Hey everybody, it is Jack Murphy and you are back on the Jack Murphy Live podcast, the flagship podcast for The Liminal Order. You can find me on Twitter at Jack Murphy Live. You can go to the website, jackmurphylive.com. Get the book, Democrat to Deplorable, and come down to the website and check out what we're doing on The Liminal Order. The Liminal Order is a men's group seeking to train and equip men to be the best versions of themselves they can be. We train the mind, the body, and the spirit in The Liminal Order, all with the intent of being of service. Take care of ourselves first that we may better be able to serve our families our communities and perhaps even the nation

We've got some exciting things going on right now in the liminal order including a fitness challenge and an eight-week workshop on fourth-generation warfare come down check us out www.liminal-order.com But enough about all that Today's guest is somebody that I'm very super excited about Been trying to get him to come on the podcast for a couple of months now and the time is right It is perfect right now for us to do this conversation. I'm talking about the one and only Bronze Age mindset or Bronze Age pervert who's written the book Bronze Age Mindset. He is an anonymous author and commentator whose book is currently the subject of mainstream media debate. The book was already a huge underground hit, but today people like Claremont Institute

and Politico are talking about Bronze Age pervert. The book has allegedly made the rounds within some powerful members of the Trump administration, White House officials and now into conservative think tanks. So without further ado, I give you guys Bronze Age Pervert. How's it going today, sir? Yes, hello, very good. Very glad to be on your show, Jack, yes. I'm very happy to have you here. And I'm just gonna say something up front. I'll be honest, I don't know what to make of the book or all the ideas contained within it. There's a lot of stuff there which seems perfectly normal and then a lot which to some could seem completely crazy. it can be confusing, which is why I wanted to talk to you directly myself so I get the answers for me and for everybody listening.

And that's the spirit of the conversation I wanna have today, which is one of just sort of exploration and understanding and of curiosity. And I appreciate you taking the time to do this and to going into it with an open mind. No, pleasure is mine to be here. Thank you so much. Perfect. Well, like I said, this book, Bronze Age Mindset, was originally sort of just like an underground sensation. I think it came out earlier last year, and it's just sold tons of copies. It was at one point in the top 150 overall, not just in one section, but overall on the Amazon website, and I believe they sell something like eight million books there. So that's a pretty impressive feat. And now the book has made it into conservative think tanks and mainstream media, and there's been a series of articles

that have come out, notably in Politico and from the Claremont Institute, where Michael Anton gave it a very thorough review, almost 5,000 words is from what I understand. And it sort of brought the book and these ideas closer and closer into the mainstream. And, you know, Mr. Bapp, I'll just call you Bapp if you don't mind, you know, before we were talking, before we started recording, you mentioned to me that you had some things you wanted to say about those media pieces, and I'm just gonna open up the floor for you a little bit here. So what, how did it feel? And what do you think about the sudden interest from mainstream media and from conservative think tanks? What does that mean to you? Well, on one hand is very nice because I want my message to get wider exposure. Any author does.

And I was very glad Mike Anton gave it such a thorough review, as you say. On the other hand, I don't think he agreed very much with me, but that's fine. gave me a fair review and I intend to respond to him in writing. As for the other piece, the political piece, that is a different matter and if we have a minute, I would like to talk about this for a moment. The political piece was very concerning. It was a hit piece on me. Tell us, what do you think? Well, quite aside from the fact that it connected me implicitly to shooters and to violence, which is just absurd for anyone who knows anything about me, quite aside from that lie, there was a much more sinister and significant lie that was spread. The media attacks on me, they try to oppress me

in coordination with probably with political strategists. And if you have a few minutes, I want to call out their dirty little game now, then we can talk about details in the book, but I think people need to understand what is going on, why they are doing this. Yeah, I would love that. I mean, we're very interested, my audience, my listeners, we're interested in the media games, we're interested in the online networks, the information networks, the way that people push disinformation, misinformation, propaganda, and whatever to control the narrative and therefore control reality. So So seeing something like this happen in real time and talking to the players involved is something that we're all very interested in. So go for it, man. Tell me what you're thinking. Yes, thank you.

Because this information, what you just said is exactly what it is, is complete lies. You know, the Russia hoax failed. They built it up so much. It was huge embarrassment for them. So now they are going full with the Trump, evil Trump is a racist white nationalist thing. the head of New York Times even said that they were switching to that strategy. And in fact, they were already veering in that direction. They were trying to combine conspiracy theories because it's in these people's fevered heads that Putin or excuse me, putler, you know, the latest incarnation of Hitler, okay, that he's been spreading a white nationalism around the world, an absurd thing, which if you want, we can talk about later. But the point is, they were already switching to the

Trump is a white supremacist trope and it's very significant. Biden began his presidential campaign at Charlottesville. I don't know if you remember. Yes, of course, the many fine people comments. Yes, why would Biden begin his campaign there? It's obviously the narrative for 2020, okay? It's been obvious for a while. I didn't realize they would try to make me a linchpin of their lies and conspiracy theories and the political article was disgusting smear job and it was the most, by the way, it was the most viewed political page that day when it came out about two weeks ago. It was shared by all the top left Democrat media establishment, all the corrupt Hillary guys, Peter Dow, the oligarch, the billionaire, many others and it tried to, how should I put this,

It tried to say the really sinister part, apart from the violence accusations which are absurd. It tried to say there's a white supremacist conspiracy in the White House and that I'm corrupting somehow this administration with my evil, that I'm the linchpin of a conspiracy to corrupt America's youth, to radicalize them or to radicalize the military. It's out of a dumb like James Bond idea. And if I was more vain than I am, I would go along with it out of, you know, out of desire for attention. But I don't want to, it's all fake. It's all straight out of Clinton playbook. If you don't remember in 1990s, she went on TV. And these are her words, she talked about vast right wing conspiracy against her husband, Bill Clinton. You know,

that's right. Yeah. And this is the same thing. It's done by her operatives and their heirs. And and it's important for me to call it out early so people can realize what they're trying to do to me. I have no interest in being part of a contrived media push to frame this president and his supporters, or even worse from my point of view, to smear and frame the whole youth movement, which has really nothing to do with white nationalism, any of these things, you know? Right, and in the Politico article, what they do is the sort of classic smash-up, guilt by like paragraph proximity and they talk about how oh there's these accounts that follow you also oppose mass migration oh and these other people that oppose mass migration

you know read this book called the great replacement and then oh this other guy who said that he talked about the great replacement went and killed some people then then they smash up other paragraphs right underneath it where they start mentioning you know people in the White House and whatnot. So there's really like no direct link made by any means. It's just sort of like association by association and by association. It's insinuations. And you know, the journalist who wrote it who obviously never read my book, and who's not very bright, but he'd never retweeted his he never tweeted out his own article. And also it's very interesting. It was I believe it was a hit piece that was already lined up I don't know who coordinated it but I

have my suspicions and I think other such articles will come as they try to build this narrative that I'm some kind of James Bond villain. Well it's very common you know my experience in dealing with men's issues and men's groups and such you know people from the New York Times as writer Nellie Bowles and others, they're constantly trying to find links between people, the men who are looking to improve themselves and get better. They're trying to find links between that and mass shootings, and they're constantly trying, they're constantly trying to make a comparison, constantly trying to say that people that question what I call feminist overreach, you use more colorful language in your book, I would say, but my way of saying it is feminist overreach,

They're trying to tie anyone that talks about that to mass shootings, and that's a guilt by association kind of thing. And that's not a game that we like to play. And has there been any sort of negative fallout for you so far from the Politico article? I mean, just so you know, this guy, Ben, what's his last name, Ben Schreckinger, he sent me a DM a few months ago asking me if he could attend one of the private meetings of our men's organization, The Liminal Order. And I was like, absolutely not. There's no way in hell, first of all, no one is ever invited who's not a member. Second of all, no press will ever be invited to any event without full disclosure to everyone who's in attendance. And that guy is a White House correspondent according to his business card.

So I am very curious as to why Ben from Politico all of a sudden is interested in small, private, online men's organizations, underground books written by anonymous guys who's also now he's supposed to be allegedly a White House correspondent, or not allegedly, he is a White House correspondent. So how and why are all these things coming together right now? What is the plan, you think? What are they cooking up? I mean, I think a couple of things. I think the main one, at least as regards me, and I'm sure they will involve other people in Manosphere or whatever, is what I just said. They try to make this narrative that we are corrupting the youth and these other things, okay? After the Russia hoax failed, they need some way to smear Trump and they're

trying to use me and probably you also to smear him. OK. Right. But my book isn't even especially a political book. If I had to describe it to a normie, I don't know how you describe it, but it's like a modernist prom. There's an old nice lady, a boomer lady on Twitter. I don't know her. Small account. And when someone else was making some time ago similar accusations about my book again, without having read it. But she said, you know, this is not a manifesto. She said Bronze Age mindset is this generations on the road. I don't know that I have no idea if I have as much influence as Kerwek did. I'm not even especially fond of his book. But it's much closer to something like that than to any political manifesto. It's just absurd to try to make

me into this. And by the way, since this connects to what you just said about the way you promote self-improvement for men and why these people are so threatened by that. I'm not saying that I just wrote some kind of artsy book out of a desire to pretend I'm harmless. My book is not harmful in the sense that you know I don't teach violence, I don't do quite the opposite and so on, but it is very damaging to the establishment. It's damaging to the so-called elite and to their agenda and their pretensions. I think what you do, what Roush does, what these other people do on the internet is the same. It shows to these people that they have no more say really with the youth. They are not the future. So of course they try to smear us

the only way they know how by tying us to violence or whatever, pretending that I'm some kind of foreign guy trying to corrupt the military that I guarantee you that's what they will go with next. Right. I'm gonna jump ahead a little bit here. But I you mentioned that the book was a taking shots at our critique of the establishment and the elites and it makes them afraid. One of the questions I was going to ask you later is, of the establishment itself, at whom did you take aim, because I think Michael Anton, his reaction to me was like, this guy, Bronze Age pervert, is talking to the audience that we establishment conservatives want to address, and he's doing a better job than we are, and for that purpose we should be afraid.

So it seems to me that your book is probably, can be sort of discarded by people on the left because they already hate us. But for people on the right I think that it's actually sort of terrifying because you have opened up a conduit to the next generation and that's something that they have been unable to do so far. And for that reason you may also be subjected to attacks from people on the right as well. What do you think about that? Oh I have no doubt and in fact many people, so called on the right, are bad people. They will attack, they'll come out with all guns against Trump in 2020. Not by the way that I'm a big Trump booster, but just be aware that many people so called on the right, Russ Douthat, other people like that at New York Times and elsewhere. They're

hardly really on the right. But how to answer your thing? Look, The people on the left and the right hate me because I talk to young people outside of their knowledge and outside of their surveillance. And what they need to understand is they can try to dox me, isolate me, destroy me. I'm guessing they will try all of these things. They try to identify me as a representative of this online youth movement so that then can destroy me and they think therefore also this whole 4chan youth movement that's been going on online. They don't understand and I want to also tell you this. I think you do understand what's going on online is much bigger than me. It's much bigger than bronze age pervert or bronze age

mindset. I didn't invent it and the conditions that led to it will exist with or without me. It's a whole movement of young people who communicate with each other, with images, with jokes, with a highly specialized form of knowledge that the whole establishment had no access to whatsoever. They missed it entirely. And there are guys who came on in 2015 or 2014 and they were 15 or 16 years old. So half of their teenage years they've lived in this world, okay, which has spread. well, you say the left doesn't care, they do care. It's spread well beyond the so called right. That's what I'm trying to say. It's spread among in the pop culture of the youth at large, except outside the eyes and control of the establishment. That's why they're panicking. And my book is only just the tip

of the iceberg of that. You know, it's just the one thing that came out of that that made it to national media. Maybe the first but there are other things that will come out. And the missing this entirely and they're panicking. They have no access to this to this entire huge segment of the youth who are good kids. You know, they go to school, they have good jobs, etc. It doesn't work to try to smear them the way these people try. So they try to smear me instead. Right, well there are kids coming up and coming of age politically speaking who have only ever heard from their elites and elders that white, cis, straight men are the root of all evil and so there's I think that there's a growing dissatisfaction with that that sort of label and there's no there's no way any self-respecting

individual male like that can can support or be involved in a process that sees them or their fathers or their grandfathers or their legacy as being the source of all the problems and something that needs to be eradicated And while those kids may not understand what critical theory is or what actual social justice or intersectionality is, you know, all that has really worked its way into all of our media and narratives, universities, everything. And it's not sufficient enough for the leftist philosophers and ideologues to just discuss things. It's built into their ideology to destroy and dismantle things. In fact, that's their explicit, express, stated goal. And the morality code is based around intersectionality which has the white male at the middle of it.

Now personally I fucking hate talking about all these issues about race and gender and that shit because I was raised to not think about that stuff. I'm Gen X, I'm 43, I was raised don't think about race, don't think about gender, judge everybody by their merits and let's just be happy. You know I was like okay that seems reasonable to me and now all that has sort of been turned on its head, and people are coming up are not going to really want to stick with that. Now, this brings me, what you said brings me to a question that I have for you, and you mentioned that it was, you used the language and ideas and imagery of sort of the very online, sort of underground Chani community, and I was fortunate in some respects that I got online big time, like around 2007,

so I've, and I've connected with a lot of these people, So I have seen this stuff evolve over, you know, more than a decade now. And as I was reading the book, I was struck by sort of thinking it was like, it was like urging people to do things and describing the circumstances. But at the same time, it was sort of like surfacing an underground to the mainstream, if that's even possible with a self-published book. But it seemed to me it was like a collection of all the things that I've been reading and thinking and people have been talking about over time. Was there any intent that you had to sort of memorialize what you had discovered and the things that you had talked, you know, the people you had talked to and the things that you'd read and your own ideas

and contextualize it in that community and bring it forth? Or was the book just all coming straight off the top of your head and the way that you've been thinking about things for many years now? Yes, much more the second thing you say. Yeah, because my intended audience was really this youth generation that you talk about, and not the mainstream. I have no desire whatsoever to talk to the mainstream. I wrote the book, we can talk later if you want, but I wrote the book for that audience, principally. And I like you, I've been online since around exactly that time. And maybe you also, but I've been, I don't think I take too much credit, I've been in part the origin of some of the means people use and have been using for a while. So I've been part of it for a long time. No, I that's just

how we communicate with each other. Right. And I have to, sorry, if I may, I have to, it isn't just about white youth, I must emphasize that it's, it's much bigger than the, there's a joke running around that this dissident right is is mostly non white. And there's I think, no, but I think there's a lot of truth to that people would be very surprised to learn. Yeah, I would agree with that, and again, me personally, I'm uninterested in race and ethnic-specific conversations and such like that. The Gen-Xer in me sort of takes a sour look at things like that, but you mentioned that you're writing specifically for the youth movement, so what do you say to someone who doesn't know anything about you, who may not know anything about rhetoric or satire or hyperbole in literature,

what do you tell them about your book? How do you tell them to approach it? And what do you think happens to someone who picks up your book and reads it, who isn't steeped in rhetoric, doesn't understand sort of the big picture and the techniques involved? Yes, I imagine they might misunderstand, But the book to a normie, which is what you're talking about, that's the name for a normal person, let's say a mainstream person, right? That kind of person, I think, unless they are malicious or demented, would realize for them it's a humor book. I mean, there are things in it that are so absurd to a normie, right? So my hope is that such a person would maybe chocolate it and put it down. Aside from that, or even that, I really don't care what they think. I didn't write the book for them.

Who did? Right, for normies. But let's just say just like a college freshman who doesn't know that like American politics has been steeped with rhetoric. I mean, I remember reading about like an election around the turn of the 19th century where the presidential candidates in the newspapers that they owned themselves, mind you, were like writing about the other guy saying, if so-and-so wins, there's gonna be open fornication in the streets. I mean, just like crazy stuff, like end of time stuff. And so there's a tradition of rhetoric and hyperbole in American politics, but when you're 18, you don't know that shit. And there are some passages in the book that I think if people read quite literally, could lead them maybe to a different outcome than perhaps you had intended.

Well, you'd have to tell me what you have in mind, But I can tell you, I have a very big audience in Scandinavia. The first review of my book was in Swedish. And since then, it's been circulated widely in Scandinavia. I have huge sales there, huge sales in Japan. So my book is not- Really? Yes, it's not specific to American political culture or even just to the lingo of this internet world. I think I try to go beyond that talk to someone who doesn't know anything at all about it and hence the many references to books from antiquity to philosophers and so forth who have inspired me and have inspired the ideas in the book. So I've tried to go beyond just say a small corner of the internet but I should emphasize

the attraction of this corner of the internet is that we are not completely, although although, you know, the stereotype is we're artists, we all have Asperger's, right? But we don't just talk to each other. We have tremendous reach outside of our corner of the internet, you know, Menaqui known for this post, you know, we can talk about it. How has your reach outside of this corner of the internet changed now that this book is picking up momentum? It's too soon to tell. You have to remember the Anton review came out on the 19th of August, I believe. And less than five days later came the political review. And from what I see online is I see horrible lies told about me, which I came on your show partly to counter, okay, because I don't want to be part of political struggles of information

warfare of these kinds of things. I don't want to be contrived as part of this conspiracy they're making up. Do you do you feel like that you stepped into the arena with this kind of book, though? I mean, you can't throw a rock and not expect one to come back at you. Well, I don't know. Again, my audience was not the political world. It was not, I do not intend to change one election or the other. My aim was to begin to change culture. And I encourage readers of the book to do just that, to make movies, to write books, to read certain books. So for Peter Daou or, you know, myopic strategists for Hillary Clinton to take interest in it doesn't make objective sense unless they were planning something nefarious. It's not intrinsic to the book itself. You see what I'm saying?

Right, it's the impact and the conduit to the young people and your ability to influence them, which is self-evident across Twitter and social media, the way that the images of the very high physique males and the books, which I like. I mean, hey, it's all fun. And the picture of people taking, people taking pictures of their book in various locations and whatever else, I mean, the influence is very clear. And those democratic strategists might be dumb in some ways, but they are smart in others, and they can acknowledge and do understand that having, in today's world, getting your message into people's ears is one of the biggest challenges, given the widespread number of new sources and stuff in the competition for people's attention.

And if you're somebody that actually has people's attention, well then A, they wanna figure out how you did it, and B, they probably wanna take that power away from you. I keep thinking, though, about how you said that your intentions weren't for the political audience. And I'm thinking back, personally, when I first started tweeting and writing, I tweeted and wrote a lot different when I only thought 50 people were gonna read it. Now that I know that the size of a small town could possibly read every tweet, and sometimes even millions of people can see a tweet, Thousands of people have read my book. I have in my own sense of what I call platform responsibility, right? I would never write some of the things I wrote when I was first starting Anonymous for fun,

as a joke, et cetera, as I would now. Do you feel like if you had the same platform size when you wrote the book as you do now, and will seemingly have in the future, even bigger, would you write the book the same way? How will you handle your power growing and the unintended consequences of your writing? So how do you plan to handle that? I think I would write the book the same way. I don't think there's anything irresponsible in the book, and I think it's a very wholesome message, the practical advice I give. If there's something not like that, you should tell me what you have in mind. But no, I think I would do the same. Well, you asked me, and so I'm going to have to ask a couple questions. So wholesome, I don't know that wholesome is the word that I would use to describe it.

Indeed, some of the few concrete example call to action items in the book are relatively wholesome and benign. For example, go to the gym, worship the sun and steel, which I love. That's a wonderful phrase. That's something I've been writing about. Anyone that knows anything about improving yourself knows that you need to aspire and perform at a high level physically and build your body and such. That's great. On top of that, you talk about content creation. You urge your audience to create videos and to write and to express themselves, which in today's day and age is a fundamental part of how we're going to figure out how to adapt to this new technology that we have. Jordan Hall, who's been on my podcast and will be coming up again soon, he calls it the Express and Explore phase

of this new technology that we have. So everybody's expressing themselves and exploring ideas. So I see that that's great advice. And then also you give them advice to form very tight male friendships, fraternity, societies, and orders. And obviously I take that very seriously as I've already created and done something in that very exact particular vein, which is to create a fraternity of men who seek to support each other and wanna prepare themselves to be the best people that they can be. And if something crazy happens down the line, be prepared to take appropriate action. And by action, that can mean protect your family, I don't know what, but just be prepared and aware. So that to me is like the wholesome part. There's a couple of the rhetorical flourishes, let's say,

or sort of the, and this is gonna dovetail with another question I wanna ask, but sort of like predictions for the future and or slash requests for the future, I don't know. Like, for example, there's a passage where you say that in the future, either, I can't remember, is it there will be or there should be or there shall be a sweeping hordes of barbarians coming across the globe. Now, how, A, is that wholesome? B, is that something that you predict by observation or is it something that you wish to see come to fruition? Is it inevitability, is it desirable? Let's talk a little bit about that. Well, you have to remember, I also say somewhere that zoo animals from the zoo should be opened and that animals from the zoo should run free in the cities, you know. And I think-

I know, but as I'm reading that, to me, that's a metaphor for unleashing the beast within upon the world, I mean, is it not? Or was that just a throwaway, literal joke? Well, actually, it's a joke within trading among each other, but it's obviously to anyone reading that, you asked about someone not steeped in this internet culture, anyone reading that realizes it's good humor. The media tries to, and I'm not saying you're doing that here, I know you're playing devil's advocate, but media tries to deploy humorlessness as a strategy. They do this with Trump all the time, you see. He jokes, he says he's the chosen one or something, and they pretend to not know he's joking. So there's obviously, my book is listed as humor. There's obviously a lot of stuff in it like that.

Now as for the specific question you ask about the future, that's not a call to action. Many people have, let's say, predicted the withering away of the state and its replacement by sub-state actors. That's not a call to action. It's based on observations about political life across the world, and it's entirely possible that at some point in the future, who knows when, it could be 100 years. That's not a call to action, but. Right, right, and I mean, and that's also part and parcel to like fourth generation warfare, too, where the lines between military and civilian are being blurred, and the combat comes in all different kinds of levels, whether it's mental, moral, spiritual, or physical. You know, those things are evolving. So, you know, it is an observation

of something that may come in the future. And this is exactly why I wanted to have this conversation, is because I tried to read the book as if I were someone that didn't know anything that I know, right? And when I read you say that women's freedom is an infection, a fatal infection upon the West, it makes me laugh, right? Because it's funny. But, you know, so somebody who's not, who doesn't understand that there's a deeper, more nuanced argument within there, they're going to read that and just be fucking terrorized. Right? And so, you know, that's your way of saying feminist overreach, I guess, is what I'm understanding. And, you know, I think that there are probably people who will hear me ask these questions, hear your answers, and hear you say it's humor and these are jokes

and whatever, and then they'll still be like, Nah, it's still just secret code to turn everybody into pirates running around the world, you know, just taking what they want. Well, then I would be worshiping the Somalis, right? I mean. Right, right, right, which is right. So again, again, this is exactly why, this is exactly why I wanted to have this conversation. And before I move on from sort of like this meta part and the structure and stuff, like, did you, you said you've been very online since around the time I have did you hang out around any of those old blogs like Royce or the old ruche place? Did you ever read anybody do you ever read Jack Donovan because like a lot of what I read sort of felt like echoing? Jack Donovan's way of men

And certainly there were terms and ideas and memes and turns of phrase that Reminded me of very specific commenters back on those old boards. I told you about that again. I was like no. Oh my god I know who it is But you know, I'm guessing you hung out in those areas like did those those guys have Influenced you like are you connected to them in any way or sort of like that old not? Operationally, you know, we're not friends But her feast was he was very important for all of us many of us went on Twitter because he was there Jack Donovan not so much. I have nothing against him, but I'm telling you being honest. I've never read his books I think it is probably okay. The inspirations for my books, the intellectual inspirations, I don't make a secret of it. I lead people directly to

the writers. I say read Nietzsche, read Schopenhauer. I'm thinking sort of stylistic. Yes, at one point I do copy one phrase from a commenter on Rossi's blog but I don't think this of interest to broader audience and that's not me and I just thought he had a funny turn of phrase in one you know a butt hexed okay I like that but let me address the example you just gave of how it could my rhetoric you say could be misinterpreted or the thing about women because okay so you're right I do say that giving the franchise to women, the voting franchise was the biggest self own that Western civilization, any civilization has ever done. Okay. And I stand by that as a historical observation. It has nothing to do with call to action. But as a historical

observation, the so called liberation of women has is unprecedented in human society. The few times it's been sort of tried it's it's led to disaster because as I argue in the book and elsewhere it is an impossibility what you do when you free women to vote and not just women, but when you put Universal democracy the way it exists now, it doesn't actually empower women or people at large you give certain actors in society you talk rhetoric you give certain orators or manipulators in society power and And we can talk about historical rightness or wrongness of that, but in so far as call to action, remember, in the book, I follow this up by saying, and you should never try, as some idiots do, to quote unquote, put women back in the kitchen or to curtail their rights in any way.

I think I say this in the book, too. I say it is women that will save us because women, more than men, can still follow their wild passions and they will vote, sometimes they vote for men or whatever, who can break through the machinery of the modern tyrannical state, which only pretends it's a democracy, by the way. But remember, I say that, you know, so I do a turnaround in terms of practical call. I say, no, it is women, women voters who may actually vote in people like Trump and others, or Trump is just the beginning, he's not. Okay, so I can try to mix in the book what you would call extreme statements of truth, of theoretical truth, with moderate calls for practice. Okay, so in terms of practice, I'm a moderate, you can say. But I will never edit what I believe to be the truth

because it may offend some. And you are right with what you said before, power and truth and maybe publicity and truth don't mix. But I had much smaller account then. And yes, when you are obscure and you lack power, you are freer to tell the truth. Right, part of, on a meta level, I thought that the book was a demonstration in freedom, right? It was a demonstration in I can do what I want, say what I want, and I'm gonna get away with anything that I want. and this is sort of a way to follow. It's sort of a role model. It's sort of like, not to the extreme perhaps, because most people don't have it in them to be extreme, but in a sense of like, maybe finally somebody, a guy out there who's like always put his needs second is finally gonna be like, okay, well, it's okay,

I can want something that I want. I mean, this is just like a small example, but did you have any of that in mind? Were you trying to lead by example with your words like that? Absolutely not. Not in the sense that I want, let's say, a 16 or 17-year-old guy to go around saying such things in public. In fact, I encourage them to be quite cautious in some ways. It leads me, by the way, to something else I want to clarify to enemies who are probably listening now or watching my every move. Again, I have no doubt that they are going to try to isolate me, to dox me and that they're trying to dox me as part of this whole frame job they have. And they can go ahead and do that. I've arranged my life in such a way that doxing isn't really going to change much

for me. I haven't been living in America for a while. OK, so other people may not be in the same condition as me, but for me, what doxing will do and what this constant digging on their side will do, it will embarrass them. There are things about me, let me just put it this way now without giving details about myself, but they should be very careful because I'm connected to their friends, I'm connected to their patrons, I'm connected to institutions they look up to. A lot of people and institutions would be embarrassed a lot of things they like would be embarrassed let me put it that way i don't really fit the profile they want to contrive for so-called alt-right which is by the way a label i reject and actually none of the online or very few of the online prankster kids fit that profile

we can talk about this if you want they just tell lies it's all vile lies yeah i mean they put the alt-right label on me and you know that was pretty far from the truth and and I also you know I was doxxed and you know they came after me and sure they got my normie career taken care of I got fired based on things that people had dug up out of the internet trash from years ago and then other just sort of normal things that any reasonable person should be able to discuss like the merits of sanctuary cities and the impact of undocumented immigration on things like school budgets and things like that. Reasonable things to discuss, but I set up myself in such a way to kind of anticipating maybe that would happen and I have been able to turn a doxing into a positive

and to use it to become more powerful and I suspect in some ways that if that ever happened to you, you would be able to do the same thing. In fact, I have absolutely no doubt that you've thought about that quite a bit. Yes, yes, they need to understand. I'm not going anywhere, you know. Some people disappear, unfortunately, when they get doxxed, I'm not. But it's important to understand why they're doing this. They believe by isolating me or isolating you that they can put cat back in the bag when it comes to this youth movement. It's not going anywhere. And when you mentioned earlier about why they would take interest in you and us who built our own audiences over time. It just shows how artificial before all of this popular culture has been in America, probably in the world as a whole.

They pick a young guy out of Los Angeles or some other place, Miami, and they raise him to be a singer and everything is public relations. He's completely, and through raising up such people, entirely hope to modulate popular culture and the minds of young people and we have been talking to the young entirely outside of that okay and they can get rid of us you know but they can't get rid of this and it's not just white youth this needs to be emphasized the entire sections of the youth not even just on the right are dissatisfied and they've been communicating with each other online outside the view of the authorities and establishment and that's going to continue No matter what. Yes. No, and it's only going to actually proliferate.

And for folks like me and the members of the Liminal Order, we've got over a hundred guys now. Seven countries around the world. Three different continents. Our goal is to sort of get out of the spotlight, get off of social media, out of the glare. And to sort of go back underground and put down deep roots. And in fact, part of my inspiration for doing that with Liminal Order was talking to Curtis Yarbin. He suggested that exact thing, which is to stop engaging with the predators on the savanna and to actually sort of become a little bit more quiet and a little bit more judicious with the things that you do and you say, and to sort of allow things to have time to grow and to evolve. And I know that online, the kids, the young people, we don't mean children here.

We mean like 18, 24, somewhere in that range. They're definitely taking their conversations out of, they've learned, right? They know, don't be too upfront about it because it's gonna get you in trouble. And so those conversations are certainly still happening. I wanted to just sort of now get into some of the meat and the concepts in the book because there's so much fascinating stuff in here. I gotta say, reading it reminded me of reading Camille Paglia, in that every sentence and assertion you made was backed up by historical references to antiquity and the classics and stuff, which I found to be very impressive and very interesting. There's by no means any way that I could fact check or confirm everything that you said in there, but of the things I did know about,

you seem to get them right, and so I'm gonna trust that. But the book contents is something that I also really want to talk about here. And one of the main things I want to talk about is this idea of, of space and claiming space. Is there a, you know, can you give us a little summary on that? It's a very primary theme within, within the whole book. And it's something that I want to dig into and dig into a little bit with you. Yes, I think I can sum it up in one quote that I think Carl Schmidt, he said, They've put us out to pasture regarding the fate of Europe after World War II, when it was reduced to a province and entirely dependent. And I think this experience of essentially being put in, I don't want to say a mental

asylum, but something like that, an enclosed own space is something that many young people grow up today feeling very dissatisfied with this lack of ability to explore so forth. So I wanted to talk about this feeling in context of biology in general and meaning of life in general. Meaning of life biologically, I mean, yeah. I see. I see. So what is constraining young people in their space? Who's putting them in their space? How is the space you're talking about already preoccupied? What's occupying it? I would like to just, for you to expand on that a little bit, please. Yes, I must say, I think before we start the talk, I told you in regards of particular ideas or passages of the book, I would prefer not to elaborate too much detail because I put them this way in the book for a reason.

The book was something I'd thought about for perhaps 10 years or longer. And I express things in it in a very condensed way for a reason. While writing some passages, I found myself going for many pages with explanations and arguments the way people normally would. And I stopped myself and I limited myself to expressing the main ideas. skipped many steps of reasoning on purpose. And so for this reason, I don't want to get too much into detailed elaboration of passages. So I think the book speaks for itself. But I can tell you regarding what you're asking now, in the book, I say we don't know who the owners of this space are. And I meant that and I will leave it at that. But the feeling that your possibilities for

action are entirely constrained is undeniably there and it's not just there in the first world it's much more pronounced people don't realize this if you go to a third world slum it's it's much more it's not uh it's much more advanced this this feeling right that's sort of a sort of a lack of choice a lack of freedom i i guess this was just one step in a series of questions I wanted to go through which was you know trying to find a frontier like where where is it right now where people can feel like they're exploring um where is it that they feel like they can get that sort of vitality that you described from seeking out new adventures and new places and unknown things and weirdness and the underworld like well I think you yes I think there isn't is

Yeah, I think that's the point. I think it's been completely squashed down, tamped down throughout the 20th century and much more so after the cold war started. But you said one word there at the end and it's the last section of my book and I'll just put it at that. There is a frontier, it's just not what people think it is. Because the way this world is controlled, you asked who the owners of this space are. The owners of this space are the people who just assassinated Epstein in front of the public knowing there would be no consequences for them. They are stronger than the president, they're stronger than the department of justice, you don't know who they are, they don't care, and that is the frontier. Except a normal person has no access to it. The Epstein, I like

like how he called it an assassination, the apparent suicide of Jeffrey Epstein. Just kidding. That should have been just a massive, and I use this term loosely now, red pilling sort of revealing moment for the entire nation, that there are these forces out there that seemingly can just murder the guy. We all knew the guy was gonna get killed. And then they did it right in front of our faces and they're gonna get away with it. If that didn't just stop everybody in their tracks like nothing really is gonna I don't think it seems to me that We've sort of accepted that would you agree that we've accepted the presence of of people that can operate with impunity and and commit murders and steal billions of dollars and Start wars and I mean have we just accepted that as our fate

I'm afraid so. I'm afraid everything they say about Russia, that it's run by spooks who bribe and extort people with kompromat and this kind of thing, is how America and in fact all modern states run, except here it's much more occulted by this whole language of democracy and rights and so forth. And people have been hypnotized, many into buying that language, but more and more they're seeing the way the cake is baked, right? Sorry to use cliche, but they saw it with the Podesta emails. Yes. You know, it's so obvious. But I am a bit black pill or pessimistic about this. I have an older friend who says, Kennedy, when he was killed, everyone, no one believed the government story. The single shooter. Yeah. I mean, it's come to be believed because

because it's the historical narrative that got put in books, but apparently at the time, no one believed the story. They all thought the CIA did it or whoever. Some secret agency we don't even know about. But did that change anything? No, I think. So you ask who owns the space and I can only begin to think that that is who. Well, one of the frontiers that I saw and I see in my life and that I seek out is one that's inside my own head. I'm finding through meditation and the time that I take to become present inside my own thoughts or even to able to discard them, that there's like a whole frontier inside of my brain that I had no idea was even there. And I recommend guys to take 10 minutes every day to try to meditate and to try to calm

themselves and to try to explore that space because truly that is sort of one of the only places where you can actually find freedom and liberation. In fact, Charles Manson I think claimed to be more free in prison than on the outside because he had more time to dedicate to going into his mind and going into his space. Where are you on meditation and non-denominational spirituality perhaps like that. I didn't get the sense that you were a Christian per se, but what do you think about the frontier inside and sort of self-mastery as a way to deal with some of these issues that you've raised in the book? Yes, I know many people use meditation, profit from it. I don't know very much about it myself. I'm against quietism which I know you are

not recommending it as sole purpose. Quietism? Yes, I'm against retreating into one's own mind. I am in the same way I'm against many people on both the right and the left who are dissatisfied with modern world want intelligent people to drop out of the system to move to middle of nowhere, Montana or Alaska or something and I don't like that. That's a way to self-castrate yourself. I think we need to continue the fight against this very oppressive. I think it's one of the most oppressive tyrannical societies that we live in now, okay, and you cannot give up the fight against it. Now, it has to be a peaceful fight, as I repeatedly say in the book. In fact, they want people to engage in violence because it allows them to increase their

surveillance and their power. But when I say you fight them, you have to fight them spiritually. You have to engage them the way I tried with the book, with Samizdat, with media, with videos, with most of all with mockery. It's what absolutely kills them is mockery. They can't stand being mocked, you know, so they come after me and people who mock them. Right. In fact, that's one of the things that I have wrapped up on my notes here was that was a very concrete call to action that you had there, which is, I'm just going to read a quote real quick. The long game of persuading the public is far from one. Keep the eye on the task far from the accomplished, to discredit authorities, to mock all public peonies, to show leaders of government, bureaucracy, finance,

corporations, big tech, and media for the pathetic ghouls they are. And that is a pretty, it's in wonderful language, and ghouls and stuff is very strong words, but this is a very specific, concrete call to action for people, and it's also not one that's extreme or radical in any way. And in fact, it's I think a playbook from the left even, the mockery especially. And I can totally get behind that and we've seen the effectiveness. And Trump utilizes mockery to the chagrin of many, but it is effective. And when you do mock people, it does sort of denude them of their power. And it is something that I've become more and more aware of as I understand the differences between rhetoric and dialectic and which is more powerful today. I mean, sitting down and trying to walk someone,

as you did, as you said, you decided not to walk people through all the rationale and the reasoning that you went through to get to your positions. You just went straight to the main idea and then put some really powerful language behind it. Is today an era in which dialectic and reasoning like that reasoning like that is not going to be effective in any case, and that rhetoric and big, powerful language and mockery is really our primary tool. And or has that always been? I don't know. I'm not an expert in this particular field. Yes, I would agree with you. It's always been and the only people who believe otherwise have maybe mild case Asperger's, which is fine. We love them, you know, but I, you look

at someone like Nietzsche, who I keep mentioning in the book, there are many people, middle-brow people, who read him and they say, oh, this is all rhetoric. It's all rhetoric. They are the ones who can't get beyond his rhetoric. But Nietzsche isn't interested in talking to the middle-brow. He talks to two audiences. He wants to talk to the people on one hand, and perhaps artists, and others who would make art, literature, writers on the other. And on the other hand, he's in dialogue with great philosophers like Schopenhauer, Plato, etc. And he doesn't care about the other audiences. And this is lost on many people. When those are your intended audiences, you don't need to go into all the details, what you call dialectic, and

and present all of your reasons on one hand. In fact it's in poor taste. I find it horribly boring. What's the point of that? People who really like to think will fill in the steps on their own. They will follow your illusions. They will follow the writers you put in and read on their own. They will make the connections on their own. And then with the rhetoric you will affect the others who read it for entertainment. But I have no interest in in, for example, convincing someone writing at New York Times or even a pundit, a blogger, I mean, many are friends, but I have no interest in convincing, you know, London Review of Books. Okay, right. No interest. Right. And, you know, you very well described the sensation that I had when

I was reading the book. Even though I was, I mean, I read it a while back, I I reread it again in the last few days. Even though I was struck by some of the imagery and the language, I could feel myself sort of backfilling in the steps and like, what does it mean on the ground today? And like, what does it mean for me in my day-to-day life? And for people that are seeking answers and truths and stuff, you're right, they will fill it in. And it is also a powerful persuasion to clearly describe or sort of push off your unintended audience, right? You wanna disqualify people from reading your book. I have no interest in respectability. I need to emphasize this because you brought up at the beginning that my idea is going mainstream and so I don't think it's possible

for them to go mainstream. And I'm very glad of the opportunity to increase publicity. I can't refuse that because I do want my book and my message to spread. But I don't care about mainstream respectability. And I did not do this to springboard to that. I have no interest in that. You know, I told you mentioned Curtis Yarvin. I told him recently the same thing I'm about to tell you. There's nothing published now under people's real names that anyone will read in 20 years, let alone 50 or 100. You know, I don't really care about what I've called the name fag world. It's the world of the dead. I'm not talking about you or him, by the way, but believe me, I know this world well. I'm not saying that to brag, but I know its highest institutions very well, they are dead.

There's nothing worthwhile that can come out of it. I'm in dialogue only with the audience I told you. I wrote the book thinking of when I, myself, was 16, 17, 18, maybe through 23, something like this. And what I would have wanted to read and the writers I would have wanted to be introduced to. And I wrote it for them. And on the other hand, I try to be in dialogue with other writers. I'm just a humble blogger. I have no interest in the world of the dead of the New York Times, okay? No, and frankly, we don't need them anymore. We have a direct conduit to the people and straight into their brains. And that is the revolution that's happening right now. And that's what the journalists and authors and big mouth intellectuals, our talking heads

are struggling with, is that we're able to bypass them. You know, in the old days, you know, you would do anything for a New York Times book review. You know, today, if the New York Times calls me, my first instinct is gonna be to hang up the phone and tell them to get the fuck out of here, because I don't, nothing good, nothing good is gonna, will come of that in some respects. But you know, we certainly don't need them to amplify the message. And sometimes maybe the best messages are ones that, you know, you didn't really have any intention of amplifying terribly too much anyway. That sounds like a true expression of art and a true expression of creativity, which the book is just an impressive feat of. As a writer, I love the prose, I love the imagery, I love the tone, the rhythm.

It's obvious the book was very carefully edited. It's really just well-constructed and well put together and very, very easy to digest if you can keep going through those moments of like, holy shit, what am I reading here? And allow the more subtle, sort of on the ground stuff to settle in and give you a sense of what you may be able to do to escape the numbness that you described. And so one of the things, and I don't wanna, these next few questions are only meant because I respect what you've written and your ideas in these regards, and I'm interested to hear your feedback and like other ideas and how I can help my own audience. The panic is preferable to numbness line was something that really, really stood out to me. And there seemed to be a lot of emphasis on feelings,

feelings of despair, feelings of confinement, a feeling for more feeling. Do you think that right now people are limited in their like human experience? Is there something that we can do to grow those experiences or those feelings. I mean, numbness, if you're, and I know this isn't literal and I totally understand this, but panic is preferable to numbness. That makes sense to me, right? Is there a value in seeking that stuff out as a way to feel something beyond numbness? I mean, people, what do you say to the readers out there who already feel numb? Yes, well, obviously, mere thrill-seeking is something I don't agree with. You can do bungee jump or this kind of thing. But ultimately that, or even travel, today I was talking with some people about this movie

The Beach, you know, the movie The Beach. The movie Leonardo DiCaprio is a great mockery, however, of the hippie idea that you can escape this numbness, the grind of modern society through this kind of travel okay, or through mere thrill-seeking. I think in the book, I try to emphasize that you will only really be able to escape that feeling if you manage to attain actual sovereignty of some kind, actual independence of some kind. A personal sovereignty. Yes, and that can be achieved primarily, I think, in the fight against what I've called, well, I'm copying Hobbes, right, but it's called the Leviathan. Right. Okay. So so rather than let's say you want to escape the numbness. Yes, it's true. Panic is preferable to that. That doesn't mean I, I think that you

should take drugs to induce strong feelings or go on a bungee jump or try to do the beach and go to to Thailand in a backpacker. Right. Find artificial adventure because that will feel ultimately artificial because you're still just playing in a playground where the surveyors are watching you, you see, right, so the real freedom as Nietzsche says, only the warrior is a free man, so he means it spiritually by the way, okay, so I think I mean it the same way in the book, the only freedom you will really find is in spiritual warfare against this immense force of smothering evil that is suffocating life out of the world, And not just, by the way, out of Europe. It's absolutely destroying the third world, suffocating

all life out of it. The Chinese are going to completely kill all the megafauna of Africa. I don't know if people realize this. All the big animals in Africa are going to disappear within our lifetimes, probably. So it's a system of immense evil that needs to be fought. And I believe that the real thrill and the real freedom is doing that. And that doesn't mean that you need to even run for office or anything. I think the biggest task that lies ahead of us is cultural warfare. But that, you know, I don't mean over the fight over abortion of this guy. I mean, make movies, make books that inspire people. Yes, I think that that's 100 percent correct. And I think that there's a dearth of dissident literature and art out there today. I went to the Modern Art Museum in DC the other week.

And I was struck by the conformist nature of the dissident art that they had up. I mean, it's all in the same veins of what, I believe, Yavin would call the cathedral, what Jordan Hall called the blue church, and all that's contained therein. it's all just sort of art echoing all that stuff and it's not dissident it's not subversive in any way when was the last time like a dissident or subversive movie came out or even music i mean there's not is there even such a thing as punk rock anymore maybe i'm just old you know they've completely co-opted it okay yeah rage against the machine is now the machine i mean i've seen them talk and they toe the new party line and such. And so I think that your book in particular is

a great example of the possibility of dissident or subversive art because it is important to take, to read the book with that perspective rather than like a literal handbook. They are freaked out by anyone who is not owned. They're freaked out by you, they're freaked out by Cernovich, they're freaked out by Roush and by many others whose names are not yet known from our corner of the internet like Manaki known for and other incredibly talented people who I think deserve attention and who actually do have a very large audience among the youth, but they're freaked out by people who have a message that isn't owned. Look at how they react to PewDiePie, right? I mean he's the biggest one of all, but he's so big they can't stop. He's got a hundred

million, you know, me, they can stop, they can, they can try to stop or something him, they can't, but look at how they freak out over him. So when I say cultural warfare, he's having a lot of fun, right? He's not explicitly political, I think, right? I mean, things like that people can do things like that, right? I think, right. And I think also, people can create new associations and create new friendships and new communities and such. And I think that that's something that you really emphasize, especially near towards the end. There were some quotes that I like, man, they really hit home to me, like especially this one. The friendships you have made meeting each other in person or online are the greatest event of the last few years and source for the greatest promise. I can't tell

you how much I agree with that sentiment. It is an absolute miracle. The people that I have become connected to, the way that we've been able to congregate both online and in person because because doing things in person now is an essential next step. The ability that we've had to come together around ideas and not just come together around a job or a location where I live or a school that I went to is exceptionally powerful. I think we have no idea still how powerful that's gonna end up being. And the people that I have met along this journey here have been the best part in the new relationships I have. I was looking through my text messages the other day and like the first tenor from all people that I've met in the last five years, no one's from my old,

my old friend network or old family network. They don't understand anything. In fact, I'm, you know, to them, I'm the bad Nazi racist, misogynistic, you know, rape advocate. When in reality, I'm out here trying to teach guys how to like, you know, strengthen their mind, body, and spirit so that they can become more, you know, productive to their families and to their communities, which is really what my big goal is these days. And I've found a lot of support for that in your writing. Men coming together have done great things over time and it's time for us to start doing that again. And I'm really excited about that. And one of the things, and this is gonna be like one of the last issues that I wanna dig into before we just sort of come to a wrap here, was your sort of discussion about,

oh, there's so many things, sir. The masculinity, purity of purpose is manliness. Manliness is the first requirement of the philosopher. These ideas and the mention of masculinity to me seem like to indicate that it was really important to you. Do you think that masculinity is specifically under attack today? Who owns the masculine space right now? And I don't mean like manosphere, I mean like in general. And what can be done to resolve any issue there beyond sun and steel, which I love. And I keep tweeting that out, by the way. Yes, of course, sun and steel lifting. And so, you know all the benefits of that and your audience and mine, I think, also know the mood benefits, the psychological benefits, aside from the physical ones. But aside from that, I think just what you said right now,

if you are able to form strong friendships with other men based around the higher task. That is what these people feel the most. They want us completely isolated and I'm afraid that they will turn, they will somehow try to shut down internet to prevent this. I don't know if they can but they're trying to do that. The quote that you have about purity of purpose, I encourage people to read Yukio Mishima and And that quote is from the second installment of his tetralogy, The Sea of Fertility. It's called Runaway Horses. But actually, the first installment of that tetralogy called Spring Snow, which is just a love story, I think people can read that. And it's about a very sensitive, you can say sensitive artistic boy, not what you'd think of as Chad or something like that.

But he, at the end of that love story, shows through this, what you just mentioned, purity of purpose. Of course, I talk about other heroes, ancient heroes, conquistadors and such in the book. But yes, I think that is a necessary element, a crucial element of manliness. And it's completely edited out of experience today where the man is supposed to be a caponized ATM bank for women and kind of ATM for taxation and you're supposed to go to work and- Beast of burden, beast of burden. I think that there's definitely a growing sense among the satisfied men out there that the burden of performance on men that they are seen as beasts of burden, civil rights being curtailed across college campuses, family courts, you know, there's a whole list of reasons why men are starting to feel

as though the clamps are coming down even tighter around them. I think that you may not probably disagree with this, that basically all of society and its laws and structures are meant to constrain sort of the male spirit in some ways in the sense of adventure and conquest and risk-taking and all kinds of things. And I personally have always felt that my whole life. I've always been, I always got in trouble in school. I always challenged authority. I looked to game the system rather than be a part of the system when I was a kid. And I'm sure I've carried some of that with me. And there's no feeling that I hate more in the world than feeling like there's somebody that has power over me. And I feel like lots of guys out there are feeling like there's sort of an amorphous power

sort of wrapping themselves around them, that's sustaining them and controlling them. And that's why this idea of coming together and communicating and sharing ideas, and not even harping about that, but just like a shared purpose is essential, which is one of the reasons why those passages in the book struck me so much. And I'm starting to hear this more and more from people, Jordan Hall and others too, where they have different ways of coming to assessing today's problems. But the solution seems to be pretty close to the same, which is form communities, be strong, be good to your family and your community, and try to, for me, find the freedom freedom inside of your own sort of spirituality and try to carve out that inner space and

inner peace so that you can better deal with all this stuff and be strong. We're going to lead through strength and I think that that is kind of the gist of your book. I mean people will read it and say that you're looking for pirates to roam the earth raping and pillaging and taking what they want through sheer force of will but I'm going to argue perhaps and you can confirm or deny that basically what you're saying is that people should be as strong and dedicated and focused as they can be, and be good to themselves and their brothers. Is that right? Yes, it's definitely a teaching of peace. It's even in the book description on Amazon. Teaching of peace. Well, I like that. I like that, and I'm glad that we've had a chance

to talk, and I'm glad that other people will have a chance to listen, because I'd like this to be in the record for you, your specific views on these specific matters, so that one somebody's gonna go through a list and oh is it gonna be a long list sir of all the things in the book that they can talk about But you know, I think again that plays to your place to your advantage. There's a million trillion things I'd like to ask you about but I'm gonna be respectful of your time and start to wrap this up for you And for me what what's next? What's next for you? What's next for Bronze Age pervert? Is there a sequel? as are more books. What's next in the next few years for America? What happens in 2020? Tell me. Well, let me get to that. I want to say one more thing to our common audience.

Yes, please. I am all for building friendships and all of this and I say you should in the book. And I myself have met people in person among our common friends online. I don't know if they're your friends, but I've met people I've met online. Oh, yeah. But I can afford to be maybe more reckless or indiscreet. I want to emphasize if you are young, if you are 17, 18, 19, please take care of your OPCEC, operational security, protect your identity, because we don't need people to dox themselves, to make martyrs out of themselves. I can make a martyr out of myself. It won't really affect me. But you should not. you should be discreet and we need people to do well in this society so just take care of your

upset now you asked me about future my next book i've already told people it's going to be a philosophical erotic novel for women yes you know so so you say i say that the thing about women actually some people who are hardly by the way on the right notice that my book is extremely generous and worshipful of women okay I think that of real you know you know like Penelope okay okay and so you know women women love my teaching you know because I teach them also to be their best and this next book will be a philosophical erotic novel for for women and I hope to put it out soon within next few months maybe in January of next year, something like that. Well, that will be the first philosophical erotic novel for women that I have ever read. And I look forward to that tremendously.

What do you see happening in 2020 in America? What's next? What's gonna happen in the next two to four years? What do you see? And the women love that. I talk about this also on my show, recent podcast, you know, I'm in Brazil, the mulatta women love that. I don't I don't doubt it, sir. As for 2020, who knows? I think it's too early to say. I think Trump looks like he will win right now. But it's very hard to say because they can crash economy. think they will do anything they can do. Look at this guy who's supposedly on the right, Ross Douthat, this guy who is a federal agent like William F Buckley was, okay, who is in the New York Times today trying to raise up all kinds of trouble against Others on the right they will come out. They will do anything. So I think we can expect even

Right, they will run mcmaster or something as a spoiler candidate. They'll do anything to stop trump, right? So for people who don't know there was an editorial in the new york times today where rah I don't even know how to say his last name russ. Do do that doubt that I don't know. It doesn't matter but what he basically said was like He said that there was a there was a problem with racism on the right and it's the right's job to deal with it So he's basically like calling people to arms for some sort of expulsion and attack and stuff. But you know, the problem with that is who gets to decide who's racist and who isn't. It certainly isn't me anymore. Certainly isn't me anymore. So these guys will run Yang as a spoiler candidate. They'll run some general.

They'll do anything. And Trump has been to many people a disappointment in policies and so forth. but in what he symbolizes in his in the way he talks and so forth is a huge slap in the face to the establishment they will never forgive that and they have to they're going to try to destroy him at all costs you know they try the coup on him the Russia hoax right and I'm afraid that they're trying to contrive me at the Russia hoax 2.0 I want that just I don't want to be the next George papadopoulos okay great well I understand that but you know with powerful words comes powerful responsibility perhaps and the your book and your ideas have certainly touched a nerve with thousands upon thousands of young men around the world fascinated to hear that there's an audience for you in

Japan Sweden not so surprising but an international audience there's definitely common feelings that you're tapping into there's definitely a strain of this numbness and a lack of own space for individuals that you're talking about there is a sense of oppression and darkness and bleakness and evil that is seeping into people's consciousness is whether they're able to identify concretely where it comes from or not they are having those feelings and so your words are going to continue to spread my friend there's no question about that I'm sorry about that sound. You see how they try to sabotage me. They turn on their machine. Turn on the air conditioner. God damn air conditioning. But again, like I said, I could ask you about a million things. I wanted to talk about hierarchies.

I want to talk about power. I want to talk about understanding how to cope within the hierarchies. I want to talk about dreams in the underworld. I want to talk about a million things. But we're pushing up on almost two hours here already and we can save some for another time. Yes, if you have me back on I'll be glad to talk to you about mafia and the underworld, you know, because that's how modern world is run. Yes. Now they're chasing me, the Macomberos. You've been to Brazil, you know, they have human, they have kind of voodoo here and they're trying to chase me. I mean, I'm on the move this week. I'm in hiding. Oh man. Well, I hear you. You're not the first one I've talked to that's been dealing with this. This happens to quite a number of different

people. They'll come at you from all different directions. Bank accounts, you know, social media, just limit your ability to conduct financial transactions, get you banned off of Amazon. There may be a million other things coming. They can't stop me. You know, my books have already spread what they can, but my books, they can't stop it now. It makes me stronger, but I'm afraid of this black magic. They do voodoo, you know? Well, I think if anyone is prepared to handle this you sound to be and I look forward to having another conversation with you perhaps we can also dialogue in writing as well but mr. Bronze Age pervert sir mr. BAP thank you so much for coming online and talking to me I really appreciate it we try to get this done for a couple of months and

this is a really good time and I appreciate the energy and I appreciate the time and I hope that we get a chance to do it again thank you pleasure It sure is mine honor to talk to you Jack. Thank you. All right. Have a good one. Bye. Bye. Bye