Yes, welcome Caribbean rhythms episode 155 and delirious and absolute delirious today from Insomnia. I cannot, I apologize if I start chuckle uncontrollable during the show. I'm trying to relax here. I have put on kumjokudo incense. I was never into scent. I was not a scent fag and this kind of thing, and I found always incense somewhat off-putting. But I was walking in Kyoto, and I walk in Kyoto store kun-yokudo, which claimed to be the oldest incense producers in Japan from the 1500s. Japanese, I don't know if that, yes, actually it's before 1600s, so it's during their period of warring. It's during their on Renaissance, I continue Renaissance series on this show, and I like these periods of wars and upheavals, actually very interesting that it take place in Japan, same time that

it took place in Italy, and there are many similarities where social overturning and bastards without legitimacy, in the traditional social hierarchies, could advance by their own wits, by their own military ambitions to top of Japanese society, including a man who almost became Shogun, Toyotomi Hideyoshi, I think is his name, who was planning to found the first greater Asia co-prosperity sphere and take over Korea, but the Koreans stopped him. Anyway, I was never so much into incense, but I relax now with kungyokudo, and they are very elegant. not like hippie scent, okay, which is overbearing and heavy. I walked into this store and I was amazed, the smells are very elegant and mysterious and very subtle and mostly they use, I think, sandalwood for their basic flavorings.

I mean, their basic incense sticks, but they use real sandalwood, I think, and they add certain other subtle sense and very pleasant. You can buy online, I have no relationship with this company. Next there will be conspiracy theories about that. But if you look up Kungyokudo store, they will ship anywhere in the world, it's not so expensive, $15 or so box will last, I don't know how many sticks there are, but it will last you a long time. So yeah, terrible insomnia this past week, you may notice that I've been slowly returning to regular weekly programming or so, but sabotaged yet again by terrible insomnia, which I try to solve with delirium and in various ways by furious masturbation. Please don't let children listen to this episode, okay, because the first segment, especially

the first segment or two, I will talk the sexual mores of the third world, something I have a, you could say I'm a specialist, I have a doctorate in third world morality. But yes, another way to solve this matter, or not solve, but to wallow in insomnia is to zone out watching Star Trek, Voyager, or Law and Order, with Star Trek Voyager with a strong female captain, you know, predictive programming for Hillary Clinton, but Captain Janeway of the Starship Voyager is, I think, a much better woman than Hillary. And one thing of Voyager you notice is how there are actually mixed race, or what is mixed race is actually mixed species character. And how is this possible? I mean there is half Klingon, half human on Star Trek even with Captain Picard before, but then there are many such others.

Counselor Troi is half Betazed, so she does not inherit the full telepathic abilities of the Betazoid species, but it's just an empath, in other words, can sense the feelings of others. Captain, yes, Captain, this ravenous alien may be angry. Be careful. So, you know, Counsellor Troy is a madmanny. I used to be obsessed with her. I wanted to write letters to stalk her. But yes, how is this possible? I mean, aren't you told by scientific people that even different species on Earth cannot mix? There's a notion that this is how a species is defined, that cross-breedings are possible only within species. So if two animals can breed, they're the same species. If they can't, they're not. But I must tell you, this is not really true, that even any normal fag scientist will concede

there are many organisms defined as different species that actually can breed, whereas there are some that are defined as the same species that for any number of reasons, including functional, they cannot breed. For example, Great Dane with Chihuahua, how would that work? The mechanics of it. I myself have never wanted to feel the pussy of a female dog. I don't know what it is about some people in the third world, you know what they get up to. I'll talk that in a moment. And bestiality is the least of it. But how is it that entirely different species of aliens from different planets can breed on Star Trek? And I think they are sending people a message for decades that different species can cross-breed In the same way, with the Cassie Gifford shooting,

Gabby Gifford, I think, actually Gabby Gifford, the politician from, I don't remember if it's Arizona, but they shot her in the head. And at that time, none of you remember, but they never stopped announcing, it was nonstop in the news, this female politician got shot in the brain and they kept repeating, ritualistically almost, that she had a bullet lodged in the brain, but that she survived, she survived, full recovery, expected to make partial recovery, full recovery, full recovery, but you know how part of her brain removed, but full recovery, they kept repeating this phrase which drove me into a fugue state, speculating that they were trying to mainstream the idea, brain removal therapy, not even just partial lobotomies and so forth, but to introduce the idea of that being

without the brain can function just as well as any other being, which I totally believe, by the way. I saw men without the head the other day behind dumpster downtown. I'm in a completely decrepit city. I have to leave right away. I can't stand this. The insomnia is in, this city is driving me insane. I have to get out of here. I am touched by a filigree being with pink wings at night. Listen, try to focus. Yes that Star Trek was trying to introduce subtly the notion that yes you can breed with different species and in fact you will. That, why not? Because Marquis de Sade casually talks this, Marquis de Sade in his enumerations, 120 days of Sodom and others, he says his libertines bred a goat with a woman or a ram with a woman, a bull with a woman, and then

he says this phrase, and then a monster was born. He says this phrase. This is a very popular idea during his day. I am repeating myself, I'm sorry, but the Abbessiers, one of the philosophers associated with the French Revolution and so forth, he promoted the idea that you could breed different species of apes with humans to create a half-breed, like a half-human, half-animal slave case that would free mankind from the necessity of labor, because the Enlightenment in its beginnings was an attempt to raise up all of mankind to the level of aristocracy rather than to level everyone down to the level of, let's say, the lower middle class. And so getting rid of the necessities of labor, which I, you know, why not? But he wanted to create this half ape, half human species.

I'm sorry I've said this on previous episodes, but this was a popular idea at the time. The crossbreeding of species in Marquis de Sade has it in a different way. And then a monster was born. And I believe in this, in the fact that in the ancient world there are catalogues, teratological occurrences in ancient Greek, you know there's this word teratology, the study or the interest in monsters and in mutants and you know they were seen as portents and not just like a snake was born with two heads, that was very popular, but a woman gave birth to a human cat, hybrid and many other such things and there are ancient catalogues of this is what But I'm telling you, and I believe in this, I think mutants exist. But anyway, look, another way I deal with insomnia, besides Star Trek, I went to some

nightclub again. I have to tell you, Orlan's screed party as such. I notice again the Iranian phenomenon, which is that Iranian guys, and you have, it's something they actually share with that whole hairy races from that area. The Armenians and Kurds, God forgive me for saying the name of these people, but the Kurds even, as well as the Azeris, and I know a Persian Jew from Los Angeles just like this too. He emphasized to me, oh, I'm not very picky, you know, because we were talking about grills. And whenever you see gentlemens from that side of the world, that particular area, but especially Iranians, when they go out, it's a matter of honor, you know, to go home with a girl. It's not just, you know, all men might have it as a goal for the night or would be disappointed,

course if they set out to but didn't work but no here it's inconceivable and a matter of honor and of like achievement having to do with their identity. If they'd come back without a girl at the end of the night they'd be mortified in front of themselves. So you know what happens of course is that as the night goes on if they don't succeed they get more and more desperate and then usually what happens end of 5 a.m. they end up with a fat hog, whatever fat hog they get their hands on, who will, you know, you know they do it. It's just a matter of total loss of self-respect for them if they don't. And this explains also Roush, you know, this poster Roush, who had, I like him, I'm not actually even attacking him now, I like this quality about him.

He turned it into a literary career of sorts, he had a forum, many writings, YouTube on pick up artists abroad. That was his specialty. Friends with artists, I think. But you know the series of books that he has since disowned because he's become a religion fag. But it was bang Colombia, bang Denmark, and by the way, that was the most difficult, bang Denmark. The Danish girls are... Most other women in the world don't necessarily want you to discuss politics with them or to agree with them. In fact, they might even want you to push back and challenge them in an argument. So I hear, I don't know, I don't get into that with women, but the Danish girls apparently will chimp out if you contradict them. So you have to just be a yes man to them. That's how you do in Denmark, okay?

But that type of series, and he's half Armenian-Iranian or something, half Armenian half Persian or or Turcoloid, I don't know which, but he gave this up, unfortunately, and he found religion, you know, which he self-canceled through this, I suppose. It disappeared. Where is he? I don't want to get into this now. In 2012, 2013, he and Hart East and the good red pill typewriters, of which a few remain, Rollo Tomasi, I think, but you don't, the red line guy, is that Tomasi or is that Rivelino? But they were great on Twitter, and they're one of the reasons me and my friends decided to go on Twitter in the first place, but somehow, both Hardis and Roush gave this up, to embrace, on one hand, religion, Roush, and on the other hand, Hardis had a peppering

of white nationalism-type political posts, and that's mostly what he's become, I hear, and he's on gab, I don't know why he doesn't come back to Twitter now, but they should have each written some funny book or made some funny documentary, because they were very good at this, at writing and promoting these views that at the time were not widely known. And Lena Dunham in the show Girls, and just one example of how artiste ideas were mainstreamed, his language, you know, even. But these two, artiste and ruches, basically self-immulated. They made themselves completely irrelevant by now. I don't want to comment on this in detail on this episode, on the progressive decrepitude of the right, right, okay, so the so-called

dissident spheres, and how good posters and potentially good writers and people capable of satirizing the left have either disappeared or self-immolated, and meanwhile we're being flooded by myriad retards, who instead of mocking the pussified left, the left being They're all brown-noses for olds. They're all the attendants of stuffed shirts. They've made themselves such easy targets, opened themselves up to mockery. But no, instead it's all pile-driving about demons in your iPhone, and back to the stock conspiracy theories of decades ago about JFK and playing David Duke on Twitter instead of TV, and black gay models for Balenciaga doing secret hand gestures, you know, this kind. Alex Jones, child blood drinking, interdimensional elves, rituals, this kind of thing.

You know, the right wing minstrel show playing once again the retarded patsy from a leftist Hollywood production. How to save, how to save the dying left, it's pathetic, but I don't want to comment on this in detail. There is one particular talking point that actually has been spread on both the right and the left, which is that degeneracy, this is what I want to talk, this talking point that degeneracy, they keep using this word, degenerate. Of course, degenerate means something, they don't know the original meaning of the word, which you find in The Count of Gobineau, the steampunk father of racism, who defines the degeneracy of a culture in terms of the decreasing quality of the blood of that people. To me, a degenerate scene is when you're walking in a city

that you knew one time in the past have been vital and full of beautiful people and full of life and everybody's dirty and haggard looking and full of olds and cripples and homeless to me that's degeneracy it's not what people say that god's watching you because you jerk off and this but in it's a misuse of the word to mean both loose sexual morals ranging anywhere from sluttiness to i guess orgies or gay bathhouse or other gay sex, I'm saying the word, the way the word is used now so much on the so-called right or dissident spheres, right, it's degeneracy, right? Or also these people who use it to just mean sluttiness in its varieties, they also extend it to mean the gay identity, the transsexual identity movements, because under this way

of thinking, sexual identity proliferation, where there are, excuse me, where there's supposedly 40 or 50 genders now, you know, stretching from non-binary to asexual, gender fluid furry to Elena Kagan. But this way of thinking connects this phenomenon to that of, say, a girl, a thot, right, a thot who likes to fuck around, has a high body count, wears Lululemon or such things. This way of thinking on the right, which is an extension of the social conservative, the old religious right, but large parts actually of the so-called dissident left have picked up this same way of thinking too. They connect these two phenomenon of sluttiness and gender identity, gender movements, which I think, by the way, it's totally wrong to put these two things together, but I'll get to that in a moment.

Anyway, this way of thinking connects these things that supposedly all fall under the category of hypersexualization or sexual immorality and says that this is an especially Western phenomenon that it's caused or it's supported by the United States and the Anglo world in particular that it is an important element of American imperialism around the world as America interferes in other countries either directly using threats to force them to liberalize laws regarding gays or other sexual identities or women's rights which again this way of thinking connect to the matter of sexual excess or immorality I mean they connect women's right and feminism to it too I forgot to mention that but anyway yes that this is a phenomenon of neoliberal capital or capitalism as it seeks to

multiply desires and even consumer identities you see that it's rather vague the two things are mixed up but the commodification of sexuality you may have heard this phrase they use that commodification of sexuality under the power of neoliberal capital as a tool, maybe the main tool or even the engine of the American NATO and Anglo-imperialism of our day, which can then be called GAE, G-A-E, the Gay American Empire. You've seen this phrase, although not everyone who uses this acronym casually believes in everything or even most of what I've just said necessarily. I've never used that acronym by the way, I prefer GNC because while there's some truth to the picture I just sketched, as there must always be some truth to complex of ideas like this that become common memes.

For example, America does intervene in the Balkans to force people in Belgrade to host gay pride parade. That was Hillary Clinton's dream that was made Madeleine Albright dream to attend the gay pride parade there, or similarly all over East Europe, less so in Africa, but they still meddle in Africa in the same way. And you'll note that they don't meddle at all in this regard in the Gulf States, I think, and in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. Isn't that interesting, though? They don't. What is up with that, Mr. Dugin? I forgot that in the Duginist scheme of the world, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States are in the American Atlantic sphere, maybe, so it's complicated, you see. But leaving aside the geopolitical – you know, I hate this word, geopolitical, it's

self-important geopolitical commentator checking in, but quite aside from the Duganist orientations, there are many people of that bent, let's say, who have this opinion, who think the West is responsible for this package deal of sexual immorality, also in political gender confusion, or social gender confusion. I think it's wrong in so many ways this, but yes, it's really a Duganist idea, right, Alexander Dugan. And the assumption behind this, quite aside from the false connection that's made between sexual looseness, immorality, and on the other hand, transgender and gender identity movement. But the false assumption behind it is the existence of an opposite and supposedly more virtuous non-degenerate default then that is converted by this, a natural state of things

before this or that would exist without this imperial economic coercion. And what is this? I mean, what it looks, this alternative that's being destroyed here, right? is saying the peoples of the world are poor, hardworking, sexually upright, modest, salt of the earth folk, you know? They're pious, simple folk with no time for this urbanized, cosmopolitan, guff degeneracy, you know? They're temperate people, traditional community family values that even if they differ maybe according to various traditions, they're fundamentally being aggressed, right? The family is desubstantialized spiritual traumatization by Anglo neoliberal capital atomizing you dehumanizing you, you know, but let's look at this for a moment.

A lot of this, but by the way, a lot of this is the internet being opened up to a bunch of resentful brown and base guys, some girls too, but mostly guys of this POC or borderline POC who are mad that white girls won't fuck them. So they go around saying, oh your women are all whores, your son will become a transsexual, you know the type, and oh I'm a real dissident, if you don't listen to me and embrace this, my uncle had a manual, a religious manual for how you're supposed to wipe your ass, if you don't follow that, your sister will become a whore, you know this type, but they see porn, online porn, and they see a few tweets from libtards, and they imagine it's the accurate representation of life in the West, or they hear about polyamory in Silizog Valley or such thing.

But that's quite aside from the communists, the socialists, the commies, the constipated priestly closet cases also, others who simply dislike America and want to blame it for this. Supposedly for the misery of the third world and for supposedly introducing or bullying other peoples with the gay thing and with sexual immorality of various other kinds. Not that America does not have its own considerable problems that I've talked many times of a different type, but consider for a moment these facts about the salt of the earth from the third world. Let's look at a second at sexual morality in the third world. Let's take the Muslim world to begin with because they're so self-righteous and puff themselves up so much when it comes to this, right? First of all, in traditional Islam,

you have a class of women called al-amma, if I'm pronouncing that right, they'd be translated I think concubines, something like that, but they're not, don't imagine Duke Leto Atreides' concubine or, you know, the concubine of an ancient, fancy Hellenistic tyrant. They are Hellenistic king, excuse me, but they're love slaves, okay, basically they're public in the sense that they're supposed to walk around in public naked or bare-breasted and you can touch them and it's not a sin, fondling their breasts is considered as inert as touching a wall. I personally don't have so much of a problem with this by the way, it's understandable that as Islam began, so Islam became the way all biblical religions become a vehicle for the Ned Flanders bio-type, I've talked this before, excuse me.

But Islam began, is maybe respectable in its beginnings, it began as bands of young warrior companions of the prophet, as a gang, a collection of gangs essentially. And the society dominated by men like that would have this kind of public institution as the al-amma type so-called concubines, why not? But whether you are a traditionalist social conservative, or you're in full mode where you think hypersexualization or sexual impropriety or lust, public nudity is somehow the result of American or capitalist neoliberal, fuck I hate that word neoliberal, but if you think it's meddling on behalf of that, I don't know how you deal with this, you know, let alone with more ancient institutions like the harem. But let's leave aside this for a moment and deal with the Muslim world as it is now.

And as it is now, it's a haven for boy sex. Always was actually, but very much still is. The type of love slaves I describe have mostly disappeared, but not the boy sex. It's been known as a welcoming place for Western men into boy sex for a long time actually, and still is. Most have heard of the bacha bazi by now, the dancing boy prostitutes of Afghanistan or of the fact that in that country, American and British soldiers would often be approached by the local men to try to paint their toenails, dance with them, whatever, but that's very common all over the Gulf States especially. It's been so for a long time. Schopenhauer mentions that medieval Arabic love poetry women might as well not even exist. And William Burroughs, you may know of him, but he's not really only Western type of gay

who travel for boy sex, in his case, to Morocco. popular destination for this, but again he's not the only one. The whole Maghreb in Morocco and such place have been known in modern world I'm saying for a hundred years or more as a popular destination for boy sex. And there was this disgusting Arab lecture, right, an Arab man touches you, okay, and he tried to touch my thigh. I think I must have been 18 years old because I frequented the chess tables in a major city and he was hanging out around there too and this was an old man okay like old late 60s I think I don't know and I thought I was naive I thought he was being friendly to me and he tried to tell me to become a rent boy with stories you know in full public there are people around we were playing chess

this is outdoors and he made stories about how all of his friends did it in Saudi Arabia oh no they all did it yeah you know you should charge you know they told me they charge three hundred dollars so that's what they would charge in the United States and that it was It's perfectly normal there and everything else I've heard about this region checks out that that's the attitude there as an issue. Also if you're a blonde Western guy especially, they're very much into that. So if you travel to an open air market, as a tourist I'm saying in Turkey countryside or Turkey's second tier cities or in Syria or such and you'll be given the rapes there nonstop and you'll be hit on and so on. People say Lawrence of Arabia lied about being raped by Turkish soldiers, but I don't think

he lied, even if he did, it's entirely what happens in that area. Napoleon's soldiers were raped in Egypt and he told, you know, they came to complain to him and he says, well, you're alive, aren't you? What are you complaining about? Move on. He tells that story about Napoleon, but it happened all over that area and it still happens. It's not just rape, it's just a rapey vibe all over Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and so forth. Watch Midnight Express, I think it's called. So I don't think Lawrence of Arabia lied. I think the Turkish officers raped him to prove that England was beta, you know. But why did it become common knowledge about, let's say, British pedophiles, pedos, that you travel to Morocco, for example, for boy sex, because it was acceptable and easy there,

not easy and it was dangerous and illegal in England actually until recently and I think the pedal variety probably still is, but not in the Muslim world. And yes, everyone knows about the English boarding schools and such, but I'd say that's not the same by the way, both in the practices that were frequent, the fact that I don't think Sodom used widely practiced in the boarding school, there were other things practiced. But the fact that it was a temporary thing, they engaged in only as adolescents, whereas As a grown man, I'm saying it was not possible to find this in England, and so English pedos had to travel to other locations around the world where it was acceptable, you see, and that's the Arab Muslim world or certain equatorial places also and such I'll get to in a moment.

But yes, they don't have gay identity in Iran, for example, so they can get away with saying there are no gays here, you know, which Ahmadinejad, Ahmadinejad, he claims that, but he was the leader of Iran, some of you are maybe zoomers don't remember, but I read you a comment. I don't know if this is from Steve Saylor's blog. This is funny. I don't know if it is from blog comments on Steve Saylor blog. I'm not saying Steve Saylor wrote this, that would be funny. Some commenter, I think from ONCE or something like that. Iranian He says, I think you are a bunch of idiots trying to judge everything with your nonsensical mindset. I am a man and have fucked boys in Iran when I was in high school. They were supposedly gay and we used to call them sissy boys. So will that make me gay? No.

I did that because girls were not accessible. Also at a younger age, fucking somebody meant proving your superiority. Even now I would happily fuck you MF to show who has the upper hand. But this sort of affairs would mostly happen between bullies and sissies. The rest 90% of children were immune of such activities. Those of us who did such things a couple of times also gave up doing so as we became more mature. I think you are out of your mind if you think 30% of men are gay and those unmarried are involved with other men. You come up with such ideas only because your fucked up society is so obsessed with gays, gayness, gay rights, etc. As Ahmadinejad said, we don't have gays in Iran, but we are happy to export our sissy

boys to your fucked up societies, I am sure you will enjoy their company since you new generation nurdish western nerds have turned gays yourself. Agree? Disagree? Etc. Okay, like that. Read Richard Burton's The Sotadic Zone. Traditional Japan, I see on a previous show regarding a previous episode where I discuss geishas. These are the courtesans which is high-priced fancy prostitutes with special skills, and the important role they played in Japanese society, similar ancient courtesans played superstar role in Greek and Hellenistic society. Also at times oppressive role where the king Ptolemy would impose confiscatory taxation so his geisha could have very fancy soap and so forth. But I think I made a mistake when I told you that it was the samurai warrior class who

frequented the geishas in Japan. I don't think it was. I was corrected in that by a friend, Masaki. He told me, the samurai, again, most of their love poetry is about boys. And I'm not saying this to condemn it, by the way, but to contradict the people who claim that these things are introduced somehow by neoliberal modernity or America. Let's look at sub-Saharan Africa for a moment. This is a place that disingenuous, stuffed shirt, social conservatives, the integralists, you know the type, they love Cardinal Serra and they think because of Cardinal Serra that's their excuse for salivating about sub-Saharan Africa, I think it's something different from that. It's too dark, let me not get into what the goateed integralists are into Africa about.

Let me not get into the possible question of their motives, I'll just say how wrong they are. Once again, the argument that sub-Saharan Africa is some sexually conservative place, complete false. I don't know how. It's something based on a vibe, a kind of vibe, vague impression. It's not an argument. It's not based on any fact that sub-Saharan... I can't believe I have to say this. A sexually moral or chaste place? Is that the argument for sub-Saharan Africa? Really? So what is the basis of it, that they don't like gays or they say they don't? Yes, they don't like gays in the same sense as the Iranian fag I just read for you. But homosexuality is rampant throughout Africa, of course, which is why Guy Tandugas, patient

zero right, super-spreader of HIV in the Western world, I think a flight attendant. But he had to go to like Equatorial Guinea, I think. He wanted to get railed by 10, 20 men at a time. And in general, these are places that have long been used for the same purposes by a a different type of homo from the West, right? So depending on your tastes, you'd go to Morocco for one thing, you'd go to Gabon for another thing. Look at the rate of HIV in Africa, okay? How do people come to believe nonsense like sexual immorality was introduced to Africa from the West? Of course, when you look at HIV rates there, of course, the same people will tell you HIV was engineered by neoliberal white men or the Nazis or the Jews or other such thing to wipe out

the salt of the earth Africans, who are all otherwise chased, you know? It's amazing. Do you know that when you introduce Islam into a traditional society in Africa, which was previously animist, actually false paternity rates rise under Islam. In other words, Islam and Christianity are hard core Christianity, are liberalizing elements in Africa, their traditional animist religion has to literally lock up their women, imprison them during ovulation and so on. I don't want to get into it right now, but by the way, I'm aware HIV rates are inflated in Africa, governments that do it to get foreign aid, but not at these rates. They're still very much higher than anywhere else. That's proven also because there are many other sexually transmitted diseases rampant there besides HIV.

And no, it's not all from straight sex. It can't be. Through which it's very hard to transmit HIV. I hear now that one of these Dork Web people is challenging the HIV causes AIDS hypothesis. Yes, that's very interesting. I'd just like to say HIV is not a sexually transmitted disease. There is a particular definition of what a sexually transmitted disease is. A sexually transmitted disease passes easily from man to woman and woman to man. It doesn't just pass in one direction, you see. Whereas HIV, it's almost impossible to get it from a woman because it can be passed through intercourse of course, but so can quite a few other diseases that are not defined as STDs. No, HIV is something else. It's not an STD, but let me have future episode on this.

Would you like me to try to invite Peter Duesberg on this show? All the men that are engaging in ass-fucking each other and such, they're homos, or should I say, some is transmitted actually through heterosexual sex in Africa more than in other places. In other places, it's almost not at all through heterosexual sex. But in Africa, there is some percentage of it through straight sex, so-called heterosexual sex, right, because charming, right, there is a charming traditional practice in Africa, it's called dry sex. sex. To make the, I guess maybe African pussies are too loose or wet or something, so to increase friction there are these dry herb, like plant herb concoctions that are introduced into

the vagina to increase friction during intercourse, you see. But you know, it's like introducing a sheet of sandpaper, right? But this obviously causes terror, trauma that can increase likelihood of transmission of any number of things and other infections and so forth. So, yes, it's By the way, this is another traditional practice that God forbid it should be left behind because of the alienating, atomizing neoliberal modernity influence. So in the United States, among the black community, which also has enormously elevated rates of syphilis, all other STDs, HIV too among the black community, which is in its own way captive to ideas very much like what I'm criticizing here. In other words, blacks in the United States sound very much like the case I am criticising here.

We are the salt of the earth and we're virtuous, but the man has destroyed our communities with this new-fangled modernity, liberalism, you know, it's actually a variety of the arguments from the ordeal of civility by Kadehi. But quite aside from the promiscuity of the black women, the out of wedlock births in that community and so on, which everyone knows about, but the men are all faggots and will do literally anything for money. So on one hand you have the myth presented by Ashk Hollywood and similar types about black masculinity and so on, which however black men are very insecure and brittle about their masculinity, but actually in reality they all suck dick and get fucked in the ass for nominal payments.

Same thing happens in the third world by the way, I have not spent too much time in Africa myself but I can't imagine it's different. Hispanics since I'm on this, if this needs to be repeated, Hispanics in the United States have out of wedlock birth rates and so on other similar statistics of that type similar to blacks, which is why the GOP consultant's dream of the natural Hispanic conservative is so stupid. A similar impetus behind that, by the way, the old social conservative's fixation on the family values Hispanics that would supposedly be a corrective and a tonic for liberal Anglo culture. Excuse me. It's a discourse that's only slightly changed now, you know. They used to blame Sam Huntington and to say that the reason that Huntington was skeptical

of Hispanic immigration and his clash of civilizations argument was because he was an Anglo liberal and wanted to stop the natural progression of America toward the conservative consensus with the help of the family values Mexican, and that the good neo-con and Catholic social conservative intellectuals would bring the Catholic Mexican family values to the United States. And this argument has only slightly changed now among a certain type of conservative and so-called dissident type person, but I will not address this now, they don't say exactly this but they say something very similar and the whole compact magazine and so-called dissident post-liberal crowd, I'm telling you believe something very much like this in different

words and especially with fixation on the tranny thing to which I'll get in a moment but by the way, go to any gay club in a mixed country, okay, a country that has different races, different peoples, whether it's America or Panama or some other and you'll see, well Well, Panama, of course, but you'll see this proportionally minorities. Disproportionately, you'll see minorities, POC, okay? In the United States also, the statistics bear this out. POC are disproportionately identifying as people of color are disproportionately gay or transgender. In most surveys, this is true. But yes, many black guys will do gay stuff for a rather small amount of money. And I'm not talking about, oh, get your dick sucked for money. They will suck dick. gets fucked in the ass for money, very little money.

And many get punked out in jail, which is why Tariq Nasheed, right, the black red pill and masculinity, and he's an Afro-Saxon, he's an Afro-Saxon nationalist, right? And to us it seems embarrassing and ridiculous that he would talk about buck-breaking so much, but he does it because it's a major problem in his community. And he's one of the very few who is addressing it, but it's a big thing in Africa too. And as for the women in Africa, I've had friends whose tastes ran that way, fuck their way through, right like the size, like a sharp size cuts through the thick sugar cane reeds early in the dewy morning on a tropical plantation in Recife or Martinique, and the reeds fall right and left around the workman's steady wrist in the wet sun morning air.

So just like this, these friends fuck their way through the long-legged girls of Africa, right and left. Yeah, do you enjoy my Homeric facsimile? But African girls can be pretty, unlike American shiboons, which Gobineau knew this, right? I mean, some are very hot, some of the African women, a lot of Gobineau pessimism regarding race mixing is because many French men, him included, could not resist the chance of the mulattas and such. But let me explain to you the men I've known, I have a photo of a good friend with twins. He's got hot twins in Malawi. I'll post this photo with his permission, I'll block out his face. But no offense to him, he will agree with what I'm about to say though. He's not Dolph Lundgren, he's not Pietro Bozzelli, he's not a pick-up artist expert

either, has no interest in game. He's a neurotic Jew. I have another friend who I tried having on this show but he's fried his brain with medication I'll try again in the future because he's so entertaining when he's on his game. But Owen, the most popular man on Afro introductions, who tells me he's the most popular playboy now in Nairobi, Kenya, Nairobi, who emphasizes that he doesn't pay the women. But he's okay. He's basically, he must be 50 years old or over and he's completely mentally ill, you see. I'm not saying this, by the way, to attack these men or even to attack the African women because I like sluts, but it's not like the women that are very, they're not restrained or prim or such. This is a complete lie. They never were. It's always been known what

they were. You know, it's funny that it used to be a stock leftist line that it was capitalism and its rigid ways and the demands of corporate life and maybe even the ultimately the puritan Protestant roots of capitalism that made the West and capitalist society in general too restrained, too prudish. That's an old leftist But that narrative has now been turned on its head by the latest wholesome dissident critics of America the pro-socialist ones especially and I know for a fact that they sell complete garbage also about the East block and become and Communism by the way and the line goes that they may have been leftist in the East block But they were not morally degenerate like the consumerist West or like the new left in the West and okay

Let me leave the detailed discussion of this for another time because I'm talking about the third world now But just to quickly touch on it. It's nonsense. You look at the abortion rates in Africa I mean in in Russia and in the East Bloc and you look at HIV rates also in Russia and other STDs and the sexual culture also in East Bloc was actually more liberalized and looser than in the West even leaving aside particular cases like for example Belgrade and Bucharest and Bucharest had a long-running pickup artist culture not introduced from the West but leaving that special case aside if you look at this Netflix show just to give you a small example but very telling example you watch this Netflix show I think it's called Cleo right and at one point there's an offhand

reference by a West German man who assumes that this main character is a slut because that's what's known about East German women right everyone knew this stereotype about them that they're sluts and it's accurate and that's That's communist era sexual morality and practices. The declarations of the state to moral virtue notwithstanding. And what other entertainment do you expect from people there to have? They were bored, of course. The only thing they did was fuck around. Russian women, okay, basically all the East Bloc girls, but Russian women especially. I don't want to get into this now. East Germany, I believe, had at least by the 1980s declarations of support for gays and so forth. Similar to how Julius Malema, the white genocide GNC advocate from South Africa, he also supports

LGBT. There was just this beautiful speech by him just now supporting LGBT and he's precisely one of these African nationalist types that's promoted by the people I'm criticizing on this segment. Oh, they are resisting the dehumanization of Western capital, introducing notions of of sexual slutiness, they don't use the word slutiness, but sexual immorality in LGBT and that he is giving a speech in support of LGBT just now, their ally in the African continent, because it's just part of the leftist program, claims to the contrary from leftist populists notwithstanding. But I'm talking about the third world, yes, the women of Africa are loose, African and Arab men are gay, end of story. By the way, Arab women, I think, are also loose.

I have a friend who recently, it's not in their own countries necessarily because they're being watched all the time, but you go to Malaysia, you go to Singapore, Thailand, and there are traveling Arabs in the hotels there, and you know, a couple of people I know who don't know each other have had the same experience, you're in an elevator, and a virtuous Muslimah couple, the woman covered in a burka sheet with only the eyes showing, and she will eye-fuck you right in front of her husband. Her husband will do it as well and you know there's this vibe that they expect, okay? There's no way to measure this but if you've seen it, you've seen it. I said in my own book Arabs and Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews who are just Jewish Arabs, they become animals without religion, okay?

But what's religion, right? I mean to the average man, spiritual content means nothing. It's actually just rules, laws, regulations. It's being watched. So if they think they can get away with it, they do. What about transgenderism? I find it interesting that Thailand, which is a traditionalist Buddhist country, is a long tradition of transsexualism. Similar, Brazil, which is or was a traditionalist, not Buddhist, but you had to fend off or even physically push trannies away from you on the street 20 years ago. Of course, it's proliferated now, but Brazil had trannies for a long time. It's a Catholic country. It used to be a traditionalist Catholic country. Quite before the integralists, the DC so-called comfort intellectuals, that's something else.

But before the transsexual craze in the West, and of course the tranny tradition in this communitarian traditionalist Catholic country of Brazil, it's been there for a long time. quite aside from the point I'm making of this episode, I'm very curious about this. Why Thailand and Brazil cases? Where they got the tranny culture from and how? In the case of Brazil, it's funny. It existed for a long time in Argentina too, by the way. Argentina much in the news now. There's a place called the Rosedal. It's in the parks. At night, it's a very well-known gathering spot of transsexuals. And I assume that's being done for some decade Again, preceding the transsexual craze in the United States and in West Europe. And I don't know where they got that from in Argentina either.

It's not as big part of a culture as in Brazil and Thailand, but definitely it's there. But in Brazil, it's completely apocalyptic. For decades, you'd see occasional reports in the past of a tranny dying because he injected industrial grade silicon into his chest, right? apocalyptic Mad Max, sorry to repeat myself if I've said this before, but governors in the southern states of Brazil building runways for UFOs and many such things. I don't know, is it the same thing, the tranny thing, is that where it comes from? But no, the providence of all this is not from the West is my point or from so-called capitalism. By the way, the modern tranny phenomenon in the West comes from social democrat Scandinavia.

That's where its precedents were, especially in Denmark, which introduced it as a measure of empathy and compassion for marginalised individuals as such, and that's where it's been directly imported from. The whole – I'm tired of this – the whole World Economic Forum, the whole case that the World Economic Forum or the IMF is coercing virtuous salt of the earth population into its demonic hedonistic sexual programme. What is this stupidity? zero of Western concern with gender or with gay rights, and also with feminism, has anything to do, zero has anything to do with lust, lustfulness, or hypersexualization. That's not where Beyond Women comes from. Nor does the low birth rate in developed world come from lustfulness.

Nor would this problem be solved by teachings of chastity or by religious instruction or religious government. In fact, it might even make it worse. I would say it actually comes from a lack of lust. But you basically have religious theocratic government in Iran with the morality police and you see the results I just read for you, but they can't even get the birth rate up. It's below replacement rate. They have theocratic government. But yes, Trani is in Thailand and Brazil. And on top of it, almost all Latino countries, by the way, there's a similarly easy sodomitical hobby on the side if you want to go there and look for that. You see them often done as gay for pay, although again the amounts are often just nominal, the amounts demanded for, you know.

But yes, family values Mexicans, you know, family values gang rape. But that's another thing, you know, the worst of it all is the incest, which I did not discuss in the Twitter thread that where I spoke about such things already more briefly. But this is all, you know, everything I've said so far, the gay thing, the tranny thing, walking a sheep. It can be funny or whatever, but the incest thing is tragic. A professor I forget where, but I'm saying a real statistician and geneticist who publishes studies on variety of it. Not an internet right-winger, if you want to dismiss what I'm about to say, but the professor somewhere mentioned that his team tried to publish a study showing 6,000 times greater incidence of father-daughter incest among a certain population in Scotland,

But that the bioethics committee would not allow this study to be published because the right wing might make use of it, okay? That's scientific ethics for you. But you heard right, 6,000 times greater among, and of course it must be the Pakistanis. Please Mr. Tate, tell me this. Is this the cool and manly sexual morality that Western boys should learn from Islam? The manly virtues of living in a shithole slum shack and fucking a monster into your your daughter. That's the thing, you know, about squalor that gets unsaid. And I didn't fill out all the details in my book when it comes to the longhouse lifestyle and communal traditional multigenerational family living, which is extolled now by idiotic traditionalists.

But that kind of thing isn't just among Pakistanis. I guess that it's in most so-called traditional societies in multigenerational households and other places where people live like rats on top of each other in hovels. It's the incest too, okay? That's another feature of the communal longhouse life, the trad, non-Western, pre-modern life. So yes, not all of them, but a lot. And I guess almost all the ones that live in slums and you know the slum, the favela really is the default state of mankind. The slum where the uncle fills up your ass and father might rape daughters before self-righteously taking her to the cliterectomy specialist. A charming way of life, you know, this is what I'm telling you, America, England and

especially the left write a lot of problems, much to criticise, but when you criticise it the wrong way in the name of lies or in the name of ugly, stupid things that you don't know about and you don't understand, this whole unpleasantness will cause an inevitable reaction. There are entirely too many self-righteous retards among us now. I prescribe for them a week in a Gambia slum to correct their impressions. This is the cure. Why don't you go there and see for yourself? Okay, I will be right back. Here are the 10th, the Medici Pope from 1513 to 1521 in the Forum at Rome during a time of the plague, he offered up a bull, offered up sacrifice, sacrificed the bull with sullen pagan rites. Hecatombs of bull offered up in Rome yet again. And he was a genuinely

pious man. He was not Cesare Borgia or Malatesta. And this you can begin to see as the contradictions and wonders of the Renaissance when it comes to religion, which I talk again on this segment very short on this and the next one only as introduction because this matter of religion in the Renaissance could be object of study of lifetime for a scholar or more than one. Oh what a scholar sorry I can't help myself but yes no simple formula exists to capture what happened to religion in the Renaissance because it's not enough to say paganism overtook Christianity or or secularism or rationalist secularism was born and triumphed among the learned, or that the dogmatism of the Middle Ages was rejected. Yes, the Middle Ages mindset was overturned, but it's not true.

Only a particular type of constipated fanatic would therefore say that that means automatically that irreligion or heresy rules the day. There were many very religious, genuinely so religious men during this time. But yes, it's not okay to say the dogmatism of Middle Ages was rejected in favor of free inquiry. This would be the naive line of, let's say, a wiggish rationalist or a formal atheist in our day. Or on the opposite side, there are those who want to claim a continuity with the Middle Ages. There is this also, you know, that the Renaissance did not really happen, that nothing changed in regard to religion. I just want a brief sketch now how both for the people and for the learned and the nobility actually everything was different.

And both in different ways exhibited very colorful contradiction mix of devout Christianity, even fanaticism at times, combined with showy and near blasphemous paganism and also colorful and often blasphemous skepticism that actually did not have very much similarity to what you know now, to the dogmatic, self-satisfied skepticism you see in dim writers like Sam Harris or Chris Hitchens. I do like Chris Hitchens as a writer, but that type of dogmatic, rationalist atheism or Pinker or Harari, others like that, you know, the Reddit, is just, I think, another form of medieval dogmatic type. And I really think it's a cover for their moralism, and that what happened in Italy in the Renaissance as a result of vital and very different type of aristocratic individualism

was the turning of religion and also skepticism into highly personal and subjective, I don't like this term too much, but highly personal forms, whereas they did in many individual cases and informally and often beautifully and poetically what the German Reformation did theologically. This at least is a parallel that Jacob Burhard draws a few times. I will comment on this briefly later because maybe it's his view, yet maybe he does not go far enough, I think. But as for the people, in terms of paganism, as with the sacrifice of the bull by Pope Leo X, they exhibited paganism at times that was not even syncretized with Catholicism. It was just straight-up paganism. Right now, as I record, this is February 19th, and on February 18th, for example, they used

to present food offerings on February 18 because this week, February 14th to February 21, in ancient times was the Roman feast of Pheralia, where you honor dead ancestors. You do that now, and you appease their ghosts with food offerings. And on February 18th, the people of Rome and other parts of Italy would offer, would make these offerings, and technically it's four days before some major Catholic day. I forget which, I think it's the chair of St. Peter's something, but it's coinciding with Feraglia. But the food offerings, as far as I know, did not actually have even this justification. As you might find, right there are midsummer day celebrations now still all over Europe. Presumably it's called St. John's Day.

So in many cases everyone knows Christianity quite wisely syncretized with paganism. It took over pagan holidays. But I'm saying in Italy there were straight-up pagan holdovers from ancient times that were not even justified with a fig leaf in Christian manner or that this is the feast of such and such a saint, you know. And right now many of you, some of you maybe have celebrated Carnaval or Mardi Gras which what it means. It literally comes from carnaval, like a naval carriage in which a showboat or boat on wheels procession through streets. This was also inherited from processions of Greco-Roman paganism. They would take a boat, put various revelers in it, you know, this devised boat pagan procession of revelers. That's why it's called carnaval.

And yes, in this case, it was given a Christian interpretation, but I'm saying in Italy, there were numerous other pagan practices, cults, and holdovers that were always understood to be part of religious and customary practice, but that were never fully syncretized with Christianity or at times only very, very loosely so. And during the Renaissance, some were resurrected, such as animal sacrifice in the forum and such, they were not only role-playing. It was maybe continuous tradition. But they saw no contradictions between that and the Christian religion. People in general, I think, have an easy time living with contradictions and not feeling it to be a problem. I think they're right to do so. In the same way, Japan, Buddhism, and Shinto, it's not even that they're syncretized,

but every Buddhist temple also has small Shinto native animist shrine to this or that. And it's generally in Japanese history, the people felt no need to justify this or did not see it as a different thing. They are separate, but they are the same. One is a Shinto thing, one is a Buddhist thing. They go together. It's religion, it's a cult, it's matters of the spirit, you know, it's spiritual practice. They didn't really think about it so carefully as to say, oh, that is our native animist practice and that is the Buddhist one we imported from China. It didn't occur to them in that manner. And aside from this, the people through Renaissance, just to emphasize, and it's not syncretism either. In other words, the Shintoism was not understood in Buddhist way, nor was

the Buddhism necessarily understood in Shinto way. It's just they are together, but they're different and they're not together, you know, it's ambiguous and I think similar something was going on with paganism, holdover, and Christianity in Italy in particular. Italy was special, it had kept things from the ancient world. Probably the rest of Europe had also, but the difference is that the paganism of let's say North Europe had not already been in touch with Christianity in antiquity. So that Christianity, when introduced to North Europe and other areas of that type, was actually something from outside. In Rome, of course, it was from outside too, but it was much older, it wasn't felt in the same way to be, you see, is a kind of vagueness both held over from antiquity, as

it were, in Italy. Ancient spiritual practices, ancient rites. And aside from this, the people through the Renaissance, though continue to be extremely devout, aside from their pagan holidays and pagan rites and offerings, they continue to be very devout in an Orthodox Christian sense Catholic I mean but you know I'm using Orthodox in the other sense now especially they were fanatically devoted to the relics of saints so I will read for you so you can understand maybe flavor of the period with a mixture of pride and pious or Michaela he's talking about Michaela Savonarola a different Savonarola than the Florentine one A historian, yes, I think from Padua, am I right? Yes. With a mixture of pride and pious awe, Michela tells how in times of great danger the saints

were heard to sigh at night along the streets of the city, how the hair and nails on the corpse of a holy nun in Santa Chiara kept growing, how the same corpse, when any disaster impended, would make noise and raise its arms. When he describes the chapel of Saint Anthony in the Santo, the author loses himself in ejaculations and fantastic dreams. In Milan, the people, at least the people, showed a fanatical devotion to relics. And when once in 1517 the monks of San Simpliciano carelessly exposed six holy corpses during certain alterations of the high altar, after which there were heavy rains, the people attributed the visitation to this sacrilege and gave the monks a sound beating whenever they met them in the street, right?

Okay, it gives you flavor of what the popular religiosity was at the time centered around the relics of saints, bones, nails, hair and such of saints, right? Okay, so there was even a trade at times in the relics of saints. By the way, note how they just beat up bad monks. Again, that's another feature of the Renaissance and actually of the period also in Italy, especially leading up to the Renaissance from the time of Dante in Boccaccio, even in the Middle Ages in Italy, there was widespread contempt for priests and for the actual officials of the church and for monks at times. But despite this, the people continued to be very religious in their own way. More on this in a moment. Again, it was a kind of informal reformation at the personal level.

And in Bologna, for a time, the city of Bologna considered selling the skull of Saint Dominic to Spain for a big price, they needed money and so forth. But there was this both reverence and because these objects were so highly revered, they could be sold to different cities or different countries for a lot of money. Popes went to great lengths to acquire relics of Pope Pius II in 1462, got head of the apostle Andrew from Greece and the people of Rome rejoiced, it was put in Saint Peter. There were some exceptions to the cult of relics, especially in Florence of all places. It was Florence which was not so hot for the relic scope, but that's because the Florentines had been swindled by a Neapolitan nun some century before selling them false relics.

So because of this practice they became less devoted to this veneration of Saintly relics. So it's supposed that besides this event that they were swindled, it's also the great aesthetic sense of the Florentines that turned them against, you know, because what is the reverence of relics of saints, it's the reverence of literal corpses, bones, mildewy clothes and such. And instead the turn in Florence, among the people especially, but elsewhere in Italy too actually, but in Florence there was the turn to mariolatry, to very extreme reverence of the Madonna, which picked up all over Italy, and images of the Mother of God proliferated in Italy during this time more than anywhere else, even though in literature the last truly devotional text for the sake of Mary as such was Dante's Paradiso.

But in the visual arts it was something else, wild universal proliferation of popular icons, icons presumed to be some ancient by popular rumor. They spread endlessly and miracles were attributed to them and this was a cult that must have been, it was especially favored I think, loved by women and the magical qualities were sometimes attributed even to paintings that have come down to us, famous Renaissance paintings of Mary, so new things in that time, not like an ancient icon, but the people attributed miracles to them at times, you know. And this is the second thing where right in literature and highly intellectualized discourse, there was a kind of tendency toward deism or something of this sort.

If you read the devotional literature of someone like Lorenzo de' Medici, it reads almost Protestant. Whereas in the visual arts though, the cult of Mary, again, an aesthetic improvement on the veneration of relics of saints, but the cult of Mary became supreme. And in general, you see this Italian contradiction here especially clearly, where if you read religious polemics of the time, it was widely remarked that the churches were empty, nobody went to church, this is a time of increasing irreligiosity, the feeling of skepticism and paganism were seen to be rising. And this was seconded by others who came to Italy at the time, Luther, others from North Europe noted the carelessness in Rome, the irreverence really with which priests carried

out daily services, and yet during this same time there was enormous expenses were lavished on the most beautiful devotional art and depictions of Mary, right? Some of which has come down to us priceless works of art, Raphael's paintings, not only his, of course, but remember or look up what Schopenhauer says about Raphael's depictions of the Madonna and the paintings with her and the baby Jesus and the look in the eye of the Madonna signifying the self-abolition of the will. It's some of the most beautiful philosophical poetry writing I've ever seen. And that type of art, venerated by both the people and the nobility, was also from this time when apparently I'm saying the churches were empty, the church corrupt, priests from

elsewhere in Europe noted the apathy or the blasphemy of the Roman priest even. But this is another example of the contradictions of religion of the time is what I'm saying. And yes, they were noted to be lax in daily services, but then they put on wild feasts and on the big church days they put on the Italians, I'm saying, of this time put on magnificent feasts beyond anything else were in Europe and this likely a result of they were bored with daily life they were bored with humdrum and it was only for special occasions and wild happenings of the spirit that they put in all their efforts it speaks much to what character of the Italians of the time was but devotion aside from this was in force everywhere in Italy because

because the people demanded it or admired it in their government but really because they demanded it. So if you remember on last episode, I mentioned that the state of Ferrara was the most efficient professionally run government of the time. It was really the prototype of later European and modern bureaucratic highly centralized governments where the dukes of Ferrara basically ran the state completely regimented with cadre of managers, very much like a modern state would be, right? But in Ferrara, the dukes of Ferrara enforced religiosity with the same discipline. For example, they forced Jews who had taken refuge in Ferrara from Spain, they forced them to once again wear the yellow o-mark and publicly, they attend church themselves,

they publicly fast, they force Jews and Murano's to do the same. They forbid blasphemy, gambling, they force the closing of stores on Sundays, they prohibit sodomy, prohibit concubines, close stores on feast days and many such things. And a lot of this, why the government in Ferrara do this? Were they religious fanatics? No, it was done out of political calculations because the people of Ferrara ended up demanding it as the Renaissance went on. This was in the 1490s and what happened in the 1490s Savonarola in Florence, like a religious fervor, a kind of medieval revivalism awakening religious fervor took place in Florence under the leadership of fanatic religions men's Savonarola and then they spread throughout

central Italy so that in all other cities, but I'm using Ferrara in this case, the people of Ferrara said, we are turning this way too, we return to religion, we are proclaiming a public fast, and the ruling house of Ferrara, who ran the state as, I don't want to say as a barracks, but as a modern bureaucratic, rational, centralized state, they had to go along with it. So they are so disciplined politically, they say, okay, we have to also fast in public and we have to double down and copy the people in this. But these kinds of religious fervors and manias took hold of the people periodically alongside the frank celebration of pagan customs and theists and rites which the nobility also engaged in, especially the veneration of the saints among the nobility was basically carried

out in pagan fashion. Some of them even called by pagan names Apollo and such. And then totally opposed to this in spirit was actually a certain skepticism blending, passing over even into atheism, although they would not dare or even want to describe themselves as atheist, but a kind of blasphemy that was, I'm saying it was the same elements, wild devotion, colorful paganism, and skepticism was present even among the people. It was not only among the nobility or scholars and such, but even among the people that there was a sense of irreverent skepticism and blasphemy in Italy of the time, and even before I'll give just one example, Boccaccio's Decameron includes a tale. You want to look it up, it's day one, tale three, if you want to find it.

It's his story about the Jew Melchizedek from Alexandria and his discussion with the Sultan Saladin. But this story isn't Boccaccio's. It's his version of something called the parable or the tale of three rings, which had been told around the Mediterranean ports already for some time and was spreading throughout it for hundreds of years before and after, maybe even before the time of Saladin actually. Lessing had a more famous retelling of this story. The Jews name in that case, in Lessing's version, was Nathan the Wise. In all cases, the story is the same with some differences, but I'll very quickly summarize it for you now that Saladin was the Sultan, he was putting on big magnificent shows, he owed money to people because of the shows so he wanted to approach a merchant in Alexandria,

Jewish merchant named Melchizedek, famous for his wealth and wisdom and wanted to get money from him but didn't want to outright ask him for a loan and didn't want to coerce him either. So he tried to trick him by asking him a question, which of the three religions, the Mahomedan, the Christian, or the Jewish, is the true teaching of God? And Melchizedek, seeing that whichever he answered, he would be wrong, he would be found in fault. So he came up with a story that he then told Saladin, I will tell you the story, a father once crafted a perfect ring, a beautiful, precious ring, and he passed it to his son in public saying, whoever possesses this ring has a right to my inheritance and is beloved of God and so forth.

And so the ring was passed from generation to generation, father to son, until a father happened to have three sons. They were all alike in virtue and piety and loyalty and he didn't want to choose between the three of them. So he had a master craftsman make two counterfeit copies of that same ring, the original one, so that nobody, but maybe even not the craftsman himself, so that nobody would be able to really tell the difference. So he gave them three rings. And now they all walked around with three rings saying that they were each the inheritors. And after telling this parable, Saladin and Melchizedek get along wonderfully and Saladin gets his loan and pays him back and they become lifelong friends, you know, right?

So it seems to be, and certainly was in Lessing's much later telling, that the story I just told you, the parable of the three rings is just a call for tolerance, right, based on an assumption of deism that can serve as a basis for this tolerance. And you can imagine why, especially in a Mediterranean commercial setting where business was done daily between Christian, Italians and Greeks, with on the other hand, Muslims and Jews all over the ports of the Mediterranean. You can see, oh my God, did that scare you? They did something to my throat and nose. I don't know. I've never had that before. I've never had that effect. I don't know what that is. But you can see why in the context of, let's say, Mediterranean of the Middle Ages, where

a lot of commerce was actually happening, so you had Christians from Italy and Greece interacting with Muslims and Jews all over the ports of the Mediterranean, and an easy ethos of tolerance would develop. In fact, for the same reason, the daily commerce, Italy was the first place to have a widespread admiration for Islamic civilization, which is something else, by the way, that weakened belief at home. That's not merely a modern libtard invention admiring Islamic civilization. The Italians of the time especially admired the ethos of the sultans that combined dignity and nobility and grace and so on in their minds. I'm not making that up as a multicultural libtard now. They had this attitude and this appreciation for Islamic civilization and

And also, by the way, for Jewish civilization at the time, during this time in Italy and before slightly before this time also in Italy could have a very nice expression. It's only partially explained by the fact that such tales and stories developed when the Muslim world was ruled by the Fatimid sect. That's a partial explanation. Their descendants today are the Ismailis, but this sect, the Fatimid version of Islam that was ruling Egypt and other places at the time, it was especially tolerant. It was even skeptical and casually atheistic maybe, at the rulership level certainly. At least unbelief, again, maybe not something where they understood themselves explicitly as atheist, although I think actually for the Fatimid ruling class they did.

And the rightest sect of Islam, the Sharia law, is not binding anymore, right? Lord Hassan, their founder, turned his back on Mecca and raised the sword, and the law was abolished. And it was instead replaced by the rule of the successor Imams, but the Imam went into hiding and so forth. But Italian appreciation of Islam and understanding with it was only partially explained by the fact that this sect ruled for much of the Middle Ages, because even actually for Ottoman Turks when they later came, the Italians sought a kind of understanding and didn't really fear them. But so I'm saying the tale I just told you, which is made into a literary form by Boccaccio, but it was a popular tale, and probably the popular version was a lot rougher and more

plain-spoken than Boccaccio's subtly blasphemous version, which, you know, because okay, behind the statement of skepticism and tolerance in the name of deism that's implicit in the story I told you, there's also the fact that just blaming the three main religions are are seen as fake, they're counterfeits, right? They each see themselves as beloved of God, and they're actually all in strife with one another, and what does that tell you about the promise that was made to them regarding the rings, you know? And that's really the meaning of the story, I think, and to see this, there was also a kind of crude condensation of this tale in popular proverb at the time, the proverb being, the three who deceive the world, referring to Moses, Jesus, and Mohammed, which this saying was attributed

to the Emperor Frederick II Hohenstaufen, the Antichrist, right? He was excommunicated as an Antichrist, although probably it's a false attribution to him. I don't think he said it. It's quite kind of a crude condensation of that story. But I mean to say there was widespread skepticism of this kind already even among the people of the time, along with fanatical devotion and colorful embrace of paganism. The skepticism was always helped along by the universally perceived corruption of the church also. But looking away from the people to, I don't like this word intellectual, but looking now to scholars, thinkers, artists, statesmen, this type, the people whose productions have actually made the Renaissance a timeless inheritance of mankind.

But you see actually again the same wide range of extreme devotion, frank paganism and also of Frank secular rationalist scepticism. I'll just give a brief example because I'm only saying all this to show you something about this age as opposed to later times. Okay, so many of the translators of the Greek works, many of the propagators of humanism and ancient knowledge were in fact not only a devout pious man, but in some cases they were fanatic, religious fanatics, ascetics. One pure example is the guy, I forget his name, but he translated Diogenes Lertius. This was the ancient Greek writer who wrote short biographies in antiquity now of all the philosophers and he was translated like much else was in Italy of this time.

But the translator in this case was a monk, I think, who basically only wanted to translate church fathers from Greek and he only did Diogenes Lertius. He translated this secular philosophical writer because he was basically ordered to do it by Cosimo de' Medici, Lorenzo's father. And that's an extreme case, but there are others. So let me read, let me read for you because you get more flavor of the time. His contemporaries, the contemporaries of this man I just mentioned who was a hardcore ascetic, devout monk. But his contemporaries, Niccolò Niccolò, Giannotto Manetti, Donato Accioioli, and Pope Nicholas V, combined a many-sided humanism with profound biblical scholarship and deep piety. We have already noted a similar temper in Vittorino da Feltre.

The same Maffeo Vegio who added a thirteenth book to the Aeneid had an enthusiasm for the memory of Saint Augustine and his mother Monica that cannot have been without a deeper influence on him. The result of all these tendencies was that the Platonic Academy at Florence deliberately chose for its object the reconciliation of the spirit of antiquity with that of Christianity. It was a remarkable oasis in the humanism of the period. This humanism was in fact profane and became more and more so as its sphere widened in the 15th century. Right, okay. Anyway, is that nice? I take quick musics break and I'll come back to discuss this. Enjoy musics. Do you like this? I just have such enthusiasm for Scriabin again lately So I'm playing mostly Scriabin, Opus 42 etudes on this show

So other dimensional for me, memories of unusual cocaine spirit and dreams. I will be right back. But okay On Renaissance, we are back to discuss the religion of the learned man of the Italian Renaissance, some of whom were very devout, while on the other hand, the skeptical rationalism that inhabited most scholars and philologists of the time, which could range from a very mild, right, boccaccio before them could be outright blasphemous maybe almost, but many Many men of the time could express their skepticism in a milder way than Boccaccio. But unbelief was widespread alongside devotion and it showed itself most usually in a cleaving to a kind of superficial or casual rationalism that you can maybe, you know, to sound like

Spock from Star Trek that you can get this attitude reading ancient Greek thing also. But they held to that kind of distillation of ancient debates. We are rationalists. And if they spoke against the church, they were called atheists. But they themselves went to great lengths to profess their own particular unusual kind of religiosity even when they attacked the church and the theologians in temperate ways. And in regards to the actual atheistic content of ancient philosophy, what was felt to be a threat, in particular the lack of belief in the fires of hell, in the afterlife or in immortality of the soul, the belief that the soul died with the body in other words, which is perceived very dangerous for the church, this had since at least time of Dominican

Inquisition been denounced by the name of Epicureanism. And it's interesting actually how the vulgar meaning of Epicurean came to be of what it is today, given that everyone knows ancient Epicureans were not hedonists, they practiced, They aimed for ataraxia, a state of not being perturbed and so on. But what happened was, for whatever reason, the Epicurean sect of philosophy is the primary point of contact in Italy for ancient philosophy as such. In other words, ancient Greek philosophy didn't come known, Plato, Aristotle, etc., even Heraclitus, it was the Epicurean sect. And it's interesting, the Herculaneum scrolls that I mentioned last episode, most of them are also probably Epicurean texts. It's not only Italy, by the way, the Muslims and the Jews, whose authorities also attacked

philosophy much more vehemently than within Christianity. Islam and Judaism is much more hostile to philosophy. Their point of contact was also Epicureanism, which is why there is an old Jewish theological command – learn how to answer the Epicurean. In other words, learn how to argue with Greek philosophy, to argue against it, which denies the whole foundation of biblical religion in the immortality of the soul, the judgment by a creator god for sins and many such things, wherein the epicurean work of Lucretius on the nature of things is a godless universe. And it was said, if your soul dies with your body, then you must surely only care about bodily pleasures. This was the claim. And in Middle Ages, the Inquisition, which started from Dominican monks, if it couldn't

find evidence, if it wanted to prosecute you and could not find evidence of heretical beliefs or something blasphemous outright that you may have said, but if you were a Paterine or a Manichean or such, then it would be easy. They say, oh, you are spreading this false doctrine that Jesus is not, you know, that is an apparition or something like that, then you'd be professing heresy that's provable, that was easily defined. But if you could not bring such easily defined charges against someone because of, let's say, your beliefs or anything else that you said, they would use lifestyle evidence, okay? So they would say, this rich man lives in luxury or has some luxurious habits, he must therefore be an Epicurean, and therefore he is a heretic because he denies the immortality of the soul.

And through, I guess, prosecutorial necessity, you can say, then the word Epicurean became associated with this, lover of luxuries, liberty, and many such things. And this was a charge levelled also against Manfred, who was the heir of Frederick II, Hohenstaufen, Emperor, opposed Pope in big wars and many such. And his heir Manfred, I guess because he was handsome and had affairs with women and many such things, oh okay, he must be an Epicurean heretic who believes in the tenets of this philosophical sect so we will condemn him as a heretic because of that. Even though he's never said anything against religion, he must be an Epicurean because etc. But you can imagine the type of man who becomes an inquisitor like this combined with the

general corruption of the church at the time, that through these very means of oppression, the church drove the smartest and most spirited men into a reaction. And so actually it became impossible to control the flood of disbelief, unbelief, skepticism that proliferated among them, yes in the outward showing of a kind of mild rationalism, maybe not even going as far as Boccaccio, who I said he was blasphemous but he was really a funny writer, he didn't even go that far, but many of the scholars and translators of the time and artists even, they held this unbelief, casual unbelief, for many divergent reasons you can say, among the constant commerce with the Muslims, the extremely unstable political atmosphere, an atmosphere that fostered both ambitious individualism and because of the

constant overturnings of political conditions, there was then an appreciation of the fickleness of fortune, this stimulated thought on freedom versus necessity. Many such factors combining with the corruption of church authorities and the bullying of the type of inquisitor I just mentioned, the resurrection and admiration of an ancient literature with very different values and gods, all of these things, it led you can say to a kind of secular pagan syncretism that was highly colorful, highly blasphemous and again it became a flood. It could not be controlled and yes, it existed alongside very devout men but even in the men who I'm saying who espoused secular rationalism combined with pagan and occult attitudes,

Even they, in their own minds maybe, believe they were devout Christians and not to be blamed on that account. It is unusual, complicated pictures that are not fully explained by a wiggish thing of all Renaissance broad science. But let me read again from Borchardt because you get better image of time. The Philologians added many special follies of their own and thereby attracted universal attention. How far Pope Paul II was justified in calling his abbreviators and their associates to account for their paganism is certainly a matter of great doubt, as his chief victim and biographer, Platina, has shown masterly skill in explaining his vindictiveness on other grounds, and especially in making him appear a ludicrous figure. The charges of

irreligion, paganism, denial of immortality, etc. were brought against the accused only when the charge of high treason had broken down, and Paul, if we are correctly informed about him, was by no means the man to judge intellectual matters considering that it was he who exhorted the Romans to teach their children nothing beyond reading and writing. In his priestly narrowness of view, he resembled Savonarola, except that to Pope Paul one could have retorted that it was he and his kind who were the most to blame if culture made men hostile to religion. Nevertheless, it cannot be doubted that he felt real anxiety about the pagan tendencies that surrounded him. And what in truth may not the humanists have allowed themselves at the court of the profligate pagan Sigismondo Malatesta?

How far these men, destitute for the most part of fixed principle, dare to go certainly depended on their surroundings, nor could they touch Christianity without paganizing it. curious for instance to notice how far Giovanni Pontano carried this confusion. A saint is not only a divus but deus, in other words he called the saints gods. To him angels are identical with the genii of antiquity and his notion of immortality reminds us of the abode of the shades. This attitude occasionally results in fantastic extravagances. In 1526, when Siena was attacked by the exiled party, the worthy Canon Tizio, who tells the story himself, rose from his bed on July 22nd, remembered what is written in the third book

of Macrobius, celebrated Mass, and then pronounced against the enemy the curse with which his His author had provided him only altering Telus Mater Teque Jupiter Optestor, I call as witness you Mother Earth and you Jupiter and yes I know you are supposed to say Yupiter but I will not do that. He changed it into Telus Teque Christe Deus Optestor, I call as Witness You Earth and Christ Our Lord. After he had repeated this ancient pagan curse in his own way, on the following two days the enemy retreated. On one side these things strike us as a matter of mere style and fashion, on the other as a symptom of religious apostasy. And in particular, regarding Sigismondo Malatesta, the warlord of the state of Rimini, he was

a mercenary leader again in the service of Venice, and one of the most admired soldiers in Europe at the time. He came to leadership, excuse if I repeat, only at the age of 15, and Burkhardt calls him. I mean, I'm pretty much ending the series on Renaissance in this, and in next episode I might read for you, well in next episode I will cover on a segment the special role of Renaissance in biological history of mankind, what that means. But I will read for you again from the book briefly regarding this man Malatesta because it is an exciting passage. Life and manners at the court of Rimini must have been a singular spectacle under the bold pagan condottiere Sigismondo Malatesta. He had a number of scholars around him, some of whom he provided for liberally, even giving

them landed estates, and others earned at least a livelihood as officers in his army. In his citadel Arxis Mundea they used to hold discussions, often of a very venomous kind, in the presence of the Rex, the Duce as they termed him. Duce, Duce, yes. In their Latin, that means Fuhrer if you don't know what that means, in their Latin poems they sing his praises and celebrate his Amur with the fair Izota, in whose honor and at whose tomb, Divae Izota i Sacrum, sacred to the divine Izota, the famous rebuilding of San Francesco at Rimini, the Templo Malatestiano, was undertaken. When the humanists themselves died, they were laid in or under sarcophagi within the niches of both sides of the wall of the church, with an inscription testifying that they were laid

here at the time when Sigismundus, the son of Pandulfus, ruled. It is hard for us nowadays to believe that a monster like this prince felt learning and friendship of cultivated people to be a necessity of life. And yet the man who excommunicated him, who made war upon him and burned him in effigy, Pope Pius II, says, Sigismondo knew history and had a great store of philosophy. He seemed born to all that he undertook. And that's from the Pope again who fought him, yes, but that kind of figure, you know, At one extreme end you can say mixing blasphemous humanistic skepticism with revived paganism, a warlord, there were many gradations between that, okay, and others. Not everyone went all the way like Malatesta.

But even in cases where they didn't go all the way, religion became actually a matter of indifference. This is the point. This is the special way in which antiquity conquered the Middle Ages, conquered as it were religion, not by directly contradicting it, but it outflanked it, it outflanked it at the root, it didn't try to contradict religion directly in argument with dumb pseudo-theological debates about the existence or non-existence of God or many such things that modern atheists would do while they actually agree with the morality of the people they claim to oppose. But no, this is instead very different. They left the outward form or were happy to leave it alone, but they changed the priorities of human life and demote religiosity and piety because certain other sectors of the human

spirit were raised higher than piety. Resuscitated antiquity affected religion most powerfully, however, not through any doctrines or philosophical system, but through a general tendency which it fostered. The men, and in some respects the institutions of antiquity, were preferred to those of the Middle Ages, and in the eager attempt to imitate and reproduce them, religious differences became a matter of indifference. The admiration for historical greatness absorbed everything. I just read another very short paragraph from the book, but this, what I mean, the emulation of ancient search for undying fame that you see in ancient literature from Achilles and Actually, before, onward, two examples of Alexander Caesar, but really all men of antiquity

sought everlasting fame and glory, including the philosophers, and the reproduction of that attitude basically outflanked the need for religious arguments, and you could even be outwardly religious and it made no difference. You could do it in your own way. So Burckhardt is very right on this. I mean, I wonder what Leonardo da Vinci believed. You know, remember, he associated himself with some of the immoral, violent tyrants of that day, Cesare Borgia, Ludovico il Moro, ruler of Milan, when da Vinci could have lived anywhere he had chosen, but he chose to associate with these men. What did he... I'm not saying he went as far as somebody like Malatesta, but I am saying that all the great men of the time, even when they didn't veer into outright skeptical blasphemy or

outright paganism, they ended up having highly personalised understandings of religion. For example, Alberti, who I mentioned last episode, very personalised, unusual, his own version of Christianity. And Marcinio Ficino, who deserves his own episode sometime in the future, I will not do it soon, but who pursued his whole life a new and unusual syncretism between Christianity and Platonism, again invented his own religion basically under the guise of Christianity And this is what Borchardt partly means that whereas in the north of Europe the corruption of the church led to the Reformation, on the other hand in Italy Italians, having lived with the church there for a long time, being witness to the kinds of people who went into

the church, let me put it that way, for centuries, but the Italians being a highly imaginative, highly individualistic people at this time, they didn't go that way that North Europe did. religion, you don't find again among the figures of the time, as extreme as Malatesta might be, you don't find again any formal or philosophical statement of atheism, right? It's in a way far more subversive and an overturning to do what they were doing, what they were moving toward, which is an acceptance of many of the outward forms and words of the church and of religion, but actually a total spiritual and personal reinterpretation. This is why Nietzsche mentions the possibility of Cesare Borgia becoming pope and what an event that would have been for Europe.

Because for Nietzsche this would have been the casual overturning, the overcoming of Christianity from within in its very point of subversion in Europe. Done casually, the outward form of the church, its institutions might have been preserved but its morality, its self-understanding would have been totally retaken and reimagined by the spirit of Europe in Rome itself by Cesare Borgia, revived Hellenic antiquity, overcoming Judea in Rome. And this is why Nietzsche blames the Germans for the Reformation, because the Reformation, the pious reaction against Cesare Borgia didn't become Pope, but against this type of change in Rome and the corruption of the Roman Church. But the Reformation caused the inevitable other reaction of the Counter-Reformation,

And it was this that ended the Renaissance in Italy. Spain basically ended it with the Counter-Reformation in Italy and the invasions of Italy. And you can maybe date the formal end of the Renaissance to when Giordano Bruno, the philosopher with his wild reinterpretation of religion and Christianity, his revived pantheism that Schopenhauer says, Bruno's home was spiritually on the Ganges. He was burned at the stake for this in 1600. Right now his statue exists in Rome, it is facing the Vatican, the Masons built it, but he was burned in 1600 and thereafter both Spain and Italy under the weight of this persecution sunk into a kind of moribund darkness, decline for at least 200 years. Again the Renaissance stopped by dirty, smelly, pious priests with little hats on their heads.

This syncretism, this highly personalized, I mean subjective forms of spirituality developing at the time, also included by the way astrology, especially astrology, and also alchemy, oriental and Islamic mysticism, other kinds of occultism. But as uncertainty and unbelief grew and man cleaved ever more powerfully to these kind of again very subjective kinds of spirituality, astrology became more and more important. Astrology was huge. Every court had an astrologer. The popes allowed it at their courts. Most universities ended up having a professor of astrology alongside the one for astronomy. Astrology had been central to Italian life for a long time and this man, the warlord Ezellino da Romano, he was one of Frederick II Hohenstaufen warlords in the 1200s.

He is the one extremely brutal man. He later gave an example of untrammeled, lawless, individualistic tyranny to all later princes and others of the Renaissance. He tried to build the dominion without any respect for traditional hierarchies or medieval feudal claims or such, purely through violence and intelligence. But he had a huge, huge well-paid court of astrologers, including from Greece, from the the Middle East, Paul of Baghdad, a famous astrologer was in his retinue, others whose names are still known, and some of his most gruesome violence apparently was committed in accordance to astrological dictates and prophecies. Same thing continued later, Malatesta himself tried to sodomize his own son again because

of astrological prophecy he believed in, and someone raped the Bishop of Fano, the Pope's I think rape the Bishop of Fano again in keeping with astrological superstition rape by astrology I believe in this I want to write political theory book all decisions must only be taken would you and you know? What I'm going with this with any states today agree with this, you know, I think They couldn't do worse than what they're doing now. I mean look at the elected politicians Kamala or the you know you know, do you want her making decisions? Wouldn't it be better if she followed the astrological chart in case she became, you know, or even Biden, you know, or the dreadful ignorant apparatchiks in government now, State Department, CIA and such. If they made decisions

based on astrology, you know, do you want them to make it based on brain power and their own rich knowledge of politics and history? I'd rather they use astrology. But yes, anyway, Maybe you don't like the astrology part or the interest in mysticism and magic and alchemy, but this was only the flip side of a great freedom, a great spirited desire for discovery on the part of highly ambitious, highly individualistic and capable men. And in this matter of religion, again, I will do one more segment in future, maybe next episode on the Renaissance, I mean its significance in the span of human history understood in the biological development of mankind as such. But if I can emphasize anything even on this matter of religion now is how much richer

the genius of this time was compared to all subsequent ones. So Burckhardt, for example, calls the culture of his 19th century, and he puts the word in quotes, the culture, but the culture of the 19th century considers it only a pale copy and an approximation or a play-acting at what was actually happening, at the work of genius being done in Italy in the 1400s and 1500s, at the work of discovery and creation. And still more so in our day, I mean, I only touched on it briefly, but compare the highly colorful and intense versions of religiosity, their version of atheism, their version of paganism doesn't really exist today, but consider just those two then, their versions of religiosity and of atheism, to the sorry debates surrounding each of these that exist today.

I mean, Sam Harris and these people are peasants, including of course academics who comment on such things that are basically very shallow, drab debates by people who don't really care about any of it, have a hacks understanding, are mostly ignorant, whether you take... I mean, it's one thing to have a debate between a pope who translates and comments on ancient literature in his free time and he also happens to be a devout man and he has a debate with someone who has unspoken pagan sympathies and so on. But today, whether you take the pro-atheism or pro-religion people, what comes off as opposed to Renaissance, Titanic personalities trying to basically each invent his own new religion or own new skepticism.

What comes off in that version that exists today is the partisan, the drab, repetitive conformity of the pile drivers of our own day. Which is why, by the way, if I can toot horn, but it is insane that international attention is fixed, for example, on me, on the bureaucrat, on other frogs writing and talking now, because I say this with no false modesty, it's the truth. We didn't seek to be thinkers or pundits on Twitter or in what we write. It's called shitposting for a reason. We did it to fun and to have laughs. And it's a very poor reflection on our times that people who go online to post vulgar satire like us, that we end up being basically the only game in town. And it's because it isn't just even just because of censorship.

Everything else is just so drab, spiritless, so unambitious and irrelevant that of course First there's no intellectual life today worth speaking of, so that's the problem today. It's not really, oh, are you an atheist, are you religious? It's the low level of thinking, of debate. I know I tried and you simply can't find, I mean there are a few good scholars, sure, but they're isolated accidents. But I tried and find there's nowhere near enough human material now to have a culture properly speaking or any fruitful debate. And yes, the Renaissance extreme color in debates around religion versus skepticism and the varieties of religion, this is just a reflection of a world which was discovering greatness in poetry, in art, in culture, in science and the huge personality of that time

also finding their way to God or the gods or the opposite. Not just unreligion by the way, not just unbelief because it is said some tyrants called out to Satan for help in their hour of need. But yes, in the same way in which they found their way to science and poetry, they found their own particular way to God or to a religion, all done by titanic passionate men of great will, violent men of culture. And can you plan for such a thing to happen again? I don't know, probably not, but the one indispensable condition anyway to usher in such a kind of world is an end, right? An end is not enough, but you need an end to all this fake peaceableness. To all stolid, comfortable, naive self-satisfaction. All the superficial compromises that people make with this excuse for life.

You need men such as the ones who heralded the coming of genius in Italy. You need barbaric, tyrannical adventurers to break apart the rule by olds, by faggots, by women, by women-men. Break the good. The good must be broken. Until next time, Bap out!