major chip-out happening on United States National Security Strategy paper, recent release from Trump administration, which CIA YouTube, these are influencers, ex-CIA employees, and they go on YouTube to become a talking head pundit, and they are freaking out now, call major departure from American policy from the last few decades. They say it represents a betrayal of the American shining city on the hill ideal, and that it It now replaces what I would call the American community centre, community organiser activism. It replaces that, the Obama Peace Corps thing, with the ugly transactional business authoritarianism. This is really embarrassing to them. The ugly, brash, American rapist Trump is demanding that he see profits from allies,

so it takes away from their self-conception as paladins of liberal democracy, the old the Republic Jedi. I wish actually so-called populist dissidents, some of them at least, would take a step back and see how often in their denouncements of so-called globalist neoliberal capital they actually sound a lot like these CIA employee ideologues. They both tend to see their enemies the same way as scheming, fat cat, amoral, materialist nihilists. In fact, what Trump and his proxies lay out in this national security strategy paper, its substance, which is the so-called Trump corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, and a global order based on mutual benefits gathered from intercourse in commerce, that is much closer to boogeyman of globalism that exists in mind of leftists and populists.

And also actually, as I'm telling you now, the CIA Lactation Room soccer moms, they all actually share a moral framework where, right, if you go to any high-level CIA lady, or let's say a boogeyman of the populace like Lady Rothschild or such, and their main concern is dark money billionaires gunking up the workings of democracy, and how can you stop that? To them it's Satan to replace idealistic support for democratic and civil rights, humanitarian values, to replace that with naked statements of profit desire. They're nice ladies, like Ursula von der Leyen, the leader so-called of the European Union. But these nice ladies and eunuchs of the international liberal order are represented in the minds

of populist outsiders, so they think Ursula von der Leyen is a Machiavellian cynical schemer who answers to dark, Frankist, demon worshippers. You know, they think, or at best they think that the East India Company, right, of gentlemen meeting in wood paneled smoking room bad guys. And conversely, the nice liberal ladies at the CIA and the State Department, they also think the populist so-called chuds from around the world are controlled by tyrannical, plutocratic, foreign, mysterious bad actors. So anyway, what's in this national security paper, strategy paper? It's a double somewhat recentering America to western hemisphere, recognize then the permanence of great power conflict and implicitly of spheres of influence. That phrase I don't think appears, but it's realistic, you know,

if you claim universal jurisdiction, which is what liberals pretended to claim and would still like maybe United States or international institutions to, the question comes, it's you and what army. It introduces certain instability to talk about. And second then, to tie this, we will focus on our own hemisphere and we recognize the permanence of that great powers have legitimate interests in their own spheres. But they tie this vision nevertheless of its, you could call this a kind of moderate internationalism, actually. It's a Bronze Age style, actually. That's right, Bronze Age was the first international society but it was based on mutual trade. That was, it wasn't, you know, shared commitment to international human rights and having a judge from Winnipeg, Canada.

For some reason, well, we know the reasons. Canada produces smart people who want to get out of there so they are the prime joiners of these international human rights institutions. But in Bronze Age, the international ties between the great powers had primarily to do with commerce. In fact, bronze itself as a material only possible with preservation of international trade networks for mining and importation of tin. Weird enough, there are tin mines in the middle of one of the great lakes in Michigan, but there is no society in North America at that time or even later making things out of bronze. So that's a nice historical oddity for now. Nobody knows who or why was mining tin on an island in middle of some lake in Michigan. Well, anyway, so the establishment libtards

want to pretend this strategy statement is a departure from American posture since 1947, an abandonment of America's post-war commitment to its liberal democratic allies in the face of tyranny. At the time, of course, it was Soviet tyranny, but really I see the deviation such as it is. This Trump policy paper seeks to change the status quo since 1991, I think, not 1947. Now, in the Cold War, America did, in fact, support non-democratic regimes sometimes, not as often as some think, but at times it had a reasonable view of things and said we're going to support military nasty bad guys all over Latin America, for example, like Alfredo Stroessner, or the Brazilian military dictatorship, which I'll talk about later on this episode. American presidents met with Stroessner,

you know, he supported him for 30, he stayed in power for 30 years because he kept the communists out. But you know, a few years ago, one of these writers from a conservative magazine, and they all hate me at the conservative magazines, they got mad because I praised Stroessner, and he said, well, his parents were tortured by Stroessner. Okay, so what did his parents do to get that? So no answer. So this was a conservative, though, you see. So, in other words, the innovation of the neo-conservative thing and similar factions since the late 1990s, or since the end of the Cold War, actually, is insistence that America can work only with democracies and should act in a hostile and destabilizing way towards so-called anti-democratic, tyrannical, or dictatorial regimes, and to a large extent,

effort is to delete the difference between dictator and tyrant so that now if you praise Lee Kuan Yew or Salazar or Stroessner and others like that were really dictators then but they're also called tyrants it's become immoral you know to to say what many people did during the Cold War that we will support Pinochet and that's become and anyone willing to continue the common sense tradition that you sometimes had to support such men was all called all kinds of names until quite recently I think still would be if not for Mr. Trump and a few people around him I remember the chimping of Shirley Fiorina if that's her name Carly Fiorina I don't remember I'm not sure you remember her she was supposed to win the 2016 primaries against Trump the the

The faggot Rich Lowry from National Review boldly said that she cut Trump's balls off in some primary debate in 2016. Where is she now? Everyone forgot her. I have to remind you who she is. She was a DEI hire for, I think it was Hewlett-Packard. She was CEO of Hewlett-Packard, which she mismanaged, ran into the ground. I remember her chimping during that primary debate in 2016. He was very upset that Trump dare suggest that you even talk to Putin. After all, you do not talk to tyrants. See this is what they learn in political philosophy class. So Putin, of course, is a classic dictator, not a tyrant, but his relative absence from actually this recent national security strategy paper, making all these types lose it, you see. They call it a love letter to Pootler.

That's what all of CIA YouTube is up, up chimping about. Welcome to Caribbean Rhythms, episode 202. I have my own very different objections to this strategy statement, which, you know, they've been doing this every year. This paper comes out yearly, I think, apparently as a matter of law, a law passed in the 1980s. There is this poster, Andrew, he's a good writer, has article at the Jacque's magazine. I'll repost it. You should read this maybe. I think he's very shrewd to say that what's in this strategy is not at all as someone our side would like to think it's not a position of non-interventionism or ideological nationalism, it's its own relatively clear-minded internationalism. It is again an internationalism based on the prospects of shared prosperity in fair trade

and commerce, and this is in turn related to a Trump corollary Monroe Doctrine. Now in the original Monroe Doctrine, the intention was to keep the European powers militarily out of intervening in the New World. But they continued to do this even after that, by the way, not militarily. But for example, England invested greatly in Argentina and other European nations also. They did it hoping that one day Argentina able to counter America as a New World power. And I think Argentina certainly had, still has in itself to do this. But I mean, in terms of natural resources and size, even population size and I would say even human capital having lived there quite a bit, there are talented and intelligent people.

Stay away, I insist, I want to do on next episode, I don't want to derail conversation too much, but I was with Argentinian prosti, it was awful, I would encourage all of you to stay away from Argentinian women. Of course I don't include my friends, this does not apply to Argentinian women I know, right, but the Argentinian woman as a type is extremely insecure on one hand, but sometimes a girl being insecure can be cute, you can educate her, you can encourage her, but no, they're both insecure and vain, and at the same time, extreme extrovert bossy, you know, so it's, I will discuss this next time. I will give you prostitute ratings. I'll try keep this a family show, okay, But, so, but, so, Argentina had major advantages, aside from its women, okay,

who probably make the lives of men there so miserable that it went from one political disaster to another. Catastrophic misgovernment since 1900. It's just been on a staggered downward slide, until Millet, which we'll see how he does. But it was neck and neck with Ramschenkel, Venezuela instead of the United States before Millet. And so yes, Venezuela also, I suppose, maybe because of Mr. Rubio, for those of you not in United States, Mr. Rubio is Mr. Trump's Latino Secretary of State, running the foreign affairs, and his insistence as a Cuban refugee from communism, I think actually, basically any non-insane Latin American, the regime in Venezuela is a major preoccupation for them. And I think actually Rubio and they, whatever his faults, he's right on this.

I wish this National Security Strategy document had mentioned the Puebla group and the Sao Paulo Forum, either directly or not, because if you've been listening to my show since episode 11, I think that's when I first talked about it, I warned you, these organizations did and will have far greater effects on your life as an American than anything regarding Al Qaeda or even China or anything like that. They were, I believe, deeply involved in the Obama administration, especially in the second semester, second term of the Obama, when really he kicked off all the woke, shite, and I believe they were deeply involved in that. And he felt, I think, personally close to Chavez, and in fact the influence of nefarious

foreign powers in the Americas is now mediated through these networks I just named. This is a leftist kind of a society of societies, and it's much funded by Venezuela and Cuba, But really, aside from that, whoever funds it, it's a way for all the Latin American Marxists to coordinate across borders. Before Millay, the government there in Argentina was one of their bases. In Brazil, they now have strong foothold with Lula and always had, even during Bolsonaro's ineffectual rule, they took the government of Chile previously. Now I think there's a center-right government in Chile. I think that in Colombia and partly in Ecuador, they are very strong in this Mexican government of this president, Claudia Scheinbaum, who oddly enough as a Jewish Marxist in control

of Mexico and in conflict with America over migrants, with Trump over their fighting over this migrant issue, and she never figures in the anti-Semitic tirades of the modern than the current day, the contemporary mainstream so-called anti-Semites in the preoccupations of real anti-Semites from, let's say 1950s, you take magazines, let's say conservative, I'm not even going to say because, you know, there were performative Nazis type whatever even then. But let's say, okay, but take them or take American Mercury, I think it was called, which Ilair du Berriere worked for, one of my favorite writers. But people like that, to people like that, Scheinbaum, the president of Mexico, would have been the supreme.

She checks off all the boxes of actual historical wariness over leftist Jewish activism. But note how these new ones who became out of nowhere suddenly popular on Elon's ex. What happened to his lawsuit against the ADL, by the way? But never mention her, basically. When's the last time you've seen one of them talk about, it's all about the supposed Talmudic plots involving Chabad Jews, who are the kind who wear the long whiskers and the hats and they're very easy to spot, but they never touch the actually effective organized spearhead of colored third world revolution. It's very odd the extent to which the supposed antisemitic prominent accounts online now almost entirely conjoined message, you know, the message discipline together with the Jewish academic anti-nationalist far left.

That's a very odd development, yet not only regarding migrant flows into America but also drugs and also simply the degradation of the standing of the United States in these two continents where it should really be dominant. And eventually even the actual, I'm sorry to overuse this word, but genocide or ethnic cleansing, call it the forced expulsion of white elites from South and Central America. This is the aim of Puebla group under the cover of neo-Marxism, which is an achievable aim for them would make the world much worse. Whatever is good south of America's border, and I'm telling you these societies are not that bad if you go to their major cities, Rio, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, and even to To some extent, Lima and these capitals are much, you have a much higher standard of living

there than in many places around the world that do not have these white elites. The position of the United States also would be made far weaker if these were degraded to the point where this Puebla group wants them to be. So I hope there's at least awareness of these networks by the people who composed the strategy document even if they don't mention it. I don't know if they know this. I do want I want to do more frequent music breaks now both for me to rest and to enjoy my opium pipe and also for audience with your scattered shot attention spans and the brains degraded tick-tock Jerkoff sessions. I hope you enjoy this Bach exciting organ thing I will be right back You see in recent Africa things the French were kicked out of West Africa out of Mali and such places in

in Sahel by a series of coup that were either Russian supported or encouraged. And then Wagner mercenary group and other Russian interests went hog wild in area, fucking it up. And it's not doing very well at all without French patronage. And then you may remember that some time ago Gaddafi was kicked out of Libya against Italy's wishes and very much by French and English initiative. And that allowed, after flow, sub-Saharan migrants into Europe. That was now about, what, 15 years, 16 years ago. And that's almost a generation. But through that time, no stabilization in North Africa that could stem this flow. Gaddafi had been given guarantees, handshakes by American security establishment. Politicians, I think, Condi. I confuse Condi Rice and Susan Rice.

Somebody made funny jokes that the name Rice in the future will be seen as a honorific. So many nondescript American politician of bureaucrats in the security establishment named Rice is these high yellows, I guess it's a high yellow name. Condi Rice and Susan Rice, I confuse them and my friend William Oden, I think it was about Susan Rice. He used to say she proves that the United States does not need a Secretary of State. That was, she was embodiment demonstrations, that it's a superfluous position. But she's on camera or the other one or both are shaking Gaddafi's hand and it led him to give up his nuclear program. And I will never forgive that. Gaddafi is a great man, such as can be in our time I mean he's he took over his country at the age of 28 and how

then an erased an erased being a grim being like Hillary Clinton can rise by entirely different means of glad-handing and marrying right to the top of the American political establishment and then oversee the murder of this man I'm not she didn't do it but she oversaw and the destruction of his country and even Even if the Europeans, again, were the ones who goaded it on, but merely because she happened to be born in a stronger power. That is a kind of injustice against nature I will not ever forget. So chance works that in large empires, at their points of decay, you get this situation with various eunuchs of dull mind, distended spirit, managed nevertheless to wield positions of great responsibility, to wield the wealth and strength accumulated in prior generations

by others, others very much unlike the ones I'm describing now, the eunuchs like Hillary Clinton and then they direct this against occasionally remaining high specimens of nature who may have had the misfortune of being born in a shithole like tribal Libya. Saddam was another such by the way. And another crime against the order of nature was committed in his execution. I don't care about Libyan or Iraqi so-called nations which are fake, but about these men Saddam and Gaddafi, who managed by their native wits entirely to rise in a truly competitive natural environment. And you could always see the spark of great intellect in their lively eyes. I wish the national security strategy had spoken of this, of my appreciation for certain dictators. But you know, yes, that's too much.

But what about, I mean, spending more than a couple of paragraphs on Africa is what I mean. It's much more important than what it got one paragraph in this policy paper. And I don't want to refuse the gift of this administration. It is a divine gift because it is indeed a good thing to finally have a government of any major civilized country, let alone the Western nation declare mass migration a security threat. I never thought it would happen and I don't think it's in this document, but also I never thought I'd see in my life an American president call out the crimes against white South Africans. I don't know what you think, should they bring the Boers to the United States or should they arm them? I think the European presence in the southern tip of Africa should not be abandoned.

But these are all great things that I've just mentioned now. But what's happening now in Africa with the Congo containing an estimated $25 trillion in precious metals and mineral wells, that's the latest estimate. And other regions of Africa, also great riches of this kind. It potentially is the most valuable area of the world in terms of buy low, sell high principle. So if you buy now and you buy right, so even from a pure profit point of view, then to allow China and Russia continue general access there, when in fact many Africans are getting fed up with Chinese meddling and so-called investment. It doesn't come without strings as you may have heard. But that's the rumor. Many are getting fed up with that and many are still within memory of European colonialism.

In some cases, these places were very well run by Europeans, including in the Congo, where in the south in Katanga, which I may have mentioned on this show, the Belgians had developed and built a native industry in Africa with its own factories and the people that love the Belgians, whatever you may have heard from the slander where they're trying to redefine... let me deal with that on a future episode, because they're trying to find a new Holocaust that has an indisputably non-white victim, so the Congo thing with the Belgian king, that's their own blood libel that they want to harp on. But I'll talk about that another time. In any case, and not to counter even the simple way of saying, France had a major presence in Western Africa. We want to support French reassertion there.

Why not say that? Europeans are not hobbits to stay home and do basket weaving and organic farming for tourists from Dubai and Shanghai. Okay, they are what they are because of this hunger for expansion and for, yeah, you call it the white man's burden, but they want to be in these parts of the world and French identity is deeply tied to their colonial expansiveness in Africa and other places. And why not say in this document, yes, we support European resurgence, and therefore we support French neocolonialism, not by that word, use another word, in West Africa, where we will partner with them to kick out the Russians and the Chinese and re-establish civilization, re-establish fine used liberal, tactful language, why not? And you wouldn't even have to do very much, right?

You wouldn't have to provide soldiers in that case. But maybe not meddle against the French there, at least. And so far I only see Eric Prince has his eyes on the potential of the Congo and that region. I disagree with him, by the way. He thinks that Paul Kagame of Rwanda, who is another dictator who I great admire, but he's colonizing the eastern Congo, basically, and I think Mr. Prince doesn't agree with that and would like to kick out the Rwandans from Eastern Congo and have a Congolese-American partnership there, and I guess that makes sense if you can actually control the Congo, but can you? Kagame has, you know, proof of concept. He's shown that he's a good governor. Why not let him develop that area and work with him? But anyway, what if consider this

plan bold moderate proposal here you were going to announce the creation not of a Peace Corps for American use use but something more specific maybe call it an Africa Corps now yeah an Africa Corps for American use in which various types of training given look at what was given to the OSS men in you know when that organization was started in World War two basically languages psychological warfare training, maybe some knife fighting, subversion and sabotage tactics, things of that kind. A volunteer force, a volunteer where this foreign legion was sent on adventures to Africa to open businesses primarily. I don't mean simply military might or what I just said, you know, you don't need to blow up bridges, but open businesses.

You know, you as the American government, put them there, facilitate them and then you look the other way as you turn that region into what Southeast Asia was for the Dutch at one point, read an outcast of the islands of Lord Jim to see what means in the books of Conrad, dissolve the debts of these men who agreed to go there, say we will not tax you actually for what you make there. America is one of two countries that insists it has the right to tax its own citizens universally on what they make abroad. Tell them you're free to make there any money or you will not tax. And here's training in language, culture, business, and skullduggery to get you started and not act like, you know, maybe have Balkanoids, you know, maybe have Nick Sallow, like a Croatian

cigarette smuggler teach them not to be, you know, kind of, excuse me, I love my Anglo friends but like naive high trust Anglo dummies, right? You can't do that in Africa. And I slandered a little bit because the Anglos were not like that abroad, they were very good and so were the Dutch, but actually I take this back, it's not an Anglo or even a Hainal line, you may have heard this word, an HPD thing, some kind of break happened in the tradition of transmission of knowledge from father to son, where many boys today are just, you call them high trust, I call them docile dolls, so you don't want them to be taken advantage of, and you want to teach them scoldoggery business practices so they don't get eaten alive starting, you know, whatever, a factory in Malawi or this, you know.

So maybe some paramilitary contingents too, you know, open a frontier for your intelligent and brave youth is what I'm saying. But no, instead you have to have this, yeah, let's not do that, right, that's too naughty, you know, let's have only the Chinese and Russians do that. Now we're going to have neo-peronist type of like guys in government hitting their cane on the floor insisting that you go to your factory job or coal mining job and come back to your fat wife and decorate your shingled coal-fired home with artisanal tchotchkes and she makes pickles for you and whatnot. Are you insane? Do you imagine in the era in time of awakened desires, the time of social media where people can see yachts and this and you think you'll get people to embrace this entirely uninspiring

image of a hobbit life going to clock in at factory work? And guess what? And on this I believe my friend the bureaucrat will write, it's just that in the contrast that this national security document makes between, on one hand, business, commerce idea and soft power. On the other, it contrasts this to interventionism in the name of democracy and liberalism values promotion, what existed before this Trump administration. And so it's a form of positioning against the previous follies of American administrations and factions, then that makes sense. But as an international posture, not so much. Because Russia and China themselves have imperial ambitions, international posture, and international ideology.

So you can play on that in various ways without, you know, I'll let the bureaucrat make this point as he wants, but you see, I know very well that my Africa core idea will not be done. But that's only because of a lack of creativity and boldness. It could solve so many problems at once in American society, not just Africa. You can send other parts of the world. I mean that in this case, a kind of language of ideology could be useful. You don't need to throw that out just because you don't want to sound like Susan Powers, okay? There's more language of international expansion idealism than just protection of the weak and humanitarian rights intervention of the Obama regime and so on. But for example, these men you send there could be seen as educators to the American

way and bringers of the seeds of liberty or something like that. And I don't say that entirely cynically, I mean they could actually act that way in the long run and it would be entirely volunteer, entirely volunteer legions I mean. The Chinese do allow this, they let a Chinese man have three wives in Kenya or Tanzania and they don't pursue the monies he makes there. But if you as an American citizen take a job as a cop in Pointe Noire, Congo, Brazzaville, Actually, if you so much accept a paid lunch from a government official abroad, you will get body checked by a lesbian attorney at State Department. I warn many of you, do not accept gifts from foreign governments. Talk to a lawyer before, even if it's so much as a plane ticket.

Otherwise the strategy policy, when it comes to Europe, it's a wish list that I don't see – I'm talking about now the Europe part of this Trump strategy document – I don't see what purpose is of bringing up problems that you don't have plausible solution to. The premise of claims of this is to want to save Europe's Western heritage and identity. Sure, yes, that's a great thing, but the premise is that America is in a position to do so itself when again maybe less than 50% of America is white or European at this point, it doesn't know what it is. It's controversial to say Anglo-American. That's how Tocqueville understood the identity of what the United States is. It's how I understand it. The worst countries in Europe, like England and Holland, are about 73% Dutch and English

still, and of the remainder of what's not that, many are immigrants from East Europe. The most problematic migrants in Iceland are Lithuanians. I don't think that's changed. skinny Icelander this Lithuanians and Poles. And I remember the Arabia discourse from the early 2000s which a mainstay kind of conservative hard conservative discourse like Mark Stein and Coulter those kinds of gates of Vienna blog that it made no difference at the time and the thing is as in so many other subjects the conversation now is being struck back to a pre-2007 level without people realizing It's just the amplification now is broader, the screaming and hysteria about the same ideas louder, but it's the same ideas from 2003 and 2004 I see recycled now.

And the thing is, both Europe and America, they're both in a very bad way, right? They're not in a position to go to the other and say, hey, I'm going to save you from, save your Western heritage. It's not that one is that much better, but imagine if a European nation not only put out a strategy document talking about the Hispanic and black minorities in America and the political threat this poses, which actually they would be right to do. But not only did they, if they did that, but then seemed oblivious to their own racial and identity problems. And then they went on to talk about the birth rate of America or such, which I believe the birth rate of white Americans is something like 1.57. It's also terrible, which is another thing that no one has ever figured out a solution

to, even with dictatorial powers, let alone another nation's embassy figuring it out for you, or Elon telling you in tweets that you have to fix your fertility problems. It's just that at a point, this is no longer a strategy document, but in the European case, a form of punditry, it only serves to make your opponents there bristle and close wagons And it also embarrasses your friends because now, you know, they look like gophers for a foreign power. And when this strategy paper speaks of the cause for hope and seeing various European nationalist parties rising, I hear again, repetition again of what happened during the last German election when Elon and others who have brainfucked by online influencers sold people the lie that AFD in Germany had prospects of winning.

And I'm telling you, these parties in Europe, I can't speak in any one particular case, maybe AFD can win an off-election or something, but I'm telling you, I'll bet you these parties don't, they cannot win, that's not how it's going to happen. They can't win national elections, they are subcultural parties, and you are being lied to by influencers who want to export American politics by proxy into Europe. A lot of this document reads like it was written for populist media consumption at home to get a claim from media audience rather than to provide a path or solutions that America can do in Europe. This goes for actually a lot of you mamzers with bigger accounts now who comment online or want to face fag and go on TV. I want to remind you a mistake this document makes that you also make.

When you bring attention to serious problems that you don't have plausible solution to, That also is a form of demoralization whether you know it or not, and often even you talking about it can make it worse, not just because of demoralization but entrenchment and mobilization of your opponents. You have to persuade somehow with incentives and not in public, you have to let them save face in public and behind the scenes persuade them with whatever incentives you have in government, persuade the European Social Democrat and other ruling parties of the stupidity of mass migration, as was somewhat done in Denmark, and of other basic common sense things like not abandoning nuclear power or thinking that air conditioning is evil or using power or energy is evil or what, things like that.

It's either things like that, those kinds of tactics which can be done, have to be done discreetly behind the scenes while you glad hand them and flatter them in public. So it's either things like that maybe can work or actually I think what will happen is financial insolvency, that will bring things to a head in Europe. But these are the only solutions. You are not going to get based nationalist parties winning governments there and certainly not with American explicit cheerleading makes various portions of these societies defensive against you. I mean, if Germany or France took strong positions in American elections, I believe as per my last episode in Erasmus-type student exchange programs between Europe and America now.

Why not Erasmus is the exchange college student program between different European nations. It's called also Orgasmus, except in this case it would be done with special attention to increasing birth events by saying if you're a lithe European, French, or Swedish girl of, you know, volleyball Swedish lies, especially luscious midsection, and you get impregnate by American young muscular frog on one of these outings when you are exchange or his exchange and you get a substantial bounty for the improvement of the stock. And also American citizenship immediate. And the biological father also get financial bounty. And instead of Modlock breeding pens, you see, you will have elf for elves, elf no state eugenic program, you see.

Anyway, I'll be right back to discuss various movies I've seen recently and the ways in which present political moment is being processed now by the movie industry. It's beginning to seep in the things we're talking about, seep into popular culture. I'll be right back. I watch movie Eden by Ron Howard, who this the guy from American Graffiti, he had lead in that movie, and then direct a famous film like Apollo 13 and The Beautiful Mind. I thought a sentimental tedium owed to, you know, maybe a middle-aged lady's idea of what a genius is. But apparently Ron Howard is a Republican. I was alerted to this fact in this movie some time ago by Jack, perfume nationalist guy. He made the case this movie represents really some engagement with the online biomes and

the new media and the memes and the character types that have been discussed and popularized by frogs and me and others online. And in a different way, White Lotus series, HBO, is another kind of engagement with us. I think the online right thing and more broadly populist right worldwide movement, of which the online right is in full overlap with, as you know. But it's interesting to see how these are finally seeping into popular culture and movies. It was inevitable given persistence and spread. I think the catalyst for all of this again is Trump's victories, especially his 2024 comeback as well as the fact similar leader around the world continues to win. And so it's becoming impossible to dismiss it as a one-off freak event or a machination of putler. But that doesn't fully explain it.

It's more like that so it gives it fuel and cover because although Trump himself is a larger-than-life personality and movies and literature, I think, still have to give him a fair treatment. I mean, even so far as accurately satirizing him if they want to do that, nothing like that exists yet. I kind of like the movie with Cohen, you know, his mentor. You know Trump mentor, the lawyer, Cohen for McCarthy. But anyway, Trump, whatever he is, is one guy. And aside from him, the populist movement is mostly grim, boring types and don't make for good cinema or stories. I think what's really happening here is that the world is so boring. And so where should a filmmaker or novelist look for interesting characters, flashy situations? After all, you have to entertain people with art.

And given that very few of them read older novels to begin with, and that even then you'd have to digest what you read and filter older personality types, transfer them to the modern situation anyway, and that takes a lot of skill. But yes, this is the reason I'm saying it's just for all of its problems, the online right, I dare say, myself and my friends, we have provided some flash of color such as it is in a world that's very gray, and before 2015 had become increasingly humdrum, homogenized, nobody really interesting. So Ron Howard tells a story here, I don't remember, sometime before World War II, let's see, it says, the story takes place in 1921, and it's Jude Law as a survivalist on a remote island in the Galapagos, a German man, And it's not a tropical paradise island, okay,

but a difficult terrain that he absconds there with his sick mistress. They flee modern corrupt society. And Jude Law here plays this, a plainly Nietzschean, a Schopenhauerian type, okay, well, primarily Nietzschean, quotes Schopenhauer, a severe type of man, an independent man seeking a confrontation with nature, a wannabe Nietzschean philosopher. Many such existed in Weimar and so forth. He seeks solitude to write his book. And there are some funny scenes. He's trying on this typewriter to make paragraphs come out. It's shite, of course, in his case. I mean, you know, when you kick off cultural movement like this, like Nietzsche kicked off, sometimes wonderful inspirations he put into the hearts of great artists and writers, but then for every one of those,

there are 10 or 20 or 100 or unoriginal copycats. And Jude Law in this movie actually represents that but also a certain vitalist type quite well actually. It's a much overused word, badly used now, but if you want to see kind of one kind of vitalism here, if you're curious one popular type of the vitalist in the interwar period, another type would be Ernst Junger and Gabriele D'Annunzio, the soldier and stormtrooper types, or the young Ernst Kantorowicz who was also like a storm troop, or Ernst von Salomon. You know, those being the military adventurer, literary estate type of vitalist. I think that's kind of the real thing. But then there is this other that, you know, individualist loner, which is fed by currents of the late 19th century and early 1900s,

principally Nietzsche, but not only there were other two, there was Stirner, there were others. I don't want to say who. There was a journal in late 19th century Germany called... I cannot talk about that, but then there's Teddy Roosevelt, the type of man who seeks to test himself as an independent survivalist in stark competition with wild nature outside society. It's in a different but still recognizable way you can find this character in Chekhov's story, The Dual. It's a short story, one of the best short stories I've ever read. I forget the character's name, but he has a German name, the guy with the German name in that story, and it's this kind of Nietzschean vitalist like Jude Law you see in this movie. Very severe, very independent, highly competitive,

although in that case it's not so much about leaving society or survivalism. But so anyway, Jude Law goes to this island with his mistress, and then he achieves fame, I guess, with articles, letters he sends out about his experiment in this tropical individualist utopia Robinson Crusoe experiment. And fans start showing up. He doesn't even know that he's become famous through his updates of how he's doing on this life he's built. So in particular then what comes a young family, Sidney Sweeney as the wife, I forget husband, but they've got a small boy and she's pregnant. And this is what I'm talking about the online characters and types being shown in movies now. This is almost stereotypical from online trad wife, trad family.

She dresses looks, the face, the makeup, but the clothes she wears, the trad wife memes you see online, the whole family is. You could call them maybe crunch granola, nuclear family conservative, kind of trad hippies of a sort. Think like a Rod Dreher-style trad family, although I don't remember if the religiosity is in the movie or emphasized. But these new settlers are remarkably capable, competent agriculturalists too. And at first Jude Law tries to get rid of them. He wants to be alone on the island. He didn't know he'd become, he has international fame now. So he gives them what he thinks is a completely unsuitable plot of land to get them to fail and to leave. but they make the barren earth bloom. And the movie is really a story about their success.

In particular, it's about their triumph over other online types, like the Jude Law one, who's partly a caricature of things I and others talk about. And then also others show up on the island who are simultaneously Weimar types, but also, as I tell you, things from online. So a baroness shows up. She wants to start a resort on this island eventually, but she's a young, well, she says she's a baroness, but a young woman, good-looking, extravagant, you know, the kind of Weimar gangster's mole clothes, and she shows up with two male companions, both very self-consciously presented as handsome Thursday types. They are mild homoerotic overtones, but they're supposedly friends, as well as both of them are companions and assistants of the baroness. They're competing for her sexual affections,

and she trades in between them during the movie so you know that kind of love-sex triangle causes tension, conflict, drama, screenwriters love that and uh but basically you have a collection as I think Jack the perfume guy hinted collection of Nazis, sluts, Nietzschean vitalists who quote Schopenhauer, Handsome Thursday, beautiful male specimens who are annoying but are also violent Nazi sluts themselves, living in some unconventional bisexual trio with this baroness. And the story, supposedly, is how this Tradd family triumphs over all these other types in the context of this natural experiment on an island, like survivor competition. And it's survivor, but made funny, populated by, you know, online characters. So Ron Howard, as a decent, normie, conservative Republican,

It is the trad family that wins in the end. So look, that's Jack's take. But to me what becomes stark is something different. It's the display of our thing in pop culture. I can't say I object to this kind of mostly apolitical appropriation. Ultimately the way people like us who are so alien to the mainstream. I must repeat, I am extreme opposed to what's going on now with attempts to become media figures on the part of some. I mean chiefly Elon and Tucker, to mainstream online talking points and ideas of the past 10 to 15 or so years. I'm very wary of it because I don't see how it can possibly work. I believe they're killing it through early overexposure. The time for these ideas is not here. Immigration restriction, sure, but that's not what we say.

That's common sense, it's not even populist. It's just common sense, centrist ideas. But I mean what I am, what others are. If, for example, you are arguing, This is not my position, but let's say you go on TV to argue for monarchy even, or any idea is more exotic, extreme than let's say Trump, who really is within the mainstream of the 1990s. And that includes what I've called dork right, who come with IQ charts, you know, even what Charles Murray is to come to make normal fags, accept the red pill of racial differences on these points of intelligence. I'm warning you again, that's not going to end how you think, because you can put all the new facts into their minds, if they feel the same way, they will use them for their

ends and because the primary fight, I think, is on people's moral valuations and even more so on what precedes that, on the ground of morality in aesthetic appreciation and taste, how you form people's tastes and in the long run, that's how you really change people's true opinions for good and in that sense, the fact that engagement with our thing is primarily of this form, I mean, in White Lotus it's much more ideas-based, language-based appropriation where Mike White, I think that's the guy who made it, he tried to lampoon both the woke and also certain upper middle class types by showing them ridiculous, that's good enough but I'm much more approve of what Ron Howard does here, I think that's a good sign,

even though I don't like how he does it, but the appropriation of interesting new character types, that's the most important part of so, you know, I can only speak for myself here, but if I can introduce to world new human types, new desires and ways of life, which I read from history and literature, but, and then many intellectuals always forget this step, you have to transfer that through modern possibility prism. And humor is your only path to jolt an audience and show something fundamentally new. So even though Ron Howard is hostile and caricatures some of online innovations, I think it's still a good sign, but the success of any of this will depend on very few friends who actually have the knowledge or creativity to inject these new archetypes and images with humor

and ultimately actually on our own efforts in film and other such things, you know, at some point you have to make own books, own movies, videos and so on. It can't just be tweets and streaming. That's nothing. This New York thing, for example, it's been going on for what? I've known about it for at least two years now. Tell me of one art piece that you know of or would watch again, or whether movie or book or anything like that, that's come out of that. I like art collectives that actually make art. That's why I'm interested in this Dutch. I see it as a humor art collective. It's called Kirak. I don't know it very well yet, but I'm curious. I've watched some of their movies. They're quite funny. funny but anyway Eden yes I would recommend it's enjoyable at least

something new different and the best part is the volcano at the end to me that although for reasons I'm not going to get into that was the biggest tell this movie is a reference to the online right the volcano as for my interpretation of what actually happens I think it's based on a true story apparently and I don't doubt that Ron Howard intended it to have the message I I just said, whatever Jack Nationalist perfumes say, the triumph of the trad family, the conservative family values, wins out over the assortment of, right, normally it would be hard to criticize leftists, you know, it would be hard to criticize kind of leftist libertinism through Hollywood mainstream, if you're making a Hollywood movie. But because Weimar in 1920s had their own,

and I would say far more real, sexual revolution, And here you can see libertinism, slut-dom, vanity, looks-maxing, beautiful young people who hold unconventional antisocial views and ways of life, things conservative hates, but they can be Nazi and Nietzsche-branded, you see, in this case. So then they're easier to lampoon and criticize for a conservative like Ron Howard, who may not want to criticize 1960s whatever because it offends his liberal friends, you know? So I think actually you'll see conservative leftist condominium in this direction. Because, as I keep telling you, we do not live, I find it very strange, people who continue believe that we live in an ongoing sexual revolution from the 1960s. The middle and upper middle class libtards are already living conservative lives

for quite a long time now, you know? I've offended many at whatever dinner parties I used to be invited a long time ago, I would offend them greatly by bringing up just such Weimar views, I mean I wouldn't put them in Nazi words, I'd put them in 1960s words and they would be very offended. These were hardcore liberal types, they're conservative in not just their private lives and their ideas. Many of them are deeply skeptical of the sexual revolution for feminist reasons, yes, but they're very skeptical of it. But you know, this is what I'm telling you. They're uncomfortable attacking sexual liberation 1960s style because still sentimental attachments to leftist traditions and so on and you have to bow to Mr. Chomsky or whatever.

But if they can reframe everything they don't like as, oh, it's fundamentally Nietzsche right wing nihilism, which it actually is, that's how they'll attack it. So you're going to get a restatement, I think, of the social conservative feminist union against sexual freedom, especially, you know, but rebranded as the fight against Nietzsche and Schopenhauerian evil vitalist nihilism sexuality, you know, you see one start of this in this movie. So anyway, that's Ron Howard's intention, but for what actually happens, which, which I guess maybe he tried to stay a little on path to the true story, but what really happens in the movie is you have, I have no idea on his ideas of literary skills, but an independent

enterprising exploratory and individualist Robinson Crusoe type Jude Law character, again I cannot vouch for what he writes, maybe it's crap, but him as a character, as an adventurer who wants to live alone, who holds Nietzschean individualist ideas, maybe in a purer form than you find today, and takes off to a tropical island, gets fame by writing about his being there and then his peace and quiet and his colonist project colonial project is destroyed by women and that's actually the story the movie actually tells ineffectual corrosive annoying women his mistress Sydney Sweeney as the trad wife and the baroness the three women in their stupidity and grasping vanity they destroy what this man this man built

by himself and although the trad family at the end is shown as triumphant and yes they they have genuine ability to fend for themselves, survive on their own, whatever. Nevertheless, by the end of the movie, it is a tale of squatters. Yes, traditional family value squatters who, uninvited, arrive. I mean, favelas sometimes have traditional families too, you know, they squat and replace the intrepid efforts of a kind of brave explorer individual who is trying to escape the defilements of precisely this kind of society. And the baroness has a line midway through, she say that like an animal, you can sucker a man into loving you first by hurting him and then by nursing him back to health. And this line is really a summary of the whole film. Three women totally fuck up paradise,

and in the end, one of them is portrayed as the true Nietzschean ubermensch, right? The trad wife vanity modality as the true Nietzschean ubermensch conqueror. I'll be right back to talk other movies of Walter Salus also deal with kind of online political and world political things. Recently the Sidewatch movie I Am Still Here by Walter Salas about the military dictatorship in Brazil in 1970 and it shows infection of our times triggering images and characters into pop cultures and movie very different way than Eden though. I wouldn't call this movie inspired by the online right, or at least not really anything related to me or my friends. It's dead serious, though, inspired by Trump and by worldwide populist tumult, obviously,

and maybe by what is to liberals the most sinister aspect of the new media and new discourse. It scares them the most, you know, I'll tell you here. The movie itself is basically modeled on torture Holocaust stories. It's just a typical Holocaust story movie, refitted to what was probably one of the most pleasant urban environments for mankind ever, Rio de Janeiro in 1970, for which you can see the filmmaker, Walter Salas. He has a lot of love for this, so that despite its unpleasant aspects, the movie is also love poem to the Rio of his childhood, to the city. It's a very nostalgic cinema of that place. And I'll talk another one of Walter Salas' movies on this segment also, the movie that made his name and for which he won all kinds of awards in 1998, Central Station.

And actually, I'm Still Here was going to win, unprecedented I think, both Best Foreign movie and best movie at Oscars in 2024, but it won, I think, only best foreign movie. Brazilian friends were much relieved. They think that if it had won both, the libtards in Brazil would have celebrated as if they had won the soccer World Cup. They would have never heard the end of it. But Walter Salas is an interesting guy for a director. It was funny for me to find out. He's the heir to the Udi Banco Itau banking fortune. These are Brazilian banks, but really, I think that now international banks. So he's worth like $5 billion with I think only Lucas, yeah, I was gonna say Lucas Gage. George Lucas and Spielberg, they are ahead of him as people in entertainment business

with a bigger personal net worth. But aside from them, he was born in Rio de Janeiro in 1956. I love his cinematography. I'd recommend his movies, Pleasant just for that. I've only seen his Brazilian movies though. He also did the Che Guevara movie, Motorcycle Diaries, which, so you know, you may think of this man as ultimate champagne socialist, very much a Latin American type. I wasn't going to watch any of his movies, but I have an airplane, and so I'm glad I did. But his films are high in joy. pleasant based alone on image quality suffused with nostalgic light of pleasant tropical lands and otherwise I think both of these films I talk now are worse than they should be I mean they're good movies but they're made a little bad by an overwrought emotionalism

very hand-handed in the Spielberg over your head sentimental style which totally unnecessary like he needs like an emotional, not emotional, an emotional editor to just force a bit of Buddhist ataraxia on him, have him try a bit less, because with just more understatement, lack of sentimentalism, I think both of these films could be genuine, very good, but when it comes to films about dictatorship in Latin America, there's a long tradition of this by now, and I can I can recommend to you one other for contrast. I've said it before the secret in the rise from Argentina And I feel very bad after watching that movie because I feel jealous that leftists made this, you know It makes the military dictatorship in Argentina during about the same time. I talked now that was the late

1970s in that case, but it makes it look really bad and the movie itself though isn't overtly political it's actually a great movie about lost love and second attempt at pursuing a romantic affair and Political side of things takes place as a side story It's shrewd that way and so it's very effective showing just callous officials of the dictatorship Empowering the worst kinds of criminals to do their dirty work and it's all embodied You know This is what I'm getting at in that movie as in past films of military dictatorship, the bad of these regimes is embodied in certain stock characters that you'd readily recognize from previous decades, unpleasant types like the intransigent bureaucrat or a vicious military Martinet authoritarian.

This is in Pan's Labyrinth II, okay, just a vicious, almost ridiculous caricature of what a fascist officer would be when you get in Pan's Labyrinth. But in this movie I talk now, I'm still here, the bad guy characters are something entirely They've shifted in keeping with the spirit of our times. The movie is about an upper middle class family with I think an engineer or architect father. You find out later he had been a deputy or congressman before the dictatorship. But at the start of the movie, it's kind of idyllic setting of very pleasant domestic life, big family. There are something like five children, I think, a teenage girl or including a teenage girl who's about to go to college, a dog, a live-in housekeeper, and they live in just

about the most beautiful part of Rio, right by the seaside boulevard in Ipanema, a nice classic colonial-style house. And that's maybe the best part of the film, the beginning of it, the obviously loving and nostalgic images of Rio de Janeiro of that time, the beach scenes. And slowly, then, you start to see evidence, hints that's supposed to disturb you. I found exciting, so like a military helicopter flying over the sea near the beach, that still happens by the way, trucks of armed soldiers and the like. I'll say this for real, I never saw it at its height in the 1980s and before and it's been seriously declining maybe forever and certainly in recent times it's declined considerably and I hope to go back one day but don't know when I'll be able to.

I hear there is new movement there now, Renan Santos and MLB. You may have heard of them. Jacques had an interesting article about this. I'm curious about it. They had a recent conference. I know many friends are involved with them. I hope they do well. I'll just say that despite its rapid decline since 2011 or 2012, Bolsonaro was barely able to have made it safer for a little bit after he won. It was getting a little bit better after 2017. But even so, it's one of the most enchanting places in the world, even with its considerable downturning. And there's never been a time that I've been happy to leave it when I was there. Even if I didn't have a good time, it puts such a hold on you, you always feel bad to leave. And I think Salas captures that quite a bit.

Actually one of the poignant parts of the movie is when the family leaves this house toward the end and it's been emptied out and the daughter looks into the empty house longingly. So I think Sal is like, Giorgio de Chirico has a certain taste for this, for the melancholy of departure. There are beautiful paintings by Chirico with titles like that, and it's also very much present in this other film I'll talk, Central Station. But anyway, this as I tell you is just retelling of typical Holocaust movie Golgotha's thing. Still here starts with this idyllic middle-class family life, and then at some point, despite only very few hints that something is amiss, that the father may be doing something he shouldn't be, plainclothes men from government or the military come to the house, arrest

the father, and then they, you know, he gets taken away in a car and these men stay in the house for the next few days camping out in a polite way, they don't abuse the family or anything, they actually go out of their way to be nice, but saying, you know, nobody can leave the house until your husband comes back from questioning, which okay, I'm not giving spoilers, you know, because this, you know what this movie is, but he never does come back. In fact, they arrest the mother to take her in for questioning, hood her up, put a hood on her head, take her to interrogation center where she ends up staying, I don't know, a week or two weeks under quite, they don't beat her, but it's very unpleasant conditions.

cell interspersed with increasingly absurd Kafkaesque questioning, you know, who comes to your house, who did your husband talk to, do you recognize, you know, having her look at series of photos and so on, but it feels very much like extraordinary rendition torture porn from the Bush era, combined, as they say, Auschwitz-y vibes, and then she's released and goes on a campaign to find out what happened to her husband, becomes human rights lawyer eventually, et cetera. The rest of the movie is a kind of liberal standing up to the state redemption story. But not, you know, it's also the story of a mother in trouble and in that sense it's sympathetic. It's not, doesn't beat you over the head with. But just regarding political matters, I do wonder if it ever occurred to Mr. Salas,

the director, that what you see in this movie, in his own telling, which is not friendly to the military dictatorship, right, okay, showing it at its worst. And even at its worst, it's not like what the communist regimes routinely were, and I even remember as a small boy, was inconceivable when they did the very same thing on a much bigger scale and worse. And thereafter, the mother, the aggrieved mother or whatever did not have, the pretense has shown in the movie that you live in a prosperous, relatively free society where you could make complaints to foreign press, foreign governments about inhumane treatment, have a foreign newspaper come and take up your case, but okay, look, these kind of political blinders are to be expected. One other interesting aspect of this movie

that come out of right-wing military dictatorship authoritarianism is you get the sense of its informality that the military was not in some ways formally ruling, And so it did things as if it were a private mafia associated with that society and protecting it, but had to do things under the table, you know? So it's quite different model of authoritarianism from something like communism, or frankly Ba'ath Party in Middle East, which permeates all of society and depends on mass party mobilization. The feel, the everyday feel of that is very, very different. In this kind of society, you kind of still feel you're, and you are living in a free kind of Western capitalist society, but there's this kind of mafia beyond the law, the military, which has its secret police can come take you away.

In this case, actually, justifiably, Walter Salas does not hide the fact that the father was involved in some stuff. But the reason I talk about this movie at all, what struck me in particular way, is that officials from the secret military police unit, the way they're shown. The key scene for me was the guy who came in with the plainclothes secret police, he's a bearded brunette man named Schneider, who you think, I mean, he looks very much like a Spanish man, he could be from Portugal or Spain, but black hair, black beard. But okay, that's common, you often have people even quite darker than that with German names in South America. But this guy, he doesn't look bad, he looks friendly, seems mostly polite, decent with the wife and the family as they are waiting to hear what comes

of the interrogation of the father. But in the conversation between them as they're kind of getting to know each other, she asks him, so what is your job, what's your specialty? Something like that, and what did you study? And he hesitates, and he says, parapsychology, parapsychology, almost smirking. Which, okay, whether he's trolling her or whether it's real, and that was his specialty, which I think it probably was, it's a very, very telling detail for me, the way it's made very marked in the movie, I mean you notice it and remember it. And as in this is kind of nightmare fear fantasy of a liberal who made the movie. The most immediate image of the bad guy regime is a kind of mostly polite chug who studied

or says he specializes in parapsychology which, okay you see what they're doing here, I actually haven't seen this in any of previous films about military or fascist dictatorship. To me this is kind of ham-handed acknowledgement of things going on now online but not just where a lot of the new populist right both in America and Brazil, actually maybe Europe too maybe, it's suffused with the kind of kook, mysticism, conspiracy theorizing, pseudo-religious shite, you know, Kabbalah demon discourse and so on and I mean to say that the Libtards and Walter Salas, the director, he's not a communist, okay, he's just a nice Libtard and I believe they're genuinely spooked, okay, like they're scared, you're going to do to them what you see in this movie done to this family.

I don't think they're putting it on, I think they do believe they're in danger from fascists and the officials who do the interrogation of the mother in the rendition center, they're I mean, okay that on one hand shown just as typical grim hard-faced, you know, scary secret policeman But even there maybe maybe you say I'm biased I thought I caught a whiff of he's not just trying to show them as fascist authoritarians But like, you know weird like they're trolling her They're taunting her in this particular alt-right ish kind of chud way I got very strong scent of that and furthermore earlier in the movie when there's a roadblock blitz, right? So everything bad in the movie happens. What precipitates all of this is leftist terrorists kidnap the Swiss ambassador and then ask for

the release of political prisoners, like, okay, that's standard. Fly them to Chile, at which point we'll release the ambassador. At the time, Chile was under Salvador Allende, and that was a proto-communist regime. This is what they did. terrorists in Argentina later, actually during this time to Brazil, other parts of Latin America, they would kidnap foreign ambassadors, executives, Fiat executive, Ford executive from United States to embarrass the local government and then ask for release of their friends from jail. Just fly them to whatever, wherever there's a friendly government and so on. So following this event, the military regime in Brazil cracks down and that's what leads to all of this. But even before that, there is a roadblock and the daughter and she's college-aged daughter

and her boyfriend are taken out of the car rudely, they're searched, not quite roughed up or beaten, but they're not treated civil at all. And the soldiers, you know, they're saying things like, go on, move it hippie, go on hippie, up against the wall hippie. And I think this is normal, similar class tensions took place in America at the same time. state thing and very often it was working class guys in military or similar contrast with middle class and upper middle class hippies. But here again in context of our time I got with in this earlier scene of what I'm saying that and all that happens later that a lot of the animus and brutality shown directed against this family is not just because of the father's sympathies for the communist

rebels which to his credit again Salas doesn't hide that. In other words, it's not like this is a case of false accusation. The father shown in this family was actually giving some minor aid to the terrorists. But the movie somewhat clumsily even tries to show you that this family is mistreated in part out of class resentment. He doesn't touch the racial angle at all where it's a white family and aside from the secret police chuds who are also white, many of the functionaries of the military aren't white, but I do think it is very much shown as a class thing where educated, mannered, upper middle class, liberal people are taken through this Holocaust torture porn by working class populist authoritarians and by secret police incel chuds into parapsychology and astrology.

So actually here I almost believe Salles in the sense that I can see how populist paranoid hysterical regime could act stupid and emotional. I need to emphasize that the military regime in Brazil was not like this as elsewhere in Latin America it wasn't like this at all. Again, please read very good book by Samuel Huntington, Political Order in Changing Societies, where it's made very clear especially in Latin America the military was often the only meritocratic institution, the only place where actual professionalism could flourish and merit could be rewarded. But Salas isn't thinking about that reality, he's thinking about our own time, where unfortunately I think he's right, where I can see a Libtard family like this, mostly innocuous Libtard

family, getting targeted, say if one of our guys' governments ever does get authoritarian power and they would target the father merely because he checks off all the trigger buttons for populists. He's not just liberal leftist but he's rich, he's educated, he's got this nice family with hippie daughter and the whole thing just, I guess part of the movie's point is that yes, he was providing material support to the leftist terrorists in fact, but only to the extent of sneaking letters from abroad or from jail or such to their family so it was purely like personal aid you know so they that mother would know how they're doing in jail somewhere or something in retrospect and again I haven't studied this case so I don't know if the director of the movie is

telling the full truth but in retrospect the persecution and execution of this man in this as shown in this movie was not worth it right because he wasn't even remotely important to the terrorists secret war effort you know taking him out achieved nothing it just got international outrage created a cause celebrity I mean it's a real story right it created cause celebrity with this aggrieved mother now becoming human rights lawyer permanent stick in the side of the military regime champion for indigenous rights and that whole thing so look I don't know it but I am sympathetic to the military regimes but But I believe in going to the sinews and like offing a few thousand men of this kind will not fix things if they're the wrong or irrelevant men.

It can cause all kinds of trouble if you get the wrong ones like this and the Argentine dictatorship was similarly unwise. In that case they mismanaged also the economy very badly as well as starting a losing war with Britain over the Falklands. So all I'm saying is you have to be smart and I think the feeling probably correct on Salis part, unfortunately, is that if present day populists ever had authoritarian power of this kind, they would do emotional stupid things like this just to satisfy their feelings. Look, I don't know, but you should watch this movie. I've shown it to various people and two women I've recommended it to by now cry during it, so it's an effective movie. It's a good effective leftist movie, unfortunately.

And you see how the present day types of characters in the news of our time and online are getting filtered through the terror imagination of pop culture. I don't want to end on this though, a much better movie by Walter Salas is the one that made him internationally famous to begin with. In English it's called Central Station, it's called Centrado Brasil in Portuguese. And it would be a great experience if only toned down again the sentimentalism at the end of it. It's about a pair of characters in which, look, I wouldn't be interested in these characters myself otherwise. It's a 10 or 11 year old orphan boy and a retired woman. She's a schoolteacher, somewhat, this is from 1998 movie, somewhat embittered cynical spinster,

makes a living scamming illiterate people in Rio de Janeiro's central train station, pretending to write letters for them for a small price, but mostly she never mails the letters and then laughs at, you know, reads the letters with her friend and laughs at them. But yes, I'm not interested in telling you plot details. Basically these two characters go on a long road trip from Rio to the far northeast of Brazil in Pernambuco, which, that's a huge road trip, it would be like a cross-country trip in the United States from, I don't know, from Maine to the southern tip of Florida, something like that. But Pernambuco, this place they go in northeast Brazil, I knew about it until recently as state that really Africa poverty levels, it's actually very dry there, it's not tropical

paradise at all. The beauty of this movie is its love for this undeveloped, mostly unknown part of the world and I like this kind of ramshackle, corrugated steel, new world romance of broken down highways, truck stop restaurants and especially, which seems Walter Salas, this is his talent, he should have been encouraged in this direction, he seems an appreciation for unusual faces, like the mix of the racial types in that part. As you can imagine, they are bound in this very mixed, rural Brazil, just the salt of earth if what you'd call them there's there's nothing really political at all in this movie that's part of its charm but he obviously wanted to indulge his his love this showing you monstrous deviant faces and racial types these

these that face you know that face the the peak of the movie is a religious pilgrimage festival in some town in that area and so I watched it mostly as ethnographic anthropological document I think it was intended that such on some level the emotional part of the movie you know a selfish spinster finally finding love and feelings of motherhood for an adopted son she never had I suppose this timeless heart-string puller blah blah but it did not affect me again sentimentalism to Spielberg worn on sleeve but what Salas is good at both in this and the other one is evoking a sense of nostalgia and longing quite quite aside from this and it's this is not an easy thing to do genuinely you have to do it visually and not so much in whatever the characters say they feel or crying that doesn't

work you have to show it visually and i think though he does appear to try very hard to do it and striving and showing your hand and technique and sinews is never good to see in any painter or or movie maker, even so I think he does achieve this feeling of longing that he wanted to. He leaves you a dreamy feeling of longing for love or longing for travel. But you know, the movie in some way is so simple it makes me angry that some of you who call yourselves artists and so forth and you live in the United States with your friends, I live alone but maybe, you know, and now you don't need film, an expensive film. Some of these digital cameras are very good and cheap. And a road trip movie of this kind, I don't know what exactly some of you are waiting for.

America is a big country and it would be the healthiest kind of non-obnoxious nationalism to have a road trip movie showing unusual parts, whatever still exists. Even if it's hinterlands are obese people now, I know that, but you can still have story in the midst of obesity. You can travel as sex therapist and TFR advisor. Will JFK Jr. promote public calisthenics classes to deal with America's obesity rate, which is so intimately tied to the birth rate problem? When can I have a thin black Afro slut girlfriend in America? These are the important questions on my mind. Can you have Mulatta Hunter's road trip movies drive from Florida to New Mexico? Would you stop with me in Houston? Anyone want to make this? Listen, until next week, I come soon, until next week, BAP out!