and never did. Even decades ago. And it's not because of consumerism or capitalism, but because Anglos and Nordids who populate Seattle in great numbers. It's just autistic, cold people. They don't really like to talk to strangers. So what I mean is quite a large number of things get confused in this talk about consumerism. It's really just a way for left-ways to attack normal Americans from the 1950s who, they like what they call those neon designs, neon artwork outside hotels.

I think it's lovely, but nice products and such. As if the life of a peon under East block commie bureaucratic tyranny was any less alienated atomized or whatever you want to call it. The lives of others I think captures quite well the life of a Soviet apparatchik and not only of a Soviet apparatchik. It should become the standard movie in the same way that Death of a Salesman was the standard movie about the West in the East block. But the lives of others, that kind of bleakness has nothing to do with either consumerism or capitalism. You know, in Hong Kong, I think that tradition, men take their sons to a Mandarin Oriental luxury hotel for their first shave or such, who knows if it's true. But the point is, in modern world, consumerism of this kind, as I just said now, you can

see it's a relic of some kind of love of beauty and refinement. The high brands like Hermes and such are derivative, relic copies of late French ancien regime consumer products, if you want to put it this way. At least it's a reflection of a feeling, however warped, a feeling for fine material things. I love fetishization of matter. Communists who attack so-called fetishization want you to love and want nothing beyond a full stomach and to be happy for the same reasons a pig is happy. And yes, I'm aware of the problem, for example, of replaceable goods. Heidegger has that plodding essay everyone quotes about the shoes in Van Gogh and so on. And Hulabek says the same thing better when he goes off about how he feels sorry

for brand coats that get discarded and replaced with the season of fashions. As an animist by instinct, not an animal, an animist by instinct, I understand what Hulabek means. The pain you feel for a poor discarded coat. It got made last year, nobody wears it, it gets through. I've always felt that spirits inhabit things. But nevertheless, even with There's a beauty and style, even in some mass-produced, non-artism luxury goods. And the people who want to replace them, who replace consumerism of this type, to replace these types of mass-produced goods, are not trying to do so in favor of a tradition of high arts and crafts that does not exist now. They're doing it because they want you to live like a drab serf or Soviet worker in

Arctic Nickel Mining Colony, or the House of Mango Street Eating Refried Regurgitated Chilaquitas. Yeah, so to get back to it, Dugan is some stolid stick in the ass. We all know them from East Block, if you're from there or lived there for a while, it's a certain type, you know, who very ostentatiously want to reject the West, wants to reject modern liberalism and show everybody he's doing it, and anything they think smells of modern liberalism, including entirely unrelated things that were associated in their minds with the West either by a lie in a movie or a show, or even entirely by accident or misunderstanding. I knew such a moralistic pile driver from that part of the world who, having seen some movies or sitcoms where Americans went to the gym, immediately he decided that anything

that has to do with physical improvement means it's Western degenerate liberalism, which Which is also, I've seen this view repeated actually by Trad Cocks on the internet, with the result in his case that he became obese, whereas I think the Trad Cocks, they just start out obese, but they have this thing that, no, lifting weights is degenerate, it means you want to fuck girls and lift weights. These are very sayically wholesome, the kind of guy who in the West complains about meatheads and is either a Trad Cock or turns to libtard moralism. In that eastern part of the world, they turn to the salt of the earth religious or pseudo-religious. So you know, no, we do not like surfers and people going to the gym and absurdity, right?

Because the Soviet and post-Soviet sports programs are just actually so strong. But no, we don't like Coca-Cola. I'm a Brazilian traditionalist, petty nationalist retard. I only drink guaraná. I drink mass-produced guaraná. So you know, I get, by the way, none of this pettiness at all in Japan or countries like Japan or England that actually have their own real culture that they enjoy. They have their own brands, their own trends, they're simply not at all concerned with showing the West or anyone else that they don't care or care about you. They simply do what they like and do it their own way without rank or they borrow what they want, but they turn it into something of their own. The peculiarities of island life, you know, I learned to embrace high island manners and

ethic of world conquest and passive homosexuality mainly by reading stories of English public school life and Japanese ethics, research dominated by Doug if interested, dominated by Dasha. Anyway, where was I? But look, Dugan, attack on surfers and surfing culture, under the pretext of some intellectual high-minded spiritual position, but in fact because he's one of these types of a giant wooden cross around the neck, slamming a cane on the floor, and screaming about that desperately Western degeneracy. The Dugan likes his into POC third-world virtue thing now, you know, I can't take much more of this NASBOL trash, you know, now I hear Murdoch, Murdoch is funding Compact magazine, now you think about that, in their hatred of the garish and hyper-American opulent consumerist

Mr. Trump, the GOP is embracing Nazbol aesthetics and abuelita virtue ethics. But anyway, this is just a long way for me to say yes, I'm aware of when you rate nations and people by sex appeal, there is a danger you just impose your own particular tastes and impressions on others and then you justify it with palpable sophistries. But even so I will do this. Look, I took long tangent. I will do this on next segment. I'll be right back. Have you been gaining weight? Have you been eating well out there? Have you been eating sushi's out there? Well, did he understand you when you said that? Why don't you just challenge him to a chess match or something? A very passive kind of Suikai gay with a visit room, you know, to take me there. Yes, you see, telling me like 50, 60% of the people here

are queer in Japan, you know? Anyway, Bob, you're probably enjoying a bottle of sake out there with someone, no, you're not? I've been dividing up these Japanese men into four categories. You've got the sex easily, and then the last group is the straight men. Oh, also I asked this guy, I said, you know, don't you want, he says, don't you like women? What's wrong with women? He said, I said, don't you want any children? He says, yes. He says, you like women? Yes. I says, you're a bisexual? He says, yes. Did you like this Bobby Fischer interview from... He had a grudge because his interview given from a Japanese jail, he had grudge against the Japanese people, but was he telling the truth? I do not think. And now it is time to rate various nations and peoples according to their sex.

You know, I'll do in no particular order, but maybe what occurred to me. And first of all, the tallest and some of the most athletic men in the world are the West Balkanoids, the Serbs, the Croats, some of the Serbs, but while they have heightened and athleticism, their faces are ugly. You can see the Balkanoid basketball players, what they look like, and even Djokovic, that's about the best, you know, and I know some women like that, but they have to be discounted from among the top contenders in beauty on any level because their face is ugly. And you have to admire the Croat and the men of the Montenegrin, the dinaric alps, so-called. Their achievements in sports and their height, have to admire, but that's just not enough.

On top of which, they have the clumsiness, often, of the Slavic ape in manner. And I know some women like that kind of Slavic ape style now, but it's hard to accept. The men of Russia, Ukraine, and that whole part of the world are also unsexy, especially when compared to their women. How did Russian women become so beautiful? It is unknown. Hardist and others had evolutionary theory. They say that because so many Russian men died in World War II and in some birth years In the 1920s he had birth in 1920s Some of those men were completely wiped out and some of them those birth years, you know So and so a few of the men who had left were able to select the most beautiful women only to do sex or as Breathing with but I'm not sure about this, you know

But there is amazing beauty in that nation among the women now but not so much among the men. I don't know if such a contrast in physical quality exists between the two sexes anywhere else in the world. And I don't attack my Russian friends here, you are all handsome. This discussion is not about exceptions. I don't want to keep having to make disclaimers because there are good looking people in all races and bad-looking, mostly in all of them. But no one who sees Russia City, many frogs have been in Russia, but with some exceptions, this is problem all over East Bloc, you know, the Bulgarian family values type man who, he has a pretty wife but he drinks rakine, wife beater, here is Slavic ape who hits his wife in the face with a shovel, Bulgarian family values.

So yes, again, yes, I was in Belgrade long ago, I have no idea if this is still the case, but the men were handsome and muscular and had a swagger on the street that that was unusual. It's very out of place in East Europe, you know, I suspect it was a lingering effect of the military or of the wars of the 1990s, but I'm not sure. But yes, these intermediary peoples in East Europe and Russia that Gobineau, he didn't think highly of them especially the women which is interesting that in his day he could just speak casually of how they are so ugly but that's changed by now and it's interesting to think of why I believe there must have been change in nature in the material it can't just be in this case it cannot just be manner or

refinement of female cosmetics and such that can never really carry it not to this extent anyway what you you can look like supermodel and so forth but goby no just does not think that white and yellow mix leads to beautiful types, but on the other hand he swoons over mulattas. And that's just very French though, again the French have always been against the Russians and love the blacks. But so you know the French-Russian thing, it would have been in Germany's interest above all to prevent a French-Russian alliance and one Machiavellian move that Nietzsche suggested that could have been pursued, or maybe it was, but it was for Germany to intensify religious feeling somehow in France, to provoke strong Catholic feeling in France, because

as long as Church was strong in France, they would never want to ally with Orthodox Russia. And could Germany have done this, or the pathetic Kaiser Wilhelm II, who almost single-handed his foolishness led to World War I? And some say that Nietzsche was imprisoned in mental asylum because of this Kaiser. It's horrible. I mean, yes Nietzsche had neurological condition, but it is said that after the initial episode he recovered some function later. But then they just kept him in mental asylum, lobotomized essentially, and it's a horrible story. But anyway, the mulattas, yes. Mulattas can be of great beauty, of course, we know is right, saying in Brazil a good, you would call creole, but white Iberian Portuguese woman is good for marriage and a mulatta for passion and affair. Is this okay?

Obviously, there is something hyperactive in such African-type women in this sense. A whoremonger friend who, again, I try to call this in common show, but he will talk of Kenyan adventures. He went there specifically after his Filipino adventures ended. Maybe delicious tacos can... But it must be something in their nature and not so, on the other hand, with Japanese women's. The case of Japan is interesting because Japanese women are famous, desirable worldwide. But I see in Japan very few beautiful faces of women, almost none. I've been here for months and I think maybe I saw one stunning specimen girl, maybe one, in months, not even sure about that. There are some who are pretty, yes, but even those are very few and actually bad faces

are more frequent, much more frequent than in other parts of the world. But of all women in the world, they have the most refined manners overall, the posture, which I understand they all get training, beautiful posture, the facial expressions and they dress in unusual ways that even if it's not especially sensual style of dress it's elegant and much care is put there like dolls, the grace with which they talk and smirk and the cosmetics and care they put into perfect skin. It's a case of total triumph of manner, cosmetics and custom over nature. And while their nature is not terrible, it's not bad, it's just not something great to to start with. Also, many of them have disproportionately short legs. They are very self-conscious

about that. There's even a phrase for it, but I forget. It might explain their kind of peculiar fashion style, but the Japanese men, on the other hand, are just widely lied about. And so you get an inversion of the truth in international media, which portrays Japanese women as knockouts and Japanese men as otaku herbs or SWPL metrosexuals or gay or such. I mean, you listen to Bobby Fischer, did you enjoy a Bobby Fischer interview excerpt? But it's actually the opposite of truth, because by nature, the Japanese are a people of more handsome men than pretty women. It's also the case for Brazil. It's an interesting parallel, where the women of both countries are famous, actually, because of their manner.

In the case of Brazil, less because of highly aestheticized, civilized grace, although some Some have residual bossa nova style or lure, but more because they are known to be sexy that easy and cheerful, you know, the boondah, the national passion, the boondah. But in fact, in both cases, it's the men of both countries who are much more handsome and manly than the women are beautiful and pretty. And this is only somewhat known in the case of Brazil, but it's not at all known the case of Japan where it's widely lied about and I find lies outrageous. Japanese men, at least in American media as you know, Asian men are desexualized and so on and presented as irredeemable dorks or in the case of Japan as feminine metrosexuals

which even if there is a partial truth to this propagandistic line, let's say 20-30% of the males might be fit this lie somewhat and in their own advertising maybe even they They sometimes privilege this kind of somewhat effeminate type, but it's still a very distorted basis. It's a slander against them in American popular conception, because in fact, you see many stunning men in Japan, certainly far more than you see stunning women. You can quote me on that. You can make clips out of context, you can have jealous DC intellectual conservative strivers who are raging against me, make clips of this show and others, but it's the truth anyway. There are many stunningly handsome and manly men in Japan, enough to make the race notable

for this as a natural power of theirs, if the truth was told about them. I hear the same about Korea, and you can see how that could be true. I've never been to Korea, but they are in Los Angeles, and they also do not fit the slander in America on Asian men, which might be based on the Chinese actually, but leaving Japan behind, because I don't know if the source of this manly power among them is samurai heritage or something else, but in general a lot of this slander on Asians I think depends on ignorance that mixes up the surf oriental and the urban clerk oriental, on the other hand mixes them up with the Tibetan and the step, also the step Asiatic, who are anything but subdued or obedient in manner. In fact, in medieval times and dark ages, the view was very different.

It was that the Asiatic step-ogre was a savage of unbridled ferocity and wildman vitality and love of freedom. Quite different from the image of the Asian now, which, okay, the tiger mom thing, but the tiger mom produces conniving, deceptive slaves and comes out of a serf and Mandarin meritocratic so-called but really bureaucratic grubby urbanite culture and I like cities but in this case it's fair to call this a kind of grubby high density city urbanite behavior. But I don't think this is the result of custom and training ultimately or of acculturation. I think these are actually separate breeds of Asiatic or that docility has been bred into some of them over time but Mongols and so on are very different in manner from Chinese

even today, not to speak of Kyrgyz, who the Kyrgyz are still savaged, they practice bride kidnapping. But anyway, look, I return to ratings. So the Japanese men, I think that despite what I say, they could still not be counted among the top in the world overall. But it's a real misunderstanding about the nature of the sexes in Japan that I've wanted to clear up. I think everyone who comes to Japan sees it's undeniable, this contrast. But it's made me wonder, there are cases like the Japanese, to some extent, Brazilian women who, okay, look, in a mixed population like Brazil, the average result of mixing is not so happy. I mean, naturally speaking, it's not so good. But the exceptions there are very exceptional.

But still, the overall, the much-hyped beauty of Brazilian women is not overall, I think, on account of their naturally nice faces or even bodies or whatever, but a matter of manner in style. And so women, I mean, can definitely make up or almost make up for a great natural deficit or for being humdrum, but the manner and style can elevate it to something really internationally alluring. I was wondering if the same is possible in the case of men, of the men of a nation, too. I can't think of any case, a case where the men would be unremarkable naturally as men in face or body or manner, or even maybe slightly below average, But again, where style and custom can almost make up for that, or make up for it entirely and elevate them to international allure, I can't think of any such, can you?

And to think through why this maybe can't even happen at all is very revealing, I think, because for men, men are in custom, civilization makes them gentler. That is its purpose. But that gentleness isn't either sexually alluring or impressive and awe-inspiring in a manly way, so those things for men have to come from their own natures, maybe. And custom and manner can make them polished and refined in a certain direction, but can't supply these things, whether they're lacking or middling. At least, I can't think of any examples, not really. I speak to Red Scare girls, they mention maybe French men. But in that case, it would be exception to rule, because their allure, the allure of Frenchmen would be result of them having

Reputations for being slightly sleazy sexually sleazy and loose and not so much because of gentle or refined manners And maybe that sleazy loose seductiveness So-called romantic, but it's not really it's something that could be learned or accustomed passed on. Yes, maybe it's true But okay, so then who are the top nations? I've been I've been Ruling many of them out, but who are top? who would you count? For men, I would count the Scandinavians and the Dutch, and I would count the Brazilians, which are a mixed population, yes, so it's a bit odd what do I mean by Brazilian, but there is the Spanish and Portuguese blood in the same way that Anglo-Colonials, although they may be 100% English Anglo background, but Anglo-Colonials become very impressive

and strong, so that for example, I would count South African men, the Anglos and the Boers in their mix, among the most handsome in the world. I think the same development toward the more uniformly manly type than on mainland Europe took place in Brazil, and forgive me also for saying this, but in many cases a small mix of Indio or black has not been bad for them. Small mix. I want to remind audience that in the American South, some aristocratic families even, and This is, according to Macrobius, who is himself an old internet autist, if you have ever encountered his post. He's one of the smartest people online, but he's of that heritage of the American South. But he say some families, especially places like South Carolina, wanted to allow tiny

intrusion of black blood through certain pairings, but I think, in some cases, India or black blood if it was introduced in a controlled fashion. And in this case, I mean, if it's not affected the features of the face in the end, it could have helped Brazilian men and some of them in this way. But since we're on this subject, I should discount black men from being in the running at most sex-rating or manly power, although this is of course much hyped up in American media. And why that is done, if it's for political reasons or something else, I leave that for others or maybe I talk another time but if I mean look who ran Spike TV look I don't know but that's for another time the fact is if you look at Africa in general the run of black men there is a kind of degenerated black type by which

I mean short bizarre body shape bloodshot eyes skin unpleasant dark in really unpleasant shade of dark and then the worst feature the face which is It's almost invariably ugly, scrunch face. There is a tribe, the Fung, I think they're called, unless I may be confusing them. Maybe it's not them. But there is a tribe that has different facial features. But the orc-like look on black men almost entirely cancels out any occasional advantages in physique that some may have. But overall, there are no advantages in physique either. In America right now, the blacks are the ones the most riddled with obesity. And in Africa, there are many varieties, but they're mostly of squat shape. Their shape of their body is developed to work land as farmers, so it's not the image

that's propagandized there, this kind of squat type, the Hutu in Rwanda, for example, the Hutu. Now, the Tutsi in Rwanda are different. They're a noble people, and they look very different, and they have the Ecoline Roman those, which is also, by the way, appreciated in Japan as an aristocratic feature. But the Tutsi�I�m sorry, I think the other black people with decent faces are the Fulani, not the Fon, if I remember right. But the Tutsi, their skin tone is also different from the Hutu, and they are more gracile, and they are more graceful and such, they are warrior people. And I�ll say this in conciliation to those who call me a racist, that the Nuba, who like the Tutsi are herders and pastoralists, and they are Nilotic, they're not Bantoids, whereas

the Tutsi in their origins, whatever their present language is, but ethnically by blood, they are of Ethiopian Cushitic type, and certainly they are known to have come from that area with their herds from the Nile region to the north. But the Nuba, both the men and the women have a kind of robust beauty, which was celebrated most of all, and glorified most of all, but by guess who? My sister in spirit. And Handsome Thursday's Strength Through Joy enthusiast Leni Riefenstahl. But most black types don't look like that. They don't look like Nuba wrestlers. And even in that case, the faces and noses are, I think, quite unpleasant. But their women are beautiful in the same way, although the women of this tribe have narrow hips. Do you like that?

They dance with narrow hips and the small pointy breasts, but they have a certain grace and scarification tattoo under the skin, these Nuba women. But that's not a matter of nature, the tattoo scarification. But it is nice fact that the most glorification of black beauty in art comes from a Nazi like Riefenstahl, who was immediately attacked for the so-called fascist aesthetic, that loathsome witch Susan Sontag wrote, essay accusing Riefenstahl of this fascist aesthetic, You can find this trash article online. But she was attacked precisely because of her photo documentary of this black tribe, the Nuba. But so anyway, to go back to ratings, yes, on account of the development of facial beauty in Europe over long periods, except for the West Balkans and such.

But you'd still have to count, I think, the Dutch and Scandi men as top rated in the world because they are about as tall as the men of the Dinaric Alps and their frames are about as big and they are some of the tallest and most physically powerful men in the world, but they also have well eugenic faces of a Nordic type that, well, there are certain Nordic men who look like retards, I'm sure you've seen the type, but I'm not talking about them. Now they attack my throat. So I say Dutch and Scandi men, and maybe the Brazilian men, along with only certain parts of France, Italy, and Spain, so that, for example, in Madrid, you have large congregation of very white Spaniards of powerful blood. I think all the Gothic blood migrated to Madrid as it's the capital city over the last 200 years.

Whereas if you go to north or northwest, where you'd expect maybe you'd say, oh, it's the Celtic, it's the north, they're going to be ruddy here, they're going to be red, but actually it's quite the opposite. In Galicia, in northwest of Spain, almost everyone, it's a very uniform physical type, the same actually found in north Portugal, and they're all short and dark, and it's a kind of very uniform look. I tell you, I did not like seeing that. It's got a very, there was in Coruña, big Galician city, there's a kind of weird, orthodox Hasid Ashkenazi vibe, with women in these skirts and short, short dark people hurrying about like midgets. I'm sorry if I offend, I only tell the truth. I met good Galicians, but I'm just talking as a whole as a people.

I would not count Asturias or Basque Country in this same judgment, but most of these places are very mixed. I mean, phenotypically the Basques range from pure Nordic to pure Levantine to some weird Neanderthal thing. My God, if you look at the women from North Spain, I've been frequently shocked to see their huge faces passing by in a car. You watch Pedro Almodovar movies, you want to see this, it's a kind of Iberian woman with a huge face, from the caves of Rioja and so on. If you go with large face and brow ridge, you feel like she could be cannibal. But in Madrid, no, many white Spaniards congregated there over the years, I think. And since I'm still on the ratings of men, the men in Madrid can be very handsome as can those of Paris and Normandy and certain parts of Italy.

For example, Pietro Bozzelli is from Veneto in northeast Italy. But Pietro Bozzelli, by the way, despite his coloring of his hair, I mean, not his skin, but the hair is dark and the eyes are, but he has very Nordic facial features, and that's an old physical anthropology observation, that the Nordic and Mediterranean pure types are basically the same except for the coloring of the hair. At least somebody like Pietro, if he changed his hair and eye color, would be indistinguishable from the best of the Dutch and the Scandinavians and so on. But in all these cases, although these are meds or Mediterranean hybrids, I mean the French, Spanish, and Italian I mentioned, Atlantic type so-called in France, but the

particular beauty they would have is just the generic, I don't want to say North Europe face because again you do have the, there is a kind of retard looking North European and some retrograde types but so I mean there's a generic eugenic European face not Dorf Lundgren who again he's he's widely considered very handsome man but he has cannibal prehistoric evil in him as that Schwarzenegger but someone like Alain Delon you know something on that spectrum from him to Pietro Bozzelli is probably the most aesthetic type of man and are these my subjective impressions I don't think so there is a reason such men are celebrated worldwide in movies movies and advertisement, and it's similar to why so many male supermodels are from Brazil. You may have all heard of Francisco Laczowski.

He's not the only one, but he's a South Brazilian, I think, who was widely celebrated on Lucasm forums and such. Lucasm forum, some of you may recognize this forum. If you like this show topic, you will surely know about Lucasm forum, but it was just endless obsession over what I'm talking about here, you know, because they all believe its attraction to a woman is looks only. They dogmatically carried this forward, but getting into the detailed nuts and bolts of it, they do this. They discuss canceled tilt and many such things, but Lachowski was widely celebrated on these forums, and I think maybe if you look at him and it is used, he's probably Euro-Polish mixed with Iberian and maybe a touch of Indio, although it's hard to tell, you know, that there may be no Indio.

Dilma Rousseff, the crook, ex-president, communist pinko of Brazil, she's a slight swarthy and many look at her and assume that she must have Indio or black in her. But then you see her family background, her father is 100% Bulgarian, her mom is Iberian origin looks 100%, I think, if you look at the photos. And there are women who look just like her in the Balkans, like Dilma Rousseff, I mean. So these things can be misleading. Your mind thinks, oh, she's Brazilian, so she must be. But yes, I just mean my own ratings here are not just my impressions. It's the various European types I mentioned. Brazilians, you know, it's not just that male model. There are many others. And I would add to these, to the two types I mentioned. I would add certain volcano. Is it racist to say volcano nigger?

Is that okay to say it's a Polynesian? At least from description, the ancient Hawaiian royalty was very much looked up to by the Europeans who first encountered them, but we don't see them. That's hard to judge. There are impressive certainly Polynesian types and there may be subgroups also throughout the world like this, but then you get too niche on these matters. I think Basques, for example, are very good looking among some of the men, but almost never among the women. I don't know a beautiful Basque woman. I don't know that one has ever existed, maybe. As for Jews, I think they cannot be in the top running for either sex, but they are also unfairly maligned on looks because even an obsessive anti-Semite, and I say this as a

a compliment, but a committed anti-Semite like Thomas 777 has frequently said there are many good-looking Ashkenazis and Sephardic women and men. They seem to be, in certain respects, genetically strong race, if you look at that, or at lifespan relative lack of disease. I mean, they have their own unusual diseases like the Icelanders do, but long lifespan and certain events. But they wouldn't be in the running for most handsome or beautiful, but they are unfairly maligned on this count, just like the Japanese and others are. Most people, you know, again, are just unpleasant to see, most people of any race. It's always just a question, not only of the average, but of the proportions of how many stunning outliers there are.

And so, again, in mixing, when you consider this, it can lead to unhappy averages. But in Brazil, again, you find highly mixed people of both sexes who can be stunning, and it's not, this is not an endorsement, by the way. My preference would be biological quarantine. I believe the subgroups of mankind need to be studied and preserved. I mean, they need to be preserved so that they can be studied, so that then decisions can be made on auspicious breedings and such. But even if I had in my power to ever do such a thing, I still think experimental islands should exist, where men like delicious tacos could carry out their cross-breedings. I think he liked Latina. And this brings me to women. And I've said before that according to aesthetics of Kant, you have to separate consideration

of beauty from the sex impulse. But I myself don't fully hold to such Kantian aesthetics. Simply I trust in my ability not to be misled by idiosyncratic fetishes and such, which you know, if you find for example, Mayan women, or if you find Mayan men or whatever, you them aesthetic. Well, that's an ideal, that's a private, a niche, weird taste. It's a weird like of yours, but it's not a reflection of any objective value. It's very strange. The sexual impulse can take many weird directions. You can meet many men who don't like generically beautiful women. They like certain imperfections in women. They have peculiar taste. That's very common. That doesn't mean that's a judgment of objective aesthetic or even sex power worth.

You know, most people in the world are ugly because they were bred to be work slaves, and because breedings almost never took place with regard to beauty and physical quality. Among certain rare tribes, you find weird outliers. But, overall, it's really just a few populations, the ancient Greeks and such, who cared about this. It's the sorry tale of most places in the world where women are bought and sold, you know, that's tradition, that's, that's, it leads to ugliness, physical ugliness. But the judgment somewhat changes in the case of women, I mean it's not the same peoples as in the case of men, north European women can be too robust I think, they're too, the Helga, you know, I think they would be good for making strong sons, you have to wrestle

the Helga and throw her on a hay in the barn and force her to breed three strong sons, but they're very strong-minded women, and maybe they could even crush, I don't know, they could crush some of you, but Mediterranean's on the whole are a mistake. I'm referring to the nose-mouth combination, okay, so forget the so-called Roman nose. That's not what this is about. There's a kind of rat-like Mediterranean face that's very frequent. If If you look at Sopranos, you see Tony Soprano's nephew, I think, the guy who's on cocaine or heroin or whatever, the young moron unable to be a good gangster, and he's got simply the classic nose-mouth-eye combo. It's very off-putting. Okay, you find that type throughout the Mediterranean, and if you like that, fine, but it's unaesthetic

on a man, and it's hideous on women. Now, Persians, though, by the time you get to Persia, those kind of unpleasant Levantine and Mediterranean features disappear and so many have celebrated Persian women as among the most beautiful and I'd say they are in the running among the top few, equal to the most beautiful of Europe and from among Europeans I'd have to pick the same, some of the same ones again, parts of Spain, parts of Italy and France. When I lived for before in Madrid many frog came to visit, they were amazed to see in certain parts of Madrid that almost every girl was a nine or ten, I do not exaggerate. I shouldn't say this on show, I don't want too many people to show up, you know, to try to take the Spanish women. The Spanish men hate the Spanish women.

But I know people keep looking elsewhere, outside of the main classic countries of Europe, because they like the exotic and also I think because for the vast majority of men, French French girls, for example, are inaccessible, it's hard to go live there, it's expensive, once you do the women spit on you, there's very intense competition from the French men and there are only a few French women abroad and so on, when they are abroad though they are extreme slut, extreme sloot, and you should take advantage, although I have friends who dislike French women travelling, he says they are too extreme sloot. But the classic European woman in France, Spain, Italy, they are, I think, probably top in the world, along now with the Russian, the Russian women.

Not all Slavs, but the Russians in particular, for whatever reason, it was not so historically, but it is now, they possibly exceed West European women. I am told German women are an underrated success story, but it cannot be Helga built like a tank. built like a Trabant, it has to be, there are certain beautiful South German women from Munich, which is a very blonde city and so on, but from outside Europe, you know, and outside Persia, and that Persian area, you know, I think it's very hard to find. I think some have liked Tahitian, the woman of Tahiti, and certain other Polynesian women again. Would you like a Polynesian woman to assault you with various coconut shell to tie you so that the high tide drowns you while she roughly sits on your head.

I don't know if I'm allowed to talk such things. This is not a family show. My earliest fears and fantasies were about things like this. There was a Venezuelan girl, she looks Polynesian to me, and I thought of copulating with her. I think I was 12 or 13, maybe I was only, I don't remember. I was a freakish boy. This guy could have been maybe nine years old if I remember right But I remember thinking of her Against the tree and copulating with her against the tree as everyone in the class looked on and clapped in a ritualistic way Is this okay? but I don't have enough large enough sample either from in-person or media or immigrant groups to judge if Polynesian women are actually among the most beautiful or if it's just an exotic taste of

escapist Europeans like Gauguin the painter and so on so Bill O'Reilly fantasy of yeah tropical fantasy I want to spread oil on your breasts under a palm tree stop bloviating can I be on television can I be on TV one day look I've had show go on for a while I take break and I come back very soon with next episode this time or if I don't come back soon you are allowed to smack me on head with coconut lingam and I'm afraid I'm afraid of this humiliation so So, next episode come within a few days. I hope you enjoy this light variety show. Until next time, Bap out.