Vian Rhythms, episode 140, extreme special episode, a mole bug return to show. I need no introduction. Mole bug, welcome back, it's been a while, how have you been? I have been well, I have been contemplating the full-bodied pubic, the curse of Pam, nature of slavery, many thoughts, many thoughts, let us discuss. This good, yes, I recently posted this screenshot, Twitter of the kinds of things I was reading in 2009. I don't want to repeat this thing again. It's just depressing the kind of insane content he used to find on a simple Google search, and now everything streamlined. But on the subject, Mobug, the Twitter episode today where Elon, for inexplicable reasons, made Twitter unusable or half usable, what going on? Is this silly Zog Valley stupidity infecting him too?

Why tech doing this? Why Twitter not working? To be the king, you know, and a CEO is a king. To be the king of Tesla, the king of SpaceX, you know, in these things, you operate in the dark. And when you operate in the dark, and no one sees your day-to-day, no one sees the thing you do, you don't affect the public, you don't see the public, the public does not see you. So much of the success of such a king comes out of the people around him. You know, there's a learning curve with sort of being a public king, because with a public king, you have, you know, you're a patriot king, you're Bolingbroke's patriot king, and you have to have, you don't have to have an intuitive feel for your public. And, you know, your power, it's always an alliance of monarchy

and democracy, it's, you know, it's in the oligarchy, the aristocracy, that democracy is the most subdued, but the alliance of people and king is very necessary. You know, when you have a position like that of Elon, there's a lot of, you know, learning curve, but it's a different role. And, you know, I hope that he can step into it because the service is so important. It's been a tough learning curve. I feel, you know, what he's done with the blue checks is very silly and wrong. Why? Why do you think so? Why do you think about the blue checks? Carlisle, my hero, Carlisle, said this wonderful thing about slavery. He said, you can abolish the word slavery, but never the thing of slavery. You can't abolish the thing. We were talking before the show about the maid who

comes to clean my room in London. The dots you made. And I thought about the nature of slavery. And there are many ways to define a slave society. But one of the simplest, it's not about sort of details of work contract and so forth. For me, it's more about the separation between the service class and the servers and the serve. You can measure the social distance and number of hops between the server and the server. Yes. Served. One time in the 90s, I was living in San Francisco, and we had a cleaner who was actually a friend of a friend two hops away. That was very strange. And she was cleaning. And then my roommate began, as they say, dating. Yes. He became dating the maid, but she was a member of our social class. It was a little awkward. It was a little strange.

You know, I think it was good. And at least it sounded good. And I want to hurt it. And when I look at the distance between me and the maid, whether it's here or in California, me and the person who cleans my toilet, how many hops is that if it's just social connection? Yes. I would say I probably have a closer relationship to Putin. I have a closer relationship to Chairman Xi. I might have a closer relationship to Kim Jong-un. So, you know, and when you have this sort of separation between, it's the separation between the nobles and the ignobles that makes a slave society, you know, many, you know, throughout history, this phenomenon has always existed, but, you know, there are people, frankly, there are people much socially closer to me, who should be cleaning toilets, put it on.

And so, you know, the same is true in the way of nobility. And so, you know, the struggle between Elon, King Elon, and the blue checks is very like the struggle between, you know, the king and the nobles. Old Twitter, you had a weak king. And, you know, the king was in the hands of the nobility, of the oligarchy. He was a figurehead. He was a pawn. The bureaucrats were in charge. Now you have a new king who's determined to be king. But the thing is, he can't. He's the king only of Twitter, not, unfortunately, of the world. And he has a lot to learn. When the king goes up against the nobility, he can't abolish the nobility. What he has to do is something much more subtle. He has to make them his. And so when the king comes in, and there was something very valuable about the blue checks.

They identified these people. It was useful. I don't use Twitter. I don't have a Twitter account. I just browse on the web when I can, when that power is activated. And I find the blue check very useful, because I know what I'm looking at. It conveys meaning to me, the reader, not even to the poster. I don't care about having a blue check. It conveys a kind of meaning that this is a member of a very arbitrarily constructed aristocracy, but like formalizing that aristocracy and saying, you know, who wears this blue check? Who wears, you know, it's a sort of, if I may be, may I be a little politically incorrect? The blue check is a sort of yellow star. To both sides, it identifies who these people are. And now it means nothing, it means absolutely nothing,

it might as well not be displayed, you know. Yes, if I may interrupt, the reason many frogs and not just frogs, all kinds of people, choose to buy the blue check now is because it, at least perception, it gives some protection from arbitrary banning. If Elon did what you say and kept the old system, but at least afforded people protection from this, this kind of capricious banning, And especially if he got rid of the rule of Les Majesties against blue checks and journalists, which was introduced after Trump won. And that's what really ruined Twitter, because why was Twitter good? Because people could come into the mentions. You could talk back to these people. You could speak to your bettors, right? Yes. And then, you know, it was the banning of Milo for making fun of this Michelle Obama

type, your tweet with the Japanese royal family. Yeah, the only Baba, yeah. This was a new thing, and it went downhill from there. I mean, you were speaking of 2009, earlier. I remember even as late as 2013, I would say, well, in theory, we need better free speech internet, yada, yada. But of course, you can say anything you want on Twitter. You can say anything you want on Blogger. you know it was really it was sort of no one cared and then this this sort of you know thing springs up. I love Elon but he's a boomer. As someone born in 1970s I've worked very hard not to be a boomer. Most of my friends are younger you know my woman is younger. Yes this is power. There's a certain level of you know for a man there's a certain level of it's a kind of success that happens and the

first time your woman is mistaken for your daughter. No, that's good, yeah. Well, she won't listen to show, it's all right. Yeah, so you're like, okay, you have this nobility and your goal, you cannot abolish the nobility. Your goal is to master it. And there's a couple of things wrong with the legacy blue check. First of all, the new blue check, you might as well call it, you know, Twitter Pro. Showing those blue checks when reading tweets is absolutely useless, they mean nothing. It's a visual clutter. It tells you nothing about this person. As I read your Twitter, I have no interest in whether you're a blue check or not. That use of blue checks, it shows that Elon is a boomer in a way because what he's really trying to say with the new blue checks is I'm not a bot.

And the reality is, on Twitter, bots are not a real problem. I disagree with that particular part, but I can tell you more in a moment. I agree with what you're saying about Elon. I know people who know him, and they all say he has very similar personality dysfunctions to Trump. I don't know. And in that kind of position, your attention span grows very short. As a reader of Twitter, I read, I don't tweet. I can't, I've never even considered thinking of a problem with bots, I don't read posts by bots. Spam is incredible though, it is, and it's not just business spam, it's at least previously there were these blue checks that you mentioned, the legacy blue checks, they regularly used bots to boost themselves and many other such things.

I mean I have GOP, excuse I cannot use naughty words, but GOP Pathics, let's say GOP Pathics, who are regularly trying to quote unquote correct the record and do disruption radical networks and so on in my mentions, and periodically, it's completely artificial, every few months there's like 300 spam replies and you know, it's obviously, I don't know if it's the Santis the Negro campaign or what, but it's something like that, some outfit like that who's doing this. You know, the mentions, you know, whatever, that's like, you know, sort of should be an internal thing for the poster, but, you know, I'm in a unique position because I only consume content on Twitter. I don't produce. And so, as a consumer, bots are, you know, a non-issue.

And so, that check saying you're not a bot, you know, dear airline, I know that Bronze Age Pervert is not a bot. I don't need the visual clutter. As far as I know, if I may say gossip on Elon, I'm sorry, I don't mean to interrupt you all, but yes, and I should tell the audience that I don't usually drink when recording, but with a guest it's different, so I have a bottle of champagne in, so excuse if I'm being indiscreet. But I hear from people close to Elon that in the beginning, after he took over, half or 75% listened to his Silicon Valley billionaire friends, but that recently, for whatever reason, cut them off, he no longer listens to their suggestions regarding Twitter. And so I don't know if this mistake he's doing today with the scraping and the rate limiting

is related to that, or who's giving him advice. I can tell the audience I know, well basically for sure, 98% without having access to documents that – and Moldberg, we are going to talk this on this show, we have time, we're going to talk it later. But there is some kind, whether it's sincere, traditional, conservative, threadcon, or some fedcast, federalcast, traditional so-called e-internet Catholic, giving Elon all kinds of bad advice, which is why, of the frogs, I was unbanned, I think because certain people in that world like me and asked for me to be unbanned. I don't know, but my friends have not been unbanned. And not one person in Frog Twitter from original, whether it's Mena, I guess quite a few others, including Inkplot, who has an extremely popular account

on our site, which simply posted animal videos. And he's permanently banned and hounded off the internet. And meanwhile, Elon is bringing back all the most noxious face lords, let me put it that, the face fags, the people who went to Charlottesville, those noxious sort of organizational ones, they're all unbanned. And I can tell the audience this for the first time. E. Michael Jones, who I have nothing against, I know I have friends who like him, he was unbanned the day Elon took office, took over Twitter, that is, but without Elon's knowledge at all. And ever since then, the same group of, you know, the whole people around the Quania campaign, the Charlottesville thing, all the most noxious, aggressive face fags, the people that the feds love

because they entrap people in these idiotic public rallies, they're all coming back, but none of the smart, witty, humorous frogs are coming back. We're all, you know? Yes, yes, there's something rotten there, and if I step back a minute, you know, There's an old aristocracy and a new aristocracy. And the real mission, if I were in charge of Twitter socially, I think part of the problem is this vision of the free speech internet, the intellectual dork web, those sorts of people, 90s libertards. And I was a 90s libertard. I know 90s libertardism well. I respect, right? But you have to get with the program and your job to be king, it's like to be a social king in a way. And so you have to basically both constrain the old aristocracy and tame it, really.

And the blue check was a critical tool in taming these people, or it could been a critical tool in taming the legacy blue checks. A lot of there's much disorder in, you know, I know people, they got a blue check because, you know, they were at a party with someone who could give it to them. Some came through bribes. It was very disruptive. But, you know, if the king basically has a fight with the nobility, with all the counts and dukes and so forth, and if he says tomorrow, okay, there are no more counts and dukes. Everybody's, no, sir, No, Lord, everybody's just Mr. You know, the reality is there's still counts and dukes. And if he sells, then he sells, you know, count ships and dukedoms and so forth for eight pounds a month. Yeah, these people are still not counts and dukes.

The great thing about old Twitter is that, you know, in the darkness, this new aristocracy, the frog aristocracy, the sort of dark, invisible aristocracy flourished, and it grew strong, and then later its enemies began to oppress it. You know, the capital, I'm a capitalist, I believe in capitalism, and the capital of Twitter is reputation capital. And the reputation capital is not yours as CEO. Charging money to your best content producers makes no sense. You should earn more money off of them than they produce you know but you should earn money off of their content and you know perhaps even share that money with them that is one thing he is doing that could be good but you know to basically find them for existing

this also makes no sense you want you want to you know take these people and perhaps even regularize formalize this blue check even more you say okay you have a legacy blue check why do you have it you know come in apply for this you know let's confirm that you're really a noble you're really a journalist you're really a notable person a person of note and then you have this this kind of aristocracy and then you know what you want to do is you want to say okay but there is this other aristocracy that flourishes next to it You know, and you'll have all of these different kind of groups you have different kinds of reputation And so you have you know, for example a world of frog Twitter and you know, is someone?

Irrespectable experience to see is he a giant among the frogs? You should have a frog check. You should have a frog check, right? You know and and and you're an official frog someone does not want to see frog posts they should not see frog posts by anyone has that has a frog check you know that is their their you know prerogative to live in darkness and and and safety safety safety very important could say is Twitter let's say I want medical advice yes okay well you know if I'm if I have an MD should I have a check saying I'm a real MD you don't want to believe real MDs like all of this stuff could be you know there's so much basically Twitter could become you know the certifier of every kind of reputation in society yes it could

basically be that you know if I'm looking for a doctor and all the doctors are on Twitter and they have MDs how do I find this person you know how do I I find it MD, and it could be the issuer of formal credentials for everything, not just journalism. And so there's a kind of, I'm, I don't know, a PhD. Perhaps I have a check for being a PhD. The arbitrary, this system of justice so-called, I remember long ago I used to browse with this sort of thing started to happen. I would browse Twitter, and it was like you were living in the French Revolution or something, where suddenly you'd had this place of speech and then you had unexplained disappearances without trials. You know, it's like basically government by death squad. Yeah, Elon has not stopped that.

And look, I agree with you mainly, except I should say, Machiavelli has these famous phrases about how the king should be equivalent of ancient tyrant, the champion of the people against the nobility. And I think maybe Elon imagines himself as this, as a kind of—he is inspired by example of Trump. Maybe he can pull it off. Maybe, as you say, he will fail. He certainly, with his decision today to limit the amounts of tweets people view, he seems to have the same silly Zog Valley disease. No, no, it's just—it's just—it's just strange. When you see kind of strange foibles in public, the king has to have Baraka, he has to have presents. Everything the king does has to seem as if it is done by God. The king is not king. The king is not actually in charge.

He is God's instrument on Earth, or God's instrument on Twitter. If you want to say, should the king do this, you should ask, would God do this? I don't think God would limit the number of tweets you can view or whatever, this strange thing. It just sort of shows like, it shows that he has a kind of external fixation in a way. Like he should really, to be sort of kind of the social lord. I mean, let someone else, there's so many business guys in this town. Hire a business guy to do the business, but be the king of the society. You must understand the society. You must feel the society in your bones. And the truth is, you know, the king is, you know, yes, he's the champion of, he protects the people against the nobility. He also has to protect the nobility. You know, he protects everyone.

And so to say, like, to go to war against the blue cheka by taking away their checks is just, this is not how you master the nobility. You have to make them serve you and love you. Look, yes, he has many problems. I agree with you, including, again, I repeat, he continues part of the old censorship regime, which is very unfortunate. I don't think he himself does it, but he's outsourced it to bad people. It's about more than Twitter, in a way, because it shows the negative vision of these people. And they basically say, I don't want to be governed in this way. I don't want to be governed by the, I cannot insult the Blue Cheka, this reign of tyranny of these pompous journalists who run away from every fight and then call their thugs to come and kill you in the night. This is terrible.

But the thing is that to have only a negative vision of government is not enough. You don't feel the mandate of heaven when you do that. You need a positive vision of how to govern. And I don't, what I don't feel in the new Twitter regime is that positive vision. And in the absence of the positive vision, the old thing will reassert itself. You know, he can't be watchful of the whole, like, trust and safety secret police at all times. You know, he needs to, if you, you know, the secret police is eternal. Every society has a secret police. I agree with you, Elon, making many mistakes since Trump was, at least they can plausibly claim that they are mobilizing the people against the nobility in typical old demagogue style. But, and we were going to talk this on this show,

Molbag, on next segment maybe, but how there are many people, I think, who imagine themselves the same way, but are not, are not capable even close of doing that. If you don't mind, let me change subject quickly because I've kept you on this one segment quite a long time. You mentioned your das you made and the levels of social and other kinds of separation between you and her. And I want to alert the audience to, I've been traveling Asia for last few months and there's a lot of propaganda. We are talking this before show. There's a lot of propaganda that Tokyo, Hong Kong are these incredibly expensive places where there is, There is—you know, you can't get a room, and if you do, it's going to be closet space, and everything's cramped and difficult and so on.

And at least if you get a nice hotel anywhere in the Orient—Tokyo, Hong Kong, Bangkok—it's going to be, first of all, much more spacious than any equivalent would be in the—whether the United States or Europe—much, much more square footage, for example. of all, the service you'll get, they truly respect money and such, and you will get lavish service from staff and so on, whereas in the West, so my mother came to visit me, I posted about this, she refused to let me see the triads in Hong Kong, and we had to dim some some crap dumpling instead. But on her way back, she stopped as stopover for one day in a place in North Europe. And she told me, for not the airline, the hotel, everything else, in Europe and United

States, there is a kind of not aristocratic disdain for money, but this kind of Yantello, pseudo-socialist, groupist thing of trying to shove it in your face, that we are going to treat you badly, and so even if she flies business class or whatever, they stop her, they make her take things out of her luggage because of extreme regulations, which would never happen in Asia and such. And I know this may be a petty personal example, but in general, in general, I think people ought to be aware of what a scam the Western world has become after two centuries, not of just political democracy, but social-cultural democracy, but do you want to remark on this? You know what I'm leaning at, it's just the living standard of the average even middle-class

person is so much less in the United States compared to the Orient, I don't know that people know this, not to speak of South America which is frequently shitted upon and spat upon by right-wing people online, and yet an engineer, a middle-class engineer in Colombia or Venezuela can live x times better, orders of magnitudes better than his equivalent in the United States or Europe. I don't know if you want to remark on what's happening on this. In hotel service, I note that now they clean every three days. Here I am in London. My woman has to climb over me to get out of bed. I'm in a shoebox. London is this paradise of dark money and dark things. And it's a strange, they guilt trip you. They say, oh, because of climate change, we will not clean your towels.

Make special requests to clean your towels. And you're sort of being, there's this great line, And he's writing about the Jacobins, and he's writing about defining deviancy down in the age of 1791, 1792, you know, the really dark era of Jacobin rule. And he says, you know, everyone, nine tenths of France, you know, despises the Jacobins, but they're completely disunited, they can do nothing. And everyone feels that he is well governed so long as he himself is not being killed. And, you know, and I look at these, I look at these countries, you know, in London, in London, you don't yet have the tents, you know, the beggars, you know, it's not a thing, you know, it's lovely, but time will catch up, I mean, you know, they're already, you know, it's a human rights violation and so forth,

and of course, you know, these shadowy figures are trying to burn Paris as we speak, you know, the French state is reacting, keeping them out of the, you the only healthy part of Paris and really of France. The only healthy part is the countryside and the old cities, which are theme parks. And everything else is either, it's one kind of suburb, which is a sort of, it's either bug man suburb or a barbarian suburb. And neither of these things is a credit to France. And so, you know, and especially, I want to remark on a subject, I don't know how you feel about sumptuary laws, laws regulating clothing, because I feel that when I walk through the streets, I see, you know, it's a sort of double whammy, because, you know,

these people are poor, you know, physically, physically they're sorry specimens, and then and they drape these sorry bodies that they've neglected for decades are draped in these shapeless clothes that 50 years ago not even a bum would wear these clothes. I was talking to Mike Anton on this subject the other day and he laughed at me because I said, the sentence for all his posturing, in Florida you go by side of highway, you often see obese woman in capri pants with a mulatto child in tow, and this is an eyesore. And if I was running president, I would seek to correct that, as you say, through sumptuary laws. And he remarked, you know, Bap, for all of your sensible feelings and proposals, I don't think they would have much popularity with American people.

But I agree with you as a campaign program, you know. But I agree with you on this, yeah. No, no, he's thinking, this is old thinking. You know, I love Anton, but he's a man of the last century. You know, it's like, fundamentally, popularity only means something when the people are strong. When the people are weak, you know, it should be, they should sort of follow in reverence. You know, because like when, you know, One thing I say often, here I am in England, in London, and I say that England is less democratic than it was in the age of Mary Tudor. And why do I mean that? I mean that because democracy is nothing more than the formalization of the power of the mob. When the people are strong, like how many people are there in the United Kingdom?

70 million, 60 million, something like that. And a million determined people can do anything. And there were far anything, anything. No force can resist them if they are truly determined. And there is no, I mean, a military force ready to shoot them can do a lot. But truly determined people, even non-lethal riot police can't do much. And it's sort of the weakness of the mob. Whereas if you look at the London Mob 500 years ago, they would have a rumor, some opinion, they would say, oh, the Germans of the steel yard are undercutting good Englishmen in the wool trade, so let us kill all the Germans in London. And they would proceed to do their best to do that. And you can say, it was an age with far more thymos. And please do not insult me by saying thymos. and there was far more thymos.

I would just say, okay, let's go into ancient Greek pronunciation. You wouldn't say thymos as though there was an omicron in there, would you? It's not oo, but it is, the oopsilon is pronounced in the same way that the modern French u would be, so it'd be thymos, you know, like an umlaut, like an umlaut type sound. Like an umlaut. How did they know that that was the original sound? because in modern Greek, in modern Greek, which I learned in Cyprus as a child, in modern Greek, it's E, it's very much E. Yeah, in modern Greek, everything is E. In modern Greek, they took five or six or seven different vowel sounds from ancient Greek and turned it into E. This particular sound, I don't know how it was reconstructed as the umlaut, I can look into it,

but the heta, which in modern Greek, for example, is an E sound, they have from many sources, obvious ones that it was an eh, for example, including the way that sheep sound in Aristophanes and other plays. It's bah, bah, whereas in modern Greek it would be vee, vee, you know. And so they know that. But look, Moltbach, I don't mean to interrupt you. This is becoming a long segment. I want to comment on what you just said because it feeds into what we are going to talk about on this show. And this matter of Elon doing what he's doing and this matter of what's happening in Tokyo and Hong Kong and so on versus United States and North Europe, you are told, you are told by people that the migrants are being let in because there are shadowy, aristocratic

secret forces who are, for cynical capitalist reasons, they want cheap labor, you know. You come to North Europe, and from everything I hear, you do not – where is the cheap labor? You don't see that. No, no, no. Whereas in Japan, in Hong Kong, in Thailand, there is – these are nationalist, ethno-nationalist countries – and there is cheap labor, and there is enormous respect for money, and much more so than in Europe. And this is a lie, I think, promoted for all kinds of reasons. But basically, you are getting ripped off, you are getting shipped here like a sheep, no matter how much money you have or not. In the United States and North Europe, where you have to imagine moldbag in Tokyo, you can go to business central district and pay $70 a night for, yes, it's not huge hotel

room, but it's something. Imagine doing that in New York. You can't even do that in bumfuck middle of nowhere United States. Yes, and in New York, your hotel room is cleaned by a slave, like someone who is not socially connected to you at all. Whereas in Japan, actually, your hotel room, they don't really have Gasterbiter in Japan, right? They actually have work for Japanese people. And the simple policy, there's so many. I mean, the purpose of government is national greatness, which is the greatness of every person within the state. And let us take in Florida, you mentioned the fat woman with the mulatto child and the Capri pants, right? First of all, this clothing is clothing for a child, that is demeaning, you know, either, you know,

if you were a noble, in a modern sumptuary law situation, if you were an adult noble and you wear clothes in a calculated way to adorn yourself, to show your self-actualization, because the mission of the noble is self-actualization, is to become amazing in a personal way, then you should wear whatever clothes you want as long as they are not, as long as they are amazing. And if they are not amazing, it is fun because the other nobles will laugh at you when you will not go out dressed in your sweatpants the next day. You know, for the woman in the Capri pants, it's very simple to say what she should be wearing. If you're unattractive and unlucky, you should be wearing a uniform. But burka is a kind of uniform, you know? I don't care the kind of uniform,

But, you know, you can do better than this. Children, uniforms. You know, children, there's no purpose in the distinction of clothing among children. They should all dress in the same way. They should be, you know, like the last, I mean, the idea of school without uniforms, very new idea, very, very ridiculous idea. It's like the idea of educating boys and girls together is, you know, of all the dumb ideas of the 20th century. It's like, you know, I have never, I, you know, my children are, you know, my oldest is high school age. You know, in high school, the problems with putting boys and girls together are one thing. But even in elementary school, you know, I watch these schools, I see these schools, boys and girls never play together. You know, I mean, it's more separate than-

Well, imagine high school. I have a frog friend who lived in Bermuda, which, as you know, is very nice place, and he's very concerned for, yes, he's very concerned for his, I think his daughter is like three years old, but he knows that as soon as any daughter becomes 14 and goes to high school in Bermuda, it's 24-7 fuck party there. I'm sorry to be vulgar, but it's a terrible idea. No, it's very, it's very, it's very Negress Bermuda. It's more than just Negress, it's Negrocious. But California is a little bit different. But yeah, the 24-7, you're a child as an ape becoming a man. And the teenager has a special position in becoming human in a way. And the idea that they should be behaving like little adults and having 24-7 fuck parties. if we may be crude, I guess we may be crude.

It's absurd. It's like, you know, and, and, and, and, and it doesn't show. It's a vulgar show. Well, you know, but, but, but, you know, as nobles vulgarity is our prerogative, you know, we, we, we cannot be mistaken for the masses in any case. And so, you know, to be vulgar for us is mere art, but whereas, you know, for the fat woman in the Capri pants, you know, this woman should, you know, I, I, One of the, especially being here in England, my thoughts turn to, there's a pair of books that I always recommend to people. Sociology books, one of them, you may know, Theodore Dalrymple, you know, Old Boomer, you know. He's a good writer. He's a good writer, and he's a prison psychologist, and he wrote this book, Life at the Bottom, which is a set of essays about, you know,

the complete moral and physical corruption of the British lower classes. And these are white people, mostly, many of them of Irish descent, actually, and they're completely useless. They should be cleaning my hotel room, but they're so useless that we have to import dossiers from very strange Eastern countries, right? trees, right, to clean. And meanwhile, the native lower classes luxuriate in their tracksuits, and their stinky weed, and their video games. And they decay as human beings. They should be in the fields. They should be. That's one of his most depressing, yeah. Sorry. It's a very depressing book. It's a very depressing book. And then the other book that I recommend is a book called The Classic Slum by someone named Robert Roberts.

And he was writing in the 20s, 20s or 30s, I think, of the Edwardian slums he grew up with. Maybe as late as the 40s, this book is written. But it's before the beverage report. It's before the dole, the welfare state, and all of this. And he's writing of the Edwardian poverty that he grew up with. And all of these people, they're striving manfully to be decent. They wear what looks, you know, you see pictures of these slums. Everyone is wearing what looks like formal attire. You know, if they have a hole in their clothes, they patch it. If they have a hole in their shoe, they paint their foot with ink so it doesn't look like there's a hole. They're all striving upward. They're striving to grow, to perfect themselves. Even though they're dirt poor and they have no safety net,

they have no hammock to rest in. And these people were given a hammock and they rotted instantly. And they just, they rotted like bad fruit, you know? And this is the absolute horror of the beverage report, because the idea, the people behind the beverage report, these Fabians, you know, labor rights, we shall build Jerusalem and England's green and pleasant land, what is this? That's Blake, right? And they attempt to build Jerusalem. And they say, well, here are all these people who strive to be middle class. They're covering the holes in their clothes. They're wearing blazers, even if they're working men. What is it that separates these people from the respectable middle classes? And their answer, fools that they were, was money. And so that was the only difference.

And it turns out, actually, that if you give these people money, it destroys them. If you let them pick the clothes they wear, they revel in ugliness. If you, you know, and, you know, like, there must be 10 million people in England for whom the absolute best thing for themselves, for their worlds, would be hard labor in the fields. And, you know, hard labor cleaning, something, something. Labor, you know, and, and, and... Well, what I disagree with you, Malbagh, is I think the same is true for the so-called British leadership in government now. Ah, yes. Ah, but we can talk this next segment. I don't mean to interrupt you, it's just becoming quite a long segment. It's very long, it's very long, I ramble on. But you see my point, you see my point.

I do see your point, I see your point, and I want just to add in closing what you said about Theodore Dalrymple and the British lower classes, he has another amazing essay about his time as a doctor, I think, in Botswana, and about how wonderful his life was as a doctor in Botswana. Rhodesia, I think. I think actually Rhodesia. It may have been Rhodesia, it's one of the two. But he, in saying that, is just, in closing, I want to remind audience of how much they're They're being lied to with propaganda about, first of all, again, East Asia, that Tokyo, Hong Kong and such, you will get a closet and you drop a newspaper on the street and it's worth $100,000, everything's overpriced, it's high stress. The opposite is the truth.

That's the United States and North Europe, whereas in East Asia, supposedly a collectivist and they say some somewhat egalitarian democratic place, it's the very opposite. Whatever social class or money you have, you get your quote-unquote money's worth, whereas United States and Europe, it's a fully socialized pseudo-communist place already. Furthermore, when right-wing people in particular attack Brazil, I commented on this today, it's completely false. Brazil, I had Frog Mollbach who, Frog friend, who was completely convinced by the talking points on the right. Brazil is the unfortunate future of United States and Europe and of the civilized countries were all going to have favelas and this. And when he came to visit me in Rio, he was so pleasantly surprised. He said, this is amazing.

The first world services work much better than the first world and the supposed first world. And yes, there is diversity. There is also associated crime. But despite the diversity, there is a genteel acceptance of one's station in life. I'm not saying this to raise Brazil, it has huge problems. But the United States and Europe are in many cases far worse already. And I want to say this in closing because it ties into what we'll talk on next segment that we are going to talk on this show. The so-called traditional conservatives, the trad cons and such, are selling people through Through this kind of reasoning about the evils of neoliberal capitalism that's destroying religion and community and so on, they're selling people a complete lie that's actually

in agreement with the regime lies about this. I want to end segment now because we've gone a long time, but do you have anything to say in closing on that, or you want to save it maybe for next segment? Yes, I would say that, you know, I think the trad cons, you know, there are many kinds of societies. There's nothing wrong with a certain kind of social stratification. It's like, you know, what's needed is that, you know, when you're importing people and you're importing labor, and especially, you know, it is true what you say, that it is actually, these countries have plenty of native labor. The real problem, while they're doing two things, One is what they're importing is much more sinister than labor. They're not importing labor.

The Gulf states are importing—that's what importing cheap labor looks like. Now, you know, there are problems with the Gulf states. There's no more useless creature on earth than an Emirati. But you'll notice that the people who are importing labor and the people, the shadowy figures setting fires in the street in Paris, these people do not work. They do not serve the, you know. Just because France controlled a third of Africa and then the third of Africa comes to France does not mean that you go to Paris and you were waited on hand and foot. you were carried in a sedan chair by swarthy figures. You're dressed by, you know. And no, no, it's absolutely not. They're important. You are that in ethno-nationalist Bangkok, or even Tokyo, by the way. You are treated that way. Yes, yes, exactly.

And so this idea that, oh, it's fine because we're importing all this help, They're not even help their occupiers. They're there for conquest, really. And conquest and the Dane Geld, or as some call it, Gibbs. And that's a sad truth. It's like I spoke with an English truck driver here recently. and the truck drivers, it's very hard. The truck drivers, when they come from France, they're fine personally if these invaders get aboard their trucks, and so they have to check and they hope for calm weather, because in calm weather, they don't invade by truck, they invade by boat. This is a new thing, the boat invasion. It's absolutely remarkable. It's surreal to watch this nation. This is amazing, Moldbug. Keeping up its funeral pyre, as someone once said. All right, let us close the segment

on a note of complete agreement. We need smoke break, yes, complete agreement. Very good. Yes. Well, we'll be right back, yes. Yes. Yes. Welcome back to the show. We are here with Moldbug talking, well, many matters, travel in East Asia, and traditional conservatives. but actually, the two are related, Molbog, and we were going to talk this episode about the problem of the social conservative, or as you say, the traditional conservative. I don't want to frame the matter for you, but it's very much related to what we were just saying, I think, because they come up lately, online and offline, in magazines such as Compact and Unheard and others. They, the so-called new right dissident sphere, But I don't think they are really new, right? It's really the old Republican Santorum boring wing.

And they are promoting this line that Lockean capitalist neoliberal globalism is for cynical capitalist reasons, destroying traditional societies which are naturally socially conservative as also socialist in economics. And they are destroying them for the purpose of cheap labor, which is—has a bit of truth to it, but really, they are doing it for cynical capital diseases. And my point, at least in part of last segment, Malbagh, is this complete nonsense, because the most nationalist countries I've been to recently have cheap labor, whereas North Europe and United States actually do not have that environment at all. It's all being done for so-called democratic or pseudo-socialist or red reasons, with a capital R, really. But look, I don't want to frame the argument for you.

I wanted to talk to you this segment, this episode in general, about the problem of traditional conservatives, social conservatives. They have many other problems besides what I just said. What is your problem with them? What do you want to say about them in general? Well, I think that they are stuck in the 20th century. You scratch them, and you see a good old liberal, and, you know, I wanted to focus—I mean, by way of introduction, I may post a review. You know, I have just read this book about—by Patrick Deneen, you know. You know, I—and— Yeah, I do know, yeah. And, you know, he talks about—in the subtitle of the book, he mentions regime change, and I'm reading it very curiously for his regime change, you know, suggestions and, you know,

his first structural idea about what to do with the regime appears on something like page 400. And it's quadrupling the size of the House of Representatives, you know. And it's like, you know, these people, you know, they're like, they're Jaffites, basically. And, you know, they live in this kind of Jaffite, Russell Kirk kind of world where everything is the struggle of ideas and we have better ideas. So what Dineen really means by regime change, he's stealing our branding. But in a way, it's kind of this continuation of this kind of 20th century Washington Generals, if you know the the term, for those who, non-American listeners, the Harlem Globetrotters were this exhibition team, not really a real basketball team, like a trick basketball team,

and they always played the Washington Generals, which were another fake basketball team attached to them, and the Generals always lost. I mean, some of the ideas, in a way, this idea of traditional society sort of being destroyed for cheap labor, it's sort of, it's not without truth, in a way, But the idea that this is a battle of ideas sort of assumes this 19th and 20th, really 19th century liberal, in fact, not 19th, 18th century liberal idea, these enlightenment ideas of like, we live on a sort of playing field of ideas. And the truth is the playing field is not level because it is tilted in favor of power. The only way to have your ideas, have good ideas, defeat bad ideas is not to open your sub stacks and have your magazine writers and your national reviews,

salaried bow-tied people explain patiently why the good ideas are better than the bad ideas. The good power has to defeat the bad power. And if you tell anything, if you tell people anything which does not resolve to we have to win and they have to lose. And ultimately, if your solution to this oligarchical regime, this sort of longhouse regime, as you put it, of these anonymous faces, these processes, these committees, these bureaucrats, if your solution to that is anything but a central power which rules from the top down, what you'll find is you're doing it wrong. It just won't work. And so my objection to the TradCon is that he's sort of, you know, it's not really controlled opposition, it's just sort of harmless opposition. It has this harmlessness to it.

And, you know, if you say, well, I have harmless ideas, let us have this harmless conversation. I wish to submit to my masters, you know, we just hope that the master rules us for the best. We must be humble, we must bend over, We must grease up. What we really need is lubrication, right? And it's like, I don't think that we need, what we need is lubrication. I think that we need to be no longer taken from the rear. And so there's a sense of these tradcons, these catamites, these conservicons are not quite a sort of Judas goat. I think they seriously believe that if people buy their books and read their essays and become virtuous. I mean, really, you know, us people have forgotten William Bennett. Do you know the story of William Bennett? And what's the story, tell the story.

The Book of Virtues, he was the ultra, he was the titan, you know, the giant tradcon of the 80s and 90s. He had bestrode the National Review like a colossus. He was, you know, and the restoration of virtues was this program and he wrote this book, The Book of Virtues, a ball about how to be virtuous. And it was later discovered that he had a very serious gambling addiction. It symbolizes kind of the corruption of these people. It's like basically, yes, you know, the regime, you know. But the thing is, you know, to expect in this decadent age that sort of virtue will come sort of from the people spontaneously buying your books and deciding to become virtuous, and therefore we will have a new elite of virtuous people who buy Patrick Deneen books.

And this new elite, by sheer force of being virtuous, power will come to them. Regime change, it's like the osmotic theory of regime change. It's like regime change will happen by osmosis. And history does not contain any single example of regime change by osmosis. It's fine to have the idea of a new elite. That's great, practice your virtues, good to be virtuous. Virtue has never seized power by osmosis. The project, the problem, and this is also a problem that in some ways has never been solved, but it feels solvable, you know, the problem of a new regime, and you see some hints of it in the 20th century, certainly the problem of a new regime is to take a demoralized population, demoralized as in both the sort of figurative, you know, meaning of the term demoralized,

and really a population that has lost its morality and to instead take these people and restore their virtue. You know, it's like on Frog Twitter, you must have seen, there's a video somewhere, it's like a presidential fitness video from the 60s. You know? And it's like, you know, this is from America in the 1960s, the hippie 1960s, you know? And it's like something out of Lenny Riefenstahl's Olympics video, like this emphasis on fitness. And you're just like, this is amazing. I mean, even growing up in the 80s, I sort of have a distant memory of this. Or for example, the vision behind the Rhodes Scholarship, as you may know, the original requirement of the Rhodes Scholarship was that a Rhodes Scholar must be mentally and physically perfect. You must be an athlete. You must be as well as.

And this was to sort of prevent the rise of these sort of bug-like, nerdy intellectual people. And I grew up as a bug-like, nerdy intellectual person. I sympathize. I accept my deficiencies. I, myself, am not physically perfect. The only chance for these societies is for a very small nucleus of perfection, a kind of seed crystal of perfection to impose itself by force and prestige on the whole society from the top down. And so, and it's the very, you know, the irony of this formula for the real regime change is that it is only through the frivolity and weakness of the population that this becomes possible. Rome is such a fine example, because people in the late republic spoke eloquently of the decay of Roman virtues. Had they seen Rome in the late empire,

they would really know the decay of those virtues, which were still actually the Rome of 0 BC, 0 AD. I will not say CE. the Rome of 0 AD is far more virtuous than the Rome of 300 AD, but far less virtuous than the Rome of 300 BC. Some idiots have just published a paper and I believe nature, talking about how every society, there's the illusion of constant moral decline. What illusion, right? And so to reverse the moral decline of a society is an immense task. But that is really the task before us. You know, we have to restore. It's like, you know, when you talk about the labor in a way, I think it symbolizes this problem. Because what you're doing when you're importing the cheap labor, first of all, the real cheap labor is all the people in your country

that are unemployed, that are useless, that are shiftless, even. It's strange how shiftless and shifty are synonyms. And we know what word follows both those words. It doesn't start with M. And so you have this labor pool of people that are lost and abandoned. And in America, we import these Guatemalans to do our dishes and clean our laundry and do our dirty work. Now I see them in restaurants. You actually start to see these helots more in front of house. Previously, they were confined to the back of house. And so you're ordering from someone who does not even understand English, right? And it's absolutely terrible. But the worst of it is you bring these people in. Men and women, they breed, and they have children. And the children are also entirely useless.

They integrate into the feral underclass. They integrate into this enormous pool of useless people that serve only as clients and voters. Their parents, the first generation immigrants, the first generation working immigrants who do the work, they're rough people. They're uncultured. They're from the countryside. But they may get drunk and cause trouble, but they're not feral. And they have, in fact, they come from the dirtiest, most backward regions of Guatemala. These people are sometimes under four foot tall. They're very short, they're very short, they're very brown, and they work very hard because they know what it is to be like dirt poor. They come from integrated societies where the idea that when you're 11 years old, your life is about sneakers

and video games is when you're 11 years old in these societies, your life is about, you know, scraping holes in the dirt, you know, and if you can't scrape holes in the dirt, you don't eat. And so, you know, we take these people, we bring them to our country, you know, to do work because our, like, you know, when I was a kid, for example, it was ordinary for teenagers of, you know, high status social families, even, to work at McDonald's doing food prep. That's all squadamalas now. Let me interrupt you. I was just at hotel, and there was Bag Boy or Bell Boy, whatever it's called. And he was clearly a man of, he was extreme handsome. And I complimented him. No homo, I complimented him. But he was an extreme, obvious example of someone who's not of, as you say,

Serf, or Dassio social class, who had a temporary job as a bellboy. I agree with everything you've said. I want to say on the subject of trad cons, the problem with them, let's bring up the matter of Rome that you just said. In the 300s, I think, or 400s AD, I have access to documents that show, I think, the tanners or the clothing manufacturers in Rome, almost all of them were Syrian or Libyan. Yes. Okay? The rivers, you know, the waters of the Orontes have flowed into the Tiber, as juvenile, you know, put in, and juvenile is far earlier than that. Yes. And, you know, yes. It was complete population replacement, at least on the working-class level. Yes. And it, so the problem of Rome, I think, had something to do with morality,

which is why Octavian tried to re-establish marriage and breeding for the patrician class, with no success, by the way, even as a powerful, supremely powerful Caesar. He was unable to do that. He was unable, the Lex, what is it, the Lex, I forget the name of the law. Yes, I forget it, too. I'm drunk, you'll forgive me. But to me, this exemplifies the problem of the traditional conservative in general, and I think, actually, Octavian is that at his best, whereas the examples we have now are really Ned Flanders types who want to be on TV, they want to have Tucker's show or whatever, they are completely unserious people. But even at their best, they refuse to accept that the problem—look, Bolbag, I know you are mostly in the norm-groid world now, you don't have to agree with what I'm about

to say, but at the level of action, the problem is population replacement and so forth. It's not really moral matters, and these trap cons that are around today, they don't want to address racial problems, again, don't comment on that, I know, or population problems. They want to reframe it as if it's, you know, they can reestablish the way Bannon wants or other ones that some kind of multiracial working class democracy in which we can enlist the downtrodden POC of the world to be, and so on and so forth. You know what the program is. And the problem. Yeah. I know what the problem is. I can tell you what the problem is. The problem is this very unscientific 18th century idea found in these documents that say that all men are created equal. And I have several problems with that.

First of all, that's blatant creationism. Man was not created. Man evolved. OK, so that's a lie. Secondly, suppose you were to say that all identical twins created equal. Well, you know, you could argue with that statement, but it's clearly more true than all men are created equal. And I want to raise this issue of science, actually, because I fucking love science. And actually, there's a magazine called Science. I don't know if you know it, you may know it. And I refer to an article, there's a couple of, this is new research, this This is the latest research. And there's an article that came out at the start of COVID by a Stanford researcher, I believe, named Dervassola. Dervassola 2020. It's in Science Advances or something.

And he studies human DNA, and he discovers this ghost population. And it's an African ghost population that splits off 750,000 million years ago, and he discovers that the modern West African is up, you know, this population in, paleontologists would not even describe this population as Homo sapiens, and yet, you know, the African, I mean, it's like if you read the abstract to this, you know, it's this amazing abstract to Dervassola 2020, and you could replace every sentence in this abstract, could add at the start of every sentence, confirming the remarkable early insights of my Uncle Roy. The latest piece that just came out a couple of months ago in another magazine, it starts with an N, no nature. If they couldn't get it in nature, they were going to publish it in the Southern Planter.

one is basically a more sophisticated analysis and kind of shows that there are sort of two stems of human DNA which has been approximately as distant from each other going back a million years and so you know this is like you know the latest okay if you want to say you know all men were created you know we're talking about you know the the the sons of Ham or something this is remarkable research. And basically, my feeling is that government should be based on science. I believe in scientific government. It's a very 18th century value. And so, at the root, you might almost say the cornerstone of this regime is this sort of blank slate theory, this Ashley Montaguism, whoever is born in a stable is a horse. If you actually believed, I used to believe very strongly, I grew up, you know,

as a blue state American, an imperialistic globalist, and I believed that, like all, you know, Americanoids, the the mission of America was to turn the whole world into America by missionary work. Yes. And this missionary work, naturally, you know, the missionaries various problems and and sending your missionaries to strange foreign countries. So what if we bring the pain in here and we missionary-ize them in our own countries that we save on airplane tickets, right? And our airplanes would not have to land in strange, jungled, foreign countries. This was this sort of beautiful 20th century vision. One of the funniest examples of this is Graham Greene's The Comedians, where the American couple. And that's about Haiti, right?

Yes, the American couple goes there with the hope of reforming, you know, it's very funny. Yes, the moral reform of Haiti. The moral reform of Haiti. I was, you know, and I was on a debate with this very irritating liberal. Even my Young Turks debate was more pleasant than this person. I was debating this person in Chicago on stage and he really insisted that what Haiti needed to really turn it into America. The problem was regulation. Haiti needed a higher minimum wage. And I pointed out that Haiti is currently governed de facto, or at least Port-au-Prince, is currently governed de facto by a man, you know, Jimmy Chardzia, who goes by a barbecue. Minimum wage. Do you know what nurses make in Tokyo? Nurses who are so highly paid in the United States

It's make about $1,600 a month in Tokyo. Wow. And yeah, and this is because the nation is fully using its labor supply, and it's not wasting the talents of everyone. And they're Japanese, and you can train, basically, any Japanese woman to be a competent nurse. I would not say that the same is true for Australian aboriginals. I just would not say it. Even Ashley Montague, even I read a long time ago, I read Ashley Montague. I hate to get into naming anyone, but very Norman, prestigious sounding name, Ashley Montague. We shall not the same names, I believe, nay, nay Israel Ehrenberg, a fellow member of the tribe, but a full member unlike myself. And even Ashley Montague in his book that marked the UNESCO statement on race, this classic achievement of the mid-century power.

He admits that while all men are created equal, maybe this is not necessarily true for the Australian Aboriginal. And in fact, if you go to Australia and you ask normal, happy leftist Australians, Eloi, if you will, frolicking on the beaches of Australia, working at Google, working at Google, And you say to them, you say to these Googlers, can you imagine, these Australian Googlers, because, of course, Google Australia is a thing. And you say to them, can you imagine a full-blooded Australian Aboriginal working at Google? And they'll just laugh at you. They would just, you know. Ultimately, we have to speak of these things. And the thing is that your TradCon builds this surface vision of a kind of traditionalism on this sort of false cornerstone of the blank slate.

And if the false cornerstone was real, despite the fact that ideas, culture is downstream from politics and power controls ideas, but these ideas might even be good ideas if they were not sort of built on this lie. Whereas you mentioned Octavian. Octavian is, of course, striving to preserve Roman virtues, but he's also striving to preserve Roman bloodlines. And the Romans really believed in breeding in both senses of the word. They believed that basically humans are a bred species. It's not even about race. Race is just the crudest version of this. It's about bloodlines. it's about breeding humans like racehorses because in fact there is no particular difference between the reproductive mechanisms and principles of humans and racehorses. And the idea that you can breed a Clydesdale

into a thoroughbred is absolute nonsense. And so when you have a society rooted in this nonsense and it is nonsense, like to actually to be able to see that that and also to be able to say, you know, let's go back to the Australian Aboriginals because these people are humans. You know, they're animals, but they are also human. And as humans, I mean, the dignity, of course, of animal must be respected, right? You know, and so, however much more must the dignity of the human be respected. And so, you know, the right thing, if you take the Australian Aboriginal, this is a noble creature. This creature is as noble as lion to turn a lion into a house pet is absurd and it is not how a lion should live a lion should be the king of the plains and you know the Australian

Aboriginal should be you know hunting the desert you know with his boomerang and his blowgun or his spear you should not be sniffing glue and sleeping in the road and raping his eight-year-old sister you know which is how these people live it's a reductio ad absurdum of course in America and Europe and Asia we do not have the Australian aboriginal problem but like you know for the government to kind of manage you know every human race is a noble race the human is an incredible beast right and to like try to turn noble people the desert into some kind of inferior servile I mean they were not born to to serve, you know, imagine, you know, your aboriginal nurse, it's absurd, right? You know, these people should be wandering the desert, free as birds, right, you know?

I agree with what you're saying about the traditionalist conservative, and I would add that, quite aside from the question of population replacement of race, and which really is at the bottom of it, but they make signature mistake in two ways. First of all, on a purely rhetorical or political level, their social conservative program comes pre-caricature. Something you've said before, I've said before, I completely agree with you on this. And so even if, let's say, the necessity of social conservative or religious programming for social order is good, it won't work because it comes pre-caricature by decades of whatever you want to call it, leftist programming. I don't think it's just that, but we can get to that in a moment.

Quite aside from that, they are cowards on a quite different level from what we've been saying so far. Let's take the example of marital relations. You have somebody like Josh Hawley get up before cameras. I don't know what this has to do with his duties as a senator of Missouri, but he tells young men that they need to man up and that the problem of modern marriage is because Because modern men refuse to take on the responsibilities and they are playing video games and such. And this is a cowardly way of not addressing many, many problems with modern women, whether it's their own behavior or whether it's the problem of obesity in general that lowers, you know, it lowers the options of men and highly raises the options of the few women

who remain not obese in the United States and other countries have worked, but that in itself is a sign of what the social conservative, the Ned Flanders type, it's just, I talked this on last episode, I don't know if you listened, but it's their signature moral cowardice that underlies all of their programs so that when I mentioned the economic theories they they have about how it's actually Locke and Hobbes and Adam Smith and modern capitalism that is to blame, really when you take, it's not just the white youth, but really any highly intelligent ambitious youth in high school or college today or anything else like that, what problems they face have nothing to do whatsoever with the rhetoric that's coming

out of social conservatives about atomization, the destruction of traditional communities by capital, and I really don't care about defending capitalism, but this is a form of cowardice in general, quite aside from the racial population question. I want to ask you also about your article about Hobbits and Elves in a moment. It's actually very much related to this, but yes. It's very related to this, because you can't, to say, when you say to these people, they should sort of be virtuous in a way, you're really confusing your hobbits and elves, who are like your nobles and your commoners. And the mission and the destiny, we spoke with the Australian aboriginals and their mission and their destiny and the perfection of their humanity. And there's nothing that would be more beautiful

than to rewild these people, you know? And the rewilding of humans, that's finding their inner nobility. And so, you know, there's a fundamental confusion when Josh Hawley, and I look at Josh Hawley and I think, this man shaves his private parts. That's how I feel, don't ask me how I know, I don't know. But I suspect. You do know his face, okay, okay. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it's a face, yes, yes, exactly, exactly. there's estrogen involved, you know, and the, I could even grow a beard. You know, I don't know. Well, but it's a bigger problem, Mo, because the Oath Keepers, sorry to interrupt you, but the Oath Keepers, this is what I'm talking about. Quite aside from any modern discourse, I have a friend, he's just a normicon, he was radicalized recently, but he has to point out,

this is what conservatism is, these middle-aged men crying on each other's shoulder, this loser energy of you come online and you say, I have a porn addiction and I was saved by religion and therefore social conservatism is the future. I mean, it's embarrassing and it's loser energy and it's going to lose. Even if it's correct, it's going to lose. It's loser energy and it comes out of this kind of fundamental confusion of kind of elf and hobbit. You know, the problem with the social conservatives is that they're sort of, they're elves larping as hobbits. They sort of pretend that, oh, we are speaking. The hobbits don't hear their words. Hobbits are not within a discourse. If you're a true hobbit, the great American hobbits are the Mormons. The Mormons have an intact society.

Once you, as a Mormon, need to listen to some National Review writer, some William Bennett about your virtues. You've already lost that. You shouldn't be listening to, if you're a real Hobbit, you're not listening to these people. You're listening to your bishop. You're part of the society. And once you say, oh, everyone must become an elf, and you get these people, everyone must become a noble, we're trying to turn hobbits into nobles, we're trying to turn orcs into nobles, we're trying to turn Australian aboriginals into dukes and counts and princes, and it's absurd. It's like, no, everyone must become what they are. And so once you basically lost sort of that kind of traditional society and you're thinking in ideas, you're thinking in Locke, you're thinking in Hobbes,

forget it, forget it, forget it. Like actually, if you were meant to sort of reform and become traditional again, you would throw away your books and just listen to your bishops and listen. And so you're speaking, these ideas go to the people that don't need them, that are not helped by them. And actually, these people, the people that these ideas are speaking to are these nobles. And to say that the nobles, the elves, whatever you want to call them, should become little hobbits listening to their bishops and ministers, No, no, that is not their destiny. Their destiny, you know, their destiny is to become, is to achieve a more difficult kind of greatness and to achieve like mental and moral and physical greatness. And you know, the idea that that greatness,

you know, like let's take sexual morality, for instance, like the sexual immorality of the middle classes and the upper classes has always been different to basically become a noble, you're living like, you know, Chaudelors de la Clos, Liaisons d'Angers, right? You know, like, that is actually a normal way to live for a noble. For a commoner, it's completely dissolute and it will result in complete destruction. Even William Bennett has his gambling addiction, you know? And so there's a sort of fundamental, you know, once you're sort of in the life of ideas, the way to regard kind of the Hobbit classes is sort of the way to regard Australian Aboriginals. It's like these societies, they're human societies. They must sort of be tenderly protected. They must be preserved.

We must preserve the Mormons, the Amish. The Amish are what hobbits should be. The Amish, it's a beautiful society, but race breeding doesn't breed true. Or every once in a while, someone is born Amish who should be an elf. Maybe he's as homosexual. Maybe his intelligence is just too high. He has to get out of there, and he has to inhabit his elf destiny. Yes, well, I don't mean to cut you off, but I must, because we don't have a lot of time left, maybe 10, 15 minutes. I know you have a hard deadline. You have important state dinners to attend. I wanted to get to some important matters in the last 15, 20 minutes, if you have them. I want to, first of all, mention, regarding what we've just said, that a lot of the discourse of the social conservative and such is to turn their audience,

and their audience is necessarily limited. It's not the hobbits, as you say, it's intellectuals on the right, and they're trying to turn them really into demes. And I want to remind the audience that the Copts lived as a third slave population to the Muslims for a thousand years while having traditional values. And there is nothing, nothing whatsoever about traditional values, good though they may be, in preserving communities, there's nothing that guarantees you will be independent or you will rule your own fate or anything else. They will face instead repeated pogroms and oppression. That being said. Yes, yes, and it's even worse because the cops lived as dimmies, but they lived as dimmies under a society that was not destructive to these traditional societies.

They lived as they were tolerated. They were a resource for the state, the caliphs, the sultans, basically regarded them as pets. The Greeks, the Jews, the Armenians in Turkey, the same thing. And this is not the fate of the traditional society under the rule of these people. Now, it's somewhat amazing that even the Amish are allowed to persist as a traditional society. They can do that only by closing themselves off completely grammatically from this sort of corrosive impact of modernity. The Hasidic Jews, the Satmar Jews in New York, similar, they maintain a closed society. And so if you want to really promote and retain the hobbits, The reality is that you can't be making them to elves. You can't corrupt them with elf stuff. You actually have to sort of preserve them

in even their ignorance, in a way. You have to say, if I'm a Mormon, and I have a Mormon family, and I'm on the internet, OK? These Mormon kids on the internet, they should be not on the internet. They should be on the Mormon net, where everyone they see is a Mormon. I know what you're saying is important to what we're talking about, but I must get to the nuts and bolts of it, because I fundamentally agree with you that, let's say you take a silly zog very billionaire, and where does their money go? It goes sometimes to funding a new campaign, a new candidate, and that won't really change anything. And I don't know if we have time to talk about this this time, maybe next time. I hope we have a new show soon.

But I agree with you that their money would be much better spent on, let's say, what you you call a dark elf, having the insurance, let's say, from cancellation to write a book, to make a movie, to change society, to change society in some way. And so this is why, on the article I brought up at the beginning of this episode, where you wrote about the elves and the hobbits in the wake of the Roe v. Wade decision, I fundamentally agree with you. Political efforts, for example Roe v. Wade, but many others, are in some sense counterproductive and so on. thing that would really change things if we if we have let's say a repeat of the beatnik or some kind of 60s counterculture maybe not on the right but on the anti-woke or anti-left I agree with all that what I want to ask

you just for audience if you want to talk about this if not we could talk about other things but when you wrote this article there was a big chimp out that ensued and I just read this article again before this show I don't know why this chimp out in suit. I fundamentally agree with you. But in everything you're saying now, and also in your article, you must know that the hobbits or so forth, or people who identify with them, will be offended by the way you put things, will say, well, why, you know, it's condescending. Why is he saying to us to stay out of the culture war while he can win it? Obviously, you must know that nobody can by nature accept that. So I wanted to ask you, why did you put these things this way in this article that you knew,

I'm sure you knew, people would be offended by and they'd react again, you know. I care not at all, not at all, not even slightly, if I offend these people in bow ties, what are they going to do, you know, come to my house, you know, I don't think so, I've never been attacked by a man in a bow tie. And, you know, the, like, never once. And it's like, yeah, I have to basically, you know, you say to these people who are LARPing as hobbits, right, if you say to these people, like, you know, this idea that everyone should become hobbits is, you know, is absurd. They themselves are not hobbits. They, you know, their head is full of ideas. A hobbit's head is not full of ideas. You know, they have—you know, they're gambling addictions, so they write their books of virtues.

You know, someone—I forget who introduced the phrase to me, a D.C.-related phrase, typical Republican social life. What I object to is the falsity of all of this. And, you know, when you say to the Dark Elves, like, become who you are, you are noble, you You are out of sympathy with the current nobility, with this current sort of degenerate aristocracy. You should wish to be part of a new aristocracy, and that new aristocracy should have a new kind of relationship to the commons, where it tries to protect and preserve these traditional societies, but it preserves them from above. And the idea that sort of everyone goes backward out of modernity and becomes traditional, you know, I have never seen like anyone, like even the, you know, these trad cast, you know,

they have not cleansed themselves from modernity. I used when I was Bronze Age perfect a few years ago to post much more racy, weird sexual things and so forth. And my Catholic Christian friends loved it. And now it's these fakers, the ones you are talking about who blow up at me, so okay, I have to restrain it somewhat, or maybe I don't. But my Catholic friends who are born Catholic and raised that way say they have no idea what these electronic internet threat cathars are about. They don't know any people like that in real life. It's a complete, what you are talking about is an internet and media and TV aspirational phenomenon of this kind, yes. It's fake, and nothing, nothing ever, nothing which is fake ever succeeds. Nothing succeeds as a lie. You have to get to the truth of things.

And you're like, okay, do you wanna restore the Catholicism of, you know, Urban the Fifth? Okay, great. You know, simple question to you. Did Urban the Fifth fuck? Was he one who fucked, you know? And I believe that he did. And he was an aristocrat, he was a noble, He was not some like, you know, and, you know, so this attempt to kind of larp, it has this almost like Marie Antoinette kind of tone. You know, these people are like, oh yes, I will, I'm a milkmaid. I should milk the cows, you know, with my ideas, my head full of lock and hobs and de maistre, you know, and that means, you know, even in a way, the life of me, you know, let's talk de maistre, right? You know, you can't get more of a sort of, in some ways, an arch-Catholic than de maistre,

But even to Maestra, in a way, he's not really a trad. He's a neo-reactionary and not a reactionary. And the old reactionaries, the real sort of old hobbit, high-bound Catholics of his time, did not trust him. Because he was saying these very good things about the pope and so forth. But he sounded like Voltaire. And he sounded like Voltaire because he was educated in an enlightenment way. And he could not help sounding like Voltaire. And in the end, for all his brilliant writing, his words were written in water. The essence of like, I have as much of a respect for tradition and the meaning of tradition as anything. But the kind of nobility, I'm an Oxfordian. I believe that Shakespeare was a noble. I believe that he was the 17th Earl of Oxford. If you look at the life of Oxford,

This is the Renaissance man. This is not someone who goes to church every week. Does the Earl of Oxford fuck? My god, he fucks. Is he well-dressed? He's amazingly well-dressed. Did he kill a man with a sword? Absolutely. Was he the greatest writer in history? This is, as an aristocrat, I hate to sound like one of these feds, but become who you are. Don't become who you aren't. I want to remind audience, because this Which is kind of the subtext of your article that caused such a chimp out, again this is the Hobbes versus Dark Elves one and people chimped out about it. I don't think your article was condescendingly addressed to the red maga world and to the people you call Hobbits and so forth. It was addressed to these kind of, the United States unfortunately has a long tradition

of people like Paul Ryan, an equivalent, and these so-called D.C. conservative intellectual circuit people with bow ties, like you said, who come on. They all shave their pubes. Well, I know what they get up to in their cocktail parties, but they come online and they pretend to be this super traditionalist populist party and it's completely fake and it will never work because they come pre-caricatured and so forth, and I agree with you on that. And I know you have to go soonish. I want, in closing, to ask you an extremely important matter. I hope you can stay past your hard deadline to ask this. You are – For you, Eddie, deadline is soft. Yes, I know in your article there and in some others I've read, you are implicitly asking

the Silicon Valley New Money to fund some kind of cultural art world centered in New York. And I agree with you. I don't live in New York. I can't come back into the United States. But I agree with you. It has to be centered in New York. And by the way, I have—Molbag, with all due respect, you are a wonderful person, but you're not a socialite. You should be writing books. I have a woman—there has to be a woman—who's the right kind of socialite for this, who can set up glamorous parties, and they have to look glamorous. They have to look glamorous. But to look glamorous, there have to be millions of dollars pumped into this scene, as you say. Yes. And millions of dollars are small—are small amounts of money, and— For these people, they would be peanuts. They would be peanuts.

And I've been at these scenes. I've been at these parties in New York. I didn't run these parties. My woman, if she's listening, is everything that you describe. She's amazing. I love her. And she knows how to throw a great party. And she's a natural socialite. And the sense of reading a new aristocracy doesn't start with William Bennett's Book of Virtues. It starts with excellence. And sheer excellence, amazing human beings. And these human beings are out there, but they're like desert flowers. This is a desert that needs water. It needs like, yeah. It's very sad. I wrote my book because I had essentially gone kamikaze and didn't care. And there are other people who are maybe going to write better books than I do, and they don't because their families will starve if they get doxxed.

These millionaires, billionaires you're mentioning, could provide perhaps some kind of insurance for these people. One side point that maybe we discuss on next show, I somewhat maybe disagree with you on the definition of elf, because, do you have a moment, I need to go on a tangent. Right now, I hear, and if I may self-flatter, that a lot of people I didn't know about offline are reading my book, inspired by my book, You mentioned the concept of the longhouse, it's being watered down somewhat. It happens inevitably. I'm sure you hear the same about your work. Our ideas are spreading. It's wonderful. They are. But as they're spreading and becoming more popular, I think you probably also notice, I certainly notice, a lot of retards, mold bugger, picking up on them, and have been

actually since 2017, but it's increasing the number of retards. And so the left, since 1972, you mentioned this article, but probably before, they have had this 100x, 100 times over retards, retards, retards. And so it's, they've been actually, I think, replaced by, frankly, by yokels, if I can say that. I somewhat disagree with you on the definition of an elf. I don't know if anybody's an elf today, Molbag. On the left, you have complete replacement by low-IQ yokels who are sort of aping the old radical left intelligentsia elf persona, you know. And so I don't know if anybody's worth, worthy of the title elf. You have certainly the phenomenon of the ignoble noble. It's not what these people are. It's what they should be, and you know, what they should be, what they should aspire to

and what they do aspire to it's like what makes you you know one of these things is like it's your self-image you know let's end where we started with a you know the blue check intelligentsia you know yes like if you look at the quality of like progressive intellectuals across the 20th 21st century it steadily degrades and you go back to the 30s and you find these people almost admirable in a way even if their their ideas are leading to perdition you're like these are these are amazing people these are these are giants compared to the pygmies of today you look at you know American diplomats of the 1930s sure are they leading the world to perdition you know are they shills for the USSR they are but you know there are sort of giants in the earth in these days and so

you know it's not wrong to say like you know we've talked about two kinds of like degraded elf the elf who thinks he's a hobbit and you know then you point out that even the core, you know, even the Jews, even the Jews have been going downhill. They've degraded in the United States. They've degraded, they've degraded, they've degraded. We do not have the same quality of Jew that we once had. And this is a tragedy. Unlike sort of restoring the quality of these people, you know, it almost transcends right and left this need to restore human quality. And you point out rightly that this was the mission of the first emperors, this was the mission of Octavian Augustus with his Lex oh my god if Papia and he fails but you know what he was right to try and you know we need

to try ourselves we need the power look I know you have to go in closing and actually let's have another show soon because this is very big topics what message I know Silicon Valley people love some of them this is part of the reason I'm hated some of them love me even though I didn't seek them as my audience, they listen to this show. I try to convince them to, because I am in complete agreement with you about what's necessary, what message might you have for them very briefly? Because, you know, they have this libertarian delusion that the only things are worthy that make money. And if they go with that, I guess you and I could make up some reason, some startup, why they could invest in this New York art scene. It's retarded, it's retarded. They need to pump millions of

dollars, moldbag, and you need to understand that that's how you change the culture. Just buy off the fucking left intelligentsia in New York. Just buy them off. Oh, my God. Oh, my God. It would be so easy. It would be, you know, the scene is already so successful without it. Like you can't. I mean, these are immense parties full of amazing people going on, you know, right now. OK, Silicon Valley people, you know, there's something you often say, you know, when to people when pitching, which is, if you want money, ask for advice. If you want advice, ask for money. Really, the mission of the aristocrat throughout time, of the true aristocrat, not the one who wallows in luxury and vice, but the true aristocrat of means, is to turn

money into power, to matter, to leave a mark, to make a difference. But I think it's also It's also true in a way that when you seek power, you will find money. They don't understand how to invest in power. They don't have the metrics for, they sort of think in this kind of 20th century, oh, everything that can be measured is good. And fundamentally, power is not quantitative. Power is aesthetic. Power is felt. Power is who looks up to who. If you turn your money into power, and you basically worry only about power, you also find money. Don't worry about that. Worry about buying power, because your enemies know how to do that, and they will destroy you if they are the only ones doing it. Exactly. Bolbag, that's a succinct way, and I completely agree with what you just said in general and

in particular, and we can continue that next show. I completely agree with you. I've been keeping you. I know you have important state matters and dealers to get to. I do. It was a pleasure to have you on and very good. Heil Pothler, you don't have to say that, but very good. We must talk about Prigozhin sometime. All right, all right. The Michelin century is coming, very good. Great honor, as always, to be on and let's do this again soon. Very good, very good. Until next time, Bap out, yes. Let's rest open house all gun-free gun and your stuff and tell me there's often that fun Tonsion not slots in there Martin eight hours a month And be figured out There is an