We're back. The moment you've all been waiting for has arrived? Yeah. World podcasting championships. We have a very special guest, Mr. Bronze Age Pervert. Welcome to Red Scare. Yes, it's very special. Thank you. Thank you so much for having me on. It's an honor to be on Red Scare podcast. And I was walking today on street completely. I haven't eaten for two days. I have starvation, psychosis. Please forgive. Are you in ketosis yet? I guess you always become on ketosis whenever you are fasting. But I'm not sure if it interrupts it when you drink alcohol, you know. I've just started a bottle of champagne. I hope that's okay. Of course. I was going to ask what you were drinking. Can you tell the listeners what you're smoking? We're smoking American spirits and drinking a chilled rub.

And I'm vaping. Yeah. I am smoking Cohiba clubs. These are, you know, they're slightly aged tobacco. It gives a big brain boost, yeah. Are you fasting for spiritual purposes? No, it's just a regular cut, but there's always a spiritual purpose. If you've seen Hemingway book, Movable Feast, he talks about going to museums and how the the colors become so much more vivid when you are hungry. I believe in this, I believe in caloric restriction, but we shouldn't talk nutrition on this show. No. Why not? Why not? I wanted to ask you. I have a lot of anorexic and bulimic fans who might be inspired by your talk of caloric restriction. Well, okay, we can talk nutrition if you want. It's just I am sometimes confused with the type of people who talk about nutrition,

fitness and so on, even though actually I almost never do that. Well I wanted to ask you about Ray Peat. Yeah, you're a fan of Ray Peat. Yeah, but Ray Peat is mentally ill, let me put it that way. Rest in peace. He's a wonderful man, he has grand ideas about physiology, he's one of the only people to talk about human biology in terms of systems, what is the purpose of hormones in terms of regulating entire systems of the human body. Yeah. And he was very important for me in part in, I mentioned him in book and so on. But he's mentally ill. He's a weirdo who lives in Mexico. Well, he's dead. He's dead. He died. Yes, I know. But he's, you know, I don't I don't talk about people like that as if they're dead. Oh, okay, okay. But he's, for example, if somebody tells you not to eat avocados, or

or not to eat berries because they have seeds. I think the true Peters also don't eat fish roe because they have supposedly... Because it's oxidized. Yeah. Right, which by the way, most fish supplements probably are oxidized if you buy cheap ones. They're rancid, they're rancid, they're poisonous. Now I hear that you can't eat bananas anymore because that's un-leftist and exploitative for the farm workers of the global south? Yeah, did you catch any of the banana discourse? Yes, I don't have any opinion on this. It's a big thing now with fair trade, right, but it's been for a while. I don't think you should eat bananas in general because they have bad effects on your bowels. Yes, it's said to have bad effects on your gut flora and many other things.

Plantains are fine, and they're just pure starch. And then green banana, green banana flour is the best prebiotic. It's food for good bacteria, supposedly. Now, hold on, what is a prebiotic versus a probiotic? That's like a proto-fascist. Yeah, a probiotic is friendly bacteria, which again, I can go into high detail about if you want me to. No, it's OK. It's it's although I think it's somewhat misunderstood because what matters is a certain balance of good and so-called bad bacteria in the gut. Prebiotics are things that good bacteria like to eat. So, for example, cold potatoes or green banana flower are certain kinds of starches that good supposedly bacteria love. I strongly recommend you and your audience

Let's try the Osfortis Biogaya brand probiotic, which is a strain of lactobacillus reteri that actually changes how people behave toward you. And everyone, I know that sounds strange, but everyone I've asked to try this reports saying, first of all, you feel euphoria after about a month of using it continually, and it changes how people behave toward you. There are numerous studies that shows... They feel better? Because they're giving off different vibes. You're more confident and assertive. It's that or it's some other mechanism like pheromones, nobody knows yet. But you find people are drawn to you when you take this probiotic. Yeah. Yes, and it's good for both men and women. For men, it's actually, there are many studies that it raises testosterone, but this company

is a reputable Swedish company and they don't want to be lumped in with testosterone boosters which are perceived as these kind of low-class bodybuilder type supplements. So they don't say anything about it, they market it as it's good for women and bones. Like the testosterone booster is the rice kernel sized microchip that they shoot into your butt. What? I don't know. I got one of those about a year ago, because my T levels were incredibly low after the baby. Oh, right. And it certainly made me more aggressive and unlikable, but I don't know if it had any long term effect. Is that what it does for women? I don't know. I think, for example, older men become shrill and unpleasant and mean because they're low testosterone.

I mean, if you look at the lowest testosterone type people, the stereotype of the old hag, That's not entirely a pleasant person, you know. Right. No, but I always assumed that that was because of too much estrogen, though I guess too little testosterone would produce the same effect. I can't, it's hard to know. How does a guy like you go about identifying and researching which companies of probiotics and supplements are reputable? It's just people talk a lot and reputation builds over time, So Biogaya, this Swedish company, who, their story, it's very funny, they say they found this particular strain of el rotary from the breast milk of a Peruvian woman. Now, I don't buy that, like how, who goes randomly looking, yeah, who goes randomly

looking in the mountains, in the high Andes of Peru at breast milk to see what, like, what the flora is, and they find this unusual strain with all these properties. I don't know. Crazy weird sex perverts. When you think of the breast milk of Peruvian women, you think of those like fermented fully preserved mummies that they find in child sacrifices, but actually it's like a woman who works in like a bra making factory and her body is like filled with micro plastics. It's, yeah, these, Peru is one of the... She has like minions physique. Yeah, she's a perfect square. Peruvians though, I have to say there's a new class of panhandlers on the NYC subways that I've discussed with Dasha and other friends. These little Peruvian mommies who have their little niños strapped in like an Aztec wrap

on their backs and they're selling candy. And that used to be the domain of black teens who pretended that they were like fundraising for their quote basketball team, but we're probably just pocketing all the funds. It's very sad. It actually makes me want to be a leftist when I see young women and babies panhandling on the subway. Well, they should start selling their breast milk because it's full of amazing profiles. But I have to say the Peruvians have very noble profiles. Some of them have Roman noses the way some Japanese do. And there are even claims that the Inca or whoever lived there before the Inca traveled across the Pacific to Japan. But just to go back for a moment, if you would let me spurg out, so-called, on the, on the RayPeds, because you mentioned estrogen.

Well, you mentioned estrogen and so RayPeds, I think, is the least useful when it comes to giving you complete dietary advice. The people who actually follow. Oh, no. You tell us now after we've been peeding for, well, they should not be like the people who If you go on rape-eat forums, it's people who want to raise their metabolism, right? Because that's the whole peat thing, up your metabolism. And so they start eating tons of sugar and sugar-like things, and they just become obese. They're constantly – no, I mean, these are people who are constantly taking their temperature throughout the day, like every 15 minutes, and eating tons of sugar, and they become obese. At most, his dietary advice can help, like, say, a menopausal woman who's 50 or 60 and has been eating seed oils and trash.

But his insights, however, are quite solid. For example, you mentioned estrogen. Estrogen is not the female hormone, and that's one thing that he traces out in a very convincing way. It was never seen as the female hormone. Yes, it's a stress hormone. It was rebranded as a female hormone by the chemical industry because coincidentally most chemical runoff and pollution is estrogenic. And so they don't want to say that it's a stress hormone that leads to uncontrolled replication of cells because that's literally cancer. It's the cancer hormone. It's also the growth hormone, right? If you don't have estrogen you die. You need some, but it's just the modern world is so, for whatever reason, incredibly estrogenic. And so in these kinds of insights, nobody else is like him. He's very

useful. But in particular advice, you should not, I don't know about avocados. Do you like avocados? Of course avocados are good for you. It's healthy fats. I like avocado. I will not stop eating it. But there are theories that the giant sloth of the Americas which was this uh you know what the sloth is it's this kind of animal that's lazy yes it's cute it's lazy they actually have big claws it's crazy they're slow but that's they're part of the ecosystem yeah they live in trees there used to be giant sloths though and there are theories that the giant sloth um was exterminated or self-exterminated by becoming addicted to avocados they have yeah they have addictive properties i think i don't know but

avocados well that explains why um all the liberal millennials are obsessed with like avocado toast and consumer in large quantities because they have addictive personalities and poor impulse control i like the hipster trends i like avocado toast i like hipster coffee i think I think it's one of the few good things to come out recently out of something, yeah. One of the salutary beneficial effects of Globo Homo is that you can really like parachute yourself into virtually any city in the world and eat well, and the cuisine is like standardized and refined, but it's good. Whereas you didn't know in the past if you could necessarily find anything to eat in many of these places. Yeah, now you can just go to sweet green. Yes. In some cases, it's been an overall improvement.

Argentina, for example, has some good things like good steak and some, but overall, it's a terrible local cuisine. The coffee was awful. But after cultural colonization by Brooklyn, where now they have good avocado toast and good, you know, hipster coffee everywhere. So that's nice. What other millennial hipster trends do you like? I don't know. Ask me particular ones. Nothing comes to mind now. I mean, what do you want me to say? Supposedly they're asexual, but what is there to liken that? It doesn't lead to any product. Well, they're polyamorous. They're polyamorous, which is even worse. A kind of asexual. You are asexual with weird, annoying social rules and strictures. But speaking of Argentina, I have a question for you.

I've been like dying to ask. So you're like famously a big Spain head. You love Spanish culture and cuisine and whatever. But you're also famously a friend of the animal. So bullfighting, how that make you feel? It makes me feel good because without bullfighting, that a very ancient breed of bull would not have been preserved. It would have died out. It died out everywhere else. And those bulls, yes, the spectacle seems gory and so on, although, you know, I find it titillating. We can talk about that if you want. But the bull itself lives a very good life compared, for example, to cattle that people eat from a supermarket. That bull grows up in something called the dejesus. It's in the southwest of Spain. You can drive through it. It looks kind of like African savanna, but it's

oak trees and other trees and herbs. It's where the Iberico pork also grows. It's kind of this idyllic environment for an animal to grow up in. And those bulls grow big and strong in that and live very good lives. And then they have this glorious death. I would want to die that way. I want a glorious and erotic death like that. Yeah, I think for women and other femoids, their deaths are very tragic. Have you been to a bullfight? No, but I've been to many Morrissey concerts. And when he plays me is murder. He screens all this really gory factory farm footage. And then he also screens the bullfights and they're of a different caliber. They really are apples and oranges. The other thing I wanted to ask you is

where do you stand on the hierarchy of olive oils? Because there's this common wisdom that Italian olive oil is the best, but I prefer always like Spanish and Greek olive oil. Yeah, Italian olive oil as everyone knows by now is mostly fake. The kind that gets exported is sometimes actually re-bottled Greek olive oil. Other times, it's just simply not olive oil at all. In Italy, if you serve olive oil that's fake in a restaurant, you go to jail. But they have no regulations for exports. So I'm not saying all Italian olive oil. I'm sure the high quality brands Italian olive oil are fine, but you have to research that. The only real olive oil that you can get 100% is American and Chilean because they have incredibly strong regulations on selling fake

olive oil. But if you go to Italy itself, or to Spain itself, I would agree with you. I think Spanish olive oil is the best. They have just very wide variety of olives with different tastes and so on and low acidity. Yeah. I have a question. I know you like to eat Five Guys. Do you ever eat McDonald's? Yes, my go-to fast food is Shake Shack, if I can have it. It was in Tokyo, and it was usually much better than the gourmet burgers in Tokyo. And then Five Guys is a good replacement. But yeah, I've been to McDonald's. It never makes me feel good. There's something I get the quarter pounder, double, whatever, with cheese. But I'm told- What is that called in France? Royale with cheese. Anna, come on. Well, I don't know. You're making fun of me because of the Tarantino movie. No, she's not.

No, I'm not making fun of her, she's literally so paranoid. I have not gone to- Classic Gemini. I have not been to France in a while. So, but according to Quentin Tarantino movie, it's a royale or something that's a famous whole fiction wait i have another question when they kill the bull in the bull fighting yeah they do eat the meat correct i don't think so i think that would be i'm curious because you know when like an animal dies under stressful and strenuous circumstances it like releases like toxins or something into its bloodstream and i watched a really illuminating episode of, uh, Anthony Bourdain, no reservations, which by the way, if you ever choose to self docs, you should just do an Anthony Bourdain type travel, but anyway,

um, it was, I watched the Croatia episode in honor of our friend Nicolo and they were, um, they went to a tuna farm somewhere off the coast of Croatia where, um, the, the blue fin tuna or whatever that's like a delicacy everywhere especially in Japan is imported all across the world and they have this very involved method of killing the tuna that involves spearing the brain through the eye so that it can't release the toxins so that the meat is not corrupted or polluted or whatever that makes sense um when they dispatch the bull it's with a clean cut through the back of the neck, I think. I wouldn't think they eat it. I strongly encourage if you ever run into Spanish ox or bull, you know, toro. I don't know if that's the ox or the... The ox is the

castrated one, the bull is not. If you ever encounter that chorizo made from toro, you should have that. It's very tasty. But yeah, I don't like food with whatever those things are. And in fact, if you've ever eaten unpleasant meat, it's usually from an uncastrated animal, but that's a different thing. Look, I don't know. Now you're going into very dark territory because I hear the pedophile elites, the demonic Babylonian conspiracy for thousands of years that have always prayed and eaten children according to the dissident right and the brain trust coming out of Alex Jones. Well, the adrenochrome, yeah. Yes, apparently it's the opposite. They want to increase stress and torture so that, you know,

then they eat the flesh. They harness the fear. It's not just about eating the flesh, it's about the yeah when the children that they originally sacrifice experience fear that fuels them but i think when you kill a bull in like a a glorious death match in a roman style arena that's different i guess than like i went to a bullfight in mexico like small and crushed animals and like a factory farm wait when did you go to a bullfight in mexico when i was a teenager in cancun that make you feel? It was dark, it definitely was not like classy, it was really weird, but I bet it's different in Spain. Here's another question, when you eat like five guys or Shake Shack or whatever, do you like immediately rush home and have like a tablespoon of coconut oil or what,

or you just go with the flow? Yeah, that's another good repeat insight, a way to counter the seed oils in basically any restaurant food and almost every restaurant, including very good ones, will be full of seed oils. You know, the nice vegetables you see may have been resting in a brine with, you know, canola oil. So yes, you should have coconut oil because it acts in the body as an analogue of vitamin E and it somewhat counteracts the bad effects of seed oils. But you But you could also take a multivitamin that has a good source of vitamin E. So yes, I do do that. But you know, honestly, I think it's a bit overblown, the seed oil sting. I knew very healthy people online who thought seed oils were fine. And these kinds of dietary over-concerns. I eat seed oil all the time.

Yeah, you have to as a Russian person. When they tell you that the Riga gold sardines are packaged in olive oil. In rapeseed oil. Yes, I'm a fan of Riga gold, and if you like to frequent Russian stores, you should have the Khabarovskaya ikra. Do you like the red ikra, the ikra krasnaya? It's my favorite Russian food. Yeah, I mean, Russians have been eating ikra for centuries. Look how they turned out, like, ugly and fat and bloated. They really hit the wall. What do you think of Russian people? Do you think there's any credence to this common wisdom that they're cynical and nihilistic? I think they are. On one hand, I should disclaimer, I love Russian literature. It's my favorite. I love Russian music, classical music.

And in general, I get along with Russian people, but the especially right wing online is quite delusional about them. They are boorish. For the most part, Russia is Africa, as my friend Hakan says. As my friend Hakan says, Slavs are hairy, smelly apes, you know, and also Russian women, no offense to the two of you, because you're not fully Russian. But when an American man marries a Russian woman, he usually doesn't know what he's getting into and they eat them up completely because, um, they're just, they're just there to think. Yeah. That's good. That's good advice. I'm Russian. Yeah. I'm actually significantly more Russian than people think. I am like to the tune of like 36, 37%. People don't believe me when I say that, but it's true.

Well, okay. So I have a question for you about, you've said Slavs, but isn't Slavic, like a very broad ethnic category? Yes, but there are very many common things running through from the Czech. Well, the Czechs are actually an exception. I'm happy to talk about the Czechs. They're bisexual, you know, but the rest of the Slavs are, yeah, they're different, but they're similar to each other. I'm happy to talk about the bull, by the way. I don't want to retread topics if you don't, but really this thing about the death of the bull. He's really shook about the bulls. Well, because what is the assumption in criticizing the bullfight? The only thing I disagree with is if the bull wins, if he kills the matador, he should be allowed to go

free. But otherwise, a violent death is much preferred, in my opinion, because like the Vikings said, a bed death, that's what they call it, a straw death, a death where you die in a hospital or in the ancient equivalent on a straw bed, that was seen as the most dishonorable thing. A death, a violent death in war, that is how you are reborn with the full measure of the will, or even intensified. And so, no, I disagree with the idea that, you know, I'm against mistreatment of animals and industry, industrial farming and so on, but a bull's death in the matador thing is such a total different. Yeah, you're making some points. What happens if you die a bad death, you're reborn into like a lesser form?

You are reborn with less intensity of being, less intensity of will, yes. Schopenhauer actually describes this from the opposite point of view, because he, you know, for him, life is teaching a learning opportunity to learn that existence is not worth it. And so after many life, after many lifetimes, you know, you realize that that life isn't worth it. And so you experience, I'm simplifying here, you experience nirvana, but the pagan ancient view was exactly the opposite, you know, and so, like a death in suicide of the right type, like Mishima did, or Seneca, or any other ancient noble Romans who died by suicide, That was a way to be reborn in a more intensified version of yourself. I could believe that I now that I started reading Nietzsche last night, I suffer from convert syndrome.

So I'm going to speak with confidence and authoritative about things I don't know about. But one of those things. Yeah, I'm not like the other girls. I'm a 40 year old virgin who read Nietzsche for the first time. One of his beefs with Schopenhauer is that he has this very, like, pessimistic, doomer view of reality. Right? But can I just segue back to the bowl? No, not to the bowl. I can't talk about the bowl anymore. No, no, no. The Russian question, because I have a minor bone to pick with you about your anecdote about the Moldovan Jew. he goes to a black owned crab shack and he like wows all the country folk with his like voracious appetite for catfish and Twitter user West Western made this into a very iconic clip, but you said,

I think maybe on Caribbean rhythms that Russian Jews are basically the same thing as African-Americans. I think that you might be wrong because it's not Russian Jews, it's Russians in general. And I think like, um, If you happen to encounter Russians in a place like the tri-state area or New England, Massachusetts, they're all going to be immigrants from that first wave of post-Wall immigration, so they're going to be Jewish. You don't really encounter many pure Slavoid Russians in these areas until now. So do you think it's possible that you were mistaken in classifying Russian Jews and not all Russians is essentially African American? I think you're right. I think that's true. It's just that Russian Jews tend to be high IQ,

but very low impulse control. And so the analogy becomes very humorous and striking, like no impulse control and violent desires, but who's high IQ. With a Jewish mind. But what I'm saying is that that's a more Russian than Jewish quality. Yeah. The low impulse control. The low impulse control. Yeah. And like the gambling addiction. Yeah. And the alcoholism. The paternal absenteeism. You know, and you asked me about Slavs, but that's for Bulgaria too, in the sense, what's Bulgarian family values? It's a guy in a dirty tank top hitting his wife on the head with a shovel, you know? And so, yeah. But Russians probably are the pure form of that, sure. I agree, which is something you said before that I think you had a tweet on this.

I'm not really with the HBD neo-reaction right in the Hanania types, especially in attacking blacks, because of their low impulse control and criminality. I think those are good traits, actually. So BAP is coming out as an anti-racist on RadScare podcast. I am an anti-racist, and I had an anti-racist post recently about Lenny Riefenstahl, which I'm happy to talk about. But it's not that it's not that I think being a criminal is that good, but that being against that, being against that, the way a large portion of the right is, including Steve Saylor, who I love, by the way. We love Steve Saylor, and that pic he posted of himself as a young boy on Christmas, oh my god. Of Steve as a boy? That gave me baby fever all over again. Spoiled Steve, oh my god.

When did he, I did not see this, what happened? He posted a really cute baby picture of himself on Christmas. That's nice. No, I did not, I want to see. I met Steve Saylor, I don't know if she knew who I was, he's a wonderful guy and he's the best journalist in the United States for the last 10, 20 years at least by far, no doubt. But I don't agree with his general take on the world, which is similar to Hanania's. I'm happy to talk about this. You called Hanania and Sailor and their ilk IQ clerks within that realm of knowledge. There's a big spectrum of like, there are people who are like, wild and free like Steve sailor and then there are people who are like bean counters such as hanania yeah yeah but even so i

think like a guy like hanania does bring a lot to the table oh come on and also i i really actually when i think about it i resent this like consensus that he's like horribly ugly no if you actually look at him he has those piercing baby blues and overcast eyebrows of like no hold on of an adorable toddler oh he does not have neotenous features he's not he looks like a fayun portrait you guys i'm an art historian you're being contrarian you know you like gainsbourg you think he's handsome no no i don't i don't i wouldn't i wouldn't let's be generous to call hanadia handsome but he has a certain uh childlike wonderment in his eyes that's generous that that almost redeems him aesthetically. I've never attacked Anania for what he looks like,

and he has some good tweets. Yeah, let's talk about crime. You guys should know you have a gigantic audience. I talk to people from all walks of life who listen to you at so-called highest levels, American society, they love you. People who are not online, people who are old friends who I got back in touch with recently, they listen to you. So whenever we talk about people like, did I what? Can you doc some here? Tell us later. I want to know. Tell us in private. No, but for example, I'll tell you in private. But for example, private counsel for X company that is one of the hugest in the world, and not just one, but that iterated many times, loves you. And so your audience is, you know, it's maybe we don't have an audience as big as Tucker,

but people who listen to us are, you know, important so-called people, right. And whenever you talk about particular names like the one we just said, we're boosting them. Sorry for the tangent, but basically what I mean to say, I'm just using that name as an example of a big tendency among some of my friends, the Neo Reaction people. I don't like the world they come out of of in this focus on crime and black crime. And I can, yes, I'm happy to talk that if you want. I have a question about black crime. Obama's personal chef. What's your theory there? Was he a down-low brother or? Obama is obviously gay. Rahm Emanuel is 100% gay. I know from a guy who was on his floor in college, Rahm Emanuel was carrying on a gay, if I may say, I heard this, I can't verify if it's true,

I know maybe you need me to say that, but this guy claims 100% Rahm Emanuel was carrying on a gay relationship with a local congressman or senator. No, Rahm Emanuel, and Rahm Emanuel has always been a huge homo everybody knew. Now, Barack Obama, you know the rumors about him with Man's World and that, And I believe that he has, he has very strong gay vibes of he's come on. attention whore. I believe I buy it. All those guys are gay for pay, which in the contemporary world means gay for clout and attention. That's interesting. I know I know a Brazilian rent boy who's gay for pay who's who's a Leo I did not know that was a Leo. That was a Leo, uh, but that, that makes sense. Uh, do I know what Obama is in his heart,

how he identifies whatever, it doesn't matter. The church that he met, um, Michael Obama in, um, uh, Jeremiah Wright, that's the guy, that's the, that's the church, right? It was a well-known church in Chicago for pairing so-called difficult women or whatever Michelle is with gay down-low brother men like, like Obongo. And so, uh, and that was just well known. That was the profile of that church. And by the way, by the way, that is also the profile of the so-called dissident right online. If you want, we can talk that later too. The coalition of so-called difficult women with, um, uh, closet case, uh, neurotics like like Obongo makes a huge portion of especially the new dissident right that came in 2017

and replaced the older so-called frogs, who are just people who want to have fun and were into humor and funny and so on. But anyway, I can talk if you would like the thing about black crime, and I listened to Delicious Tacos episode recently with you, and you began it that way, right? The famous 1352 thing. He was doing some improv, yeah. Well, I mean, Delicious Tacos doesn't mean that he's, that's not his focus. No, he's the biggest anti-racist and feminist because he's a libtard for pussy, and probably also just a regular libtard, and we love him for that. I mean, my philosophy that which I pilfered from Shamp, Miss Robian, is that when you become successful enough, you've earned the right to be a libtard. That's what we're all striving for.

And I actually don't think Delicious Tacos is on that level yet, but we'll manifest that for him. Yeah. Well, I don't see it as anti-racism. I just have a different, I think the excessive focus on that particular aspect leads to much worse things. So, for example, well, yes, this is the thing. The people who attack blacks for that aspect, and they could be attacked for other things, which I think a political criticism of blacks because, for example, any ancient thinker would see America's black population as one in stasis, this word stasis from ancient political philosophy, which means in revolt. They are in a condition of revolt, but they are actually a political nullity in almost any country that they've been whatever demographic of in

history, they are not a political actor. They're very, very easy to, I don't want to say subdue, that's rude, but they are very, they're actually a very docile population. If you look at the American South, the whites in the American South, after the Civil War, were in some cases very, very far outnumbered. And they were an occupied population. The Yankees occupied them, right? But the American whites very easily, through political organization, retook their territories and this other population we're talking now, I'm sorry if I have to talk in code, I know it's very docile. When you look in Africa itself- Great code, we're getting banned. Yes. Oh my god. Well, no, excuse me, it's a sociological anthropological thing that major anthropologists like Pierre Van den Berge have talked about.

You look at Rwanda, right? Rwanda is ruled by people who look sort of like Somalis. They are cattle herders who came from north, from the north, not quite North Africa, but from the north. They're so-called Nylotics. These are the Tutsis. They've always been a minority. They've easily, easily ruled a Hutu, which is Bantu population, which in Africa is understood to have the qualities that peasants all over the world have. They're extroverted. they are not very bright, whatever. They're soulful, but you can make that connection with Slavoid serf populations, who are also very docile. I think, like, elitist Russians are very fond of saying that Slavs are slaves, that they're docile and easily subjugated. I think, yes, I think that analogy works, but this population, you know, Russians,

I don't know if you can compare, in this sense, whatever the cause may be. Maybe it's the Russian elite, but Russians rule 11 time zones, right? Edward Lutvak, after the Crimea thing happened, that was 2014 or 13, I think 2014, when Putin took over Crimea. And that, unlike the current Ukraine mess, that was a professionally done Russian historical operation where Lutvak looked at that and gave a speech after and said, you know, this is why the Russians rule 11 time zones, because they took territory and they divided their enemies. In the wake of the Russian takeover of Crimea, which was bloodless, Europe and America started fighting among each other. You know, you don't find in Africa that type of behavior.

So I don't know who in Russia is doing that, if it's the serf population or some hereditary elite that- It's the Michelin's. It's the Michelin's. Yeah, it's going to be the Michelin's century, sure. Whoever is doing that, you don't find that in Africa. My point is that the plaques are not as such a political threat. They become a so-called problem under conditions of mass democracy. And the focus on crime and on so-called low IQ and so on, which isn't, I believe it's not really even what the problem is with this population. The focus on that, the implicit alternative presented by people like we just named, the neo-reaction people, the human biodiversity people, is something I've called IQ nationalism. It's an exaggeration, but they think IQ and docility and things like ability to work in

in an office are just the most wonderful thing. Unfortunately, Steve Saylor has some of these same aspects. He believes that the medieval, let's say shopkeeper or the engineer is the basis of Western civilization. I think it's an enormous distortion of history and of human greatness to believe that. But Steve Saylor is a chill SoCal dad with a perfectly manicured lawn, so why would he think otherwise? But there's been a lot of attempts throughout recent American history to turn black people into a political class or even a revolutionary subject. I was going to bring this question to Chris Rufo, and I still will. But Rufo, as others before him have pointed out, even more eloquently, people like Tom Wolfe and Joan Didion, that any attempts to radicalize this population,

minority population has essentially failed because they failed to develop a political consciousness, which is understandable in their right. I will be glad to give you numerous examples from Africa itself and the decolonization history. For example, in the Portuguese empire, of course it's failed. I'm sorry, with all due respect to this population, and they have their virtues, they're good at music and some athletics and so on, but they've never ruled and never will the able, and in whenever, for example, there was a revolt against European rule in Africa, it wasn't them who took over. It was a kind of mulatto minority supported by the Soviet Union or China. And it's the same in the United States. It's other people using them as props. And I am

very much against being manipulated into, oh, I can't say the word on your show. Oh, we're right wing, so we constantly need to chimp and get mad at the b****, all right? I'm very much against that. And again, the implicit alternative supported by people like Hanania or the Neo-Reaction people, it's that we should support an IQ so-called meritocracy. But my opinion is that a Han, and I don't say Chinese because I actually like the Cantonese people and the Hong Kongers, but let's say a north, whatever the demographic weight of China is, a Han and heavy, you know, am I allowed to say that a so-called meritocracy in the United States is something that's going to be far worse and far more cruel than this other thing that people are complaining about

now because of BLM. You sound like my mother. Yes. Yeah, Anna feels a real kinship with you because you remind her so much of her. I know, I'm like your mother, I know, yeah. But why, besides the IQ, then the using the focus on crime then is seen as like a corollary to IQ. It's a corollary. Yeah, it's like the flip side, right? And also it's the psychological origin of where a lot of this comes out of, which I'm very much against, which is a very sensitive subject. Again, feel free to cut me off or if you want to edit it out. But basically, a lot of these people like Hanania, their origin story is they were robbed by blacks on the street or intimidated by blacks in the past in some kind of social situation. And so with that chip on their shoulder, they laugh at you,

the black teenagers there's no experience more humbling than being laughed at black teenagers for uh yes having an overly long cigarette which you may say you may say that they will never rule but they do rule now the streets on in new york at least well yeah new york is a it's just a just a weird case like um we are told that the United States is this hypercapitalist thing ruled by neoliberal cynical elites who have tight control on everything and we live in a kind of Elysium where they, you know, they don't have an orbital station quite yet like in the movie Elysium, but they secretly control everything and they are promoting these tunnels for cynical self-interested power reasons, but they've lost control of their own city in New York, right?

I mean, yeah, and I think it's beneficial for both sides to sustain this narrative. And you have like guys like Andrew Tate and Tucker Carlson now making the point that racism exists to divide the poor because there's like this overclass of elite technocrat pedophiles or whatever. But I do think these like crime and IQ narratives are fundamentally bad because Because as Ray Pete would say, they're inflammatory. Yes. What means? What do you mean inflammatory? Like they ratchet up people's stress and anxiety levels. And they're also like, I'm going to say, a very anti-racist thing. They're kind of like false on the ground. How? How come? How come? I don't live. I have the luxury not to live around many of these dysfunctions. I travel all around, and so.

I live on the cusp of a black neighborhood and a Chinese neighborhood. And on the whole, people are very nice. Anna, your neighborhood is awful. It's awful. It's loud and crime-ridden. But on the whole, the people that you encounter on the street are hurt. Your neighborhood strikes fear in my heart. And they love the baby. Of course, most people are. All the homeless people on the block know the baby. That's sweet. That's good. Yes. Well, if the locals know you and vouch for you, then you are mostly protected, which is another point of evidence, too, that it's a political problem. It's not as such what the HPD people, the human biodiversity people and neo-reaction people, they want to make it out that it's innate to a black dysfunction, to be criminal and so on.

I believe it's a political problem. I live part of the year in a place that is majority black, and there is street crime and so on. That too is political though. And on the other hand, in certain neighborhoods, they completely do not touch you because they're terrified that if they do, the local security services will destroy and crush their family. I'm loving this new, softer, anti-racist side of the path we're bringing out on the Red Scare podcast. It's not actually, well, because I'm being listened to, unfortunately there's a spotlight shined on me now, and so I cannot say fully what I would like to mean. But it's not quite anti-racist. If you dig into what I'm saying, it goes into another direction. But you're pro-crime. Have you heard of the documentarian Louis Theroux?

Yes, of course. How do you feel about him? I don't watch his things. I know he did some exposé documentary on the so-called outright, and that was... Well, he did one on the, quote, carceral system in the US, which was very interesting and illuminating. Yes. Yes. I don't know it. I am interested more in the documentary made by Errol Morris about Fred Leuchter, and I don't know if you know Errol Morris. Of course, yeah. Of course, yeah. I famously refused to come on the podcast. Oh, he refused? Why did he? Why? Why? Why did he refuse? I think he was just busy. I don't know. Well, I don't mean to change the subject. Ask me anything. Ask me anything you want about that. But Errol Morris, I'm happy to talk about this documentary too.

Fred Leuchter was a guy who went to Auschwitz and claimed to find certain things. I'm happy to talk that through the power of autism came to the conclusion that the Holocaust was not real. I remember this guy. Yeah. Well, I have no opinion on the evidence he presented or not, but I just found it funny that well, maybe, but I find it funny that Errol Morris was showing all these guys saying, and he went into Holy of Holies and he committed sacrilege and blasphemy. And see, that's what activates my, yeah, I want to jizz all over the face of people who talk like that, you see. Right. Well, okay. I have a question. Yes, yes. Don't be offended, but why, because I don't even mean you really, but why do so many autistic guys love Hitler? Yes.

I don't know that they're autistic, but no, well, some are. There are, I don't mean like, obviously there's Nazis that aren't autistic, but a lot of, hmm, enthusiastic, let's say like Hitler is or like, there's obviously like a big, yeah. Why do they love him? Yeah. Why do, why, like, what do the autists know about World War II that we don't? Well, they do study a lot of maps and stats. Exactly. But I know it's like, part of it's they're into history, blah, blah, blah. Well, I would turn that around on you and ask you why Hitler is, the Satan of the modern world, even after, what is it, 70, 80 years? And he is still the obsession of the left now. It's always... Well, because he exterminated 5.5 billion Jews. Well, but so did

Hitler, excuse me, Stalin and Mao exterminated more people. Why? And it's not just the left, it's the neo-con right, it's Bill Kristol and these kinds of people who kind of talk like, Like this guy's Hitler, that guy's — every 10 years, there's a reincarnation of Hitler. It's Putin, then it's Trump, then it's — before that, it's Saddam. Why has he become — he is the protagonist. He's the protagonist of the modern world. He's been made into this by the left and by the stuffed-shirt establishment authorities for — and we can talk about why that is. And I would say the — what you call the autists, they like him for similar reasons. He, unlike the other mass murderers I mentioned, is a man of some kind of mystical enormous charisma. It's the aesthetics that are associated with it.

It's the aspiration to greatness that doesn't exist as much in Mao and Stalin, who, you know, I'm very happy to talk this to, the difference between the Marxist end vision of mankind versus this other one you're bringing up now. And so that's why he is, maybe the entire post-war morality and political system of the world is created in the Nuremberg trials and the precedent they set is built on a rejection of what Hitler was. So it's become this kind of disfigured thing. I'm happy to spurg out all you want about this. Why? Well, so what you're saying is that Hitler was a grandiose narcissist, so all these covert narcissists secretly envy him. It's that, it's also, why did Susan Sontag write her insane article about fascist aesthetics

about Lenny Riefenstahl doing a study on the Nuba, this African, I think they're South Sudan. Great photo series, by the way. Yeah. to this. This is my great anti-racist contribution to tell the National Review guys that they're inferior to the Nuba. But why, in response to that, did Susan Sontag write this? Because what Susan Sontag wrote, it's not that she introduced this idea and corrupted everybody's mind. She just expressed what the left and liberal mainstream after 1945 has felt, that human strength and beauty and power are evil and need to be excised from human existence. And that logic has driven the left for the last since whatever the end of World War II is. And so I don't know, does this answer your question? Well, I have a lot of thoughts on this. But before we get into that,

I want to point out that Susan Sontag is an interesting intellectual because she has had more official and unofficial biographies written about her than virtually anybody else and the portrait that emerges is of a person who was basically humorless and defensive And, uh, my beef with Susan Sontag, she was not into rock and you know, my, my personal beef with Susan Sontag has nothing to do with Polia though. I, I take Polia aside and their beef, um, it has to do with the fact that she introduced my favorite writer, Alberto Moravia at the 92nd street Y and acted all like pressed and depressed that she had to do it. And then backstage when they were all like partying afterward, she made a snide remark about him being a lesser writer than other Italian writers of the time because he was

not sufficiently like experimental and surrealistic and to like not appreciate probably the greatest living writer of your time who's standing there right under your nose is like a really great act of covert narcissist hubris, in my opinion. That really brought a tear to my eye. Yes, I know, I don't read her. I know her from Paglia's criticisms of her, which sound right. I love Paglia and I, you know, I know you guys like her too, and I take her word for it, you know? Have you ever read Moravia? I have not. You gotta do it. He's billed as like the famous anti-fascist writer of Italy because he was sort of purged from writing by Mussolini and came back to it decades later. But he's probably the best judge of like human character, the best artist of psychodrama

before Welbeck came on the scene. Yes, I must read him and I actually I want to talk to you about Welbeck. But may I ask you, I know this is not Caribbean rhythms and such and you don't take normally take breaks, but we are about an hour into this. Yeah, yeah, we can take a break. Would you mind if we take a five minute break? No, no. And before that, I would just like to go back a moment to what we were talking about regarding the neo-reaction and human biodiversity. The image they have for the future of America of a so-called meritocratic elite that I will not say names, but that is run by these or has a high percentage of these peoples from let's say East Asia or South Asia. And I would ask you, if you have had a recent encounter with customer service, with any

large company, and the hell that that means, and the fact that words don't mean anything, that rational communication is impossible, and that that is the future of the so-called meritocracy in America, the judiciary will be run the same way. Everyone I've talked to, I, you know, I'm whatever, I don't work, I don't. But people who do, who run, who have to deal with this, tell me the same. It's completely sociopathic and unethical. And they have made a mockery actually out of the very concept of meritocracy, not only by cheating, which is a huge tradition under the Mandarin system of testing that existed in China for thousands of years, and that has been now transferred to the United States. But just in general, in their day-to-day dealings, what the effects are with this recent, for

example, affirmative action ruling by Supreme Court, why did affirmative action become so bad? It was not because of the blacks. The blacks were always, let's take the elite so-called universities, the blacks were always eight to ten percent of this. And it was kind of a quota. Everybody accepted it. I didn't like it. Good people couldn't get in because of this. It was unjust, but it was contained. The problem really was with the Chinese, if I may say, admissions committees in universities noticed two things, that Chinese students, after they graduated, they became ophthalmologists upstate New York or something like that, and they also never donated back. And so they said, yes, these people get good scores, they get good grades, but is that

really what the meritocracy, what the opening up of these universities in the 1950s and 60s was about? It was not about that. It was about why did the universities, the WASP universities open up? Because Feynman, people like that, the famous physicist Feynman, couldn't get into university wanted, that was perceived as an injustice, and it was. And so they said, we want more Feynman's. But what you're getting now in this new crop of, let's say, newcomers and model minorities is people who, again, become an ophthalmologist somewhere, they do not contribute anything in class, they're silent, they often cheat. And so actually, the corruption of meritocracy does not come from the blacks, it comes from the so-called model minorities. And that's why meritocracy was abandoned.

And once it was abandoned, universities said, well, if we abandon meritocracy, we might as well make everything race-based. And this is something that is forgotten and that is promoted by these other people we've been talking about. I'm sorry to spur on this. No, no. That's okay. We probably have to cut this part anyway. All right. All right. All right. Well, let's let's take a break. Yeah. Yes. Let's let's go to a smoke break. Let's go take a break. Yeah. Thank you. So which parts of Nietzsche are you reading? What have you been reading on Nietzsche? So I read his preface to The Birth of Tragedy and an attempt at self-criticism. Yes, an attempt at self-criticism. And I read, I read some aphorisms from Human, Ulti, Human. Is that the correct title?

And then I started on the genealogy of morals because our friend, Second City bureaucrat, recommended that I go with that one first. And Dossa recommended Eke Homo. But I don't know, I'm like truly such a novice. It's actually quite remarkable that I've gone this long in life. Yeah, I'm like, you with driving. The genealogy of morals is amazing. It's one of the most right-wing books ever written, and it's resold in universities as Nietzsche's left-wing book, if you can believe that, but nobody actually reads it. They only read things about the genealogy of morals, but it's a great place to start. And Nietzsche as a psychologist, of course, that's what he loved. He loved Dostoevsky as a psychologist. He loved Larouche Foucault and Lichtenberg as psychologists.

He is the prime psychologist far beyond Freud, I think. And I think Freud accepted this, right? He basically paid homage to Nietzsche. He was a massive influence on Freud. The interesting thing about reading Nietzsche for the first time in my advanced age is that you realize that you've derived a lot of the stuff that Nietzsche says independently, which is not due to the strength of your own intellect, but due to the fact that um ambiently indirectly you've come in contact with it through like the culture at large because you've read bronze age mindset you've read bronze age mindset three times which is mentally bronze age mindset is like my good fellows and bap by the way i give this book out like stalking stuffers well i i am honored and i don't i am a humble unlike other

so-called writers and people who fancy themselves philosophers and theorists, which I would never call myself, I'm happy to say I'm just a populariser of Nietzsche because I've felt since I was 16, I first ran into Nietzsche, I was 16 years old, I read some of these same books you're talking about now. It made me very angry at first. I was actually a hardcore Marxist at 16, not mainline Marxist, like a platonic, you know, there's communism and Plato and so on. And it made me very angry at first nature, but then seduced me slowly and he's a very seductive writer. And I have always felt he is a prophet of modern world and includes nobody since him has managed to exceed him. And the people who have tried, like Heidegger and Leo Strauss, and then there have been

quite a few others throughout 20th century who thought they could criticize and exceed Nietzsche. And their criticisms are always, I think, pathetic. And we live in the age of Nietzsche in the way that, let's say, people after Plato at some point, after some centuries after Plato, because his influence creeped along, lived in the age, lived in the age of Plato, you know, Christianity is the age of Plato. And so it's absurd to try to fight against him. I'm happy to be his popularizer. I don't pretend to be anything more than a popularizer of Nietzsche and a shit poster and humble internet, you know, shit poster online. That's all. Do you think Nietzsche would indict you for your false humility? Well, okay, let me ask you this, because one of Nietzsche's good aphorisms that I read

was that honest books are good, if nothing else, because they bring out the anger and aversion of like lower, more petty minds. And what's that quote that we've like said on the pod that was said by some prominent historical figure that I can't remember now that like, foolish if you're not a leftist when you're young? Do any of you drunk retards remember the quote? You're heartless, you're heartless if you're not a shit lib when you're young and you're brainless if you're not a conservative when you're old. So why are so many young people drawn to Marxism? Why has everybody gone through a Marxist, I don't think I ever went through a Marxist phase in spite of my affiliations, my associations, but that's also because I'm profoundly literal

and unimaginative and never thought to rebel against my father? Yes, I can try to answer that, but I should say I disagree with that common phrase that you had me just say right now, because I'm not a conservative. I never pretended that I was. I don't get along with conservatives. And I want to talk to you on this episode about this problem of the conservatives versus the avant garde right and so on. actually very much relates to Nietzsche because Nietzsche is right wing, so called, but he's not conservative. And in fact, the word right wing, I prefer not to use it because it's so much misunderstood in an American context. What does right wing mean? I had a professor from New York, I forget her name, she was on Twitter.

She threw a fit when I just mentioned something that everyone in Europe knows, which is that Nietzsche was right wing. And she's like, well, how can he be right wing? Because he criticizes capitalism and he criticizes the bourgeois. And it's like, really, that's, that's your view of right wing that like, it's just like Republican versus Democrat. That's what you see. So I don't even like the word right wing because it's so misunderstood. But yes, sorry. What were you asking just now about a Marxist phase? Why does everybody in youth cycle through a Marxist phase? I think, I think it's the love of war and radicalism and that that's just the most culturally acceptable source of radicalism after 1945. Yeah, if you're like a young person who's at all dissatisfied with like an establishment,

that's the most accessible way of accessing and, you know, a revolutionary fervor and all of that. And why do certain people remain leftists and others? Because they don't have no brains. Yeah, like, they don't have no brains, like Dasha said. Yes, I believe this. But then is this a psychological and constitutional problem? I'm afraid, the thing that I'm most afraid of is that leftism as a whole is a biological phenomenon corresponding to a predominant type in modernity. And that it's not just something that you can argue people out of. I think there are leftists, even adults, who by inertia, or for status reasons so-called, for social approval reasons, have remained leftists. But in youth, I think what

was just said is true. It's young people love war, they love violence, they love energy, and they love shoplifting. There's a perception that Marxism is a rebellion against the established order. And it's helped along by Soviet anthems like, what is it called, Red Army, Black Baron, or something. It's like this incredibly militant music. I've used it on my show. It's wonderful, but it's got nothing to do with Marxism as such. It's just militant music in the Marxist end state. And this is what I hope to convince leftists of, I mean, sincere ones, genuine ones who could be convinced that the Marxist end state is a hell of boredom. If you look at what Marx says about what his ideal world is, where you fish in the morning and you paint in the evening, it's a nursing home. It's nothing.

It sounds like being like a Gore Vidal type figure on the Amalfi Coast who writes for like four hours in the morning and then has lunch with his friends and then goes cruising for rough trade and so on. I have a question for, no go ahead. No yeah he says like they want that there should not be anything any more to be afraid of, they want this like placid kind of existence, right, and they want to eliminate suffering as if that was ever like the point. And so here's a question for the both of you guys, what do you think of Walter Kaufman? Because I think he attempted to really rescue Nietzsche from all these charges of like misogyny and anti-semitism, which I don't know that Nietzsche himself would have wanted.

Was he like self-cucking to the academic establishment and therefore taking Nietzsche down with him? Or was this an act of misguided munificence because he wanted to free Nietzsche from these like, longhouses and allow him to be read on his own terms. Yes. Do you want me to answer that first, or Dasha, do you want to answer that? Well, I've only, my follow-up question is only like, how would that, depending on what you think, influence also his translations? Because I've actually only really read Kaufman, except maybe like alternate translations of Zarathustra. But I've only really read the Kaufman Nietzsche. In general, the Kaufman translations as such, like word to word, are generally okay. He makes, I think, some mistakes. So for example,

Gewalt mention actually means a violent, you know, when Nietzsche says Gewalt mentioned that Kultur, a violent man of culture, Kaufmann really mistranslates that. And then other distortions especially show up in his commentary, in his introduction, in his footnotes, and so on. I think Kaufmann was probably one of these types who was semi, at least half well-intentioned. Yeah, Nietzsche, you cannot blame Nazism entirely on Nietzsche, and so he's right in that sense. But overall, I think it has much to do with what we brought up earlier on this show, what nature of the avant-garde is what's happening on the internet since, let's say 2010 and before, because Kaufmann ended up being very bad, I think. His project was very bad. And I encourage people

to search. I can post this. A friend of mine, Nostromo, he wrote a two or three part essay on Kaufmann's distortions of Nietzsche, that as far as I'm aware, he's the only one to have done this. On sub-stack or what? I think it's on sub-stack. I'll post it in a few weeks. Is Nostromo the mathematician guy? Excuse me, is he the what? The mathematician. I don't know what he is in personal life, but he wrote a very detailed takedown of Kaufmann. I don't like Kaufmann because if you look at what's happened at Nietzsche since World War II, Before World War II, 1900 to 1940, Nietzsche was at, he was perceived correctly as a right-wing philosopher and the head of the vanguard of the artistic right-wing in Europe. And then after he was neutered and caused something like the internet did not exist

because media control was centralized in, well, all over the world, but in Europe and the United States specifically. The way it worked is the universities taught Nietzsche because they couldn't excise him. It's very funny. There's this parallel thing that Machiavelli says about Christianity and the Latin language. He says that Christianity probably would have preferred to get rid entirely of the Latin language the same way they tore down statues and closed all the ancient oracles and the Olympic games and so on. But they couldn't do that because of the ubiquity, there was Latin literature everywhere, they had to write in it, they had to write in Latin and Greek. And so they had to preserve it, they couldn't get around that. And it's something similar with Nietzsche.

He was so powerful influence on so many writers, musicians even, all kinds of artists, painters, You know, Giorgio de Chirico just understood himself and his project entirely in terms of Nietzsche. That's just one guy and, and they couldn't get rid of him. And so they had to preserve him somehow. So the way they preserved him is within the university system, they taught an entirely distorted version of Nietzsche, where he was, um, presented as this ironic, joking, anti-nationalist and anti-Nazi and anti-Semitic and these other kind of things, which are all half-truths. And anybody who stepped outside of that and said what Nietzsche really was never got, you know, you could say that maybe in a university thesis, but you could never get outside that to the general public.

You could never put it in an article, in anything else. The most you could do is maybe make a movie on such themes, which, for example, I think The Shield actually is a great, I think it's a great Nietzschean series for a pop culture, you know, Nietzschean mindset. But beyond that, it was very hard to break through. Then the internet comes along and the lockdown on information that's available to the general public breaks down. And Nietzscheanism, that's my thing. And some of my friends, it's not the main, you know, there are many other kinds of what I call frog, which is just really young people in the 2000s, 2010s, getting fed up with stuffed shirt idiots in establishment authorities telling them what they can think, what they can say.

Nietzscheanism is just one strain of forbidden thought that was allowed to come through because of the internet and so on. I am quite drunk, so I actually forget the initial question of how we got here. Yeah, Kaufmann. Kaufmann was, unfortunately, Kaufmann was one, unfortunately, yes, he quote unquote rehabilitated Nietzsche, but he was also the main vehicle in the Anglo world of this distortion of Nietzsche, which is completely fake. I mean... is there an alternate translator? No, no, no, no. We have to learn German. Yeah. No, and Hollingdale is fine. And Kaufmann is actually a good translator, is better than others. You know. He does seem like a nice guy. Bap, did you read Nietzsche in the original German? No, I do not. I do not.

No, my knowledge of German is very rudimentary to my shame. So how do you know that? What's with Kauffman? If you are really diligently like reading Nietzsche, then the footnotes are, you're all, they're laughable, you know. No, the Kauffman, the Kauffman notes can be ignored. His translations, even Nostromo, who's like this frog I named, an anonymous account who wrote a criticism of Kauffman, even he says I think that Kauffman's actual, excuse me, translations are generally fine. By the way, there's a huge amount of Nietzsche that is untranslated, letters and many other notes that has recently even been discovered, so hopefully it'll soon be translated, you know. You know what really inflames my suicidal ideation is the knowledge that I can't possibly

read all this shit I want to get through before I die, so I may as well end it all ahead of time. you've reached a Schopenhauerian conclusion. I'm not proud of that, but it's true. No, I'm happy then never to have read most of so-called philosophers after 1950. I pretended to, but I never did read them. There's so much, you know, yes, just the whole work of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, which I focused on. But besides them, nobody reads anymore La Rushbouquet or or Lichtenberg, who are other people that these two I just named, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer respect. Uh, you know, you could probably have LaRouche Foucault's books and, or Montaigne and they outweigh... Is that Foucault? No, not Foucault, LaRouche Foucault, uh, yeah, 17th century French psychologist that Nietzsche highly praises.

And they probably outweigh in insight anything written after 1950, you know, so... Well we have a friend called Metu Malouf who translated our Welbeck episode, so I'm sure he's familiar with this guy and we can have him give us like the keynote, the rocking points. Yeah. But my point is like Kaufman was obviously attracted to Nietzsche for sympathetic, well-intentioned reasons. So I have to think that his errors, perversions or whatever were well-meaning at the end of the day. And I mean, but he is like a lot of watershed figures who by virtue of making a stamp on society, and I guess he did that like peripherally by associating himself with Nietzsche, are the beginning of the end. Yes, he may have been well-meaning, but you know Kaufman in the

end is a historical footnote. Who cares about him? He's a translator. I'm more concerned with what Nietzsche meant before, let's say, 1940, when he could be read without these heavily politicized filters after 1945. And when you look at that time, you may have noticed recent attacks, both on me and on you, and tying us together as... I don't want to say his name. Well, we kind of made it easy for them. Whose name? Yes, there's this recent attack on the avant-garde, so-called, you know, the so-called Dimes Square, New York arts phenomenon. The downtown fascist avant-garde. Yeah, but this, I have to fall on the sword for this because this is basically all my fault because in 2020, I read your book after much urging and from various like right-wing

anons who probably understood that I was sympathetic to your mission. And, you know, it actually took me a long time to read your book. I was really stalling because I figured it would be like another like, irony poisoned, online pilled, like work of meme craft. Yeah. And I do mean what I said on Twitter many years ago that it's like, you know, equivalent to like a Welbeck or a Bratty Stenellis in our time, but it is true that like there is a certain association, but also these people like you have to be disabused of what they are which is like people who are like apple bobbing for clicks and clout. They are and they're really petty midgets and dwarves since a few days after my book came out. It did well from the beginning. And I had these guys, I don't want to say their names,

and I don't want to say the names of the recent guys who were attacking the so-called fascist avant-garde, but they were like, they wrote a book report basically on the Luz, which they called the book, and it didn't do well predictably. And so then they look at my book, which is on the surface just this vulgar, raucous, online shitpost thing. And they're like, well, I don't like that this vulgar thing is getting attention. How come I'm an important intellectual? I'm an intellectual. Well, I'm a serious thinker with capital S. Why am I not getting attention? And so obviously this must be a psychological operation. And so, you know, Teal is obviously buying books from this guy and money laundering to him through buying fake books or whatever.

And it's been this since basically I published it more than five years ago. And now it's because, you know, you guys like it and others like it and it's spread beyond what I thought it would. It's gotten these, again, intellectual midgets who imagine themselves great thinkers to attack me and attack you and attack this burgeoning art scene, which as far as I understand, it's just people who like to create beautiful things, who don't want to be moralized. And I hear from entirely parallel... Well, don't give them that much credit. Well, you know, I don't know. But I hear from... No, I think... Yeah. I did call the dime-square scene small and curdled people trading on transgression for attention. Which I enjoyed. You are doing the service of proto-fascists.

We don't have a serious political project. It's not about a serious political project. I don't believe it's... That time is gone. There's no serious political projects now. There could be an aesthetic project. but it's very interesting because there seems to be no end to this like spate of hit pieces and they always take two forms which is like the one where they problematize the work of Nietzsche or Younger or Vola or one of these other historical figures coded as fascist or proto-fascist as a means of basically getting around mentioning you directly by name even though it's really code for you because the sad reality is that none of these new journalists are really interested in any of these writings. They don't read them. Yeah, they read nothing. Yeah. Yeah. And then like, the the I

mean, there have been like some like, straightforward ones by like, Blake Smith, is that his name at the Baffler? Yeah. Rosie Gray, who, you know, her article was fine, except for the last few paragraphs where she attempted to like associate you with mass shooters yeah yes yes yes and then the other one is is obviously like the the kind of format of the scene report which argues that um the uh ideas of these dangerous thinkers such as bap or menchus mold bug or delicious tacos they're spreading like wildfire through the dime square scene I mean, all of whom are too stupid to realize that they're spreading their foot soldiers of proto. But I feel even bad. I guess I feel bad talking about this because I think it becomes like a self reinforcing

feedback loop where everyone is promoting everybody else and contributing to this completely like fake meme discourse. I don't know. I see it as like them doing a kind of PR. Yeah. Yeah, all press is good press. Yeah, there are unpaid PR agents. Yeah. But how do you feel about it? Don't you feel like this makes, like it sucks your energy and distracts you from your vision and by miring you in this petty cycle of spin? Yeah, yeah, it's bad and it's just a way for me to humor my own laziness and I should ignore it. I have a second book planned that I haven't written yet, I should ignore all these types of things. I mean, they show something about the so-called modern intellectual that actually my friend

City Bureaucrat has this wonderful article your audience should look up called Ideologies of Delayed Informatization, which is about precisely this kind of intellectual who seeks pat on the head from the establishment so-called intelligentsia, and the way they think they get that is by denouncing these vulgar sophists like me, like you, and so on, who are spreading dangerous ideas in society. Let me just say something about, and it's not merely self-protective, about so-called fascism. Fascism is a non-starter today. There's no prospect for it. There's no prospect for any Nazi party. There's no prospect for any fascist party. If you take the whole online, far right, whatever you want to call it, it's at most 70, I would say that's a high estimate, 70,000 people worldwide.

It's significantly less than that. It's not enough to run- I thought you were going to say 70 people, but go on. It's probably, well, 70 people, no, it might be 700 or 7,000, but 70,000 is the upper limit, I would say. It's not enough to run a party even in a European country with proportional parliamentary representation. It's enough, however, to change culture, to change ideas and so forth. And that's where its strength could maybe lie. On top of that, my own focus, a friend of mine said, I took it as a great compliment, He said, you improve on Nietzsche because Nietzsche had hopes that his ideas could be done through a state system, that they could be achieved through a statist system. And the whole fascist so-called or whatever Nazi you want to say project in the early

20th century was very statist, state-based. I don't have, and it's not again merely even, I'm not saying this to protect myself, I don't I don't have any political or state-based ambitions at all, because I'm not stupid. It can't be done anything that way. All I've done is taken the core, as I see it, of the idea of Nietzsche and mixed it with my reading of antiquity of ancient, certain ancient Greek philosophers. And I am trying, I guess, to bring to people's minds some truths forgotten and suppressed by modern propaganda. That said, these people that you're talking about, the midgets attacking us in these pieces, they make a mistake. They think wrongly that the avant-garde so-called is a fundamentally left-wing phenomenon. But the truth, if you look before 1950 especially,

very much the opposite. Most of the great artistic literary names before 1950 were men of the right or of the hard right. You could mention Celine. He's very prominent in this. You know, the big names are Celine, Junger, Mishima, and so on. But there are many, many others. Dostoevsky is, by any modern definition, a hard rightist. And even people like Proust or Musso, great novelists of the past, uh, Conrad, right? Conrad, what is Conrad? Conrad in his own time was, he'll laugh at me. No, I'm laughing at myself because, uh, uh, the Heart of Darkness was famously on all like middle school, high school curricula in the United States for a while. I don't think it is anymore, but I just reread it. Right. I saw your tweets. They're great.

He's no longer read because of Edward Said's book, Orientalism, which is all- Which I've never read, but it is on this bookshelf. I've read it. No, Said is just a Foucauldian, a Foucault, a Seith, a Conrad, a man who wrote wonderful, vivid cinematic novels that somebody like Said could never write. He's not the only one who's seething at him. There are recent- Well, which were fundamentally morally ambiguous. Anyway, sorry I interrupted you. Yes, no, I'm sorry to rant. But there are modern, like, I don't know if Ibram Kendi, but some other intellectual midget or cripple, cripplet, like mental cripplet like Ibram Kendi was also seething at Conrad recently. They never stopped seething at Conrad because what was Conrad? He was a Polish guy. English was his third language.

He wrote English better than the English. He has these amazing novels about his travels in very colorful, vivid, colonial, if you want to call it that, but in the tropical world and so on. And he in his own time may have been a quote unquote pessimistic liberal, right? But today he is the devil. Today he's a fascist devil to the far left. And what was Conrad? He was a disciple very openly of Schopenhauer. Tolstoy understood, at least at the end of his life, his own work in terms of Schopenhauer. He thought Schopenhauer was the final philosophy of mankind. Wagner was the same. I mean, I think Tolstoy's greatest novel is not War and Peace or Anna Karenina. Are those Tolstoy novels? Did I cite that correctly? Yeah, yeah. Fuck. Yeah, you're doing great.

It's Haji Murad, which promotes a very pessimistic Schopenhauerian vision of reality and human relations. I'm happy to talk details of Tolstoy, but just in the general trend of his time, D.H. Lawrence, Tolstoy, many others understood themselves as either Schopenhauerian or Nietzschean, which they were both hard-right philosophers, and these disciples of theirs are the same. So the whole European avant-garde, Giorgio de Chirico, who I know you mentioned on the show where he discussed my book, and I'm happy to talk about him, he also literally understood himself as a reincarnation of the spirit that was inside Nietzsche. And this whole movement, let's say 1890 to 1940 in Europe, the avant-garde artistic movement was politically on the whole very much a hard right movement.

Okay, so I want to ask maybe for like a working definition of hard right. Yeah, and how that applies to like guys like Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, who may not have been understood as hard right in their times, somewhat confusing. like in contrast to, you know, the modern mainstream right or whatever you want to call it. Yeah, because I think people now look at somebody like Andrew Tate or Tucker Carlson and think they're hard right. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's, it's, it's pathetic. And of course before that they looked at George Bush and thought he was, he was Hitler, right? And so, by the way, not that I support Hitler, but Hitler, Hitler carried a copy of Hitler of Schopenhauer's world as well in representation in World War I in his knapsack, whereas other German soldiers

were just, by rote, assigned a copy of Nietzsche's Zarathustra in their knapsack in World War I. But yes, it's very different, which is why I don't like the word right wing, because it's got nothing to do with, let's say, Rush Limbaugh or the Republican Party's platform of, um, flag, uh, cross-country family, uh, platitudes. But when you say a writing, a hard-write philosopher, what do you mean? I mean that they saw, uh, human life as fundamentally hierarchical and, um, opposed to what we talked about earlier the Marxist vision of a completely homogenized, universal, egalitarian state where people go fishing in the morning, painting at night for no particular reason. Whereas this other vision of man saw mankind as maybe a transitional state between something lower and something higher.

Let me just leave it at that. And they criticized especially bourgeois liberal modernity as a shopkeeper, you know, a shopkeeper's regime, a place where nothing great happened, nothing great could ever happen again. And if you look at Nietzsche's particular criticism of liberalism, he says it's a system liberalism of herd animalization, that liberalism only means something as long as it's fighting against monarchy, and that's only because it's actually fighting, because it's promoting the virtues of the warrior, whereas when it wins, it leads to cutting down every tall mountain, herd animalization, the Englishman's comfort-based shopkeeper's morality. Sorry, what were you saying?

No, no, because it's funny and ironic because I think the primary anti-capitalist, anti-liberal critique in this day and age is that liberalism is like hyper-individualistic. Whereas, as our friend Second City Bureaucrat has pointed out, it's actually the ideology, the mentality of the herd. It's group identification. It's group identification. It is, let's say, looking around, finding the regard of others and determining yourself by that. And it's also, to put it in just, let's say, autistic historical terms, right? Historically, what existed was thrown and altered. The unity, at times, they were in conflict but between, let's say, European aristocracy slash monarchy and the Catholic Church or other churches and so forth.

And that was the traditional order of Europe, and it was challenged by the French Revolution and various other strains coming from the French Revolution. And that was, let's say, the traditionalist right, which still exists in Europe. percent of France, if you can believe it, want the French monarch to return in Versailles with the church, not as like a figurehead, but as it was before 1789. That's two percent of France, that's an enormous thing. It still exists in Europe. That's the traditional right. Then you have the Nietzschean, I don't know if you want to call it radical right or progressive right. And their point is, that's all gone. When he says God is dead, he doesn't celebrate that. It's a huge hole that's happened in mankind for reasons we can get into. But he says,

the old order, the foundations of it, the belief in it has gone, it has passed. The traditional right is dead. And we now live in a society that is basically individualist in name only. That's why I'm such an accolade of Christopher Lash because he saw very clearly that all these appeals to like hyper individualism were actually in reality arguments for herd mentality, for group identity. Yes, it's group narcissism. And yes, and for a guy who wasn't a particularly like original thinker, who many people have said was more important as a historian rather than a critic. He really saw and understood this. Yes. I'm not so familiar with Christopher Lash. I know him from the stuff you guys say, from the stuff the bureaucrat says. I think he sounds good. If you want, we can talk about him.

My point is, well, they did not like the left's criticism of traditional society because the left's criticism coming from people like Rousseau was that you needed a homogenized egalitarian culture that got rid of traditional hierarchies and so on because they were they were unjust. And so, in this sense, in this limited sense, you can call Nietzsche and Schopenhauer right wing that they saw the need for some version of human hierarchy. But the way that relates to the artistic avant card, uh, is different. I can go on a, uh, yes. Would you like to talk about that? Yes. Yeah. Yeah. How did we reach a point where the, uh, normative or dominant or conventional morality became essentially a leftist morality? And how did we arrive at a point where these

like so-called emissaries of the hard right are basically spiritual leftists? Well, I don't know what you mean by emissaries of the high right being spiritual leftists. I do think that- Well, people who are like- More conventionally right wing as opposed to the progressive right wing, as you said. Well, like people who are like traditionalists or like Catholic converts or whatever- Yes. Who are seen in the mainline media, in the mainstream consciousness as right wing figures. Yes. Well, let me, if you don't mind, approach the question from a few other examples. You take the artist as he existed in traditional European society. How did he exist? He had patronage, whether it was from a monarch or from an aristocrat.

And because of this patronage, he had to somewhat cater either to that aristocratic faction's prejudices or preferences, or to state interest if it was a monarch, and so on. And so high art means just art that's developed to the tastes of an aristocracy that has had time and leisure to develop a very complicated and fine taste. When you take that, they had to mix it in with support for some kind of traditional morality or religion. Then the left wing took over in the French Revolution, which means what? It became a shopkeeper society, an industrialist society in the 19th century. That's something that never commands- Bourgeois society. A bourgeois society that's not glamorous. It doesn't command the interest of- it's not gleaming. It doesn't command the interests of people.

It's not seen as sexy by women and so on. It's not a scaffold. It's not a glittering image. It's not a scaffold on which you can build any kind of high culture. And it's not a source of, sure, there were some bourgeois patrons, but it's not a source of patronage. And so this changed the fact that the source of patronage, literally of, I guess of money you want to be vulgar about it, it got cut off. And so then you have the avant-garde artist coming sometime in the 19th century, who isn't any longer supported by an aristocratic or a monarchic scaffold. And so what happens is double. On one hand, they are unmoored from having to support any conventional notions. On the other hand, their ambition can rise immensely. This is what

what Nietzsche says about the Parisian and French artists in the 1850s that actually Wagner comes out of that world, not out of some kind of Teutonic folkish world. He comes out of the Paris art world of the 1850s and 60s. And out of that comes this enormous ambition that I'm an artist, I'm going to recreate the fundaments of new traditions. I'm going to refound basically a religion for all mankind. In part also, this is supported by Schopenhauer's theories which see the artist no longer as an entertainer or a valet of traditional morality or philosophy, but as a philosopher in his own right, right? The artist is somebody who perceives new things in reality, which is why eventually you get people like Giorgio

de Chirico in 1910s, who look at the impressionists before and they say, well, these people like Monet and so on, they're not serious. They only paint when it's sunny outside. They just care about representing the effects of light in the world and so on. But they're not showing you anything new about the world, but I'm showing you new things about the world. And so this is how I've, for example, always experienced Giorgio de Chirico, and not just me, but many others, unaware to me, I think it's André Breton, jumped out of a tramway in Paris when he saw one of de Chirico's paintings in a gallery. He was saying, and he thought, this is the foundation of a new religion. This is, you know, this is amazing.

And this is the kind of thing that came out of the so-called Nietzsche and Schopenhauerian philosophy of the avant-garde that inspired this whole generation of artists. Can you call that right wing? I don't think you can, which is why I try to avoid the word. But it's certainly not, the point is it's certainly not left wing because it rejects entirely. Nothing of what I just said right now can be built on a Marxist or leftist foundation, which is fundamentally about modes of production, economic distribution. And fundamentally, what does that mean? It means about filling the stomach, filling man's material necessities. Well, the immediate needs. Yes. Yes. And thinking that somehow that is a true change to what we've been talking so

far about the shopkeepers or bourgeois morality when it's not a true change. All that Marxism is, it takes the bourgeois society and it says, we want it faster. We want egalitarianism faster, we want it at the point of a gun, we want it accelerated. And it's, you know, its vision of the end of mankind is nothing, it's just a full stomach. And so it's, aside from very few exceptions like Bertolt Brecht, you can't really find avant-garde artists that are marxists they come from this other tradition whether it's traditional it's hostile fundamentally to the artist because it privileges these like material comforts and as you said earlier on in the show um hunger really hunger and suffering are really

the like bedrocks new hampson yes exactly i mean that's birth of tragedy right it's like because the Greeks suffered, they were able to reconcile that with like an amazing art form. Yes, exactly. The wisdom of Silenus, it comes from realization that mere life is not worth living. It's the satir Silenus gets caught, gets asked, what is the purpose of life? And he says, to die, you know, never to be born and to die as soon as possible. It's just not, But mere life isn't worth living from any rational calculation. And so it was that terror fundamental insight of the Greeks that Dietrich interprets as the cause of all their beautiful creations. Yeah. And like, I feel like the Schopenhauer was like the first Laconian because he was like,

you can't, like, you're going to be fundamentally dissatisfied with the things that you really think that you want, but you don't know. but that those are my, my big points of agreement with you. I don't remember anything anymore because I have wet brain and I'm a mom, but like you said that like the problem of modernity and of man in general is not primarily economic and will never have an economic solution. And also by that logic that like the protection of the week was never an end goal in of itself, but the by-product of what you would call, I guess, like a hierarchical or aristocratic society? Yes, Schopenhauer's attacks on the Hegelians actually perfectly are applied to our own time or to Nietzsche's attacks on the left when he says that, you know, all these people

want is a well-functioning state that fills people's bellies and makes everything run well. And that fundamentally can't change the fact that existence is a tawdry thing that can't be redeemed through any material or legalistic fix. And so, yeah, is that right wing? Is Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground a right wing text? On one hand, it's not, obviously. On the other hand, it was banned by the Soviet Union for a reason, right? They banned Dostoevsky up to whatever it was, 1940, for a reason. All of these trains coming out of the European avant-garde art world could be called right-wing just by that type of thing alone, you know? But I think the conflation of the avant-garde right with the left is that it is at war with the so-called bourgeois order.

Even that has become sort of the dominion of the left, but there's an alternative. Yes, exactly. What is the alternative? Stojtejellet. Yes, exactly. And if I can hope to reach any of your audience who I know some of them are leftists and they have entirely legitimate spiritual grievances with the so-called bourgeois order. I hate that word because even Nietzsche, that was 150 years ago, he said, you know, criticizing Bourgeois, the way Flaubert did, and so on, if Flaubert and Balzac were criticizing the Bourgeois in their own time, that's kind of old hat. Yes, it's just, it's been overdone and it's no longer really the problem. The problem is the last man who seeks to level every mountain and to homogenize everything because he has a resentment against any kind of distinction.

And so if I would hope to reach them is, me and my friends, we don't come out of the normie conservative world at all. And we agree with you on how bleak it is. You know, the Ned Flanders world, that offers nothing. And it's obvious. It's obviously a failure. They've done it for 50 years or whatever the hell it is, and it's not produced anything. And yeah, that's nothing, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about possibly resurrecting the spirit of this other avant-garde that came out of Nietzsche from 1900 on until it was crushed in 1945. I'm not defending the Nazis, by the way, but because they took over, they were at the leadership of various other strains that came under their brand. And then when they got crushed, it

was as if European society and really all mankind excised half of its face out, like cut off half of its face so as not to be associated with Nazis. And that half of its face was everything having to do with beauty and strength and mankind's possibly reaching beyond this tawdry day-to-day life. yeah my question is who is that for who does that speak to well i guess what do you think it is about nicha that appealed so much to the avant-garde artists of the of the earlier century he was a chaotic bpd ho yeah they love that artists love that and it's funny because like uh there's a lot of charges of misogyny thrown around against nicha whereas i feel he was very in touch with his feminine side. No, very much so, yeah. Like he was speaking about himself, primarily.

In a way, he says these are like my truths. Yes, yes. I don't think Nietzsche is actually a misogynist philosopher. He is, as you know, I think it's Luce Irigaray, unless I'm misremembering her name, but there are many feminist philosophers who love Nietzsche. I don't read them. I don't know what they say. I don't read him at all as that. And if you read my book, which is Popularization of Nietzsche, I was very happy that someone early on noticed, you know, this is not at all a book that's disfavorable to women. I am actually against this misinterpretation of the word long house as a synonym for feminism, which the conservanormies have picked up on and have redefined it as a kind of, oh, it's just a synonym for attack on, you know, blue-haired, haired, and feminist. It's not at all that.

I want to write about this, and it won't make any difference. Once a word becomes misused like that, it doesn't matter. I just mean to say that actually the word long house is more an attack on the vast majority of traditional societies as they've existed so far. More on that than on feminism or high, high in estrogen because they're stressed out. Wait, you guys correct me if I'm wrong, but Nietzsche primarily uses woman as a metaphor. So like feminist scholars love to impugn him with these charges, anti feminism and misogyny, but essentially they're proving his point because they're making it all about themselves when he's using this metaphor to illustrate a larger point. Well, it isn't just, it isn't just feminist scholars. It's like, I mean, Kaufman himself,

and some more, some less metaphorical comments need to make about women that I also think are true. Like there's like footnotes in Kaufman where he says like these insights like time bound and shallow. He's super ungenerous really to like Kaufman Kaufman to Nietzsche's insights on femininity. He's like trying to also cover for his own attraction. Yeah. And like exculpate himself like a good liberal or whatever. But he's raising these points that are basically incidental to the state, the nature of womanhood. And he's using this state as like a metaphor for like truth or uh the body politic or whatever he says in the state of nature woman has first rank he's like he says it and he ascribes his power to his attraction over women right which was

i don't care about his personal life that's irrelevant that's vulgar stuff what he did with women or whether he was alpha or this other kind of garbage his thought appealed to to women even during the lucid portion of his life. And you know, if I may say what I was continuing about earlier, someone noticed very soon after I published the book, my book's very favorable to women. It's not favorable to lower types of life, but there are higher types of women that have existed in the past, for example, oracles and such, which now Tate is misrepresenting. Nietzsche's point is not that he hates women because he's an incel or whatever. It's about the particular, it's about the particular modern distortions of womanhood,

which the modern democratic state is basically a giant big demagogue which tries to masculinize women and use them as its foot soldiers in setting up this, uh, disgusting, uh, bleak egalitarian kind of, uh, tenement state. That's what I would call it. It's a tenement state. It's a communist, uh, public housing state. It's like a mammy state. It's a, it's a mammy state yes it's something like this may i quote can i read yes um please this is probably an echo he says all feminism too also in men closes the door it will never permit entrance into this labyrinth of audacious insights one must never have spared oneself one must have acquired hardness as a habit to be cheerful and in good spirits in the midst of nothing but hard truths

So that's basically him like encapsulating like the Slavoid philosophy, hardness in the face. What was the thing about the labyrinth of audacious insights? That should be the title of BAP's Anthony Bourdain style culinary adventure show. That's what I call podcasting. Yes. I want to have in the future, what you said, a Bourdain type show, but not him. He's a fucking faggot, you know, like, he was killed by the, he was killed by the Obamas, of course, with a doorknob suicide. Because him and Obongo did whatever down low stuff. I really, I really grew to dislike Anthony Bourdain on that airplane. Yeah, I hate to say it. I'll tell you why I dislike him because of his Columbia episode where he celebrates this

disgusting dish, the Sancocho, which is like a communal pot dish where they put everything that the community brings to it and well I have more to say about it but uh friends we've been another hour would you mind to take a short a short five minute smoke break while brennan is here he's giving me a blow job and okay we'll talk to you after you come very good yes we're back um so i have i have a question yes um about you being the contemporary popularizer of Nietzsche. Yes. You mentioned you feel good about this. I have more ambivalent feelings about Nietzsche's recent popularity. Um, how do you feel, how does this make you feel that Nietzsche was, you know, in a self-described as someone who was not meant to be read, you know, by the majority of people?

Yes, I'm glad you asked this because, um, when I wrote the book, I had no idea it would spread so far. Um, I was told through someone else, I think it was by Roush, who I'm not a fan of by the way we can talk about him. But he transmitted to me, I should be happy if it would sell 500 copies. And I knew it would sell a bit more than that. I thought, okay, 1000 or 2000, that would be great. And it sort of went far beyond what I expected. And now you're seeing, for whatever reason, I don't know what, I can only speculate, there are almost weekly articles about me, By the way, there are bigger ones I hear coming soon. I don't know what they're trying to do. I don't think they're smart enough to be doing it for the following reason, which is that they could suffocate me with attention.

I'm not saying this to be a snob, but I really wrote the book for a few friends online, and I was not expecting it to be like this. And Nietzschean, let's say, antinomian, karpokratty and vajrayana, whatever you want to call it, thought isn't really transmittable to a mass audience. And when you try to do that, yes, it doesn't work. So I just want to tell maybe whoever is listening, I was on forums in let's say 2010-2011 with maybe 11, 12, 13 people. And we were motivated. It's like Jesus and his disciples. For the reason that modern life seems incredibly bleak and homogenized and purposeless to you, we were on it for that reason. And my only message is if you are on the left and your objection to modern life is that it's a bleak homogenized mess was that feels like an iron prison,

then the way out of it, the path out, the only path out, is this tradition of Nietzsche and Schopenhauer radical philosophers who were really obfuscated, distorted, and suppressed, especially after 1950. And it's not, in fact, transmittable in its full form to a mass audience. I completely agree with you. I didn't write my book for a mass audience. I'm obviously happy any writer is flattered and happy that their book's doing well, but I do feel that they could, as I say, suffocate me with attention. Imagine, you know, this ancient sect, the Karpokratians, right? It's an ancient Christian sect, and they taught that the only path to salvation was basically committing every atrocity in the Bible. And because they believed the God of the Bible was the demiurge and therefore Satan,

and the only way to paradise was to produce his law in every single point. And so obviously that's not something that you can transmit to a mass audience. I'm not saying that's my view and it would send you to jail if it was taken seriously. But it's something, let's say, in that general sphere. And so, yeah, I agree with you. and the general popularizations of it, such as you see with Tate and others online, are pathetic and I have nothing to do with. Yes. Well, that all sounds super heretical, but how do you feel about your personal influence, particularly on the recent indictments on the so-called avant-garde? Well, I don't know enough about them, but I think if I could inspire people to write books

and make movies or other arts things, because that's really what my intention was. It was not, I'm not again saying this for merely self-political, excuse me, self-protection reasons, but I'm not stupid. Interesting Freudian slip. Yes, yeah, yeah. I just don't think that a political solution in the direct sense is possible because we have such small numbers now. We have absolutely no power. There are people who come online who imagine themselves dictators and that they need to put out takes and they're kind of the dictator from on high saying we should do this, we should do that. leads to many confusions. No, I am happy if I can inspire some people to do. I think, actually, I have friends who could write better books than mine. They're not doing it out of caution or

depression or many other such things. I don't know. Why did you write your book? Was it out of desperation and frustration or a desire for or revenge? I don't know if it was out of either, I just felt compelled to write it for my friends. I felt at the time actually that I was going to die sometime soon, and so I had to put out some restatement of Nietzscheanism that had not been done for really a hundred years. That's the greatest compliment that my friend Loki paid to me, said this is the best restatement of Nietzsche in a hundred years. He also said it's a great soot filter because it's stated in a popular fashion and it encourages pseudo-intellectuals to pronounce on it and to attack it, but they perhaps don't realize

that a lot of thought went into it and was based on long-time reading of people like some of the thinkers I've named so far. The first review of my book was in Swedish, came out within days, and mentioned the writer Klages. And so Europeans have always understood what I was trying to do. It is only in the American context that it caused these tumult, because again, the conservative right in the United States, the conservanormy right, which has bungled everything for decades and has led to nothing productive, they've always felt very threatened by what I was trying to do. Excuse the tangent, but as to why I wrote it, I maybe don't have the psychological insight into myself to say why, it is just a statement for my friends.

But I think other things coming out of your friend's world is very promising and the reaction it's causing among the strivers on the literary intelligentsia is a sign that maybe we are over the target, so-called. What do you mean? I just mean that the glut of these articles coming out speaks to a desperation on the part of people who imagine themselves as gatekeepers to thought and see perhaps that maybe a hegemonic leftist chokehold on thought in the United States is about to break sometime soon, soonish, but that could be in the next decade or two, I don't know. I think it's kind of already broken. The left has castrated itself, you know, it's. Yeah, I know through other sources that, for example, the big fashion houses in Europe and so on are completely

exasperated with the so-called woke thing, with the politicization, the moralism. And the fact is, the left has castrated itself because it's rejected beauty. It's rejected anything higher than mere life, which is always an inherent possibility in the left, but they took their own bait in a way. And so now there's this hole and I don't think they can stop it. I don't think they can stop anything from filling this hole, you know. Yes. Yeah, that's true. But what happens next? I'm also like running out of steam. Anastasia. Anastasia. Anastasia. Are you both drunk? Are you both drunk? You can ask me anything. We're drunk, we're drunk, we're drunk. Wait, I do have a question for you that's about the musics. Yes, I'm happy to answer, but I want to tell you this anecdote.

I knew this complete schizophrenic. I know you guys had delicious tacos on your show. He's a good friend of mine. He loves Filipino prostitutes. This other friend of mine must be in his 60s by now. I wanted to have him on the show, but he's heavily lobotomized by medication. However, when I knew him maybe 10, 12 years ago, he was much more manic and he would meet me in restaurants and there would be people around and he would talk in this loud nasal voice like this. He would give me detailed rundowns. He was a genuine artist, not like a fake online artist. He would talk about the African hunting dog and the hyena and their mating rituals. And he was obsessed with animals and military history. A true autist on anti-psychotic drugs, he had been in the Philippines, liked delicious tacos.

He told me, do you know what the average lifetime sexual partners is for an American man? And I said, no, no, what is it, Owen? And he's like, it's five or six. that that's outrageous. I would be so frustrated. I must have been with hundreds of prostitutes. And so he did this in the Philippines and had been imprisoned, actually, in a Manila mental asylum multiple times. But he had these intense interests on animals, as I say, military history and some other such things. And whenever he would stop one of his rants, and there would be people around, He's like, well, what else do you want to talk about? Ask me anything, ask me anything. So this is what I say to you now, ask me whatever you like. What do you want to ask me? Well, is there anything else you'd like to say about the avant-garde?

Well, I mean, there are many things I want to say. I want to talk about, you know, women and the avant-garde, for example. We started to talk before about women. Now, something people miss, The fact is, people like Yukio Mishima, who in American popular culture is understood as this gay who wrote this book, Sun and Steel, about bodybuilding as a spiritual self-overcoming, and these other books about samurai against self-sacrificing and so forth. You don't think Mishima was gay? No, I don't. I think it's a misunderstanding. You know, actually, I was talking about him recently and these so-called traditional Catholics, which I'm happy, by the way, to talk about also, and the so-called online traditionalist and the- Wait, hold on. I'm going to go have a snack. Wait.

I really, my blood sugar is plummeting. Anna's dying. She needs to go. I'm going to have a snack, but I want to hear about Mishima. Hold on. Hold on. Sorry, Ann is leaving. She's officially back. I'm going to be right back. What are you going to have? Oh, let's take a let's take a snack and I'm going to have a chocolate. Is that OK? Well, you guys want to take a quick snack break? She's getting a snack. When the Dionysian Ravelry hits. What are you eating? A meatball. Oh, OK. You have a tiftea elka? They don't call me lasagna, Anna, for nothing. I'm a very good pick of meat products. Do you want a meatball? Okay, hold on. I have an erudite question for you. I read an essay of yours that was in the same

issue of a very obscure right-wing magazine that we was both in, where you said that classical music is the music of the right wing, and that there's no music of the left wing. And my question is, what about jazz? The eclectic, avant-garde music of urban blacks and Jews. Is that not the music of leftism? Well, look, it could be the music of leftism, and I know people who hate jazz more than they hate hip-hops. Me. And Dasha. We don't like jazz. As a cultural Social association, sure, jazz could be seen for the reasons you said, because it's associated with certain demographics and political factions. But I would answer to that same as Soviet socialist, realist, whatever you want to call it, or Soviet Red Army music, that is supposedly as left-wing as it gets.

But in the spiritual registers, let's say, that Soviet military music accesses, those are not left-wing at all. They're just revolutionary violent impulses that young people love. And so they love that music. And as I repeat to you, in the Marxist end state, I think I say this in the article you're mentioning, in the Marxist end state, which is a state of no necessity, a state where all human duty of any kind and burden has ended. That's not really the music of the Soviet military system. Now, it's much closer what you're saying now. That could be the music of jazz, because jazz in its meandering perhaps represents the end of some type of central ego in music, a central subject in music, whatever you want to call it, it leads to feelings of dissolution of the ego. Maybe, maybe it does.

But by that standard, so does certain ambient electronic music, maybe. By that standard, so does, let's say, white noise, which I enjoy listening to when I sleep sometimes. And so these could be said to be left-wing music because they lead to the solution of all desire and all longing and all ego. But frankly, I don't think that's true, though. But yeah, I think when you think it through, I think when you think it through that it isn't true, that actually, all of these, including jazz, do have some longing built into them. And so maybe actually the music of the left is Hootie and the Blowfish. It's supermarket background, crap music, you know, like that. Yeah. Well, as Schopenhauer says... Hootie was our guy. He was our guy, no.

And I haven't even really read Schopenhauer, so I'm paraphrasing Nietzsche here, but he says that music is the language of the will. And jazz music in its defense, though I don't listen to it or enjoy it, is like improvisational. The whole point of jazz, right, is to like fill this like kind of like negative space with improvisational florishes. Yeah, with whatever bullshit you want. That's willful, no? How do we feel about Chet Baker? I don't know, I don't know particular jazz performers, but I should say there is a black Black Frog, who keeps writing me about music and who points out that many of the early jazz as well as ragtime black performers were very much influenced by Scriabin, you know, the Russian, although his music has no Russian qualities about it.

And Scriabin's whole thing was that he was accessing outer dimensional entities, and he was completely, exactly one of the most prime examples of what I'm talking about when when I say avant garde, weird right wing, quote unquote, right wing artist. What did he want to do? He was he was born on Christmas Day and he died on Easter Day. And he had this plan. Isn't that what happened to Jesus? Yes, exactly. Yes, it is. He understood himself in this way. Scriabin did. He was? Yes. Well, for your audience who are Boers, Scriabin was a composer around 1900 or so. And he understood him. He died, I think he died in 1915. But he understood himself as founding an entirely new world. And his last composition, Mysterium, was going to be performed in the Himalayas

on several mountaintops mixing music, smell paintings, and colors, like colored lights. And he thought it would inaugurate a new era of mankind. And he died before he could complete it. And it is out of this insane, overly ambitious desire to be a prophet composer that actually the black jazz artists you're talking about, they took many of his chords, many of his innovations, and they made this kind of popular urban music out of it. And so, is that... They sampled it. Yeah, exactly, they sampled it. So can you say that is left-wing music? I don't think it's left-wing music. I mean, you know, so whatever its extraneous demographic, you know, the demographics who prefer this music may be, I don't think in its spiritual content that jazz is actually left-wing so-called music, you know.

Right, well, in so much as... But for the reasons you're saying, actually, Nietzsche says without music, life would be a mistake. And Schopenhauer says music is really a copy of the will through another, through another means. And so it's not therefore possible for a music that actually touches you and that moves you to be quote unquote, left wing, because left wing has to do with Marx, again, or with Marxist impulses, which either have to do with distribution of economic goods, or when you wipe that economic aspect away, it has to do with resentment that any kind of distinction and any kind of longing for a higher life exists at all. And so leftism is really a rejection of the spirit of music entirely. Maybe you don't agree, maybe you think I'm overstating, but I feel that way.

So, I wouldn't disagree with that, but my question is, I guess, that if music is the language of the will, that even music that's sort of made by a committee, well, okay, I guess I'm answering it myself, but like music that's, like if there was to be a left wing right, it would be kind of like produced or like they wouldn't have any trace left of like an individual will, because if it's still but if it's meant to inspire any music, I think even popular music is meant to inspire some sort of feeling racism. Yeah. I don't really care about its provenance. It could be even artificial intelligence that produces it. As long as it evokes genuinely strong feelings, I don't see... But anyway, this may be kind of a frivolous conversation about what music is right-wing or left-wing.

I do think the left-wing is spiritually bankrupt. I don't think it's frivolous in that sense. The left-wing is spiritually bankrupt. And so the only left-wing music is really supermarket music of the let's say late 90s early 2000s hoodie and the blowfish variety that just makes you want to put a gun to your temple that's left the music to me yeah yeah i guess but even who i mean there's emotional content what about john mayer i i do not know this who is john mayer do you know lana del rey yes everybody likes lana del rey i don't know her so well but you don't listen i don't i actually don't like lana del rey that much i do i like her but perry abasi was correct and i don't not like her i listen to her music all the time but i don't

really care all that much i'm not like a huge lana del rey stand i was very angry at him at the time but he was right i said early on that that bap bap was lana del rey for men because a big motif in and Lana's music is like wildness and like being crazy. Yes. No, I love Lana. I think she's probably the best singer songwriter that we have currently going for our generation. Many sensitive young men love Lana Del Rey. They feel that it captures the feeling of a late summer. And there's, I've heard one or two songs. Again, everyone hears them, But I don't know so much major pop music. I don't listen to it. The only modern music I much listen to is electronic music and so on, which has some, let's say, ego dissolution effects. But I don't know that you can politicize it one way or another.

But I'm happy to talk to you about the woman problem you brought up in regards. Yes, I want to speak. I want to talk about where I'm in. Wait, I have a question. What is the start and end point of Gemini season? I'm just trying to. Yes, the audience may like to know that we're several bottles or whatever into our conversation now, but I'm really drunk, but I do have a meaningful inquiry here. I am completely lucid. I am totally lucid. If I sound drunk, I'm only pretending to be that way because it's socially expected of me. but please repeat it. May, May, May, June 21st. Yeah. Okay. Yes. Alana Del Rey is June 21st. She is on the cusp. That's where I'm going with this. She's on the cusp of Gemini and Cancer. So she is a Gemini. Gemini, as you know, are the great artists of the zodiac.

Donald Trump, Azalea Banks, Morrissey, our guest here. Alana Del Rey, I consider her. She's a honorary Gemini. She is. No, I think she is. She's Gemini quoted, for sure. That was my point. We were talking about women and women, women, women suck. Yes. Well, they're virago's inheritance. Yes. However, the question you you asked me a few minutes ago, would you mind repeating it? Because the New World Order is interfering with our signal, which one? Which one? Yeah, just tell us how you really feel about women. He's simpin'. You may notice that Yukio Mishima has achieved stardom by appealing actually to women. So I think we were interrupted a little bit earlier when I was pointing out that the false

impression of Mishima is that he's some kind of gay author who again spiritualized bodybuilding or was talking about extreme samurai self-sacrifice and so on. What people are missing from that picture is that during his own lifetime and the reason therefore that we know about him at all, is that in the Japan of his time, which is 1950s, 60s, and so on, he became very popular through his stories of urban, I don't like this word, maybe not degeneracy, but decay. It's a beautiful decay, told in such books as Forbidden Colors, After the Banquet, and many other ones that are being translated now, kind of pop novels that also my friend Masaki is translating. And he was enormously popular in Japan because of his appeal to women. Similarly, there are many others.

Let's say again, Bronze Age Pervert, Bronze Age Pervert and Friedrich Nietzsche. Yes. We were talking about Nietzsche a lot on this show. Nietzsche had many female enthusiasts. I pointed out, what was her name, Lou Salomé. Lu Salome was just the one during his lifetime, and she was kind of maybe his one-eyed-ess and so on. She's not that relevant overall in his general influence. But women like Isadora Duncan, who was an experimental avant-garde dancer, and a self-described Nietzschean, but there are many others like her and mystics and so forth who loved Nietzsche. It was women in the modern world who popularized people like Nichi, like Mishima, who are my literary and artistic idols. And why is this important? Well, it has to do with what we've been talking about so far on this show.

I do think that, you know, for all my attacks on roasties and such, which I do not retract. I do not retract. I'm not being a cuck and a simp to women. I do not retract my attacks on roasties. That being said, and it's in the book, So I'm not saying anything I haven't said before. But as Nietzsche says, women have no patience for the so-called selfless objective man. And it is this self-effacing nobody man, the gray man, that modernity in general is promoting, including, unfortunately, large parts of the right with their IQ fetishization, where they're promoting, really, the shopkeeper and the clerk with this IQ stuff. Really, they're promoting the office worker. But women hate that. Women hate that. And I believe it is through the spirits of women

that the vehemence of the will can replenish life, can cause a reset. They will not abide this kind of gray, homogenized, nothing world. They want vitality. They want men who are powerful. I don't mean in the status sense. I mean in the stance of having true being. And so that's why they continually call for and promote these types of visions of life, of visions of high life, like come out of Nietzsche and Mishima, regardless of what Nietzsche's personal life was like. That doesn't matter, you know. What is it about certain men who are not? Batchists. Batchists who are not necessarily incels, but who are incel-coded that appeals to women. Well, I don't know. I haven't thought about that question, to be honest. I think, just if you put me on the spot, if I had to guess, it's maybe,

do you think it could be a kind of animal pity, like you see for a caged lion, maybe? No, I think it has to do with a disinterest. I think it has to I have to quote Eric Weinstein here who I know that many of us are not a fan of yes he had this line about how certain aspects of human behavior code for credibility I think being like an insult a guy who is indifferent to the emotions and motives of women codes for credibility it's like kind of like being a bully that people like people prefer bullies to bullied yes even though it's very uncouth and impolite to admit this fact because being a bully codes for confidence assertiveness even though obviously bullies are deeply insecure maybe it's because

the incel-coded man is the man who is the credible man in the minds of women i think there's something to that yes it could be i uh i have not thought so much about the incel question because um for me to brand yourself as an incel, actually, you are determining yourself by the thoughts of what women, the thoughts of women, their regard for you and so on. I mean, if you actually are indifferent to what women think, you wouldn't openly call yourself an incel and make a big thing out of that. I was very much against this movie T-F-W-N-O-G-F made by our friend Alex Lemoyer. Yes, we know her very well, yeah. Yes, by her. I thought that was an attack on me and my friends because... Well, I don't think so. I think Alex is sympathetic. I think it...

It's just that the incel movement came out of 4chan, which culture is downstream from 4chan. I really think this. Yes, but as you know, incel is a law enforcement keyword. I'm not saying that Alex Lee Moyer and whoever made that movie was openly motivated by- Well, it's not a crime to get no pussy. Well, no, but okay, but setting aside, well, like, forget the insult. This is a bad terminology, but women are attracted to men who are fundamentally indifferent to them. Yes, could be, but I don't think it's general. I don't think that's generally true. I think they may be, look, I don't want to offer whatever you're inviting me to offer here if it's game advice or what women are sexually- That's not what women are or are not sexually attracted to, I have no opinion on. I am just

against the so-called incel branding because although it does cover some noble sentiments, for example, there are people who brand themselves as incels but who like, for example, the book Sorrows of Young Werther by Goethe and the reason they call themselves incels is because they have a strong, passionate belief in young love. And they very much despise the pickup artist culture that came out of artiste and so on in the early 2000s, 2010s, I mean. And they don't want to be clowns for women. They don't want to play this game, so-called, of, well, what do women like? And you have to act such and such a way. They want genuine, sincere, young love. And that's very respectable but i don't see why they have to call themselves incels when you do that you are

actually uh entirely they're reclaiming it like the n-word they're like you know they're there's they're insisting on a romantic their idea about love that's why many incels have one itises and and whatnot. I think it's an aspirational term, ultimately. But it does, I think, also probably doom some people with an over-identification. But to circle back to women, as Nietzsche says, he says, women love him. And I think he's correct. And he says, except for abortive women, which he goes on to describe as the women who lack the capacity for children, but I think is really speaking more broadly to, I don't know, don't you think most women nowadays are abortive in their spirit? Even if they have children. Yes, I think that most women today are probably spiritual mental cripples, sore most men.

And I don't think there's much use in dwelling on their deformities. I mean, they're somewhat interesting. But the problem of dwelling on degeneracy, so-called, or deformity is, well, what is this? The problem is that it gives you a false moral high ground and a means of deflecting your own deformity. Yes. I prefer much more the narrator from Notes from Underground, who declares that he knows he's not even a bug. He's not even worthy to be a bug. But he is genuinely superior to other modern people, because he recognizes that and they don't. I think a great novel, or it doesn't need to be a novel, could be a movie, could be any number of forms of expression. Of honesty like that could come out of what you call the incel thing now and its confrontation with the deformed femininity

and deformed men that are around today. One of the big obstacles that's in the way of that is the moralism of the online right that's been introduced since, let's say, 2017, which I'm also happy to comment on because many of the older, let's say, 2015 and before posters who confronted many of these same issues you're bringing up now without calling themselves openly incel. Again, I don't like that branding. It's like, what's the point? You're declaring, oh, I don't get no pussy and I'm mad. It's not, again, it's entirely a female-centered branding, but there were people before 2015 and some after who dealt with these matters. Many of us got banned. And then, let's say, around 2017, we got replaced by these political actors who came in after Trump.

They were actually against Trump in the beginning, but they got a little glint in the eye. They saw media attention to our sphere. in part because of things we had done, in part because of what Trump had brought. But these are really the conservanormy types. Some of them are, you can say, hardcore racists of a stupid variety, but they come out generally out of the Ted Cruz Santorum wing of the Republican Party. They are heavily moralistic and they're very much concerned with this word degeneracy which I understand and maybe I gather from what you're saying you understand in biological terms perhaps or psychological terms but they interpreted entirely morally and so that's why you're seeing a glut of closet cases and also

So let's say people from the Middle East and areas further east of that who are beige and resent the fact that white women are more promiscuous than the women they're used to from their cultures but will not sleep with them. so around this is built up a whole moral tirade that they then present online and that's become unfortunately very much slowly it's becoming the face of the right with people like tate and so on i wish tucker would not promote him the body count thing that that's become like a pet cause of the online, right? And the trad calves. Very confusing to me, because let's be real, everybody likes a slut. Sluts are fun and exciting and a good time. And that's what everybody wants. So I'm confused by this moral purity arc, which is very unavant garde.

I'm not confused by it. I think it's stupid. I think that, as my friend Delicious Taco says, Because the very opposite is the truth. Women need to be bigger hoes. They're not big hoes enough. And the attempt, for example, look, let me give you an example. We were able largely to shame obesity, to shame fat people. But that's easy because- That's a project of ours as well. Sorry, I couldn't hear you. They're trying to interrupt. They're trying to stop. You know, like George Bush said, George Bush said they're trying to stop the love between gynecologists and women. He has a line like that. And well, the obese are easily shamed because they're like internally ashamed. So, yes, well, any criticism of them triggers an internal model. Well, it's very simple.

Fatness shows and you can't hide it. and everybody agrees that a fat girl or a fat man is unsightly. And so it's easy to make fun of that. When it comes to body count, there are a lot of cope things that come, as you're pointing out, that, you know, they try to make points about the thousand cocks there, which doesn't really exist, or that women who speak... It sure does. Well... I don't know about that. Maybe, maybe, maybe, maybe. But they're saying that, let's say, taking loads and loads of cum or whatever, that taking many cocks or whatever shows somehow physically. But the fact is it doesn't show physically. And if you look at, you don't need to look at, for example, Daily Mail. Daily Mail has repeated reports on this, where they show examples of

which women have high body counts and which don't. And the ones with relatively high body count are always attractive, let's say 21 or 22-year-old college students who've banged many men, and the ugly fat ones have low body counts. And if you look throughout European history, you find similar, where the most highly desired women courtesans, geishas, whatever you want, king's mistresses, the French king's mistresses, some of whom were actually ex-prostitutes, had very high body counts, and nobody thought a second thing about it. Now, of course, they didn't want their wives to have that, but they cared much less about their wives. The purpose of the wife was the preservation of the patrilineal bloodline and so forth, and the preservation of property within family lines.

But as a matter of romantic interest, nobody actually thought that a woman with a high body count historically was something disgusting or undesirable and that has become a recent as you say obsession among I don't think it's actually just the online right there are these so-called traditionalist left and leftist catholics and so forth online who also raise a big thing about that um yes uh I I think it's a it's a pathetic fixation and it makes a mockery out of people who try to do that, I know it will get me hate from people on my side to say this, but I think any objection in that direction comes pre-caricatured. In other words, whatever part of society at large, whether you want to call it the left or whatever it is, has successfully caricatured people who complain about that as absurd.

And I don't think it's really possible to shame people about that. Even if you were able to establish, let's say, a general consensus that that's bad, women would just be able to hide that. So it's not, whereas they would not be able to hide fatness, which is what I mentioned. Right, the real body count that matters is your BMI. Yes, it's the kilogram count. You contain many bodies within you by virtue of being fat and having to pay for an extra plane ticket. It's a big problem. It's a big problem. And the reason why it doesn't make sense really to talk about the so-called online right or whatever has drawn attention before because it's become almost where online right means a daily denunciation of oh this girl has such-and-such body count

and that girl's a mud shark and it has that body count and it's it's it's a complete waste of time yes the whole body count discourse is is a matter of the progressive retardation of the right wing as it exists now, and it's caused by these factions, I'm saying, by the bow-tie conservatives, many of whom are closet cases, whose purity spiral, and they're excessively concerned with showing that, let's say, a Fornication with women is sodomy, and, you know, blowjobs are mouth sodomy, kissing a woman is mouth sodomy. And they're very much concerned with showing to—and you figure out why—that, let's say, fornication between men and women, premarital, as it occurred in Western society for decades if not centuries, already is just as bad as sodomy.

They're very much concerned with proving that for whatever reason. And these are a big part of the American conservative right wing, and they've always been. And to these, you can add various other kinds of retards, such as ex-roasties with a complicated past who found Jesus, and you know, they found Jesus and now they want, you know, they want their new husband not to make them whatever, do what they did in their past. this extra thing of somebody from Rajasthan, or let's say Dubai, or Albania, who has entirely w****d affects and has... That's very mean to say about your friend Niccolo, but okay. Well, yeah, I don't mean Niccolo, there are many things I disagree with, but I don't have have in mind what I say, but, you know, these people come with sideways visors and have

so-called social media panels with only fans that secretly they are there to promote and daily denunciations of body count women and, no, yo, you are producing the love and this kind of thing. And yes, it's an embarrassment and none of my friends have anything to do with that. Well, let me ask you a question related to something you were saying. Do you think the sun has set on sort of the glory day of the, at least on Twitter or X as it's now called, of the online right? Yes and no. I think that there are actually many good posters now, maybe even more than there were in 2016 and certainly than in 2017. On the other hand, there's been so much attention focused on us that it's drawn dozens and hundreds and thousands of retards that we are flooded absolutely by imbeciles.

Well that you're responsible for, they're your problem now. They are my problem. also part, you know, to be fair, you guys have interacted with us. It's our fault. It's not our fault. Well, as you know, there are there are many who who desire the the New York art art whole thing. And so when you interact with us, it draws it draws many. It draws many. And they have high hopes of, at the very least, literary validation or some type of, many hope for a literary career. And so, yes, it draws many, many morons to our side. And that's kind of, again, suffocated us with attention. And I know it's not you, but it's that's part of the story. But yes, it has led to a lessening of quality on our side. Censorship had something to do with it and then self-censorship in response to that.

But I'm afraid you're right, yes, and the only solution out of it is for the old posters who have new ideas, who have humor to produce things that they have not yet produced. I believe that there are people on our side who could make books, movies, whatever, that are much better than what I did. But for whatever reason, they're not doing it yet. Don't be so humble. Yeah, don't be so humble. OK, well, I have a question. I have a question. OK. Anna doesn't like D'Chirico. No, I don't know. I don't not like D'Chirico. I just he's not my favorite artist. My favorite artists are the Russians of the Silver Age preceding the communist revolution. I like the Kiriko, Giorgio de Kiriko, very much. I've posted him for a long time. Yes. I have heard your show when you discuss my book.

I don't remember exactly what you said, Anna, but you said you are not a huge fan of de Kiriko because he tries to capture something about Renaissance paintings, loneliness, a feeling. I'm not sure what you said. I didn't completely agree with that. I'd like to comment on that. But do you remember exactly more or less what you said there? I remember I said I don't like a lot of D'Cirico paintings because they remind me of when I had to go to Hoover Dam as a child. I don't remember saying anything about Renaissance paintings. For me, D'Cirico is a kind of a lesser artist, much like J.K. Stephen, my favorite Victorian era poet, is described as a lesser poet because he didn't attain some sort of greatness, but D'Chirico doesn't quite hit for me ever.

I mean, I understand the appeal of D'Chirico because he has, I said this on Twitter once, he has the same kind of like solemn, uncanny aesthetic that a lot of Italians do from like Fellini to Gieri. Pozzolini has a little bit of this, it's like in the blood of Italians. But he like, who's the other guy? who's the, the umbrellas guy? Do you know? Magritte? Magritte. He, like Magritte, does not quite hit for me. Yes, I'm not a huge fan of Magritte. And I know what you're saying about the Italians. Antonioni has this feeling too. Yes. I think- Antonioni could never quite wrap up a story. And so he masqueraded his inability to stick the landing with like uncanny and mystique. Even though he is a great filmmaker at the end of the day.

And by the way, when I criticize artists and filmmakers, I want to make it clear that I appreciate what they do because they've done more than any of us will ever hope to accomplish in our lives. I made a movie. No, that's fine. I'm not a huge fan of Antonioni. I have friends who believe he's the best filmmaker ever. And I would say, however, that people like Antonioni, Fellini, to some extent is Hitchcock And there is a particular movie by Hitchcock, I forget the title, where he is also copying, however, the Curico, as is, for example, the Italian fashion house Fendi, they are copying the Curico. And so a lot of these people who you are saying are trying to capture an Italian spirit, I think they're actually, like many of the surrealists who are inspired by the Curico, copying him.

I believe if I'm not wrong, unless I'm mixing things up temporally and you were actually comparing them to these later artists, I think on your show about my book, you said something like the Curico was trying to capture the essence of a Renaissance painter's lonely plaza or something of that sort, but not quite achieving that. And I would agree with you that if you see it that way, he's not completely successful. I never approached de Curico in that sense. The first painting I ever saw by him was quite late. I must have been 25, 26, maybe even later, and I saw mystery and melancholy of a street. And I didn't have any cultural associations with Italy or the Renaissance or anything else. I was completely exhilarated by that. I didn't see it as sullen.

I know people do, and it has those associations. It's very easy to see it as something somber and sullen. But I didn't see it as that at all. I saw it as something completely exhilarating. I encourage listeners maybe also to see his painting, the train station, Montparnasse station, or the nostalgia of the infinite or other such of his, which are absolutely exhilarating. And if what you were saying were true, it wouldn't explain again why someone like Andre Breton would literally jump out of a moving tramway. Well, okay. When I say you see something as like sullen or melancholy, I mean that in a positive sense that it's exhilarating and life-giving. Because you see like infinite freedom spreading before you. But my issue with D'Chirco was always not that he captured something like

sullen or pessimistic, it's that he couldn't quite capture the infinite freedom. And that was my beef with this book, Habdomeros, that he wrote that was like a free association dream monologue that you see reprised in a lot of Italian cinema, actually. Yes, I think you're right there. And Habdomeros is not a successful effort. If I can be a critic. I say it's not. His talent was with painting. And there's a book by Paolo Baldacci, which has very nice, big reproductions of the Curico paintings. And again, I had no idea on his philosophical, intellectual background the first time I saw it. But I was amazed to find out that he considered himself a literal reincarnation of the same spirit that was inside Heraclitus and

Nietzsche, and that he saw his task as exhibiting the real world that was imminent simultaneously behind this one we see before us, that he saw himself as exhibiting the madness behind existence. And these are high-flown words. People have to look at it and either you're affected by it or not. But yes, it has a kind of vapor wave. It does. Well, DiCirico always, in my mind, I always associated him with Blade Runner. Yes. Because you said a similar thing to like how when I reread Heart of Darkness, I immediately associated it with Mulholland Drive. And of course, a bunch of people are like, you're a suit and you're like bat posting. But they both convey a very similar emotion that's very intangible and ineffable, but

you said in one of these essays that you wrote that the Blade Runner so-called dystopia is actually a utopia of freedom and possibility, the way that it's portrayed. And I always liked Blade Runner because to me it was very freeing and inspirational. When you look upon the landscapes of De Chirico, you see like the Blade Runner-esque future. So in that sense, I suppose he was successful. I'm so drunk and like fully rambling now. You're making a lot of sense. But I think it makes sense. To me, the most powerful parts of De Chirico, if you look at some of the paintings like Nostalgia of the Infinite at the tops of the fluttering flags, it captures exactly the feeling you're talking about. And it's a lot of the feeling that maybe me and maybe of many of my friends have been

trying to recapture since, let's say, early 2010s or before. I don't know if you can call it fully right wing. I mean, for example, Mulholland Drive, right wing movie. What sense does it make to call that? But it's this incessant searching for a longing behind what exists now and for the thing that you're talking about inherent in Blade Runner. I think that's maybe something we seek and something that Mishima also, when you look at his stories, again, I encourage readers maybe to look at Forbidden Colors or After the banquet, not so much his stories about the samurai and so on, but his stories of modern Tokyo life and the interjection, the surprising and shocking injection really of ancient vitality into that. That's kind of a feeling that I would hope young artists could capture. Yes.

What's the feeling of possibility? My beef with de Kyrk goes that he's fundamentally disappointing to me because he's like the Casper David Friedrich painting of the man looking over as a, the foggy mountain ledge. He's like edging on something profound, but he never quite reaches it. I think you think he has, he's overly reliant on like dreaminess and like whimsy maybe. No, no, I like, I like the dreaminess and whimsy. It just, it reminds me of something that this art historian called Stuart Carey Welch said about Armenian architecture, that it's cramped and hemmed. There's something like essentially like cramped and hemmed about Dikierko's vision. It almost feels to me like to try hard and he could be great if he wanted to, but he doesn't quite attain it.

That's my fundamental, like very personal, very instinctual beef with him because I like him as an artist. I'm not, I'm not like a Dikierko hater. I don't have like an act of like hatred. No, you may be right. And you may be right. There's a exhibition now that's in New York that's just about to end at the end of July of his later paintings. All of the paintings that I'm talking about are from, let's say, and up to 1925. And he had a long career after that of many paintings that fulfill exactly what you're talking about now. They're kind of trite. And he became excessively concerned with the techniques of color creation and and and technique in painting and so on. But you're right about maybe his later paintings, especially. But look, we shouldn't talk too much about the Curico.

I should go see my friends because I've been drinking very much. But before we go, do you want to talk just very briefly about about restaurants and the fact that I that I recommended for your restaurant in Boston some time ago that I understand you went to and it's closed the Hong Kong restaurant. Do you remember? Yes, I did. I went up in there. How was it? It was fun. It was very vibey. Yes, I didn't recommend it to you because it had a nice vibe but because it had some of the best traditions in at least in the United States that I knew of, for example, ginger oyster hot pot and such things. And it closed because of the pandemic. And this, not that I intend to return to the United States soon, but these are the kinds of

things that cause me great pain. Restaurants with certain good dishes that close, it's a disaster. That is painful. It's like existentially stirring. Yeah, it's sad. Yes, yes, it's very sad. We're anorexics, so we really do enjoy savour food. When we eat, we really want it to count, so we need all the restaurants we can get. I'm not anorexic, but I'm currently on a cut that causes me, as I told you at the beginning of shows, starvation, psychosis. And so I dream of good foods like this all the time, and I don't know. Now you hear the sirens, they're coming. Yeah, they're coming. They're coming to get you. What are the foods that you dream of? Yes, I don't know what I would dream of. I think I have screaming nightmares of almost every night now. I'm being haunted. But yes.

OK, well, thank you so much for coming on our show. We'll have you back again. Yes, we have a lot more to talk about. I hope to meet you both again. We meet Hong Kong restaurant. We have ginger oyster hot pot. This is good. We'll see you over the hot pot. Thank you so much for having me on the show. It's a great pleasure. We love you. We'll see you in hell. Yes. See you in hell. Ave, ciao. Bye.