April 6, 2024 - Slightly Offensive - Elijah Schaffer
03:47:10
DEBATE: Is DIVERSITY Our STRENGTH? | Joel Davis vs Drew Pavlou
From butter chicken to soaring crime rates - how has diversity improved our Western nations? What even are Western nations? Does that mean white nations? Why isn’t diversity pushed in other non-white countries? What does diversity even mean? We explore the age old question, IS DIVERSITY OUR GREATEST STRENGTH here on a special debate - brought to you by Censored TV (support below)Show more ➤ RUMBLE LINK: https://rumble.com/c/SlightlyOffensive
__
⇩SUPPORT THE SHOW⇩
➤ JOIN CENSORED TV: Watch this FULL EPISODE ad free + EXCLUSIVE content at https://censored.tv/ promo code “OFFENSIVE” for 20% - Keep free speech media alive!
➤ JOIN THE PRIVATE LIVE COMMUNITY: https://elijahschaffer.locals.com/
➤ NOTICER T-SHIRTS / MERCH: https://slightlyoffensive.com/
__
⇩ SHOW SPONSORS⇩
➤ HARTFORD GOLD: Contact Hartford Gold TODAY, the only precious metal dealer I trust — tell them I sent you and they’ll give you up to $5,000 dollars of FREE silver on your first order: https://offers.americanhartfordgold.com/content-affiliate/?&leadsource=affiliate&utm_sfcampaign=701Rb000007hx7FIAQ
__
⇩FOLLOW JOEL DAVIS⇩
➤ X: https://twitter.com/joeldavisx
➤ RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/c/joeldavis
__
⇩FOLLOW DREW PAVLOU⇩
➤ X: https://twitter.com/DrewPavlou
➤ YOUTUBE: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCds5IC0-d0k178m5raGWt_Q
__
⇩ELIJAH’S SOCIAL MEDIA ⇩
➤ X: https://X.com/ElijahSchaffer
➤ RUMBLE: https://rumble.com/c/SlightlyOffensive
➤ INSTA: https://www.instagram.com/slightlyoffensive.tv
➤ TELEGRAM https://t.me/SlightlyOffensive
➤ GAB: https://gab.com/elijahschaffer
__
➤BOOKINGS + BUSINESS INQUIRIES: [email protected]
__
⇩EXCELLENT RESOURCES FOR KIDS ⇩
Head to https://bit.ly/teach-freedom for a unique book series that introduces the important ideas that schools no longer teach. Show less
From butter chicken to soaring crime rates, diversity has its ups and downs, and we've all lost a little weight and gained a little weight, so we know ups and downs are a part of life.
But we are told in Western countries, particularly, a question already arises when I say that.
What do I mean by Western?
Does Western mean a country based on ideology such as America is an idea?
Or does diversity mean white countries and the lessening and the browning of the countries?
As Ben Shapiro famously said, I don't give a damn about the Browning of America.
To ask this question and to jump into the great debate, master debaters here are with me today to talk directly to you about is diversity our strength.
This is going to be no holdback conversation.
We're going to try to keep it civil in the beginning.
And in the end, they both have a pistol in their pocket with one bullet, which they can either use on each other or they can use on themselves if things go poorly.
To the Australian government, I'm letting you know that was a joke.
Anyway, I'd like to introduce my guests, but I'll let them introduce themselves directly.
On the side, arguing against diversity, we'll go straight to Joel.
Joel, go ahead and introduce yourself.
Tell us who you are, a little bit of background on your ideology, how you would describe your political background, and maybe anything interesting such as shows that you do or content that you create that people can follow.
I think that Elijah and Joel think that I'm going to sit here and argue that we must have infinity migration and open borders for butter chicken and taco trucks on every corner.
That is actually not what I'm arguing.
What I'm arguing against is the idea of a white ethnostate and Joel's idea that anybody who doesn't fit his takfiri idea of pure Aryan blood and stock should be deported en masse through violence.
So that's what I'm arguing against.
So look, I personally, I'm not the biggest fan of some of the work far left stuff.
I'm also a big opponent of the far right and also communism because my idea, my ideology, my position is basically one in favor of liberalism.
And so I see both fascism, Nazism, and communism, all totalitarian ideologies, as basically the enemy of what I want to the enemy of a good society.
My idea of a good society is that human beings are judged as individuals based on their own character, merit, their own accomplishments, and people aren't defined by their, you know, their color or their skin or their blood as Joel wants us to go down.
Joel wants us to go down that route.
So I'm a long-term sort of, I guess, content creator, activist, etc.
I've been condemned by the Chinese government over the years, faced a lot of arrests and bomb threats and death threats and stuff like that by the Chinese government because I went up against the communists.
But I've also, as well, received quite a lot of the death threats and attacks from the Nazis and the fascists.
And so, look, I'm basically an equal opportunity opponent against any totalitarian ideology, be they totalitarian, be they communism, Nazism, fascism, etc.
We're supporting liberalism, democracy, idea that human beings should be based on their own, should be judged on their own merit, character, their own accomplishments rather than skin color and race.
My name is Elijah Schaefer, and this is Knightly Offensive.
Don't forget that this show is directly brought to you by Censored TV.
If you go to censored.tv, it is a free speech website where we are fighting against censorship.
We have people on all ends of the views, especially on critical issues like Zionism.
I mean, we disagree on those issues, even on race, what to do on these things.
But we do have one thing together.
All of our tech, our finances are on alt tech on our own servers, which means we are cancel-proof.
We have backups for our backups.
If you want to support free speech and shows like this, make sure you sign up today at censored.tv.
Use my promo code offensive OFF, E-N-S I-V-E for 20% off.
Join the fight against censorship.
Support people today and make this kind of show possible by directly putting your money where your mouth is.
All right, let's get right into this.
Before we do our opening statements, I want to always define terms because sometimes I think that we have discussions and we think we're talking about the same thing, but we simply are not.
So when I bring up the word diversity, we'll go straight to Joel here.
What do you think that means?
And we're going to keep the context here in terms of Western civilization, Western countries, the country we're in today, Australia, the United States.
That's the context.
Go ahead, Joel.
What does diversity mean to you defining the term?
Well, what diversity means according to the common parlance, according to the definition that is adhered to by the people who rule us, diversity actually means more non-whites or more other types of minorities, maybe sexual minorities, like more homosexuals, more transgender people or whatever.
But generally speaking, it means more non-whites.
That's how they use it.
But it's kind of ridiculous because to have diversity as a value, this implies two things.
One, the term diversity means difference, basically.
It means that we value difference.
But at the same time, it's paired with this notion of inclusion or this notion of equality.
And so it's saying on the one hand that we value difference, but on the other hand, that we actually don't value any differences differently, that all differences are equal.
And so in this way, it actually is kind of against the principle of diversity.
It's saying we don't actually want to preserve any of these differences.
We don't value any of these differences.
People should be seen as though these differences don't exist and treated as though these differences don't exist.
And we shouldn't try to do anything to preserve those differences.
In fact, we should actively destroy those differences.
So actually, the way that diversity is employed by the establishment is against diversity.
It's saying, no, we don't actually value diversity at all.
Someone like me who says we should keep people separate so that we can maintain their differences, apparently I'm an enemy of diversity, but actually my ideology would actually preserve diversity, ironically.
And this just kind of exposes the ridiculousness of the way this term is employed and the elevation of it as a value in our society.
So what it really means, it's just a way of saying less white people.
It's saying, you know, if we have a whole, if we have a movie where every character is black, you know, you'll get these leftists that will say, wow, look at all this diversity.
Of course, it's not diverse at all.
Everyone's black.
There's no difference between them.
What they really mean is that it's non-whites are there.
And we see this deployed over and over again.
Now, it's held up as a value.
Whenever we have diversity and inclusion, it's always paired to the idea of deconstructing white supremacy.
This idea that in countries which are historically white, our country was founded by white nationalists.
Every single founding father and the first 16 prime ministers of Australia, out of the 31 prime ministers we've ever had, they were all white nationalists.
And they explicitly founded this place as a white nationalist state with something called the white Australia policy, which wasn't abolished completely until the 1970s.
So for the majority of this country's history as an independent state, it was a white nationalist country.
Now, if we turn to some of these prime ministers, they would say things like, well, we don't necessarily hate other races.
We don't think necessarily we're superior to Japanese people or Chinese people.
We just want to keep them out of the country because we fear them taking over our country.
They outnumber us.
We exist in close proximity to them.
If we allow a large portion of their populations to enter Australia, we could basically lose control of our country.
So the idea of being against diversity was about preserving the white man's land, that we would maintain white values, that we would maintain a white way of life, that we would maintain control of our own affairs, our own self-determination.
This is the idea of nationalism.
And the notion of diversity is being employed in all white countries to destroy the capacity for whites to maintain control, maintain positions of power over the countries that we built and we founded.
So it's always employed to basically elevate non-whites into positions of power and elevate non-whites into positions of prominent representation.
So again, they don't actually value diversity.
They want to undermine the diversity of our countries or of the world, of the human race, by basically dissolving white people into this soup, this racial and ethnic soup, where at some point in the future, white people will no longer exist.
Because if they keep filling our countries with non-whites and they keep encouraging us to miscegenate and so on, eventually whites will become a smaller and smaller faction.
We'll lose control over our own affairs.
We'll lose control over our own countries.
You know, imagine going to China and saying this is a yellow supremacist country or going to Nigeria and saying this is a black supremacist country.
They just laugh at you, of course.
It's not diverse enough.
Of course, no one says that.
No one complains about the lack of diversity anywhere other than in white spaces, white countries, white power structures created by white people to serve white people.
So what it really means, what diversity really means is white genocide on a long enough timeline.
You keep promoting enough diversity and inclusion.
Eventually, there's nowhere where whites can maintain our difference.
There's nowhere where whites can maintain our form of diversity, our difference from the rest of the human race.
And so it's the annihilation of white difference and therefore of whiteness.
So I'm not going to be arguing the straw man position that Joel wants me to argue.
I'm not going to be basically giving the same monologue that, say, Camilla Harris would be making.
I'm not going to say that diversity in and of itself is the most beautiful thing ever and all white people need to bend the knee, etc.
Like, I don't agree with the hardcore ultra-left wokeness sort of stuff where because some people on the ultra-left, the communist left, on the extremes, they do want to see the destruction of basically any Western country.
I don't support that.
So, what I am arguing for is diversity in the sense that diversity has always existed.
It is a fact of life.
It is a feature of life.
No two human beings are the same.
No two human beings anywhere on earth are the same.
You can have two people of the same, you know, Aryan racial stock as Joel would have it, and they will have differences.
They will have different morality.
They'll have different intellectual attributes.
They'll have different personalities.
They'll have different likes, dislikes, interests.
And so, diversity is a feature of existence.
Diversity is a feature of literally the universe.
If you had to try and eradicate diversity, you would have a totally static universe where life is impossible.
It's like trying to eradicate the dialectic.
It's impossible.
And so, all of humanity, all of existence is characterized by diversity, the fact that people have different views, different talents, different interests.
And I like diversity in the sense that I like being able to have a different opinion to say Joel or like or have a different way of living my life to another person.
I don't want anybody to be telling me how to live my life, what I should be doing.
I don't want people to be interfering with my loved ones, with my family.
I want to be left alone basically by the state.
I don't believe in the types of to create the world that Joel wants, which would involve the mass deportation of millions of people and obviously massive amounts of violence, including murder of millions of people, it would be total totalitarianism.
The actual reason for even being a human being would be destroyed because we would live in a world of total nihilistic bloodshed and disaster and destruction.
And this is what came of, this is what happened in the middle of the 20th century when people decided that they wanted to create these totally purified states and they tried to eradicate other people based on their differences.
And the result was mass destruction, bloodshed, disaster for all of humanity.
I believe that while we are all different in different ways, I believe that while no two people are the same, each person has the same moral worth.
I believe all human beings have the same moral worth as one another, regardless of their accomplishments, intelligence, regardless of their cultural background, regardless of anything.
I believe that human life is important because I am a Christian.
I believe that human life is very sacred and very important.
And so I think nobody should be judged based on the color of their skin, based on irreducible characteristics that they have no control over.
So for example, Joel believes that I am some kind of racial mongrel, blah, blah, blah, because I'm not pure Anglo-Celtic Aryan heritage stock or whatever.
And this is just a cope way of viewing the world.
This is just an ideology of grievance and an ideology of resentment.
It's a cope for one's own personal failings to blame it on other people based on their own irreducible characteristics.
I can't get ahead in life.
Oh, it must be the Jews.
Oh, it must be the gays or it must be transgender people.
It's a cope ideology.
People should focus on their own lives, their own families.
I believe in liberalism.
So I believe people should be free of government interference.
Should be free of government tyranny.
I don't want the world in which the, the world that Joel wants to create, the world that Joel wants which would create, which would necessitate massive ethnic cleansing, etc.
You would need a totalitarian government and this totalitarian government would control what people think, what people do, what people say.
They would ban books, they'd ban movies, they'd ban music.
It would be.
Basically, it's almost like.
It's almost like this ideology is like, kind of like a white ethno-nationalist uh, a white ethno-nationalist type of Takfiri Isis Style politics.
I mean, it's almost like White Isis this type of ideology, controlling, controlling everything, trying to eradicate, try to purify everything.
You can't you ban dancing, you ban music, you ban people having fun.
This is, this is this is my opening statement diversity.
So I tell you what diversity is.
This is my opening statement.
I'm saying that diversity is a feature of all human existence, all civilization is, is characterized by diversity, because no two human beings are the same.
Every person has the same moral worth as an individual as as a human being, but no two individuals are the same and no one should be based, no one should be judged or deported or persecuted based on their race, by based on irreducible characteristics.
And i'm saying, as part of your quest to establish this world of purification and and this is where I see it going down like the almost Isis Style lines, that you want to purify the world, eradicate all difference.
It's you want to.
You want to eradicate, you are trying to eradicate people who don't fit your iron racial heritage, stock worldview.
You want to eradicate that from Australia.
And to create that you would necessarily have to create a totalitarian government that would control how people think, what people do and say.
People would be persecuted, people would be whisked off the street blackbagged, disappeared.
This is the type of world that you would have to create.
In order to purify Australia and create the ideal Australia of your dreams, you'd have to create a totalitarian government, you'd have to destroy democracy, you'd have to destroy the even to me, all the things that are important about being a human being, all the things that are actually amazing about being a human being, the ability to express yourself freely yeah, the ability to participate in culture, the ability to to interact with other people all of this would have to be strictly modified and controlled and regimented in order to create your world.
This, this is why I strongly oppose it.
This is why I hate this ideology, because to create the world that you want, it would require massive totalitarianism, massive infringements on freedoms, personal liberties.
You would have to basically destroy everything that makes Australia the country it is today.
You'd have to absolutely destroy it and there'd have to be mass advance involving millions of people at war.
Let me, let me come in here because these are some pretty serious accusations, and i'm not even saying that you're wrong, because i'm going to take a very neutral position and I want people to know that my goal is not to make either of the of the parties here seem right or wrong or to, you know, somehow assist Joel or Drew or Anyone that's that's here today.
What I want to do is I want to get down to the bottom of this.
So I get this right real quickly before we throw it at Joel.
You know, Joel defined diversity.
I don't, I think your diversity, you were saying diversity.
Could you clarify just one sentence what diversity is?
So I guess that's important then, because I think we're talking about like, you know, racial homogeny versus, you know, a non-racial homogenous society.
But I do understand Joel.
He's saying three things, right?
He called it white ISIS.
We brought up totalitarianism, disappearing people.
And this does happen in countries.
There is religious extremism.
There is ethno-nationalism.
Countries like Israel are like mono-ethno-states and they are bombing Gaza and they don't really care what's going on there, whether you support them or not.
So is that what you're arguing?
Are you arguing for this sort of totalitarian, disappearing, black bag society?
Is he wrong or are you hiding something?
Like, is this what's behind veiled behind something?
First of all, he defined diversity as every human being is different.
This is an obvious and banal truth.
The question, though, is why are we different?
And this gets to the question of what is race?
Because race is essentially a grouping of genetic similarity.
So insofar as we are embodied in the world, that we have organic bodies that are coded by genetics, our differences are largely determined, not entirely, but largely determined by these genetic differences.
I was born with a particular nature, and that is a nature that I inherited from my ancestors and so on.
So if you look at the genetic differences between human beings, the largest genetic differences between human beings pertain to neurophysiology.
They pertain to the genes that code for literally how we think, how we feel, how we interpret the world, how we respond to the world.
More so than skin color.
Skin color is banal in comparison to the differences between human beings when it comes to how we think, feel, act, and so on.
The things that are really essential about what makes us human.
Now, these are the differences, therefore, that are most pronounced by race.
So the genetics being different across, so I'm more similar genetically to every other white person on earth than every non-white person on earth.
And every white person is more similar to every other white person than every non-white person on earth.
That's just a scientific fact.
That means that the genes that code for how white people think and feel and interpret the world are more similar to one another than they are to any non-white person, right?
So when we're talking about the differences between people, we're talking about largely genetically determined differences, not entirely, but largely.
And there's a plethora of research on this.
I don't think Drew and I are going to end up having a discussion about neuroscience and evolutionary biology and so on.
I don't think he's really equipped for that discussion, frankly.
But also, I don't think that we really need to discuss that.
It's just a scientific fact.
Drew can't sit there and tell me that racial differences don't genetically or biologically exist.
And he can't tell me that the differences are not more similar, that the differences between us aren't largely determined by our nature, right?
If you're a woman, you're genetically predisposed to think and act differently because you have a feminine nature.
It's the same if you're black.
That's why black people have a particular style.
Black people, they create a particular kind of culture that non-black people couldn't create.
Just like white people create a particular kind of culture that non-white people couldn't create and Asians and so on.
That's why we have different cultures, right?
We can just ostensibly see this in the world.
Look at like black Americans, the kind of music they create, the way that they talk, the way they carry themselves, and just notice that it's different.
Why is it different?
There's an obvious explanation for why it's different.
Now, this is important because when you try to have a society, you want to build a society around a certain amount of consensus.
Otherwise, you're fighting with one another.
Otherwise, you're in a situation of battles between people with different mentalities and different views.
And this creates conflict.
And this ends up destroying and undermining the capability for your society to actually embody any values at all.
Or if it does, it becomes oppressive.
One group oppresses the other.
And this produces a cycle of conflict.
And this is bad for everyone.
So you want to have a society in which people are more similar, if possible, so that we can have a similar idea of the kind of way of life that we want to have.
This was the idea behind Australia when it was created.
It was created as a white ethno-state.
The first thing the Australian government ever did was introduce a bill to the parliament.
The first thing that ever happened in Australian political history, that's Australia's independent state, was a bill before the parliament to deport non-whites from Australia and to institute an immigration policy that prevented non-whites from immigrating here.
That was literally the first thing our country ever did.
It was a liberal democracy, by the way.
It embodied all of these values that Drew apparently defends.
They didn't blackbag anyone.
They weren't this totalitarian, genocidal regime.
They were simply trying to preserve a population that shared a culture and shared a way of life.
And this produced an amazing country.
Australia became one of the most prosperous and wonderful places to live in the entire world.
We built beautiful cities.
We built a paradise on earth by comparison to the rest of the world.
Australia is still, even despite the fact that it's declined to a very large extent, is still a paradise compared to the vast majority of the world.
And it's because of white people building it with our values, these liberal democratic values that Drew claims to believe in.
They were created by white people, right?
He believes in stuff that white people created that's an expression of our culture, our civilization.
And it produced a free, open, incredible society where we could have scientific innovation, where we could have economic development and we could have peace.
And the reason why we could have all of these things was because of the people, right?
Things don't just happen magically.
Things happen because people do things.
Now, why do people do things?
Well, because it's their nature to do things, which then gets us back to a discussion of race and genetics.
So the point that I'm making is if you bring, I don't believe in what's called magic dirt theory.
I don't believe if you get a bunch of Sudanese people and you just move them into Australia, that they magically become Australian, right?
They'll all of a sudden become like Russell Coit or something.
They'll all become like, you know, it's standard Aussie.
They won't just adopt our values, adopt our way of life, and just start behaving like Australians.
So I want to clarify because I want to give Drew here a chance to rebuttal this.
So you're making an argument about the genetic predisposition towards our genes, which would be our race, right, or our shared collective genetic background, does determine the way we think, we process, and our demeanor, our behavior.
That collective behavior then defines a society and that society defines our legacy.
And so that's why there is a particular bent or type of bent around the world.
And I just want to know, are you saying that's the main driving factor behind what makes a country great?
Or as many people would say, well, Africa's actually, you know, disadvantaged because of colonialism.
There's a lot of other factors people would bring up.
I mean, it's obvious that I strongly disagree with Joel's characterization that all Africans should worship white people.
I mean, I'm not going to go down these rabbit holes, though, because I'm going to try and keep this topic limited to Australia.
Now, while Joel states, you know, all human beings are defined by their race and then race produces culture, I would like him to explain how there can be two people, two people of the same, say, white race, and yet one will believe in communism and one will believe in fascism, one will believe in liberalism.
Now, I saw a guy on Twitter the other day.
There was an Indian, Indian English bloke, and he wraps himself in the St. George flag and he says, I love England.
I completely identify as an English, as a member of the English country.
I completely identify myself with the UK.
This is my home.
This is my country.
I love the UK.
This is what I support.
I would die for the country.
And one of a guy like Joel responds, this is not your country.
Go home.
Now, I don't understand why it is that somebody who moves to a country like England or moves to a country like Australia or moves to a country like the United States, and they might be of a different ethnic background, but they strongly identify with their new home.
They take part.
They learn the language.
They participate in the culture.
They do everything they can to integrate and assimilate into the society and to uphold this new country and uphold their country, this new home that they're now living in.
I don't understand why they are enemies that should be deported and persecuted, et cetera.
yet a kid who might have two, you know, beautiful Aryan stock parents goes to university, decides that Australia is evil and should be abolished and burn down the country, et cetera.
Why is – so that kid who's completely of, you know, according to Joel, you know, perfect race, should have the same mindset as the other, you know, super soldier in Aryan, blah, blah, blah.
Why is that guy?
Why do we say, well, he's also Australian.
The white kid is also Australian.
He's on the same side as Joel, but the guy who wants to destroy Australia and wants to burn it to the ground.
However, an immigrant who comes to Australia completely identifies with Australia.
They're Australian for all intents and purposes.
They wrap themselves around the flag.
They love this country.
They will do everything to promote it and protect it.
They're doing everything to be part of this new society, part of the society, why they have to be deported and persecuted.
Whereas there are these kids at the university, pure Aryan super soldier stock, and yet they hate Australia.
They want to burn down Australia to the ground.
Now, this doesn't make much sense to me because, according to Joel, all people of the same race have the same genetic predispositions and all people of the same race must, therefore, they must think the same, which doesn't make sense because there is...
They think more similarly, but I mean, it just doesn't make sense to me because, I mean, look, I'm Greek Cypriot and Joel will try to say, oh, well, you're actually Turkish, you're a mongrel, blah, But at the end of the day, most people, when I'm walking on the street, would just go, that guy's white.
And, you know, when I remember when I was back at the university and I was protesting against the Chinese Communist Party, the social alternative guys used to go, that guy is a white nationalist.
Drew is a white supremacist.
Here's a funny irony, right?
They did it to troll me, but Joel's friends in the National Socialist Network, when I was getting expelled from the University of Queensland because I was protesting against the Chinese Communist Party on campus.
I was protesting against the university's ties to the Chinese Communist Party.
And they knew that I was of the left.
They knew that I was not at all associated with their ideology, that I hated their ideology.
But they went out to UQ one day as an attention-seeking thing.
They went in the middle of the night with Balaclavas on, held like a swastika flag and were like, yeah, we support Drew Pavloo, Australia for the white man, just to troll me, I guess.
And it's obviously great troll and Thomas Sewell and then they're all laughing, et cetera, et cetera.
But how is it that back then, Drew's white?
Now they go, oh, Drew is a racial mongrel, blah, blah, blah.
He's Turkish, blah, blah, blah.
All this stuff.
He's not pure Aryan stocks.
We're going to deport him.
Which is the type of unhinged, demented, mentally ill Twitter commentary that I get from his friends all the time.
So they've decided one day that Drew is white Aryan man.
We're going to defend him from the University of Queensland.
The next day, Drew's to be deported.
If I'm supposed to be white, most people in the street would probably say that I'm white.
How come I have a different point of view to Joel?
Why do I not believe in a total white ethno-state where people should be deported violently if they refuse to be deported?
Why do I not believe in this sort of society?
And also, Joel, he goes, oh, well, Australia was founded with the white Australia policy.
Yes, historically, this is true.
And he goes, well, we were still a liberal democracy back then.
There were no black bags.
There were no disappearances.
Here is a fact of life, Joel.
The morality of Australia changed over 124 years.
People decided, the vast majority of Australians, and they themselves being white, decided that they didn't want to support the white Australia policy anymore.
This gradually changed over time.
And you'll say it started in the 70s and it was a Labour thing by Gough Whitlam.
In fact, Menzies and the right-wing Liberal Party actually, some argue, took the first steps towards dismantling the White Australia policy.
So Australia, obviously, the morality of the country changed over 124 years.
And you can, I guess you'll try and say, well, oh, the Jews secretly deceived everybody or whatever it is.
But the morality of people changed over time.
But how do you explain this?
Because aren't all white people supposed to think similarly?
Aren't we supposed to all have this inherent tribalism?
And aren't we all supposed to be on the same side to preserve the Aryan racial stock?
I mean, you guys have a lot, a lot of, you guys have a lot of problems in making this argument because you like to say, well, Australia was perfectly homogenous.
But even when we had this, even when Australia had the white Australia policy, there was still a great deal of sectarian tension between Irish Australians and British Australians.
There was a great deal of sectarian tension to the extent that people like Ned Kelly literally took up arms and Ned Kelly viewed himself as a kind of like Irish revolutionary against the crown and he wanted to establish a kind of like, he wanted to establish like a republic and he was killing officers of the crown.
Now, how do you explain this?
How do you explain this?
The fact that, you know, Australia, aren't all white people supposed to be thinking similarly?
You look at the troubles in Northern Ireland, a racially homogenous society, basically.
And yet people were at each other's throats and there was a civil war and people were blowing each other up and there was brutal racial, basically racial violence, basically brutal sectarian violence.
How do you explain that in your ideology without just coping, oh, well, the Jews unfortunately like corrupted their consciousnesses as the white people?
I just want to clarify something for the American audience real fast.
So you know why we're arguing from an Australian perspective here before you tune out because obviously America is the best country in the world and no other country really matters.
But I do want to say the reason why is because while America did have, of course, you know, anti-immigration policies and it was in 1965 that we transferred and changed our white American policy.
It wasn't expressly defined as a white policy.
It was definitely enforced as such.
But Australia is a newer nation than the United States.
So it's a younger country.
And they directly called it the white Australia policy.
So it was an openly white nationalist country where the prime ministers were openly white nationalists.
This is not a modern, you know, hey, I'm racist, but I don't want anyone to know it.
This was like, we want Australia to be white.
Everyone's in agreement that's supporting this policy.
And this is what we're doing.
So it's a very important policy to discover because we're not talking about thousands and thousands of years of history like in Europe or even, you know, four or five hundred years when we go back to the colonies.
This is a very, very new nation in its definition.
And it also never had a revolution.
So it technically is still a part of the crown.
And it defines and represents a greater struggle in all of Western Europe and the United States.
And I want to talk a little bit about this before we discuss that.
I just want to give a huge shout out to one of the sponsors for today's show.
Guys, it is important to realize that no matter where you are, we've talked a lot about this, that inflation has hit America like none other.
We know that in our banks, in our institutions, our money has no value.
It's lost 25% of its purchasing power since 2020.
In four years, we've lost over 25% of our value, which means that you've got to invest your money into something more reputable like crypto and gold and silver.
My friends at American Heartford Gold, their links in the description.
There are numbers in the description.
And you can text Offensive to a number if you want to get their free gold kit that'll help you to know how to invest your money, your retirement, your savings, and your 401k today into a gold-backed and silver-backed retirement savings account.
If you have $1,000, $5,000, $10,000, it doesn't matter.
It's not doing any good in your bank account.
When you call them today, the links in the description, you can find out how to get over $5,000 of free silver directly.
You can call the number.
You can text Offensive to their number, or you can click the link three ways that you can easily find out how to protect your retirement savings, 401k, or just the money in your bank.
Don't wait until it's too late.
Do not let your money sit there.
It's losing its value.
American Heart for Gold has hundreds of five-star ratings from the Better Business Bureau.
They're a triple A plus rated company as well.
And they have your back and have dealt with billions, they say, of dollars of investments.
Trust American Heartford Gold.
They've got your back.
Find out how to get $5,000 of free silver today when you invest with American Heart for Gold links in the description.
I want to cut YouTube.
I don't know why we're still on YouTube, Brian.
Rofas, cut YouTube real fast because where we're going to go with this conversation, we cannot talk about this on YouTube.
If you're watching on YouTube, just I don't know if we know why we're on YouTube.
Yeah, so first of all, I kind of remember everything that he said.
One of the things that he brought up was how there was ethnic tensions between the Irish and the English or the British in general.
And obviously that's true.
And that just really kind of exemplifies my point.
Like if you have ethnic tensions between the Irish and the English, and that was really destructive and caused all this tension, let's just bring every ethnicity on the whole planet and stuff them in the middle.
Now, what's important to recognize here is that ethnic tensions are human universal.
Every country in the world came into existence on the basis of basically ethnic tensions.
Nationalism is the most powerful ideology in the modern world.
Drew is a big supporter of Ukraine.
Now, why are the Ukrainians fighting the Russians?
They're fighting the Russians because Ukrainians see themselves as a distinct ethnic group and they don't want to be dominated by a government and an empire basically controlled by people who aren't Ukrainian.
They want Ukrainians to control the destiny of Ukrainians, which makes sense.
And the same reason that the Irish wanted the Irish to control the destiny of the Irish.
And it's the same reason why white Australia was founded by white nationalists, many of whom were Irish, but that we kind of came together because in the 19th century, we had all this ethnic tension.
He mentioned Ned Kelly.
Ned Kelly was back before Australia was federated.
There was a lot of tension between the Irish and the English and the Scottish and so on.
But we overcame that tension because then a bunch of Chinese came in during the gold rush and we realized, hey, wait a second, we've got more in common than we previously thought.
And so basically, white nationalism was created through the unity of the Irish and the English, the English working class and the Irish in Australia.
And it became a dominant ideology to the point that the entire country was federated and controlled by white nationalists for the first half of our country's history.
And Australia was preserved as like, or as basically a 99% plus white country, right, until the 1970s.
That's just a fact.
That's how history played out.
He can shake his head, but that's literally what happened.
Even today, Aboriginals today, and a lot of people claim to be Aboriginals, but they look like me.
So they're barely Aboriginal, if at all, because you get all these government benefits and so on, affirmative action and so on.
So the Aboriginal, if you look at the census between the last census in 2016 and 2021, somehow all of these new Aboriginals spontaneously entered into existence and the percentage went way up because people are claiming to be Aboriginal.
They don't do genetic testing to determine if you're Aboriginal, by the way.
So a lot of people claim to be Aboriginal who aren't, but even today, with all of these, all an incentive structure set up to get people to claim to be Aboriginal who aren't Aboriginal, there's still a very small percentage, like 2% of the population, right?
So if we go back in time, it wouldn't be 5% Aboriginal.
It wouldn't be 10%, it doesn't actually make any sense.
And if you look at the data, the old census data from the 1960s or the 1970s, you'll see that everyone at home can go and Google it themselves.
But anyway, the Aboriginals were here already.
The point is that they didn't allow any non-whites to come in.
And the whites that immigrated in from places like China and so on were largely deported.
A few small remnants of them remained, but they were all China.
No, you know what I mean.
People from China and so on.
They were largely deported.
So the point is, is that Australia was founded as a white nationalist country.
And what was the reason why it was founded as a white nationalist country?
It was founded for the same reason that Ukraine wants to say Ukrainian, that the Irish resisted the British Empire, because we wanted to, white Australians, we became, there was an ethnogenesis.
We moved here.
We developed our own kind of independent culture.
There was a large mixing between the Irish and the English, interbreeding and so on.
Now, Irish and English people are very closely related.
They have a lot of common ancestors.
Not different races.
They are different ethnicities within the same race.
Now, you look at, like, for example, the Chinese people.
The Chinese people are composed of all these different sub-ethnicities.
And if you look at the genetic modeling, the differences between the sub-ethnicities of the Chinese people are actually larger than between all Europeans.
So the similarity between English people and Germans and Swedes and Irish and so on are very minuscule in genetic terms when referencing to other populations.
unidentified
But even still, even though to war with one another.
They're not able to infiltrate institutions and take over institutions like in Australia where, for example, our universities are filled with Chinese people.
Okay, but Joel, what I want to clarify, because I might be hearing a contradiction between you two here, I want to go to Druro real quickly.
Let me ask you this because you're talking about, you said, you know, maybe Australian doesn't just mean white people, but you reference the Chinese here as Chinese.
Can you explain what you mean by that?
What changes a Chinese person when they come to Australia?
Is it when they come on a student visa that they're Chinese, but when they change to a residency or a citizen, now they're Australian?
What changes a Chinese person from a Chinese to an Australian?
What I'm saying is that diversity is a feature of all human existence.
Diversity is a feature of all human civilization.
The morality of Australia changed over 124 years.
You said that Australia was a liberal democracy when it was founded, despite being white nationalists, and there was no disappearances in black maths.
There were still massacres against Indigenous Australians, Joel.
And you might say, oh, based.
No, that's wrong.
Massacres are wrong.
They're actually just immoral.
It is immoral to massacre other human beings because other human beings are human beings.
Life is precious.
Life is sacred.
Now, you say, oh, we were, it wouldn't necessarily have to be a totalitarian state if we were to just deport everyone.
The difference is, Joel, over time, as the morality of Australia changed and people in Australia, the white majority of Australia actually said, we don't want the white Australia policy anymore.
We are a nation of immigrants and we don't value racism in the same way that Australia, the Australian white nationalists of 1901 did.
If history went differently, if we didn't become basically part of the American-led international order as a consequence of the destruction of the British Empire at the conclusion of the Second World War, and the United States wasn't in a position where it was perpetuating this kind of globalist, liberal ideology that even now it's subjected to based.
Then we wouldn't have magically just stopped being a white nationalist.
What happened was we were integrated into a different power structure that propagandized us with the invention of the television and so on with a completely different and alien ideology.
And then you could formulate an actual intelligent response to it, potentially.
I don't know.
Maybe you're not capable of it.
But the point is, is that Jews clearly were afraid.
And they said this themselves publicly.
Never again.
They're very afraid of anything like national socialism or any kind of racial nationalism from being influential.
And they set themselves up in positions of power in places like the, particularly in the United States, which is a place where at that time white people were in charge.
White people ran the United States.
America was run based upon racist principles, basically.
The immigration policy was something analogous to the white Australia policy.
Obviously, we had the white Australia policy here, and there was immigration restriction into other European countries.
These were all white countries.
Everyone in positions of power was white.
And we had a sense of racial identity.
And the Jews are like, well, this is actually a big problem.
We can see the Jewish intellectual Jewish intellectuals and societies.
ahead if you just keep talking over me then no one can you can't actually oh i'll i'll be when i'm done i'll be quiet I'll let you speak because I want to hear what you have to say.
Now, when it comes to what I was saying, the Jews had a vested interest in undermining white rule because they were afraid of white rule.
They were afraid that if that they're excluded, if we have a white-dominated society, and we see this with Jewish community leaders in Australia as well, as well as they openly have said this in the United States from groups like the ADL and the SPLC and so on, in Australia, Jewish community groups, their leaders came out explicitly and involved themselves in politics explicitly to say we can't allow there to be an Anglo-dominated or white dominated America or Australia or whatever, because that excludes us.
And so if we basically were complicit in promoting mass immigration.
Now, they weren't the only factor.
There were many other factors at play.
But the point is, is that Australia was under the influence of the United States.
It's obvious that the United States has a massive influence over Australian politics.
It's not just hypnotizing, but the fact is, is that not just Jews, they had a massive influence.
But the new paradigm that emerged with the United States during the Cold War was about trying to develop a global ideology that everyone in the world could buy into because they're going up against communism, right?
Which was another universalist global ideology.
And so they had to develop, in their view, an ideological format to sell the American model to the world, including non-white countries.
And they also explicitly said this.
Like, for example, the desegregation process in the United States, the reasons given literally by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Brown v. Board case was, well, we don't want to alienate Africans and turn them all to the Soviet Union.
So we want to prove to the Africans how non-racist we are and so on.
And the resistance by the population, there was a massive resistance to desegregation.
There was massive resistance and still is to mass immigration.
It's wildly unpopular in America and Australia and in Europe.
But you talk about how you're an enemy of totalitarianism.
The state and the powers that be have completely subjugated any voices and any elements in the political system of Western countries who try to resist this.
You will not get attacked more in the Western media.
You will not undergo more persecution for your form of politics in any Western country than if you advocate for white interests.
There is literally no form of politics that is more controversial.
You could make a weird kind of gesture, but it's just a fact.
If we establish white rule and we ask them to leave and we make it kind of uncomfortable for them here, I think most of them will leave of their own volition.
The reason why Indians and Chinese people move to Australia...
You're going to genetically test everybody and find out, oh, this person is just white enough to stay, but this person's not allowed in the ethno-state.
And to do this, it would require a totalitarian system that would involve massive violence.
Then you're going to have people from another ethnic group with a different identity, a different interest than mine, a different religion, a different worldview, a different culture that now want to assert themselves over me.
This is why your ideology is stupid, because every single Australian, I would hazard against that almost every single Australian would have friends, would know somebody socially who is not, you know, pure Aryan Anglo-Celtic heritage stock.
Yeah, every single person in Australia has friends of different ethnicities.
And so your ideology that you're going to just come in one day and just going to demand that seven, eight million people leave because of their skin colour, despite the fact that they only know Australia.
They're born in Australia.
They only know Australia.
Their entire being and existence in Australia.
Their entire social life is in Australia.
All of them should be deported.
All of them should be deported with threat of violence and with the same thing.
We've always had, even if people were from England, even if people were from Europe, we've always had a situation where a huge part of our country's stock is the people who were already had family members that have been born overseas.
I want to ask some real practical questions here, which I think can really help us get to a good conclusion.
Let's start with something intrinsically basic about diversity being our strength, giving you guys both a second to catch a breather as well.
Okay, let's not go to deportation.
Start with the first step, which would be limiting immigration.
Here in Australia, back home in the United States, there is a general immigration problem and people agree, including in the United Kingdom.
Brexit was basically founded on leaving to get control of the immigration issue.
In a mass poll, I don't know the exact political term in Australia.
There were two polls done by the government to find out what the population wants on these things called referendums.
If you're not from Australia, which is a way that they vote, it's a different system.
There's mandatory voting in Australia, so it's a little bit different.
When you put something to a vote, it requires everyone to cast their vote.
So it is a bit more serious.
They did two polls to find out about limiting immigration, specifically to figure out what's going on overall, not just from non-white countries, but to just shut this down.
When they did both the polls, over 60% from what I read in both the polls of Australians that were asked were in strong favor, not in kind of, there were four categories, strong favor of a halting or strongly limiting, close to halting immigration entirely.
On the flip side, Americans have a similar idea of shutting down the border entirely.
Now, when One Nation and when the parliamentary parties, I think it was Senator Babbitt and Pauline Hansen and one other senator, when they went to put it to a senatorial vote to find out whether it would be put on a ballot so that people could vote to halt immigration, I think it was like 38 senators.
I might be wrong, I'm not Australian, voted against it.
Now, I'm not going to get into the groups that lobbied them to vote against it, but I read an official statement from Senate here that the situation is too complex for the people, for the democracy, for the people to vote on.
Immigration is too complex.
Now, race aside, ethnicity aside, I just saw a stat that the massive population boom, which they blame for the main rise in the cost of living crisis and the housing crisis here, the population boom is predominantly led to immigrants coming in, and it supersedes now domestically born Australians or white Australians, meaning they're at a statistical level of replacement, which is in most Western countries, excluding Eastern Europe.
So let's just say Western Europe and the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia.
So with that in place, when we're talking about diversity is our strength, at least 60% of Australians are saying, okay, maybe diversity was our strength, but at the very least, at the level of diversity that we're bringing in, it's going to be our failure and it's hurting us now.
I'll go to Drew on that first.
Not deporting him.
So let's just say, let's take Jules idea aside.
We're not deporting a guy because he's Indian.
He loves Australia.
Fuck it.
He can stay.
He's here.
But in terms of stopping the new importation, stopping Indians from becoming the majority, and let's just say, even me as an American, stopping all people from coming until this country can figure out what the fuck is going on and America can, you know, we can all figure out what's going on in our countries.
At the same time, there needs to be some level of immigration, like complete zero.
I think that's silly.
It shouldn't be based on race.
It shouldn't be based on race.
Whether there's a million people of pure Aryan heritage stock from like Germany who want to come into Australia tomorrow, or whether they come from all different parts of the world, I think the question is: do we have the housing stock to support that?
This is, I don't, if somebody wants to make their home in Australia, they agree that they're going to uphold the values of Australia's democracy.
They're going to make Australia their primary identity.
They're going to integrate and assimilate it into our society.
They shouldn't be blocked based on their race.
That's wrong.
I don't believe in race-based immigration.
However, at the same time, I'm also not open borders.
When you've got a housing crisis right now, obviously the current number, whether it's 800,000 net migrants, you can't do that when you're only building 150,000 new homes a day, new homes a year.
It's just a simple economic question.
And I don't care whether, like, Joel, I don't know, according to Joel's view, as long as they're all perfect Aryan stock from Germany, you could have 10 million open borders tomorrow.
Obviously, that's crazy because you can't even house these people.
To me, it's just an economic question.
Do we have enough homes to house people?
At the moment, we don't.
We're not building enough homes.
There's obviously a cost of living crisis.
The Reserve Bank of Australia explained that population growth was feeding into inflation and was leading to the cost of living crisis.
Now, obviously, there's been an explosion of population growth since COVID, since COVID, and it's at an unsustainable level.
I still support immigration because I believe that people who want to make their home in Australia, they love Australia.
They want to be part of this country.
They agree that they're going to integrate.
They're going to uphold the values of democracy, liberal democracy, et cetera.
They should have the right to do so regardless of race, regardless of background.
But at the same time, look, I don't believe in complete open borders when you don't have enough housing, when we're not building enough housing.
Obviously, you can't have 10 million people coming in a year.
You can't have infinity migration when you're not building enough housing.
And so, yeah, at the moment, I don't agree with the current 800,000 net migration thing.
It's unsustainable for Australia.
And I don't care whether those people were all coming from Britain and Germany and they're pure Aryan racial heritage stock, according to Joel.
I don't care where they're coming from.
Look, we just don't have enough houses at the moment.
We're not building enough houses.
It's just a question of supply and demand.
Do we have enough supply in Australia?
No, we're not.
We don't.
And obviously, it increases demand when you have a massive population boom and you're not building enough housing.
That's going to increase demand.
And then therefore, house prices are going to go up.
And that's a horrible thing for people all across the country.
Whether you're an Indian Australian or whether you're a Greek Australian or whether you're white Australian, whether you're from British Australian, if you're a citizen and you have an interest that you don't want to have a situation where you're never going to be able to afford a home.
And so I actually have, this is the funny thing.
My entire friendship group is like basically completely multiracial, but we're all Australian.
We all believe in Australia.
We're all committed to the basic fundamental values of Australian democracy.
And probably most of my friends, despite being of all different backgrounds, I've got Indian Australian friends who don't believe in, you know, having a million people come to Australia a year because it's just horrible for everyone, regardless of your racial background, regardless of where you're going.
Obviously, we're talking, there's a difference in Australia, in a country like Australia, where morality has changed over time, there has become an idea, there's a mainstream idea, widely held by people all across the country, that, yes, your ethnic background might be Indian, your ethnic background might be Greek, your ethnic background might be Italian.
But at the same, at the end of the day, if you subscribe to the values of our country, if you subscribe to the ideals of Australian democracy, if you agree that this is your home, this is your nation, you're going to uphold the security of the country, you're going to uphold the democratic values on which our society is based, then you can become an Australian through the process of naturalization, through the process of legal immigration.
That is an idea that is widely held by Australians all across the country.
But the problem with this is that if you look at the data, for example, look at like quote-unquote Chinese Australians and their views on if the Americans and the United States go to war over Taiwan, should Australia involve ourselves on the side of the United States.
Chinese Australians, the majority of them would be against that.
Whereas the majority of Australians in general would be for that.
And if you look at like the voiced to parliament referendum on the so-called Aboriginal voice to parliament, if you look at the suburbs that have a high concentration of Indians, they voted yes.
No, I'm telling you right now, like the Labour Party, their official understanding of why the voice failed is because socially conservative migrant groups in the outer suburbs voted no.
We're not talking about a slight majority, but we're not talking about like Assad level margins where like 99% of Indian Australians voted for the voice.
Here's what I want to clarify because we're interrupting each other now and I just, it's just not productive.
So what I'm trying to say is this, is in America, we do this as well.
We define people as Indian American, Greek American, not really, but we do like, you know, Asian American, African American.
These are commonly understood.
And my understanding is why, it's because America was founded by Caucasian Protestants and it was originally founded to cater to these people, which is what people think of when they think Americans.
We know America's diverse.
We know slavery happened.
We know black people were brought here involuntarily and we know why they were brought here.
So there is complex racial issues, which we all know.
And Americans have accepted the fact that there will be complex issues between white and blacks.
And we border, you know, Hispanic colonization where they integrated with the indigenous people.
And so we have this Mexican nationality.
We fought wars with them.
We obtained land, right?
We fought wars with Spain, yada, yada.
So we understand there's a level of diversity.
But what we're seeing now in the United States is this sort of aggression to replace the white population, which they talk about it.
Like Biden said, our president said, they will be a minority.
And that's actually, this is a quote.
They will be a minority, white people in this country.
My ancestors who built this country, I share their belief.
And I want to honor them by preserving their project.
I don't want my country to be reduced to an economic zone.
What you say is it doesn't matter where you're from, what your culture is, what your religion is, as long as you just come here and work hard and want to adopt these vague Australian values, which aren't Australian values.
They are liberal internationalist values that were imposed upon us by our adoption into the American-led international order.
They weren't developed in Australia.
White nationalism is an Australian value.
That was the value that founded this fucking country.
The- The ideas that fed into the creation of Western civilization necessarily include Christian values that came from, for example, you had St. Paul say there is neither Jew nor Greek, for you're all one individual.
That is the entire point of the Good Samaritan parable that was taught by Jesus Christ.
That is the point of the Good Samaritan.
These two groups were at each other's throats.
They were at war with one another for decades.
I'm not sure the exact time span at which they were at war with one another.
But the entire point of the Good Samaritan is that the morally righteous thing was to go out and look after your brother, despite the fact that he's of a different group that is at war with one of you, despite the fact that he's of a different tribe, the fact that your peoples are supposed to hate each other, Jesus said the morally righteous thing to do was to look out for the man by the side of the road who is sick and who has been descended upon by bandits and is in need of care.
He didn't teach the parable.
What's the parable of the Good Samaritan?
You think the parable of the Good Samaritan is, she said, oh, and he realized that the guy was Zog and so he kept on walking.
Are you fucking retarded?
No, the parable of the Good Samaritan is that he, despite the fact that they're different tribes, that they hated each other, the two peoples were at each other's throats.
He went out and he cared for him because they're both human beings.
And at the end of the day, you're supposed to love your brother, be your brother's keeper, despite different ethnic backgrounds, despite tribalism.
The entire point of Christianity is to dissolve tribalism.
And so you can go, oh, Australia came into existence on January 1st, 1901, when Federation came into existence.
No, Australia was a long process.
Obviously, there's the Indigenous heritage of Australia, but there's also the Western heritage of Australia.
And there is thousands of years of history that feed into Western civilization, informed by those values in civilization.
You know that there are many fascists who despise Christianity and reject Christianity in favor of pagan influences.
There are many like that.
And you're probably, because I know you try to say that you're Tradcath, blah, blah, blah, despite the fact that the Pope has said that anti-Semitism is wrong and that racism is wrong.
I know you try to say that there's Trad Cath, but there are other fascists and Nazis who would go, oh, Joel's actually Zog because he says he's Tradcath.
Because you're all at war with one another at all times.
But the point is, Western civilization has many things feeding into it.
One of the core things is Christianity and those moral values in favor of moral universalism, the idea that all human beings are created.
Let me ask you this, though, which someone did ask.
I do want to make sure that we're able to ask a few questions about Hitler.
And I do want to make sure.
But I want to ask first.
I've been hearing a lot of the idea that morality changed.
And I think that that is a true statement.
Okay.
But I want to know about the wording of that.
We'll go to Drew first, and I just want to, Joel will listen, then we'll go to Joel.
Drew will listen.
I know we're getting heated, but did morality change because people were enlightened and therefore discovered what was morally absolutely better or superior, which is the way that we accept now.
Or was morality changed, like desegregation in the United States at gunpoint, or as it is today through censorship, monetary censorship, canceling people, et cetera?
People would say differently.
So all I guess I could put that as, is canceling a good thing kind of way of expressing our changed morality that came naturally?
Or is our morality shaped now through outside institutions and resources to reflect what elites want?
Therefore, we're not naturally going the way that we would go if left to our own devices.
Human beings are not just blank slates upon which the elite and Zog projects fantasies and projects ideology upon us.
Human beings are capable of independent thought.
Human beings are able to create new ideas over time.
That is the nature of the dialectic over thousands of years.
And so the idea that, you know, the only reason that, you know, values changed over time to reject racism, reject, you know, tribalistic sectarian violence, et cetera, the only reason that happened was because of like, you know, propaganda and things like this over time.
That is just total silliness.
I mean, you actually can see the long-term sources for liberal values going back thousands of years.
When you look at, like, there is the argument of Tom Holland in the book Dominion, where he basically says that part of the problem with woke ideology today is that it's basically Christianity, but it's shorn of the redemption part.
So it's basically you believe that everyone's born in original sin and yet there is no redemption because they reject Christianity.
But he's he, and look, it's a strong argument, but he also argues alongside that part of it is that liberalism was very much influenced over time by Christianity.
Like those ideas that we have a moral duty to people despite our different ethnic backgrounds, we have a different moral duty to, we have a moral duty to people despite our different tribe, ethnic background, racial identity, et cetera.
The idea that because Christianity is a universalist moral religion, Christianity is universalist and therefore it leads to over time, over the course of hundreds of years, thousands of years, it deeply embeds these kinds of universalistic moral ideas in society.
And I think that is something very precious and special about the West, that these ideas, like Joel is right, that in some countries, you know, sectarianism and tribalism is absolutely at the forefront of everything at all times.
One of the things that is very special about the Western world is that we have tried to transcend past that.
We've tried to move past that over hundreds of years, informed by thousands of years of moral development through philosophy, through religion.
We have evolved.
We have seen an evolution in morality over time, over 2,000 years.
This is in a way diversity, right?
Because to reject all that, you'd have to have a static universe where nothing changes over time, over thousands of years.
Nothing ever changes.
We're all just siloed off into our own different tribes.
Joel, so that's, I'm just going to throw that to you.
Things have changed where nobody's retarded enough to deny the fact that things are very different today in society.
People think very differently than they did perhaps in all of the history of modern and ancient civilization.
Is this the natural enlightenment and recourse for those just joining the live stream of humans who have found a better way at life?
Or is this a socially engineered taking advantage of people who naturally go with the flow, implementing a system that goes against what our founding fathers and our nations or our ancestors desired for our continents and our Western countries?
Yeah, well, I'm going to start by addressing the question of, is it good?
Is this egalitarianism, is this idea of flattening out all differences and assessing and creating this universal moral framework where we assess everyone.
We basically interpret all of humanity as our equal brother and sister that should be afforded the exact same rights as us.
I find this to be ridiculous because the very essence of being human is our capacity to love particular people.
The weakest form of love would be universal brotherhood of man or something like this, because in order for it to be something that you project to all people, you would have to basically minimize its value.
The more that you kind of focus your love on a particular target, object of your affection and your loyalty, the more valuable it becomes.
This is why marriage and romantic love is so powerful because you say, I am going to just be with this person for the rest of my life, in contradistinction to I'm going to be with this woman tonight and this woman tomorrow night.
I love all women.
All women are totally equal to me.
I have no preference for this woman or that woman.
Or if you were to say, your friendship would be worth nothing.
If you were to say that, well, you know, I'm hanging out with you today, but you're just as important to me as some guy that I haven't met before.
That would be absurd.
The particular love that you have for your friends, your family, and, you know, if you're married or you're with somebody, your children, these are the really potent things about the human experience.
They'll be cheap.
And like if you go to Aristotle, Aristotle, his argument against the abolition of private property was that if we, all property which is held in common is cared for the least, when you isolate property to the value of someone in particular, they have better stewardship.
So if we were to say that it doesn't matter who your parents are, all children, they deserve a totally equal, a totally equal love from the community.
And so you should love every child just as much, regardless of whether you're their father or mother or not, then all the children would be basically neglected.
The only way in which to secure good stewardship over children is for their particular parents to love them more than any other child.
This radical inequality, that is what generates a good parent, good stewardship.
And the same thing as I said before about a wife or a husband.
So that is the essence of what it means to be human is to have these particular affections.
Now, if I was to say, I love all people equally, I don't care what race you are, what I'm doing is I'm depriving my people of my affection and my concern.
And white people have basically been unmasked psyoped or convinced of this notion based upon whatever has convinced them.
The point is that it's a ridiculous notion that we should care less for our people.
It's like if it was to say, oh, it doesn't matter if someone's your family or not.
You should love them equally.
No, I love my brother and sister more than I love some random guy on the street.
Otherwise, I'd be a terrible brother.
That's the essence of what it means to be human.
In the same way, I'd be a terrible Australian if I was to care for an Indian as much as I care for someone who is also a real Australian like me.
That would be ridiculous.
And actually what that does is it will destroy who you are.
If everyone in a family doesn't love each other and cares for other people outside of the family just as much as the people inside the family, it destroys the family.
And the same thing happens to a nation.
That's what's happening to my nation right now and every white nation on the planet.
We don't love each other enough because we have been convinced that there's something pathological about that.
And this is breaking down our chains of loyalty to one another and it's breaking down our identity and it's destroying our people and our culture.
I was in London a few years ago and I was in East London in a place called West Ham.
And I was walking down the street and the street is just covered in kebab shops and brown people.
You can't see any white people almost anywhere.
And I went into this pub and the pub was full of all these white boomers and they all had cockney accents.
And they were very nice and we got chatting and so on and they were telling me about their children and their grandchildren.
Some of them were quite old and all of their children had moved away.
Many of them had actually moved here.
Some had moved to other parts of Britain or other parts of Europe.
And I was thinking how sad it is that that particular cockney identity of East London, the old white working class, it will no longer exist in a few generations because the old people will die out and the young people have all been replaced by Pakistanis, by various other brown ethnicities and some blacks and so on.
And so now they no longer exist.
That particular people, their culture, their way of speaking, their particular mentality, this has been eviscerated.
This is a tragedy that is happening in various aspects of my race across our civilization.
Entire communities are being utterly gutted and replaced and diluted.
And for me to not care about that and say, well, what's the difference?
An Indian or a black person, they're just as Australian as me.
They have the exact same value as me.
I should care about them the exact same.
That would be to deprive my people of genuine love, which is what's necessary for them to be preserved.
My ancestors for thousands of years have fought.
They have fought in wars.
They have engaged in settler colonialism going across the world to build a new country and so on to pass that down to me.
And I would be pissing in their face if I was to just allow it to be thrown away and not stand in opposition to what is happening to my people.
Where my country, and not just, it would be one thing if it was just happening in Australia, but I could go back and everyone said, go back to England if you don't like it.
And I went back to England.
And in England, everyone was English.
And there was a way to perpetuate the culture of my ancestors there.
But the exact same thing, maybe even worse, is happening there.
I have nowhere to go.
Everywhere where my people were previously the dominant culture, the dominant people, where we ruled our own countries and we maintained our traditions and our way of life, every single place where that is occurring in the entire world is being systematically attacked by this agenda, this anti-white agenda of forcing quote-unquote diversity, which means replacing them with foreign cultures and foreign peoples.
So I have nowhere to run.
I am forced to fight.
If they didn't want me to become so racist, if they didn't want me to become so aggressive and hateful, they shouldn't have taken away everywhere that I could run to.
But that's what they have done.
And so they're forcing me to fight.
I've got nowhere to go.
And the same thing would happen to any ethnic group.
You see with the Palestinians and the Israelis fighting over kilometers of dirt.
You're seeing the Ukrainians and the Russians massacring each other over kilometers of dirt.
This is the universal human condition that people are not willing to just throw away hard-fought self-determination.
They establish their country, their way of life.
Their people are in charge of a particular territory.
That has been hard won, always in some kind of war or battle.
And then their ancestors have invested blood, sweat, and tears for hundreds and thousands of years, in some cases, in that particular place to make it theirs.
And they are not going to go down without a fight when that happens, when someone else wants to barge in and take over that space.
Because the reality is that the world isn't big enough for everyone.
This is going to be the country that my people have, that is going to be the place where my way of life is perpetuated, so that my children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren, and so on have a country in which people like them who share their identity are in charge so that they are safe.
I don't want my grandchildren and great-grandchildren becoming a persecuted, potentially minority in the country their ancestors built.
That is just simply not acceptable.
And that is the destiny that if the current trajectory of things is allowed to continue, that's their destiny.
I would be a shit grandparent or shit great-grandparent if I allowed that to happen.
And I love them more, even though they don't exist yet.
I love them more than I love these fucking random Indians coming in who have their own country, by the way.
And who, frankly, I don't like them.
I don't like the way they smell, the way they look.
Every single migrant I know in Australia, their entire aspiration is just to buy a house in the suburbs and just be left alone and just have a nice country.
I need to ask a question here because I see where the disagreement is and I see where it might be a point of contention.
It's not about winning or losing.
It's about making your point thoroughly.
And that's the key thing about debates because you're never going to win people that you were never going to win.
And you can only lose people, but you can convince people in the middle.
So to give a very clear argument here, you're saying that, yeah, you can still live in Australia.
I don't think anyone's arguing against that.
There's nothing against white people living.
And your definition of living was like, you said these people just want to come here and they just want to own a house.
They just want to, you know, go to school, which actually agrees with, I think, what Joel was saying, where he was like, yeah, they want opportunity.
They want resources.
They want to take part in the prosperity.
But what you're defining then as the country is the ability to live and own a home and enjoy in the prosperity.
But Joel seems to be defining it as it's much deeper than just owning a home because, you know, you could go to, I could go to Cyprus, yeah, tomorrow and maybe, maybe I can't.
I don't know the laws there.
Buy a home.
And like I'm American, but I'll never be Australian, right?
Well, I really can't because I wasn't born here and I don't have, I'm too far back removed even from my English heritage where like genuinely I'm American.
At the most, you could go back and say, maybe, yeah, maybe I'm British.
So that's British and German.
But at the same time, I don't identify as British and German.
I identify as American because it was a country built on Protestantism.
It was a country built by Anglos.
But I know for a matter of a fact that I am not German.
And when I meet Germans, we're very clearly distinct.
So I agree with you on that.
You would meet people from Cyprus.
You're very different than them.
That's very fine.
However, I think what we have here today is not a racism, like Joel just knows a couple, you know, are they called Christians still today?
I don't know.
Not a couple of people from Cyprus who he just hates because they're different than him.
There is a global movement that even the left acknowledges, our president.
So I'm not taking a biased perspective here.
Our president acknowledges there is an actual shift in population demographics, which is directly leading to a shift of power structure, which we are being told is good.
So because I want to get into super chats, I want to get into a Q ⁇ A and I want to have some conclusion here.
And I want to get sort of a final statement.
We'll go to Drew, then we'll go to Joel because it's a good order here.
The current trajectory that we're on is without a shadow of a doubt leading to white people being a minority in Western countries and losing control of the power structure.
I don't care what your opinion is on that.
We can see that in the UK when it comes to Wales, when it comes to the mayor of London, the Prime Minister of England, when we see what's happening in Ireland, these are Pakistanis, these are Indians, these are individuals.
Whether that's good or bad, I'm not going to even comment.
But it is happening there, and it's going to continue to happen in the United States.
You're seeing Congress go down in its white density.
Here, you're seeing the same thing with minority leadership.
You're seeing ethnic grievances and policies.
So with that being said, we are on that trajectory.
Statistically, we cannot deny that's where we're headed.
So is diversity our strength?
Closing statement.
Regardless of what's been in the past, whether there's been maybe 10% Asian, whatever in this country, in the United States, it's been 13% black.
It's still 13% black, by the way, but the Hispanic population has skyrocketed.
The Asian populations have skyrocketed.
There's the black infiltration from Haitian stuff is skyrocketed, not the American black.
Something is changing.
Something is shifting.
Is this good for Western countries?
And if it is, then please tell me why.
If you have any criticisms, I'm not assuming you fully agree with this.
What could we do to make it our strength?
That's why I want to conclude on here.
If it's not our strength, the current trajectory our nations are on, what do we need to change or what would we need to do policy-wise or effectively socially to make diversity our strength?
And that's why I will go to Joel after the same thing.
If you disagree, what is it that we need to do?
To what level of diversity should we have?
It is a complicated question, but I'd like to get your final thoughts, Drew.
I don't believe in a world that is defined by a zero-sum racial struggle.
I don't believe in a world where people should be defined by their race, defined by their ethnicity.
And if somebody is of a different race, they can't live in the same street of me.
I don't believe in that world.
I will judge people based on their character.
I'll judge them based on their individual attributes, their individual accomplishments.
This is the world that I believe in.
I believe in individualism and personal freedoms.
That's why I believe in liberalism.
So I believe that individuals should be judged based on their own individual attributes, their own accomplishments, their own personal personalities, their own character.
I identify as an Australian.
I believe that I'm just as much Australian as Joel.
Joel will disagree with that.
Joel will say, oh, well, I have Aryan heritage stock, blah, blah, blah.
And his friends try to go, oh, Drew's actually secretly Lebanese or Turkish or whatever.
I don't believe my race comes into it.
I'm an Australian.
I would die.
I would fight and die for Australia if Australia were ever to be invaded or if Australia was ever attacked.
I would fight and die for Australia.
I believe in Australia.
This is my home.
I believe in this as my homeland, my country.
It doesn't matter the race.
My friends, my friends, they may be from Hong Kong.
They may be from Tibet.
They may be from all sorts of different areas on earth.
But they believe in Australia.
They believe in democracy.
They believe in a life that I believe in as well, where individual people are judged based on their own personal attributes, their own personal characteristics, where we don't have totalitarianism.
We don't have mass racial violence.
I don't believe in mass racial violence.
I know Joel will try and say, he'll try and construct a, he's already tried to construct a straw man of my position.
So he's already tried to say, well, Drew is basically pushing an ideology where people aren't allowed to love their own families more than just general humanity in particular.
Of course, it's human nature to love your own family more than the abstract idea of humanity itself.
Yet people fight and die for ideas all the time.
And an idea that is important is that all human beings have a moral value, moral worth.
They shouldn't be just reduced down to their just reduced down to their skin color or their racial background, their ethnic background.
I don't care where somebody comes from, as long as they believe in Australia, as long as they too would fight to defend Australia as a country, they believe in the same Australia that I do, which is an Australia that's founded on democracy, that all human beings in Australia have equal moral worth and nobody should be subject to torture, persecution, government tyranny.
All human beings in Australia should be treated with equal moral value, equal moral worth, and all people should be free from tyranny, violence, discrimination, persecution.
If people believe in that Australia, then I will be happy to fight and die alongside them in pursuit of that ideal of the nation.
I believe in Australia as a country.
I believe in Australia as a nation.
I just don't believe that Australia should be defined based on race because there are all sorts of Australians who do not come from a British Australian background and yet they've made so many immense cultural, scientific achievements in Australia, commercial achievements in Australia.
It's completely wrong to say that Australia was only ever built up by British Australians.
It's completely wrong.
There is a long, long history.
And I actually think Australia's history stretches all the way back tens of thousands of years and incorporates indigenous Australians as well.
And I think it's an amazing thing that Australia incorporates the oldest culture on earth, basically.
There's an ancient history there.
And there is, there is, and through this, there is, we have constructed a country that incorporates people from all ends of the world.
And yet we should be united in one ideal, democracy, freedom, justice for all human beings everywhere.
That's what I believe.
Nobody should be persecuted based on their racial identity.
No one should be persecuted, bullied, tortured, killed based on their racial ethnicity.
That's what Joel believes in.
Joel believes that he actually said in this debate, he said, if we have to kill people, he's happy with that.
He's happy with that.
He actually made a threat that he would kill non-white Australians at some point or other.
So I think this guy is actually a threat to Australia.
I think he's a threat to the country.
He doesn't believe in the things that I believe in.
He wants to destroy the Australia that currently exists today.
He wants to absolutely destroy it.
He wants it to burn in flames.
And so in a way, he's also kind of like the communist extremists who want to burn down Australia.
Both these people are unsatisfied with their lots in life and they are filled with resentment and grievance and they just want to destroy everything that makes our society actually quite beautiful and nice.
Obviously, Australia has so many different problems.
We've got a housing crisis in Australia, et cetera.
But also, we're nevertheless one of the best countries on earth.
People would die to live in Australia.
All across the world, people would give their lives to try and come to Australia.
It's such a beautiful country.
It is one of the best countries on earth.
We have the rule of law.
We have widespread prosperity.
We have much less problems when it comes to racism and ethnic tension than, say, America has.
I mean, we have built a democratic society that is based on widespread prosperity, a society that isn't built on zero-sum racial competition.
And Joel thinks it should be built on zero-sum racial competition.
And there are some people on the extremist left who want to create their own type of indigenous ethno-state or whatever, who also believe in a world of zero-sum ethnic competition.
I believe that people shouldn't be judged on their ethnic background, shouldn't be judged on their racial background.
If you believe in Australia, if you believe in Australian democracy, if you're willing to fight for this country, then you're Australian and I'll fight alongside you to create a better Australia for everybody who's currently living here.
That's what I believe in.
Joel believes in, he will use euphemisms, but ultimately what he believes in is trying to expel millions of people who already live here, who have made Australia their home.
But basically, I believe that one of the special things about the West is that we have thousands of years of Christian moral tradition and moral values that have fed into contemporary liberal ideology and the idea that all human beings have an equal moral value and worth.
I wouldn't want to live in a country where we believe that all human beings should be defined based on their race and should be killed if they're of a different tribe.
I don't want to live in a country like that.
Joel wants to live in a country like that.
I don't want to live in a country like that.
Like, that is a disgusting, nightmarish, hellish world.
And I wouldn't want to live in a society like that.
I want to live in a society where people are judges human beings as individuals.
All right, but let me just make sure before Joel, before I understand that, since this is a closing statement before the Q ⁇ A, we have a bunch of super chats.
Now, this is not a people with whom we can share a civilization.
They are completely different.
It couldn't be more different from us racially, culturally, and so on.
So I think they should be put in their own separate communities.
Largely, a lot of them do live in their own separate communities, and it should stay that way.
I don't want to live around them.
They have the worst crime rate of any ethnic group in Australia by a country model.
They make black Americans look like law-abiding citizens by comparison.
No white Australian wants to live around them.
And you talk to white Australians who live around them in like Alice Springs and so on.
They are completely aware of the issues with Aboriginals and they do not enjoy it.
They're a massive problem.
They're not compatible with white Western civilization.
That's not what I said.
I said they should be separate.
I want to be separated from them.
I don't want to live around them.
Now, just shut up.
This is my closing remarks.
I allowed you to speak.
So now you're going to shut up and allow me to speak.
Now, the problem with Drew's worldview is that he says all humans are of equal worth.
All right?
So if all humans are of equal worth, then what does it mean to be an Australian?
Because then what's the difference between an Australian and someone who lives in another country?
Aren't all humans of equal worth?
At that point, we have no point of determination.
We just arbitrarily live in this geographical political area and they live in it.
Why even have separate countries?
Why not just amalgamate all the countries into one world government at that point?
What is even the point of maintaining separate countries?
He basically wants to eviscerate any independent identities or particular identities that those countries could possibly have because Australia is now being defined.
We don't have any particular ethnic or religious or racial identity.
All we have are these vague universalistic notions of liberal democracy.
unidentified
There's plenty of liberal democracies all around the world.
Pretty much every country in the world, with the exception of very few, try to at least pretend they're a liberal democracy.
And so at that point, what's the difference between here and anywhere else?
There isn't actually much of a difference.
And this is why it's the ideology perpetuated by globalists, people who want to integrate every country.
Just please be quiet.
They want to integrate every country in the world into a global culture, into a global power structure, and they're succeeding in doing that to a very large degree.
And a very key element of this agenda is breaking down anything particular about any national identity that composes this world of liberal democracies.
So this is actually, what this is, he's pretending to be, oh, I love Australia.
I defend Australia.
But he doesn't actually love Australia.
He loves liberal democracy, which is an ideology that has been pushed on Australia from without.
It isn't, at least in the way that it's been interpreted in the post-war international order, an ideology which says it doesn't matter if you're Australian or not.
Everyone is of equal value.
I think Australia should be built around the idea that Australians have more value than non-Australians.
That's really kind of the essence of having a country.
And the question becomes, what makes someone an Australian?
If any random person can just be issued a document saying you're an Australian and they don't really, they just kind of show up, maybe they've got a university degree or something, and we say, well, you can be an Australian.
You can kind of speak English, I guess, and you're going to sign off this piece of paper that says that you agree with our supposed values, which again, are these banal universalisms.
You're completely eviscerating the idea that Australia means anything at that point.
Now Australia is just another liberal democracy, just like every other liberal democracy that has these exact same values.
What's the difference between being a German or an American or a Canadian or someone from Thailand?
It's all the same.
They're all liberal democracies.
Whatever.
I mean, a constitutional monarchy like us, I get, whatever.
It's splitting hairs.
The point is that there are a lot of liberal democracies.
Japan apparently is a liberal democracy.
Korea is so many different supposed liberal democracies all over the world, right?
What's the difference?
They all have these supposed same values.
Therefore, everyone is worth the same.
Everyone is, it's all interchangeable and it's totally meaningless.
You can have multiple different citizenships.
You can be an Indian citizen and an Australian citizen and a Chinese citizen all at the same time.
Who fucking cares?
What does it all matter?
This is the trivialization of Australian identity.
And if we go to war, if we were to go to war with China, you think all the Chinese Australians are going to be lining up to fight?
Do you think Indian Australians are going to want to go and die for Australia?
If they're forced?
No, they're just going to go back.
If they were forced to fight, they'd go back to India.
There was a bunch of black people in Ukraine.
They didn't go sign up to go and fight the Russians.
They fucked off as soon as the war happened.
There's videos of this.
The point is that the people who want to defend Ukraine are Ukrainians.
hal azov but the point is is that but the point the point is is that the uh the identity of people is not something that can be it can be totally reduced to universal shut shut the fuck up i'm I'm speaking.
This is supposed to be my closing statement, and you can't control yourself.
You've got this lack of impulse control.
Just, can you try and sit there in silence for like five minutes?
The majority of people who are watching this, they're watching this to see what I have to say.
Almost no one is watching listening to what you have to say, quite frankly.
The point is, is that if you trivialize identity down to these universal characteristics, you're basically denying that that identity actually is anything.
If it's all reduced to these universal values, then all you're adopting is the value of a universal humanitarianism.
You're saying Australia exists only insofar as it's universal humanitarianism, which means Australia doesn't differentiate itself from every other country because every other country is composed of humans with the same human rights and they should all have the same democratic rights and so on.
And so what you're saying is that Australia doesn't really meaningfully exist.
It's just this kind of arbitrary economic and administrative zone that's geographically determined or something.
I'm actually of the founding stock of this country.
The people who built this country.
I don't see Australia as that.
I see Australia as something which I carry in my blood.
This soil is mixed with the blood of my people.
And that's what generates, that's what's generated this great prosperity and this, the reason why everyone wants to come to Australia is because my people fucking built it.
And when we build countries, we build the best countries in the world.
And then you can't just control yourself for 45 seconds.
We are talking about macro social events.
Any one individual is kind of irrelevant in the face of Australia or humanity or these large grandiose notions.
It's just ridiculous to say, well, did you build your own country?
No, I mean, that's the whole point of why I'm a nationalist, is that no one individual can actually do anything.
Some people can have significant lives, but ultimately, anything truly great that humanity can accomplish, we accomplish as a group.
We accomplish as a people who work together on large social projects.
That's how we generate culture.
That's how we generate economy, great institutions, and so on.
And so your group identity, therefore, is really fucking important.
Reducing everyone to individuals, when individuals, when isolated, are actually quite insignificant in the grand scheme of things is an absurd worldview.
Now, this is your worldview.
Also, this idea that all humans are of equal worth is just absurd.
Obviously, on any dimension of worth that we would want to determine, is someone more attractive than someone else?
Is someone more intelligent than someone else?
Is someone more capable than someone else?
Any dimension of actual tangible worth, everyone is of different worth.
at the end of the day i still wouldn't want to share a society with kanye or his people i think kanye should be and what do you think he's a black man hey Hey, hey, Robust, he didn't use Kanye about closing.
So just finish your point, take it in for a landing, and then we're going to go to the Q ⁇ A because we could go many more rounds, but I want to keep it because I want to make it so I can see that.
But the closing point of what I want to make is that white people have a particular nature, a particular way of life that is natural to us.
And if that is valuable, you have to say that that's not valuable at all.
That what white people can create, that what's natural within white people, our way of being, that this is something that is fundamentally not worth anything, that it doesn't deserve to be defended in any way, that white people have no right to defend our particular way of life, our race, from forces which are basically destroying it, which are basically taking away all of our countries from us, that are diluting all of our communities.
In which case, what you're really saying is that you don't value the white race.
You don't think that the white race has any value whatsoever, and it doesn't matter if it exists or it doesn't exist.
I want my race to continue existing and I want it to flourish, actually.
So that's the essence of my fucking politics.
And that's the essence of what it means to be an Australian is to say that you actually want Australia, the concrete historical people, the Australians, to flourish.
If Australians are all replaced by non-Australians, then it's no longer Australia.
It's now become just some arbitrary grouping of human beings.
So that's basically your worldview.
You claim to be pro-Australia, but no, this is what happens when you allow a bunch of non-members of your country into your country.
They want to redefine your country to become inclusive of them.
And if you want to become inclusive of them, you have to change the meaning of what your country is, destroy the identity that it previously had to make it inclusive of everyone else.
unidentified
And now all of a sudden, you no longer have an identity.
And before we go to the Q ⁇ A, I just want to give you guys one more chance, Drew, a plug where people can follow you and find you.
And then, Joel, please don't give any points here.
We'll go to the QA.
And I want to remind people as I read the Q ⁇ A, besides saying anything that could potentially be illegal or jeopardize, you know, the legal ability for us to be operating the show or hurt or harm anyone unnecessarily, I will try to read every super chat word for word.
And I always say in the beginning, me reading, asking, and, you know, reading them out fully does not mean that I sponsor or agree with everything that's said.
And so I want both the people here to know whether they're for or against either of you or put in the pejorative.
It is simply for the sake of being accurate.
If people sent in super chats over $5, they will be read on screen.
So go ahead, Drew.
How can people find you and follow you and support you if they agree with you or they want to challenge you?
I was thinking about doing that because just to go to their studio, I should like show up like shirtless with like war paint on and like a didgeridoo and just like play him a song.
It's beautiful, I think this is actually, sorry, it's So just so you guys know, I'm not even going to get involved in the questions, but I'm not pretending to be a moderator right now.
I'm just reading questions like I would host a stream.
But as someone who's worked, by the way, just so just so you know, as somebody who's worked in media, predominantly the media that even Joel would think would be like Jew media, right?
So what I'm saying is I've worked this my whole career is, dude, I talk to people all the time, right and left, that I just don't agree with and don't care.
But one thing that that's why even you said publicly, you're like, oh, well, he's kind of a fascist.
What people do not realize when they come on the show is like, I really can just talk to anybody and be fine facilitating any conversation because I go into extreme.
One thing I'll say is it is nice that Drew is a public figure that's at least because in Australia, we don't really have that many politics public figure types that'll like engage in discourse.
There's almost no one involved in Australian politics.
It's not like in America where there's like a billion people that you could have debated.
Like, meaning the professionalism, like it would, it would come down to the fact that, you know, I've spent a lot of time working in embedding in what people would consider to be extremism, both left and right-wing.
I mean, to think about the fact that I actually sieged a federal building as Antifa and Department of Homeland Security broke my leg while I embedded with Antifa for weeks.
I sieged the building with them.
I've probably committed some federal crimes while I've been working with these people.
But I will say this: perhaps, perhaps, with these people, I do think it's kind of funny, though, because when I was with them, dude, I smoked cigarettes with these Antifa.
I helped them make fucking hot dogs.
I suggested we wash our clothes, you know, crazy things like that.
Great men of history go, hey, this idea that everyone already believes in and that the people who are in power believe in, I'm going to also advocate for that idea.
If you had climbed Mount Everest, if you dropped into war zones, what they fucking most accomplished is that you're not going to be able to idea in our society.
Wow, you're a great man of history for saying the N-word on Elijah Schaefer's stream.
That's what they actually do.
The truth, the greatness that we're all missing out on is some guy from Australia with a fucking tuck feary beard saying the N-word on Elijah Schaefer's beard on Elijah Schaefer's fucking stream.
As a Christian, where does scripture or church tradition assert that a universal right for all residents in a country such that it's immoral to deport foreign ethnics to ensure homogeneity?
And that we should just rip up all of their legacy and completely change the values of our country from what Sky News and the Americans want us to do and the Jews want us to do and so on.
I know that there's been recent legislative changes in Queensland and all these different states that prohibit the Sig Hole.
And I was just wondering if Joel or Julian, as he's sometimes known, could potentially demonstrate his testicular fortitude by defying the legislation of Queensland.
A Sudanese group of youths stabbed an elderly white woman in front of a six-year-old daughter to steal her Hyundai gets for a joyride, stabbed her to death.
unidentified
And then the response of the Queensland government was, oh, we don't want this to cause any racism against the black community.
We can't blame them all for the actions of the future.
But even there's still, you know, the Chinese Communist Party loves to tell everyone that there's, you know, 56 or 62 or whatever officially sanctioned ethnic minority groups in China, etc.
There are many of them.
There are obviously many countries on earth that are multicultural.
unidentified
China's ruled by Han Chinese people.
But let me just say, for example, most countries on earth are multicultural.
Even non-white countries are the same word for nation and race.
I say, well, you know, I actually don't want them to be national socialists, but I could see them getting stronger through not a complete position of the same principles, but through applying some of the principles.
What I was saying was that the ideology that Joel has promoted is almost like a version of Takfiri jihadism, but just for white people because it believes in the same types in the same way that Takfiris go, you're not Muslim.
We're banning this, banning that, banning this.
You're not a real Muslim.
We can kill you.
This is basically Joel's ideology because he says, oh, you're not a real Australian.
Yeah, but listen, all I'm saying is the United States borders Mexico.
It's a country that shares a land border, and there's also a lot of Mexicans that are even after the acquisition of land that continued to live in the land.
So it's a little more complicated considering the fact that Mexicans are also not really an indigenous people.
It is a colonial people, a mixture of Spaniards and even the Spanish.
The language itself is European.
So we'll just leave it at that.
I'm not going to argue against any of that.
But Hispanics are a very interesting subsect of people.
No, no, no, no.
I'm saying that's a different argument in American America.
I don't know what people argue in America on that.
I'm just saying, I think it's a different country with different ethnic issues.
Beamer Boy51 said, Dave, Mr. DeVe, he's talking to him.
Yeah, and as Tony Abbott just said on air, they're using immigration to artificially inflate the economies because they fucked over the financial system so badly in this country that it's a poor form of economic stability.
Do I agree with that?
I don't know.
I'm not from this country.
I will just say this.
If you were Indian and you make my cab smell, which they do, and I don't know why.
That's one thing.
But if you fuck up my butter chicken, you're gone, buddy.
I don't even have any power and I'm already deporting you.
Actually, black people in the, you know, I would say this.
If anyone spent 10 minutes going to one of the high schools I went to in LA, you'd end up a white nationalist even if you were black.
But if you had a few, that's the joke, but it's true.
But also, I will say, black people don't mind if you call them the n-word when you're younger.
As long as you like don't back down from it.
Like if they ask you, what did you just say?
And you just repeat it to them, they don't bother you.
But if you act scared, one thing that black people are actually scared of in America, and this is crazy, is white people that aren't afraid of them.
That's a really true thing.
It's actually, they teach that when you play American football, because a lot of the players are drafted are black and they try to use racial intimidation.
And the coaches tell you, if you're a white guy, what?
What happened, Brian?
Brian?
Oh, by who?
Are we okay?
Okay, cool.
Tell them, Chief Trumpster, thank you so much for the raid.
I thought you said we're getting raided, and I didn't know you meant digitally.
I was like, I thought something bad was happening.
I just want to say this, though, on that flip side.
I give a lot of my opinions on like actresses and stuff.
And I'll have the entire black community sometimes against me.
And I always thought that was weird because if you don't care about my opinion and I'm irrelevant, then why as the husband of Hallie Bailey, the Little Mermaid actress, why is he coming after me personally and my family?
It's like, dude, you're a multi-millionaire.
I'm a retarded faggot that's in a homeless studio that's built in an old classroom.
I should have no threat to you at all.
You're the rich celebrity.
I'm the poor guy.
You know what I mean?
Who grew up in poverty in LA on food stamps?
So let's just move on with that.
And I have a doughy face.
All right.
Go, but they're upset.
And I guess it must be racial tension longstanding, but the U.S. is complicated in that regard.
I'm not advocating for anyone doing any death threats or anything like that.
It's just interesting to know, like, are you coming from a place where if you have a non-white girlfriend, it would make sense of your position a little bit more because you're invested in non-white Australia.
So Elon Bus said, yeah, I'm not just fucking here.
I'm getting out, but I'm about to leave.
Like, I'm not trying to take up land here.
I'm just whisking away another.
I don't want to get too much on my wife's statements, but she even, including, I'm not going to say anything else because we get targeted in a lot of people, but they have very, my wife is a lot more, I would say, based than I am.
Like, she's got more fundamental views because she's from this country and she grew up in Africa.
I meant, I meant like she, they realized like fundamentally like why Uganda was backwards like socially.
And it wasn't because they were, it was because they had a worldview that looked to ancestors in the past and they kind of it caused a lack of forward thinking and then in the present that caused them to not find certain solutions or work together as groups and they tore each other down.
Like if somebody created a food cart under a tree and there was shade and they were able to sell food, someone instead of helping them grow the business would cut the tree down so someone in the village couldn't like get out of the village.
And there was a lot of like self-sabotage.
And they're not racist.
Do you even tell me?
Like they're really nice to white people over there.
It's very like there's no racial tension there.
It's just like it's more Muslim Christian tension.
I think it's largely because the Australian economy, this is going to be quite boring for people at home, but I think the Australian economy is dominated by natural resource extraction.
There isn't a lot of manufacturing or high-tech industries in Australia.
It's like a service economy mixed with an agricultural and resource extraction economy, which is kind of the economy of more of a developing country than an advanced country.
Yeah, but what I meant is in like blue-collars used in the U.S. as a pejorative, people would know that you can make good money here as a well-off here, and it's very respectable.
You could drop out of high school and go into a trady program, and then people like fight for jobs in the mines and stuff.
So in some ways, it is like a developing country.
But like, if you say, oh, I work in the mines, people are like, oh, you're fucking smart and you're rich and you have a good plan for your family.
They're not assuming that you're just dead beat.
And they're like, in the U.S., there's a lot of discrimination against it.
It really is true.
And I'm not saying I believe that.
I just know from upper class whites and Jews in LA, they know they look down on the Hispanics who are like blue collar and it actually becomes even a racial divide.
I know that for a fact.
But national Bolshevist Zov also said, Drew is an idiot, so I'm not even going to address him.
As for Joel, your nationalism is bourgeois.
Only the seizure of the means of production can bring forth national sovereignty.
Liberalism is dead.
We'll just go past that.
He doesn't like you guys.
Romanji said native Emiratis are a minority in Dubai.
Well, no, the point that I was making is that in the United Arab Emirates, they get an immigrant labor class in, but they don't give them citizenship and voting rights and so on and allow them to take away the political power of the native Arabs who rule that country.
And I think that's why I can still laugh at myself and laugh at my own side is because I always tell people I have a liberal personality, but a conservative mind.
Meaning, like, I think I naturally, the way that I, being born in the middle of LA, just being born in a broad multi-ethnic place, I'm just very comfortable and like able to live around difference of opinion, different people.
But I think with the mind is what I say, oh, I have a conservative mind is just because I have a liberal personality, it means that I'm not, I don't claim to be a archetype or some sort of like conservative icon.
I don't even claim to be conservative because I think my own actions throughout my life would say differently.
However, that means I understand liberals quite well and where they're coming from, but I also understand conservatives who are bent that way.
But also, I think in my mind, if I had to agree with who seems to be more correct in a better fashion for society, I would side with conservatives.
However, I just think current conservatives, like you said, are actually liberals.
They just market themselves like conservatives.
Like a lot of American conservatives, it's just liberalism with the brakes on it, kind of.
You can be trans, you just can't be under 18 and trans.
If somebody advocates the armed insurrection against the state, somebody like, for example, Julian here, Julian Mr. V, anybody who would advocate armed insurrection against the state, I think that they shouldn't have citizenship.
You don't advocate violence, but you don't integrate.
don't adopt the identity of the host well I think people should and but if they don't what we need to do I'm saying what if they don't because a lot of them don't most Most of the education actually.
If you immigrate to a country and you're not interested in integrating and you want to have your own separate ethno-state, then yes, you shouldn't be part of the country.
I'm saying people should be judged as individuals.
If there is an individual who advocates violence against the state, if they completely reject the democratic values of the state, they shouldn't be in the country.
unidentified
That's simple.
But they don't have to necessarily violence for the future.
In Australia, somebody who commits a crime who's convicted in a court of law, we have the rule of the law in this country, they are deported.
That is a good system.
That is a good policy But your strategy What you want Is that people Somebody could be born here Live their entire life here For 30 years They only know this country This is their only home And you want them deported Because of their skin card That's wrong.
If treating people differently, if people have different moral worth based on their different characteristics, why should human rights be extended to your own child if your child is disabled?
Look, I don't like EFF malemma, the schizo kill the boa music chants that they do.
It's schizo and wrong, and I'm against race hatred and sectarian violence, whether it's coming from no matter where they're coming from, whether it's white supremacists or black supremacists.
I'm against ethnic violence and sectarianism and race hatred.
The reason why ASIO exists, the reason why we have to create ASIO was because a bunch of Jewish communists immigrated here after World War II, infiltrated the government, and started sending state secrets to the Soviet Union.
Well, I'm not a fan of the current American elite, but the Ukrainian.
Also, the other problem is that I'm not a fan of the Russian state as well.
Russian state is also anti-white.
Russia is a multicultural country.
They suppress white nationalism in Russia.
Putin has jailed countless white nationalist activists, totally suppressed the ideology.
And Russia, it's even less possible to organize a dissident political movement in Russia because they have far less political freedom than they do in Western countries.
But Russia's a majority white country.
They've got more white.
There's more white people in Russia than any other country in the world except the United States.
And they're not able to advocate for their specifically Russian interests because the Russian imperial state has decided that the inclusion of all of these non-Russian, non-white minority ethnicities in this big superstate that they've created with their expansionist aims and so on is what takes precedence over the interests of ethnic Russian people.
And this is a common tactic that's used by tyrants to bring in foreigners, to bring in people who aren't of the majority ethnic group in order to disempower their potential political rivals because they can bring in mercenary forces.
They can bring in people who have direct loyalty to the sovereign.
They don't have loyalty to the nation at large.
We see this with Putin's relationship with that Chechen guy.
I can't remember his name.
Yeah, Kadyrov and so on.
This is a common tactic used by tyrants.
So the Russian state is also replacing the white Russian population.
They're bringing in lots and lots of immigrants, non-white immigrants into Russia.
Moscow is filling up with brown people and so on, people that aren't ethnically Russian.
And their rule over Ukraine, therefore, can't be trusted.
I can see why the Ukrainian nationalists want to try and preserve their own country, want to preserve Ukrainian rule.
They've had to get in bed with the Americans and with the West.
And that also presents a large series of problems as well.
I mean, so I've worked pretty hand in hand with some Ukrainians and Russians in terms of the back scene politically.
And from my understanding, that there was very few Christian leaders, including Putin, who wanted to post Orthodox against each other.
And I don't know if it had as much to do with him being Jewish as it did with his sort of atheism that he moved to, but they needed a global leader that didn't share direct ethnicity or direct religious affiliation that was sort of willing to sacrifice Christian on Christian fighting there because there was a lot of hesitancy with someone being excommunicated from the church, basically even jeopardizing their salvation.
So there was like a bunch of discrepancies and issues in previous years of a full-fledged conflict like this.
So apparently that's why even though he's like not they kind of chose a fucking idiot from you know like a sounds like massive cope to me.
No, I'm saying he's like a fucking idiot like who's just like the Ukrainians that are fighting and dying on the battlefield are fighting for Ukraine not for Zelensky.
It's the influence, like the fact that because of his ethnic ties, he doesn't, in the same way that anyone else doesn't have those ethnic ties, are going to talk about the problems of the Jewish subversive influence over our race and our civilization.
And he underplays it, obviously, for ethnic reasons.
That's my issue with him.
It's an issue with Curtis.
It's very funny.
You know, in Curtis Yarvin, it's the same thing.
He does the same thing.
So this is common with Jews in the dissident right.
They always downplay the negative, subversive role of Jews.
And they kind of act as kind of apologists, basically, for why we should collaborate with why people should collaborate with Jews to save the West or whatever.
By the way, sometimes, like, if you see how fucked up I look today, like, my audience knows I'm like tired and like greased up.
I do this not only every day, like some sort of like long, like, this, this thing every day, but also now I have two other shows, and I'm also now helping manage like another media company that I'm helping build.
It's been fucking 14-hour days every day, plus having a kid and stuff and other things going on.
I'm totally with you.
When you side right now, I was like, fuck yeah, me too.
he's ethically palestinian but he's not pro-palestinian he's got it's like nietzschean pro but i would love is he the guy that argues for like gay pedophile shit or no Many ways.
I'm actually the biggest Zionist in the country because I actually, and I mean this genuinely, I actually want Israel to exist so much that I want them to even change their laws, that people that love Israel so much should also be able to become honorary Jews.
And they should all move.
The neoconservative people, they should all move there because if you want to fight their wars, they need more tax burden and they're going to need to develop a little more.
So they're going to need like an additional like 10 million people juiced in.
Joel Davis is base speaking the uncomfortable truths with conviction.
Cheers from Communist Canada.
And then a Zionist cuck said 15 years of the same lefty talking points.
Fuck the knee.
They can suckle my balls more than the Juro's personal rabbi.
Is that Nord Stream pipeline or a nose?
Okay.
All right.
I'm just, I'm already cooked.
Everyone knows this.
By the end of like, after we go for like three hours, my brain just gets absolutely juiced and fried, considering the fact that I still have like several hours worth of content I need to make for actual news publications, like videos, which, by the way, I was going to say thank you and shout out to the new show.
We did like 7 million views in its first two weeks, launched, and I'm really proud of that.
And it's doing really well.
And it's going to be doing even better.
We have, like, Elon Musk already followed our page, which is pretty cool.
So we're doing, it's a great startup, great launch.
Thank you guys for supporting.
It's doing a lot better than this show.
It's crazy what you can do when you don't touch on certain topics and you keep it because we call it keep it clean.
So it's stuff your parents could enjoy, stuff the whole family can watch to stay informed.
Make sure you check it out.
You can catch me on the Gateway Pundits Rumble.
You can catch it on X.
It's posted on a couple of our pages.
But it's been a lot of fun and I really do enjoy it.
You guys are awesome.
In the end, I just want to give this closing statement.
So the thing is, is Shakira, what are we going to do without her?
Her hips don't lie, but neither do we.
And I got to tell you the truth.
It is so important to realize we lost two things.
I think we lost the ability to laugh.
I'm not joking.
Like, we went from Howard Stern, like, putting literally retarded black midgets on shows and just enjoying them to all of a sudden we're trying to make them our president.
And I'm still laughing, but many people have forgot to continue to laugh at how ridiculous the world has been.
And I said many years ago, the future would be disabled.
We wouldn't stop until we started electing people with literal Down syndrome.
Just recently, some countries in the European Union did that.
So we've lost our course in terms of being kind to people versus being led by people.
There's a difference with having mercy and kindness and understanding that not that people can deserve life, but not deserve power.
And I think that's what we've lost: we've lost that.
So now we don't debate anymore.
We just mostly masturbate.
And to weird porn, mostly people do.
And we're very degenerated in our views to where we've lost the ability to just communicate.
We're never going to all get along.
And this bullshit, you know, churchianity of, you know, God just taught us to love, this idea that we live in a pluralistic society that always was like this, has made us actually more divided than ever.
We're unable to communicate.
And as much as I am actually retarded, and it's not just a self-deprecating show, I also do think a little.
You know, I cuss a little.
What words do I say?
I don't know.
But I can tell you that it is always of my desire to keep this show as the marijuana of right-wing politics.
And I've always said that.
It's just a gateway.
Smoke a little bit of slightly offensive.
Maybe you'll end up on heroin.
Sucks for you.
Or maybe you'll end up getting sober because as Drew liked to say tonight, you might have found yourself schizophrenic.
So this show stays neutral in terms of just having fun and laughing.
I'm a little more like Howard Stern is than he is today, like himself.
But I'm really appreciative to everyone who comes on the show.
I really, truly do.
As Drew knows, this show's sole intent and purpose is to fight homophobia.
I mean, it really was.
That's why we started it.
And we'll continue on.
Drew, last, like, not a closing statement, like a last statement to the audience.
So hopefully it was entertaining for the people at home.
And I actually love my life.
I'm very blessed.
I've got great friends, great family, great people around me.
And, you know, I absolutely love this.
This is great.
This whole, you know, it sucks that white people are being subjugated on a kind of mass civilizational scale, but it's quite fun to be a radical resisting that actually in some way.
And, you know, I just really appreciate all the wide people out there that are supportive and that are waking up and building what's going to keep growing as this larger and larger movement against the retarded opinions, people like Drew, where they can, you know, as you can see here, there really isn't that much substance behind any of this stuff.
It's totally propped up by this, you know, social game, the kind of institutional elite reinforcing it through their propaganda and so on.
