James Delingpole critiques the 1952 Markowitz portfolio theory as "deliberate bad advice" and a "Rand operative" scheme, arguing that the standard 60/40 split is suicidal during inflation when bonds and equities correlate. He asserts banks create money via loans, citing a 2014 Bank of England admission, while labeling global warming a scam and moon landings fakes. Delingpole warns of a financial "psyop" designed to extract wealth through fees and inflation, suggesting survival requires holding physical gold over paper assets amidst fears of US civil war and coordinated market manipulation. [Automatically generated summary]
Transcriber: CohereLabs/cohere-transcribe-03-2026, WAV2VEC2_ASR_BASE_960H, sat-12l-sm, script v26.04.01, and large-v3-turbo
|
Time
Text
Solid Gold Over Paper00:04:12
Yeah, welcome to the Delling Pod with me, James Dellingpole.
And I know I always say I'm excited about this week's special guest, but before we meet him, let's have a word from one of our sponsors.
You might have noticed that the gold and silver prices have been on a tear recently.
Silver prices, especially.
Silver's gone up like a rocket, and gold has been doing pretty well, too.
If you bought silver when I first started talking about it a few years ago, you would have quadrupled your investment by now.
If you'd bought gold, you'd certainly have doubled it.
And you're probably wondering, is it too late?
Can I still get into this market and make money?
Well, there are lots of reasons why you should have physical gold and silver as an insurance against the continued decline of fiat currency, the uncertainties in the conventional stock markets.
I would definitely, I mean, I'm not a financial advisor, I would definitely have some physical gold and silver.
And where do you buy this?
Well, I would go to the pure gold.
You can buy your gold and silver in the form of coins, for example gold sovereigns or Britannias or silver Britannias, or you can buy bars and you can either have it delivered to your home or you can have it stored for you in vaults in London or Switzerland or wherever you feel is best suits your need.
The Pure Gold Company offers a buyback guarantee, fair prices without delay, so if you've changed your mind at any moment you can trade in your gold or silver.
Call their brokers to discuss your various options.
They can advise you on tax issues.
Will silver go up again?
Yes, probably.
Will it go down again?
Yes, probably.
But I would say you should have some silver and gold in some form, as long as it's solid silver and solid gold, not paper gold.
And I would go to the PURE GOLD Company, the PURE GOLD Company.co.uk.
Forward slash.
James Dash, Delingpole.
Forward slash.
Are you recording?
Yeah, you're recording now, it seems to think.
Yeah, I put the VPN back on.
I think it might not like Russia, basically.
So that could be what it is.
Are you in Russia at the moment?
Yeah.
Are you?
Yeah.
That's interesting.
I was wondering about that yellow light.
Is that European, isn't it?
It's very.
It is Eastern European, isn't it?
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
What is that?
I don't know what it is that came with the house.
It's kind of, you know, what it is, whatever it is.
Right.
Okay.
I'll tell you what, but just as I'm finding it bloody difficult learning Russian.
Yeah, good luck.
It's, well, I would advise you to get a girlfriend, but that's not going to be good advice in your position.
No, my wife's not going to like that.
She really isn't.
She's not, you know, darling, I've got this proposal.
You know how my Russian.
Language studies are floundering.
Well, I've got this idea.
My mate Alex proposed it to me.
What do you think?
Yeah, yeah.
Well, first of all, for me, but that was a long time ago.
So she'll be trying to find out where you live and then she'll discover that you're in Russia.
Bastard, bastard.
Where are you in Russia?
I'm in a place called Dimitrov, which is outside Moscow.
And I would actually be in the UK now, but my wife has washed my passport.
So until I get a new passport, I'm stuck here basically.
Right.
Okay.
Well, maybe we can talk about a bit more about Russia later on.
But I wanted to, yes, we got interrupted because of your crappy internet or the Russian VPN or something.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Passport Washed In Dimitrov00:14:24
I sometimes look at the financial pages of newspapers and look at the financial advice that their financial experts are giving.
And I'm thinking, if you want the readers to lose money, then you're really helping them with some top advice.
So I remember I was looking at the Telegraph a few months ago, and it was saying how, yeah, if you want to get exposed to the gold market, and gold may go down, but if you want to get exposed to it, probably the easiest way is to buy some ETFs.
And you're thinking, no, no.
I know that, and I'm not a financial advisor.
So you've got this column in a newspaper, and you're telling people to buy.
Paper gold.
Yeah, there's a lot of bad advice given, and we're kind of the big one, the really big one, is you need to mix low return debt into high return debt.
That's what I was getting at.
That a balanced portfolio, you should have.
I mean, I know this.
I've read it loads of times.
You should have some bonds as well as part of the mix.
Yeah.
But you're saying that bonds were never worth.
Has there ever been a time where bonds were never ever going to work?
It really makes no sense whatsoever.
So.
The sort of compound return on equity is roughly speaking 10, 11% every year, compounded sort of forever.
And the equivalent number for bonds is 3%.
So you ask the question, why would you, you know, how much of the 11% return equity would you give up for 3% return bonds?
And the answer has to be nothing.
I would just want all equity.
And it's so blindingly obvious when you see it and then you.
You see obvious examples of it, like Berkshire Hathaway made 6 million percent returns just investing essentially in equity.
You begin to wonder why on earth was this whole crazy idea of mixing in garbage bonds, where did it come from, essentially?
And I started to figure out where it came from.
And like you said, it's deliberate bad advice.
And it was born in 1952 by a guy from a guy called Markowitz, who it then turns out was a Rand operative.
He worked in Rand.
And as soon as he joined Rand in 1952, he came up with this theory.
Of an efficient portfolio, which mixes in this garbage, essentially debt, with equity.
And as you said, it causes tremendous pain to your final outcome as a pensioner.
So you're taking away about 4% of return by coming up with this crazy mix.
And as you said, the mix is absolutely standard.
Every asset management company, basically anywhere in the world, will tell you you want to mix your equity with debt.
So 60, 40.
Yes.
Has there ever been a time where that advice, I mean, even a sort of two or three year period where that advice might have been good?
I think I missed it.
Say when during one of the periodic crashes of the stock market.
Yeah, there never really has been any excuse over any extended period of time to ever have debt.
So it kind of worked.
It gave low, but sort of.
Vaguely positive returns when inflation was coming down and interest rates were going down together.
So, from the sort of 1970s right the way through until about 2020, it did deliver anemic but positive returns through that period.
But then, as soon as you get like a recovery in inflation in 2022, this bond just basically collapses.
And if you imagine now there's going to be high inflation, it's going to keep collapsing.
So Yes, there's a period where it gives you okay.
I'm talking like sevenfold less than equity over some period of time from the 70s to 2021 or something.
It worked roughly, but then that's it.
Now it's collapsing again with inflation reappearing.
And let me guess that if you look in economics textbooks and stuff, you'll find that this guy, Markovitz, is hailed as a kind of Yeah, he of course got a Nobel Prize.
Why would he?
Oh, I was so going to guess that.
He got a Nobel Prize.
Yeah.
And of course, his theory became the science immediately it came out.
I mean, he never managed money or anything until he came out with this thing in 1952 at Rand.
And as soon as he came out with it, it became completely the science.
And you had to take the knee.
Why did I mean, I sort of know the answer to this question, but I mean, you would have thought, wouldn't you, that fund managers would be in the business of maximizing returns for their clients and that one of them would have done the maths and figured what you've figured that bonds are just basically junk.
There's no point going there.
But we're talking about the entire financial industry with regards to fund management.
Yeah, I mean, no, I mean, a lot of people have figured it out.
And, you know, of course, all the uber wealthy don't touch government bonds.
If you pull up a Berkshire Hathaway balance sheet, you won't find 40% of junk debt in there.
Neither, I suspect, if you look at the personal ownership of Bloomberg or Hahn or any of these other guys, will you find tons of this garbage debt in there.
So people have figured it out.
But it's only for some reason, few have actually spoken out about it.
And actually, funnily enough, A guy you probably know, Tim Price, who actually runs a fund, he wrote a blog quite recently, also exactly the same as the things I've been saying, saying the whole Markovitz thing was crazy.
But those people are so few and far between.
I think that, to be fair, is the only one of those I've seen that completely calls it out.
I think Tim's fund's been doing quite well of late.
It's been doing very well, yeah.
Yeah.
Because it's very heavily exposed to.
Gold and silver and gold and silver miners.
Yeah.
And like you said, his job is to deliver absolute returns to people.
He's not fiddling around matching a benchmark or having a balanced portfolio.
His job is to generate returns.
So he only goes into things that will generate returns.
Therefore, he's in what he's in now.
And again, that's why you would never have debt.
In the interests of transparency, I should point out that I do actually have shares in.
In funds in Tim's company.
But I mean, there was a phase, quite a long phase, where I was going, Tim, why is your fund doing absolutely sod all?
And he says, Look, here's the data I'm using, and here's this chap talking about what's going to happen to gold and silver.
And I was thinking, Well, yeah, it does sound like a good case.
And it was just a question of timing, isn't it?
You just, just, yeah, I mean, the thing of being a value investor is you're always, until you're not, you're always underperforming because you're not chasing the trend.
And everyone chasing the trend is pointing their finger at you, saying, you know, look at you, you're underperforming, you're useless.
And you really have to have some real courage to sweat through those periods until value actually comes back, which it has done for Tim.
And as you said, this fund, I think, is up 76% in a year or something.
So.
Which isn't bad, is it?
So, during the sort of the doldrums period, my little brother, whose investment strategy is completely the opposite of mine, he basically put all his, well, some of his money into a kind of a tracker fund, which tracked, I think, the.
The SP 500.
And of course, for a long period, that was just, that went gangbusters because of the, of Nvidia, Facebook, what was about seven companies with them?
Yeah.
Which were pulling everything else up by their bootstraps.
Yeah.
But actually, the growth, if you didn't count the big seven, was negligible.
Yeah.
But I mean, in defense of your little brother, that's the sort of Warren Buffett strategy of, A long time holding of 90% of your savings in an SP 500 index and 10% in cash and bonds.
And that's his advice.
And it really works over time.
If you've got the patience for it, that's a good thing.
Oh, my little brother is worth considerably more than me.
So I'm not dissing him.
I'm just, I'm more kind of a gangster investor.
Yeah.
Gangster investor.
But the problem would be I'm also a gangster investor, but I always back calculate, I back solve.
Okay, I've been a gangster.
How did it work out?
Even in cases where it's worked out really well.
If you then add how much cash you've had sitting in the sidelines and one or two cock ups along the way, very, very tough to beat just holding the index.
And it's literally impossible to beat holding Berkshire Hathaway.
That is an unbeatable, over a long period of time, that is an unbeatable investment.
So why don't we all do that?
Well, I think I will be doing that, but I've got to wait for the time to be right.
There's no point in doing it now in this market to go in.
But I've decided for myself when there's a correction, which I think there will be, I will actually go quite big into Berkshire Hathaway.
And then I'm kind of, my gangster activities will be severely curtailed from there on in, I think.
Can you, can you, can retail investors like you and me and our listeners, can you just buy a box?
There's an A share, which is about $800,000, which is from the original, whatever it was, dollar stock.
But there's a B share, which is about 450.
So that's doable on the B share.
And that has returned, Berkshire Hathaway has returned 19.7% compounded annually since 1965 to 2025.
It is literally so far out of the park.
And a lot of people say, well, my financial advisor never mentions this.
I said, well, obviously they wouldn't do that because the whole of our useless asset management industry is dead.
If people actually understood they could get.
That kind of return without paying ludicrous fees to sort of average people.
So the minimum entry is 450,000.
It's a share.
No, no, sorry.
It's just a share.
One of the shares, the Class A share, is cost a fortune.
You can sort of forget about that.
It's three quarters of a million.
But there's a B share, which is $450 odd.
So you can buy the B share and that's it.
You're in.
Oh, sorry.
$450.
Yeah.
I thought you meant $450,000.
No, no, no.
There's a, there's a, there's a, um, A sort of for the people kind of be share, which is accessible.
And how will you know when to move into that one?
Yeah, I mean, for me, I'm looking at the whole market and it's hard.
I mean, it's hard to get an absolute handle on how overvalued it is, but kind of everything I can see now looks like overvalued.
It doesn't mean to say it won't go up more.
We're slightly below the 2000 valuation sort of multiples.
So it can still go up.
To 2000 and beyond.
But really, from where you are now, every likelihood it'll go down.
So, you know, I'm looking for sort of quite a few percent down before I would buy Berkshire Hathaway.
Right, right.
Because am I right in thinking that your sort of research into that 1952 thing has caused a sort of light bulb to go off in your head?
And you're thinking, well, you can advise people not to get completely.
Sideswiped by the coming financial horror?
Yeah, I think so.
I think it's really avoiding two mistakes.
One of the mistakes is getting into debt and listening to that 60 40, particularly in a period of high inflation, a suicidal advice to take 40% of your portfolio into government debt, especially the way they're borrowing now.
It's completely crazy.
And then the other thing I realized is also the terrible drag that people get from these financial products they've been sold over the years by expensive asset managers who underperform the benchmark.
If Dick has an indexed product which is cheap, that's the right way to go.
I actually.
No, it's not Dick.
No, different brother.
Oh, different brother.
Financial Assets Inflate Away00:12:07
Okay.
Yeah, it's the finance brother, the entrepreneur genius brother.
Okay, good.
Yeah.
So if he's invested in a low cost index, that's the way to go.
But most of us have invested in all kinds of branded funds, you know, the Invesco Global Health Fund or the Fidelity something.
So you're paying a percentage, is that right?
You're paying, it depends on what it is, but a lot of those things.
I've just found one that I'm in.
This is brilliant.
It charges one and a half percent, but then it's got other costs.
So you're 1.8 percent in the hole every year.
And then it manages to massively underperform.
So even the benchmark, which is quite weak, is about seven percent, but these guys manage to perform two percent after these costs.
So you're underperforming five percent a year.
Paying for the privilege and the Invesco just lets this garbage go on and on and on for years.
It's not one year of underperformance.
This fund manager's been underperforming for a decade and nobody stops it.
Right.
So you're going to be getting out of that.
We all have stuff like that in there, basically, that you should just get out of and swap into the index and stop burning money on fees for poor performance.
No.
Right.
And how much, what's the real inflation rate at the moment?
How much do you need to be getting returns before you can even actually get out of the red?
Well, I think the official number is still, I mean, I've been looking at the US, it's still officially 2.5%.
But inflation is a very tricky thing because you've got inflation all over the place all the time.
So things like financial assets inflate.
I mean, when they pump a lot of money in, they're actually inflating the value of those financial assets.
But that doesn't count.
As inflation.
So even the bit that just counts for goods and services, even that I think is horribly understated.
And it's probably closer to sort of 8%, 9% is probably more realistic level of inflation.
I think one can tell from experiences like I don't eat out very much, but when I'm looking to sort of go out with somebody around where I live, that tends to entail going to a country pub, possibly a country pub with vague gastro pretensions.
And I normally go for the steak, especially, especially now, I realized that mince, see, if you go for the burger, the, the mince is quite adulterated these days, isn't it?
It's not, it's not pure ground mint, 100% pure minced beef.
It's got sort of filler and stuff.
But anyway, the, the, the cost of a steak, of a sirloin steak, which is the only way, either a sirloin or a ribeye, which sometimes they forbid your food rump, which I think is a waste of time.
But you're talking, you're, you're paying around 30 quid for a cheap.
Well, maybe more.
Maybe it's gone up since I haven't been to a restaurant for a few months.
But that's an example.
I'm very glad I haven't got any children in the private education system.
That's horrific.
I don't know.
You've got to be an oligarch basically now to be able to afford that.
Yeah, I couldn't afford it now.
Yes.
So I think you probably agree with me that we've got massive pain.
Just around the corner.
I mean, the knock on effects of this fake war in Iran and these fake shenanigans over the Strait of Hormuz, that's going to cause food price inflation like you wouldn't believe, and also oil price inflation restrictions.
Tell me what you think is coming.
Well, I mean, I'm not an economist, but I did spend quite a bit of time reading this Ray Dalio book, Changing World Order.
And thinking about the things he had there, actually recreated some of the charts he had in there.
And his view of things, which makes a lot of sense, is the debt levels we have now are completely unsustainable.
And, you know, one, well, there's a couple of painful ways of dealing with it.
One is you actually.
Killing everybody.
Killing everybody.
Well, that's always one way.
That's the sort of black adder of the old lady's advice.
Sorry, I interrupted you.
Yeah.
No, I mean, one way is to balance the budget and start repaying things.
And there's like no way Washington or London are going to do anything like that.
The other way is to have like a proper default and say, look, we've totally cocked up.
Let's like restructure this in time and, you know, write some off and spread the rest out over 100 years maturity.
And that's not going to happen.
So the only thing left is just to inflate away the nominal value of the debt.
And he's pretty convinced that they're going to do that.
And they kind of are doing it.
Again, I haven't looked at all the details of this Iran adventure, but if you've just sanctioned the bejeez out of your basically number one oil producer, Russia, you wouldn't then go and destroy the only other remaining source of oil supply unless you were constraining that supply deliberately, basically.
Unless it was deliberate, exactly.
It is all planned.
And so, how will that help them deal with what they want?
So, they want to inflate away.
The debt.
How will restricting the oil supplies do that?
Because the GDP will just go up in terms of inflated nominal dollars.
So your sort of GDP figure keeps going up really just because of inflation.
But your debt is fixed.
You know, if it's a 20 year bond, that's a 20 year bond and that you're going to get back your principal in 20 years.
So that thing stays fixed.
The sort of GDP numbers, the debt number stays fixed while your GDP, And everything else, which is in nominal terms, keeps going up, basically.
That's the way to do it.
Right.
So everything's going to get much, much more expensive.
But in terms of our standards of living, they're going to plummet, aren't they?
Well, again, it's always winners and losers.
But the guys on fixed salary are going to really struggle.
If you've got financial assets, you can basically just try and keep ahead of the curve and don't get caught in nominal.
Dollar or pound assets that are going to get devalued by inflation.
So try and get ahead of that into commodities.
Like you said, the gold and silver thing, the price value portfolio, things like that will hopefully stay a nose ahead of the inflation and you'll be protected.
Well, yeah.
Apart from gold and silver, what else is there?
You have, well, it's a good question.
Yeah, now, well, that's already been all over the place.
Coffee and cocoa have been crazy up and crazy down.
But I've actually gone kind of full on.
Like you said, gangster style and gone short the whole SP.
Actually, I went short triple Q, which is the high tech end of it, which is a bit more risky essentially, but I think that could do okay.
But the other way How do you place it?
I mean, tell me like I'm an idiot, which I am.
How would one go about placing that short?
There's an ETF you can just buy, it's called ProShares.
Triple Q short, and they have so for every unit the triple Q goes down, this thing goes up one.
It's a perfect mirror image.
I think they have an ultra short, which goes up two for every unit the thing goes down, which is really racy.
So, yeah, you can buy these shares, you can buy them like shares, they're ETFs.
Can you?
Pro shares, triple Q short.
That sounds fun.
Yeah.
How's it been doing?
I'm not enjoying it now because I'm on red ink on paper.
So, yeah.
But as we said earlier, there's a lot of pain before you get your game.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I'm certainly feeling the pain on this.
And you can also short treasuries with those things.
So there's a pro shares short treasuries, which you can buy as a share.
And one of the things we didn't say too much on the Markovitz thing is one of the big things that's changed.
I mean, The basis of his thing was complete garbage, but one of the founding principles of it was bonds offset equity.
So if equity goes down, bonds go up.
But that has now completely broken down.
And those two things are moving together.
So the correlation of those things is positive now, and it has been for quite a few years.
So you also get no protection from that portfolio anyway.
So, you know, in the old days, it would have been insane to short, you know, to go short triple Q and to go short.
Treasuries that make no sense whatsoever because they're supposed to move in opposite directions.
But now they're moving together.
You can basically make a trade like that and it kind of makes sense.
I've read various informed voices on Twitter saying, watch the Japanese bond market.
Is that a harbinger?
I don't know, to be honest.
The only thing I know about Japan is they have such high.
Debt to GDP levels because their pension system is captured.
Essentially, they're sort of more or less forced, or they, for whatever reason, they just swallow all this government debt, which again, actually, is a spin off of the Markovitz theory is that as well as us having low returns, you also create this huge captive pool of people who have to swallow debt, government debt, basically.
That's the other side of the coin that, you know, as well as depressing our returns.
That theory also creates captive demand for government debt.
So, the government can keep throwing out these gilts and T-bills and bonds and what have you, and pension funds will keep swallowing it up because of Markovits and other silly theories.
So, and I think the Japanese, I'm not sure, but I think the Japanese is a bit of an extreme example of that, where they can get away with 250% debt to GDP because the whole pension system is rigged in that way that they're always going to be eating government debt, basically.
How bad?
You're sort of pretty much down the rabbit hole with me.
There probably aren't many areas that we.
Are there any we disagree on even?
I wouldn't think so.
There's certain topics I don't look at because I'm focusing a bit on my stuff, but I take your word for whatever it is.
Oh, yeah.
I think probably you don't go into the realm of kind of the satanic realm and mothers of darkness and adrenochrome and 12 year old rituals and.
That stuff, which I read with interest.
I don't investigate.
I think that's.
Nobel Prize For Anaphylaxis00:02:01
I was thinking, by the way, earlier, when you mentioned obviously that Markovitz won a Nobel Prize for economics, I'm presuming.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
To be fair, it was quite a bit after he came up with his theory, but he did get one.
Well, they get their gold, don't they?
I was trying to think of Nobel Prize winners who actually deserved it, who actually did the thing that.
That we expect Nobel Prize winners to do but don't, which is advance the cause of knowledge for our benefit.
And I was thinking the only example I can think of, maybe you can think of others, is Charles Richer, who won the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1913 for his work on anaphylaxis.
Not vaccines, no.
No, no.
Well, I mean, essentially, I did a A podcast where we talked about this on my last podcast with Mike Eden, but really we were referring back to our friend Sasha LaTipova, who it's a great podcast.
She talked about this, about how this is the smoking gun which shows that they, with a capital T, have always known about the damage.
Well, certainly since 1913, have known about the damage done by vaccines because it causes.
And it induces anaphylaxis, especially if you penetrate the skin one week and then within a fortnight you do it again and you inject these proteins into the animal protein into the system.
Your body just does not like it.
And you've got a lifetime, at best, a lifetime allergy, at worst, a kind of ticking time bomb.
Yeah, I don't know.
I can't think of off the top of my head of anyone that's got one of these things who deserved it.
NATO Peace And Scams00:06:35
Oh, no, actually, there's one more.
Do you remember Barack Obama, that statesman?
He won a peace prize, I think.
He was a great guy.
Whatever happened to him?
Yeah.
I don't know how many wars he was involved in launching, but plenty.
Well, it's funny, isn't it?
I remember a time where I was going, look at President Trump, peaceful President Trump.
He's a peacemaker.
He's not like all the other bad presidents.
Yeah, yeah.
He goes and sees Rocket Man and makes peace with North Korea and he doesn't want war with Russia.
And now look at him.
Yeah, no, we were conned to good and proper there because I remember he gave a speech.
I called it Candidate Trump.
I don't remember the exact year, but it was brilliant.
It was the thing where he said, I'm going to clean out all the warmongers.
All they can do is get us into wars, they can never get us out.
All the generals, all the corrupt defense contractors, they're all going to get cleaned out of Washington.
And I'm like you, I'm sort of air fist pumping and like, let's go.
And here we are.
Here we are years later.
He's very good at telling you what you want to hear.
Exactly what you want to hear.
I find it fascinating to think, to look back on my journey, my changing understanding of the world.
I was thinking, I remember doing that podcast with Tobes, with Toby Young, London Calling.
And I remember when.
Global warming is a massive con.
There was no evidence whatsoever that.
Man-made climate change is a problem that is going to kill us, that we need to amend our lifestyle in order to deal with it.
It's a non-existent problem.
But how do you explain this stuff to your normie friends?
Well, I've just brought out the revised edition of my 2012 classic book, Watermelons, which captures the story of how some really nasty people decided to invent the global warming scare in order to fleece you.
To take away your freedoms, to take away your land.
It's a shocking story.
I wrote it, as I say, in 2011, actually, the first edition came out.
And it's a snapshot of a particular era.
The era when the people behind the climate change scam got caught red-handed, tinkering with the data, torturing till it screamed, in a scandal that I helped christen ClimateGate.
So I give you the background to.
to the skullduggery that went on in these seats of learning where these supposed experts were informing us, we've got to act now.
I rumbled their scam.
I then asked the question, okay, if it is a scam, who's doing this and why?
It's a good story.
I've kept the original book pretty much as is, but I've written two new chapters, one at the beginning and one at the end, explaining how it's even worse than we thought.
I think it still stands out.
I think it's a good read.
Obviously I'm biased, but I'd recommend it.
You can buy it from jamesdellingpole.co.uk forward slash shop.
You'll probably find that one.
Just go to my website and look for it, jamesdellingpole.co.uk.
And I hope it helps keep you informed and gives you the material you need to bring round all those people who are still persuaded that, oh, it's a disaster.
We must amend our ways and appease the gods, appease Mother Gaia.
There we go.
It's a scam.
I find it fascinating to think, to look back on my journey, my changing understanding of the world.
I was thinking, I remember doing that podcast with Toby Young, London Calling.
And I remember when Trump first got in, his first term, or when he was about to get in.
And Toby was, as usual, outlining the normie position, the normie on D on this President Trump.
And one of the things he used against Trump, he says, You realize that Trump is very anti NATO.
He wants to pull America out of NATO.
And this was just in my transitional phase where I was thinking, oh, well, that might be a point against him because obviously NATO has kept the peace.
All these lines were sold.
Yeah, like NATO, it's been the bulwark against the Soviet menace for generations.
It saved us from.
And now one realizes it's just another satanic organization designed to do the cabal's bidding and that Mark Rutter is steeped in adrenochrome and probably child sacrifice.
I don't know, but I would guess.
As they all are.
Yeah.
Yeah.
So, um, uh, Are you going to tell me a bit about Russia?
You go there a lot.
Yeah.
It helps you can speak the language.
Yeah.
What do you do there?
I mean, I'm mainly just, I'm now doing this activity with sort of cleaning up people's pensions, but also I've got a bit of consultancy stuff here going on, but for most part, My old business, which was representing Western investors in the equity markets, completely dead, of course, since 2022.
So, you know, I get to do dissident things and what have you instead.
So, what's so you're going to this is your new kind of business plan.
You're going to help people clean up their pensions, and they'll come, they'll contact you and they'll say, Hi, Alex.
I was quite interested in what you said.
Navigating Pension Minefields00:10:01
On that podcast, you sound like you know what you're doing.
I don't know.
Can you help me?
That sort of thing.
I think, yeah.
And I think you're not allowed to make sort of promises of gains, but I've run some people through the process and it's been very big gains in what they're returning now.
So, in reality, a lot of people are in low single digits on pension returns, whereas they should be getting a sort of market index, you know, 10%, 11% kind of level.
So, they're massively underperforming because of that bad advice and because they've been sold a lot of products that underperform.
And if you just fix those two things, you can get back to, you know, a good index return with low stroke, no cost.
And it's going to make a big difference.
Personally, are you holding lots of cash right now?
I have cash now.
I kind of committed a sin of selling gold that I bought in 2020.
And so I have cash, but.
I'm not going to put it into regular.
I mean, like I said, I like Berkshire Hathaway, but I don't like it when the SP is at 6,000, whatever it is.
So I'm going to wait for that thing to really go down before going into it.
Will it be very sudden when it happens?
Well, judging by 2008, it does actually just start to grind down.
I think I thought it was going to start to grind down, but it just stopped.
It will grind for, you know, like six months, seven months, nine months based on 2008.
And then you just get a sudden, you know, culmination where people just give up and panic selling.
So, yeah, it's kind of gradual and sudden based on the last big correction.
Right.
And isn't there a danger if you have your money in cash?
What if the banks go down and they do that thing where they.
I had a debate with some people about this great taking.
And for me, the great taking is happening all the time.
The whole financial system is a taking mechanism.
And again, it goes back to sort of Markovits and that the people.
Being induced to hold this garbage government debt are going to take a massive haircut through inflation.
So they've been sort of taken from the people handing money to asset managers to do kind of nothing with for one and a half percent a year are getting taken to the cleaners as well all the time.
And I'm getting to the point where I'm pretty sure a good portion of these market rallies and crashes, I'm pretty sure there's a bit of psyop somewhere in the background.
So People are being taken from again.
It's meant to be the shoeshine boy who's the last buyer in.
You sell to the shoeshine boy.
So he gets clobbered as he sells at the bottom in a panic where the smart money buys in again.
So I'm wondering if that's not a great taking thing happening as well.
So the whole financial market is about the great taking of like from the under or ill informed to the.
To the smarter guys, basically, or the guys that understand how the system works.
So I'm a little bit skeptical that they would break that machine.
I think the machine works well at sort of consolidating wealth, increasing wealth for the few, and taking wealth from the many.
So why would you break it by doing something as crude as like smashing a custody arrangement and taking all of those segregated assets out?
Of a brokerage and just taking them out as bankruptcy.
It's not impossible, but I've been through a brokerage bankruptcy in Sweden.
My broker basically went bust, and the next day, all my assets were in a different brokerage.
And I think all I noticed was a different logo, and that was it.
I actually had the same person handling my account, the same account number.
It was like nothing happened.
So, having been through it once and seen that, yeah, you can have a bankruptcy and client assets are segregated and safe.
You know, I'm a bit more relaxed about that outcome, but I can't say it won't happen.
Right.
Okay.
So, well, let's.
I mean, just because they can do something doesn't mean they will.
They like to dot all their I's and cross all their T's.
They love having multiple options, don't they, to screw us over?
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, I did speak to someone who was involved in that great taking, and he was pretty clear that.
Somewhere in the US, they tried to push a bit of legislation, exactly that, like putting those sort of minefields into the law that we can actually take this stuff out as part of bankruptcy, even though it's segregated assets.
And when someone pushed against it and said, no, no, you can't have this in law, apparently there was like a huge explosion.
These senators said, no, no, no, that stuff stays in the law.
This is non negotiable.
So there was, at least from that guy, a feeling that there was definitely ill intent and it was very.
It's coming from on high that this stuff goes into law, and it's like you said, a minefield for the future that they can pull the trigger whenever they want, basically.
They are so nakedly evil.
I think increasingly so as well.
I mean, have you noticed the big trades that have been placed on things like oil?
Yeah.
With using clearly insider information.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I mean, I saw that during COVID.
I mean, some people have done a lot of stuff about this, but I looked at one thing, which was Peloton.
And I don't know if you remember Peloton is.
It was a sort of yuppie product that you sit on a bike, which you have at home, an exercise bike, and you're hooked up through a screen to a personal trainer who's like yelling at you, you know, keep the RPM up, you know, stand up, sprint, sit down.
Bastard.
Yep.
Yeah.
And I, and you know what?
They sort of, a bunch of people I won't mention, they bought into this thing, which was kind of a duff business.
Then they did the lockdowns and closed down all the gyms.
This thing kind of triples.
They all get out and it basically goes back to zero.
And it's like, did they know that there were going to be lockdowns that they closed the gyms down in?
So, you know, you have to wonder.
Yeah.
Yeah.
It seems to me that there is very little morality abroad.
I mean, I actually, for example, I refuse to buy any defense shares.
Defense.
Ludicrous word.
Attack, attack chest.
Um, but just, just because I thought, yeah, I know you're going to go up.
I know it's a one way bet, but I don't want to be part of the military industrial complex.
Yeah, yeah.
But most people, I think, are not, I mean, I'm not saying I'm Mr. Morality.
Most people seem not to, isn't this, isn't this what happens in a, in a collapsing civilization where People just get more and more fly in their attitude towards right and wrong.
I think that's right.
Again, it's the Sir John Glob view of life, isn't it?
The fate of empires that at the end there's no morality and that's why it collapses.
I mean, Ray Dalio is all about economics, but Glob is all about spirituality, saying once it's gone, then the whole thing really collapses.
So I think you're right.
And for that reason, but I also don't want to be at the stage of saying, well, I can't do anything in the system because it's evil and therefore I must completely opt out of it.
I'm sort of like, I want to sort of navigate my way through it, which is why I'm trying to get people to fix their pensions so that they can at least have some more financial independence than they would have otherwise.
I think we have to work within the system.
I think that the homesteaders, I look at what the sort of lifestyle on offer, and I'm not sure that's for me, basically.
I don't want to be a complete opt out and, you know, like rummaging for root vegetables, you know, in my garden kind of thing all the time.
Although I was talking to somebody about this yesterday, my friend Izzy, and she'd been doing some reading up on the when it went sour in Greece.
And She said that the urban Greeks were rummaging around in dustbins, whereas the rural Greeks, at least they knew that they could forage.
So don't knock foraging.
But I know what you mean.
I look at Owen Benjamin and I think it's fantastic that you are on your farm with your lovely cattle and your goats and your kids roaming free and learning Latin and Greek and playing the piccolo and whatever they're doing.
But America is a big country where there's space to do that.
I mean, I live in the countries, you know, and I see it.
Money Theory Gets Made Up00:09:10
I see all these kind of new developments encroaching on everything.
It's really quite hard to find your own private Idaho.
In, well, certainly in the UK.
Yeah.
And for me, it's more, I still want to consume things that the system produces at some point.
So I still will need to and want to go on a flight.
So I need fiat to pay for my flight.
You know, if I'm here drinking my milk.
Jelly and yelly.
Oh, no, sorry.
No, if I'm eating my chicken's eggs and drinking my cow's milk, I'm never going to have the money to go on a flight somewhere.
So.
Surely that they're going to be closing down.
Flights across the board soon, aren't they?
Well, it's been sort of threatened for a long time, hasn't it?
I mean, we saw all that stuff during COVID, of course, and all these threats and the actual reality of shutting down short haul flights as well.
Yeah, they'll make them more difficult, but if you have money, everything's possible, always has been, right?
So it could be a crisis.
You've just got to get used to flying private jets.
Well, I think that's too much beyond my budget, but yeah, it won't be cheap stuff anymore.
Well, you're no financial advisor if you can't bring people returns that can pay for their private jet.
Well, luckily, I'm advising on very simple things that don't require huge amounts of financial engineering.
So, you're a physicist, aren't you?
Yeah.
I mean, that's what your brain does.
You actually.
So, I can ask you how much of physics is total made up bollocks?
Invented by occultists like Isaac Newton.
Yeah.
Towards the end, it gets very made up.
I don't remember much about it, but I remember we did these things quarks and bosons, and then you attribute these things to them, like I can't remember now even what it was colors and spin.
They're like horns.
Yeah, like horns.
Completely theoretical.
And, you know, you can't see or touch or smell any of that stuff.
So it does become.
Very abstract when you get into all of those things.
I can't even remember some of the particles and the things that we gave them as attributes, but it was all very, very out there.
So hard to say, you know.
I'll tell you why I ask you.
Because I've just been, I did a post recently noting politely that the various moon missions were just total bollocks.
I saw that.
Yeah.
And anyone with half a brain could, could see this.
And, um, most people going, yeah, you're right.
It's just like, duh.
And I, I, I said, look, we, we, we have different ways into it.
Some of us have a, a kind of verbal, verbal understanding of the world.
And, and, and so for me, it was the testimony of the, it was the press conference held by the, the astronauts after their landing.
These were not men who'd been, been in, in space.
And you could tell by the various verbal, Ticks and formulations that they had not been there.
And for other people, it's stuff like the lighting of the photographs, the twin sources of light.
And for some people, it's stuff like the amount of jet fuel you would need to.
Even Werner von Braun said this, didn't he?
And I think Werner von Braun probably knew a bit about rocket science.
I mean, he was the preeminent rocket scientist.
And he said there's no way that a rocket could carry enough fuel to take you to space, and so on and so forth.
But what I found fascinating was that three or four people were just spamming the comments with this reams of kind of sciencey sounding information.
And I was looking at this stuff and going, but how is any of us equipped to understand?
What you're doing is you're repeating stuff that other scientists have said, but they're repeating what previous scientists have said.
It.
We have no way of verifying this information or even being able to trust it because it's just sciencey science.
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah, I don't know.
I wouldn't go into a long thread of debating on a substack comment about the truth of something.
I don't know why people write all those things.
It's a bit confusing.
You've asked the question that I think needs to be asked because this is my next piece I'm going to write.
Why do they do it?
I don't think they're genuine.
I think that they are there.
I think every, every topic in conspiracy realm, especially the closer you are to the target, has this, has these sort of guard trolls whose assignation is to protect this particular subject.
I mean, actually, I'm even, I'm even suspicious of my, my lovely friend, germ warfare on the subject of Of chemtrails.
It's almost like Germ has been given the job of defending the, yes, they're contrails and it comes from jet fuel.
That doesn't bollocks.
It's just.
I've stayed out of that.
But there is one other big theory that we could do now, which is the theory of money, which I also found out was complete BS in the textbooks.
Tell me about the theory of money.
Yeah, the theory of money as it's taught is essentially that.
Somebody comes to a bank with a deposit, and the bank then lends that deposit on in the form of a loan.
And that's how the whole system works.
And that loan turns into another deposit.
So that's fractional sort of reserve banking.
And it's a theory of intermediation where the bank basically takes the deposit and hands out the loan.
Now, in 2014, the Bank of England, for some weird reason, admitted I mean, literally, it says this in black and white.
The textbook teaching of the theory of money creation in textbooks is utter baloney.
And I kind of always knew it was.
And it was a sort of hallelujah moment for me that the Bank of England actually admits this.
But the way they describe it is the first step in that process is actually the bank gives a loan to somebody, it lends somebody money.
And at that point, it creates the corresponding deposit in its accounting records.
So if there's any accountants out there, it's a debit.
Loan, credit, deposit.
That's the point at which money is created.
So the deposit is created from the loan and not the other way around.
And it's a complete sort of inversion of the way we think banking works.
And Professor Werner's been on about this for a long time.
But the Bank of England note is so crystal clear and it's so unequivocal that it says the textbook teaching of this is wrong.
And I'm like, well, listen, the guys that wrote the textbook are pretty smart.
It's sort of Stanley Fisher, who was a brilliant economist.
How do they get this wrong?
And they realize, well, it's probably not.
Wrong as such.
It's like disinformation to make it confusing and wrong.
They would have known the same as in that Bank of England document that the deposit is created from the loan and not the other way around.
And that was a big moment.
You're accusing the textbook writers of acting in bad faith.
Yeah, absolutely.
That was the exception.
Yeah.
I think that this is one of the things that one realizes after a time, if one is an honest broker, that.
All these people, it's not just a few wrong ones.
They are all part of this corrupt system of lies.
And that's the deal.
In exchange for lying and giving out misinformation and disinformation, you are rewarded by the system.
And that is your job to lie.
And it applies across the board from environmental science to accounting to.
Banking to you name it.
You name it.
Food science.
Markets As Psyop Strategy00:04:36
Okay.
I'll bet.
Who was the guy who.
Ansel Keyes.
Did he get a Nobel Prize?
Who's that one?
I don't know him.
Ansel Keyes.
Well, he was the guy who got everyone onto the idea of cholesterol and fat being a problem.
Okay, yeah, yeah, yeah.
You think now.
Apparently, my friend Izzy again was telling me about this over lunch yesterday that she'd been reading Father Paesias, or Saint Paesias, as he is now, he was an Athenite monk and visionary.
And he's written about all sorts of things, including Revelation and the end times and how bad it's going to be.
And he reckons in his book.
The tribulation is going to be three and a half years.
So you've got three and a half, which is quite a long time to survive, I'd say.
And I can't remember how it came up, but apparently the real thing that becomes a problem during periods of starvation, the things that's really hard to get hold of is fat, your fats, because fats don't store very well.
I mean, even olive oil doesn't keep more than what, a year and a half, two years, or something like that.
And how do you get your access to your?
To your fat.
And so, isn't it interesting that as early as the 1950s, they were selling fat, which is essential to life and health, as this bad thing, and persuading everyone to move into low fat and compensating for that by adding more sugar to give the food its flavor instead?
All these things.
And the whole war on meat.
The war on meat has been a long term.
Strategy to make us all unhealthy.
Yeah, I never pay any attention to those things.
So I just, but yeah, I can imagine a lot of people have been influenced into bad choices.
Or, like taking their vaccines so that their baby doesn't get measles.
Yeah.
Because measles is a killer, right?
Terrible.
Well, I think looking back at that vaccine thing is the reason I started to think a lot of the financial market stuff is psyop.
Because if you can induce people, young, healthy people, to go and screw up their immune system for no good reason to get an mRNA shot, they have that machinery.
So, why not use it to make sort of endless amounts of money?
Herding people into things that you want to sell out of.
So, sell them garbage at the top and then herd them out of it, scare them out of equities and buy them back at the bottom.
It's not a crazy idea that they would use the same kind of psyops to herd people in and out of the equity market.
No, it's interesting you say that, that although coercion is open to them because they've got a monopoly of violence near enough, they.
Their belief system, and people like Ronald Bernard have talked about this.
Ronald Bernard, who was a bagman for the cabal and sort of got an inside track on how they think, they seem to operate ideally by requiring us to consent to all the bad stuff that they're doing to us.
So you can, in most cases, you can refuse the vaccine.
You could.
And you can choose where you invest your money, theoretically, although it's not an informed choice because you've been misinformed.
But it seems to get them off the hook in their warp belief system if they can let us commit suicide rather than if they have to actually kill us.
Yeah, I think deception gives it an extra oomph, an extra bit of pleasure for them if you actually manage to deceive.
Someone into doing something harmful, it's an extra kick for them, I guess.
Surviving The Coming Storm00:05:51
This is why, I mean, we talked earlier about how there are areas that you don't go.
And I respect, I mean, it's like escape key on some stuff.
Yeah, he's always just plowing through everything.
He's fantastic.
His essays are extraordinary and they're so informed.
And there were some really good people out there doing really good stuff in the realm of economics and.
All aspects of the rabbit hole.
But I would say that those who don't go full Delling Pole, I embrace the whole range of stuff from the economic and the kind of how the entertainment industry works, the Tavistock Institute and how they manipulate you, all the way across to the spiritual war.
If you're missing the spiritual war element, you're missing a level.
You're missing the key that helps you understand why it's happening and how it's happening and what they do.
If you're determined to remain in the material realm because you think all the spiritual stuff is a bit woo and you don't want to talk about adrenochrome or traffic children or sacrifices or demons, indeed, you're kind of, you don't really, really get it.
No, it's a fair point.
But my point of view is I agree with those things and I don't dispute any of them.
But I've just come to a point where I also have a PL and everybody else has also a PL.
We have to somehow survive financially in this coming sort of storm that we're already in, basically.
And that's why I've kind of gone back a bit into money and assets and what's going to happen.
And that has always been my job.
And career.
So I've just gone back to it to think, well, how can we actually survive this period now?
Because you're going to need to make some quite big changes in the way things have been.
So, like I mentioned, the sort of 70s to 2000 was fine to sit on bonds.
They were kind of crap, but they sort of at least didn't collapse.
But that's not the case now.
We're in something more challenging where there's going to be an inflection.
So that's why I've kind of invested more time into this side of it.
Well, I know I said this before, but okay, so apart from Berkshire Hap the Way when the markets have dropped, apart from silver and gold, what else does well in times of total economic breakdown and inflation?
Well, commodities are always going to.
I mean, commodities are inflation, essentially.
You know, commodities equals inflation.
So.
If you're in commodities, you are basically in the driving seat of inflation.
So that'll be fine.
And that's about it, really, to be honest.
It's then a question of damage limitation.
So bonds will get hammered the hardest, but equity generally doesn't do that well either.
There could be some diversification outside, which I'm sort of starting to look into.
But what I'm really interested in is when the wheels fall off, let's say next year or so.
Then to buy in at that level, that's the really hard part to have the sort of wherewithal and the discipline to get in when those things are going to be super cheap.
And I've got quite a few months of time, but I'm kind of building up an idea of what I'd like to get into apart from Berkshire when things, when the wheels fall off.
Because that's those bargains, you know, could be once every 10 years or so if you're lucky.
And this will be my last go at bargains.
I picked up a lot of bargains in 2009.
So, you know, however many years that was ago, and then this could be the last chance again to pick up cheap stuff.
Yes, I wonder what.
So, if Berkshire Hathaway are $450 now, I wonder what's going to be the buy in price.
I mean, I can say now, I can say my crash price for SP 500 is about $4,200.
If it gets that low, that's like a panic sell level.
So, it's well beyond.
So, it's about $250.
Yeah, it's well beyond where it should be on a theoretical model, but that's what panics do.
They plow right through what makes sense and keep going out the other side.
So, sort of 4,200 level is like that's panic level selling for the SP.
So, you know, that's the point where I want to get ready for and say, okay, I'm going to buy anything and everything at that price.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And, Of course, it's not going to help, though, if your portfolio is doing well, if you've got hungry mobs going around your house trying to eat you.
Yeah.
I mean, that is another thing of Ray Dalio, and he's much more out there than we would be, mainly, maybe.
He actually says there'll be civil war in the US because part of the way the whole wheels fall off is money printing and it benefits the rich.
And it basically hugely increases wealth inequality.
And his projection is wealth inequality will get so bad in the US there will be a civil war, which is like, whoa, from a sensible macro hedge fund manager, that's kind of out there, basically.
Civil War From Money Printing00:15:04
But that's his view.
Right.
Well, that won't be fun.
That won't be fun.
No, that won't be fun.
So, yeah.
Who will be fighting whom, though?
How will it work?
Well, I think the poor versus the rich.
And, you know, his view also is, you know, the political, you'll have political extremism on both sides.
And that's also a glove view as well, by the way, that at the end there's no consensus.
There's only extreme political views on both ends, like a sort of, you know, hard left sort of Marxism versus.
You know, hard nationalism, ethno nationalism, and those things are going to end up fighting each other.
There's no consensus.
I'm certainly seeing that in the way that the whole Muslim threat is being ramped up.
I mean, for as long as I can remember, actually, we've been bombed.
I used to be part of this machine myself, bombarded with the idea that.
Increasingly, when you take a journey, there's a threat that a man shouting Allahu Akbar is going to blow himself up and you with him because of the evil.
And it's really been pushed on the kind of fake alternative movement, the people like Tommy Robinson, who I used to think was pretty good and on the money.
This is obviously because I still look at the mainstream media because I occasionally look at the newspapers and I see what.
What messages they're promoting.
They're promoting, well, certainly the Telegraph, rampant Zionism, rampant the Jews are being persecuted by anti Semitism, and we need to clamp down on this.
Yeah, I mean, the agenda is so naked that I'm amazed the normies don't look at their paper and just go, this is just bollocks.
Yeah, yeah.
No, I mean, it's obviously a Third rail subject, but the degree of influence of Likud party over our politics is jaw dropping basically.
They have everything captured, both three parties now.
I did a thing, I've stopped looking at UK politics, but one of the last things I wrote was about RFOI, a newly set up company in the UK by a guy called, I never get his name right, it's a long Polish name, but it's He's basically.
No, it's Zebel Yunle or something.
He's the son of a.
He's actually the grandson of an Israeli arms manufacturing billionaire.
And then you figure out okay, RFOI is Reform Friends of Israel.
So then you have that's the full house.
You got Conservative Friends of Israel, Labor Friends of Israel, and RFOI was the third kind of leg of that, which is Reform Friends of Israel funding TICE to go out to Israel and do the.
Do the compulsory trip.
Kiss the wall.
Yeah, kiss the wall, get the photo.
And so, yeah, they really have everything sewn up essentially.
The whole political class is totally, you know.
I'm not anti Israel, but I think there should be some balance.
But I don't think our political class has any balance.
It's completely one sided.
It's totally Israel can do no wrong ever, or even more accurately, the Likud party can do no wrong ever.
And there's just no way of getting around that.
You can't criticize anything.
Yes.
What about Russia?
I mean, Russia's.
In bed with Chabad as well, isn't it, really, the regime?
Yeah, I mean, that's the story.
And there's quite a good, I mean, good in the sense of bad, chopped up video of a Chabad guy talking about Russia.
And you realize it's been spliced, and actually, you listen to the original, and it's kind of more balanced.
Chabad exists in Russia.
They have this thing, and they're pretty open about it.
And they had a very successful kind of operation here.
A lot of the oligarchs were in it, so they had a lot of money.
The rabbi was kind of boasting that nobody has this much money at their event, whichever event it was, I can't remember, but he said we have all these chauffeur driven Mercedes lined up outside this thing.
There is no other Chabad event anywhere in the world that's attended by this level of wealth.
So, yeah, they're here and they're doing things, but I'm not really convinced they're in charge of everything.
Right, right.
Whenever I've said anything nice about Russia, even like.
Isn't it great that you can get raw milk at their wonderful covered markets in Moscow?
And isn't Russian literature great?
I get sort of called out as well by certain podcasters, let's say, wagging a sanctimonious finger.
They claim that I'm somehow in the pay of Russia, or at the very least, I belong to the camp that believes in this kind of multipolar.
Illusion, and I've fallen for the.
But it seems to me that one can like lots about Russia and Russian culture without necessarily believing that they're any better than anywhere.
Yeah, it's become now a cult, this thing.
They're all in it together, and anyone that questions that's an idiot.
No matter what evidence you give them, it's become quite a radical cult from people I used to get on with reasonably well.
And their main.
The main thrust of the cult is that because everybody's every leader everywhere is using technology to oppress their people, they must all be doing it to the same playbook as one group.
And I don't agree with that.
I agree, all leaders everywhere are using technology to oppress their citizens, but you can't go from there to say they're all doing it simultaneously together in unison from the same playbook.
I think that there's different camps in this whole system.
And I do think the Russian camp is different from the Western camp.
And I think, you know, the sort of fact that they've been trying to destroy Russia and Putin for quite a long time kind of speaks to the fact that he's not in that club.
You know, he might not for everything all the time, you know.
So again, people will point out, yes, but he didn't veto this thing in the UN.
Okay, he didn't veto that thing in the UN, but they did as much as they could.
But ultimately, you have to sort of compromise somewhere.
I mean, we're already at an existential war now in Russia.
So, at some point, you have to walk that back somehow, or else you're in big trouble.
So, of course, they have to compromise on certain things.
I mean, I can tell you an anecdote.
Our neighbor's son is maybe getting called up, and his friend was called up.
He was dead two months later.
So, like, you know, this is real.
This young guy's getting killed all the time.
And, you know, a lot of people want this kind of done.
So, it was stopped one way or another.
So, you know, If it means quid pro quoing on some stuff at the UN, then so be it, basically.
Right.
Okay.
So the counter to that argument that one reads of people like Rurik Skywalker is look, you only have to look at how badly they're managing it to realize that they are all in on it, both sides, that they want this war to continue.
That they're making catastrophic decisions which can only be explained in terms of this international cabal, the highest level, they're in cahoots, yada, yada.
You are not of that party.
No, I mean, it's a credible theory.
I mean, I also look at it, and if you look at the, you know, if someone set out a plan to destroy Slavs, this is a pretty great way of making that plan work.
So you can't, you know, it's a credible theory, but I don't think that is the case.
For all of the reasons I've kind of set out, that I don't think Putin is one of their guys.
And one thing I keep pointing out is the amount of support the Rothschild family have always given to opponents of Putin, starting with Mikhail Hedikovsky in the early 2000s.
And then now, more recently, I wrote about this guy who's in the UK now, who was the sort of he'd fled Russia, he was the finance minister, and he also got a lot of help from the Rothschild in getting his visa.
And leave to remain in the UK.
So it just seems to be a continuation of that pattern of like, we will support political opponents of Putin.
So I don't think they're in the same team, you know.
And so I think they're wrong saying they're all colluding on everything.
But, you know, I don't discount their theory as crazy.
I mean, it certainly, you know, it has some logic to it, but I don't think it's correct.
Yes.
The other.
The other thing that puts me off the Rurik Skywalker take on everything is that he is not, I mean, very much not a Christian.
He thinks it's all not, he's a pagan of some kind.
I think he worships Norse gods, or I don't know what he worships, but probably the devil.
I don't know.
But it sits ill, it seems to me, to slag off.
Russia in its entirety when it has the Orthodox Church.
And that was the thing that really, that was the thing I most enjoyed about Russia, really, because I spent a lot of time going to monasteries and hanging out with monks and bishops and priests and things.
And even if you take the line that, yeah, of course, the Orthodox Church is owned by the regime and they just.
Just like they were under communism.
Yeah, that may be true up to a point, but it is not totally true.
There is within Russia a Christian core.
Oh, yeah.
Big time.
And if you believe that Christianity is real and not just some made up thing invented by the Jews to control people or invented by the Romans as part of their.
All these bullshit conspiracy theories, which I'm sorry to have had people, some people on my podcast kind of invented oh, and the Bible was all translated wrong and blah, blah, blah.
I've had enough of it.
I think false prophets.
But if you are going to discount the power of God and the power of the church, or all those priests who were in the gulag, who kept the faith and God worked through them and performed miracles, you read Metropolitan Tikhon's book, Everyday Saints.
You cannot read that book and come away thinking, yeah, but they're just bloody Russians and they're all.
Creatures of the New World Order, and they're the same as you can't.
You can't.
God's kind of important and should not be discounted from the equation, I think.
I'm 100% with you on that.
I was at a, I've been to a few now Orthodox events.
So Saturday was Easter, and the tradition is to stand out.
The priest does a reading and he sprays everyone with water, you know, with this thing, I don't know what it is, some kind of brush.
And You're supposed to get some water onto your Easter cake, kulich, and you have your Easter eggs, you know, you bring on your plate and it gets sprayed.
I mean, the place was absolutely packed.
I mean, I'm in a small place in the middle of nowhere, like literally, as far as I could tell, the whole place had turned out for this water ceremony.
And they're in a long queue, and he does one lot and then the next lot.
It's all outside, hundreds and hundreds of people.
So there's no question, you know, you.
Can question the validity of what they're doing or the extent of their faith, but the faith is there.
And again, it's like if you look at what Russia's doing now, they're celebrating the history.
So they're pursuing nationalism.
The church is growing and they're very concerned about demographics.
And demographics in Russia is also in trouble.
But the government's doing a lot to actually fund birth.
You can actually make, you know, you get a decent amount of money if you have more than two children in Russia.
They've got massively.
Pro children policy.
So, all those things are the diametric opposite of what the West is doing.
So, that's another reason why you really struggle to say they're all in it together.
Well, they're all in it together, but these guys are doing the diametric opposite at the government level compared to the West.
I mean, how does that make them all in it together?
So, yeah, it's this.
And the church thing is big, it's way bigger.
I've been to several things now, these religious festivals, there's so many people that's really unbelievable.
Okay, now, Alex, I'm going to say some Russian words to you, and you can see whether my pronunciation is so shit that you can't understand the word or whether I've vaguely mastered it.
Okay.
So, loshat.
Of course.
Very good.
Koshka.
Russian Words Without Rationality00:06:33
Chat.
Sibaka.
Og.
Simalyot.
Ain.
What?
Yeah.
Karabu.
Ship.
Wow!
You're actually understanding my words.
Chimadan.
Suitcase.
Yes!
Yes!
You actually said the word that I was trying to say.
Yeah, you've only got about five more years to go, but.
Well, you give it time.
Yeah, it's a hard language.
Yeah, exactly.
It bloody is.
And words like.
The word for C has a complicated pronunciation.
Moria.
Moria.
Yeah.
I can't do the kind of the rolly R's like Moria.
You can throw some at me.
I probably should be able to come up with any of them.
I think that I really need to go back to Russia and spend time.
They were kind of luring me back to go to a language school where you just spent a total immersion thing.
I would do like a shot if I had the chance, if the airplanes are still working.
You have to go through Turkey, but otherwise, no problem.
Well, it's getting to Turkey first.
I mean, oh, can you have a trip to Turkey?
What?
It's quite a long trip.
I mean, I remember the good old days three hours, 50 minutes, and now I've got to go all over the place.
And not just that, you have to check in.
You go to Istanbul airport, and you can't just go through to a transfer lounge.
You've got to go in and go out and then go back in again.
I have to.
All those long.
Yeah.
Well, before we go, one more question.
I knew that the Iran war was coming.
So I bought some oil shares and I bought some Tungela shares, thinking thermal coal is going to do well.
My oil shares have done all right, but they haven't gone to the moon.
Tungela, which ought to have been a sure bet, has been pretty.
It's gone down.
I mean, one day it went down about 15%.
What's going on?
How can it be that they're restricting the oil supply to this massive extent, and yet at the same time, energy stocks seem to be not rocketing?
I don't know.
Timing is impossible to predict in any market.
Like we said with that price fund, you know, it sat there for quite a long time going nowhere.
And all of a sudden, I think you need patience because there is no You know, day to day, there's no rationality in the market.
So it could easily sit there doing nothing for ages until for some reason something changes and everyone piles in.
So I'd stick with it.
And is there no rationality in the market because there's no rationality in the market?
Or is it because it's incredibly rigged to give the impression that it's not rational?
I think it's kind of both of those things together.
So, you know, the day to day stuff is really volatility of more or less retail people coming in and out.
And I think they can be herded.
In and out of various things at various times.
So I think it's a bit of a combination.
I mean, they called it the famous quote is short term, it's a voting machine, and long term, it's a weighing machine.
So, short term, you know, voting can go any old way, popular themes go up, but eventually, you know, the weighing machine kicks in and things with value get rewarded and things without value get punished.
Volk.
What's a Volk?
Yeah.
Volk.
No, Wolf.
Very good.
What's fox in Russian?
Lisa.
Lisa.
And Yosh?
Oh, hedgehog.
I'm good at my animals.
I'm good at the animals.
That'll come in very handy.
You'll need that almost every day.
I did see a Yosh this week, to be fair.
Did you?
Do you think there's any connection between loshat, horse, and ploshat?
Meaning square?
That's a good question.
I don't, I can't think of one.
I wonder if it's something to do with steps.
Don't know.
Anyway, even though it's probably completely pointless, I'm quite enjoying the challenge of grappling with this completely alien because so few of the words have any analogues in any of the kind of romance languages.
Yeah.
Do they?
I mean, you've just got to learn completely new.
Pre Potavaccio.
I can't say it.
Pre Potavaccio.
Professor.
Yeah.
Pre Potavaccio.
My favorite word, because it's obvious where they're borrowing from, is the word for pencil.
Karandash.
Karandash.
Yeah.
There's a few words like that, a couple of words like that.
Well, computer.
Well, yeah, there's also for train station is supposed to be Vaxal, and they're supposed to have stolen that from Vauxhall.
There's a long story about that about Russians going around the UK railway system, measuring things and taking measurements back to Russia and what have you.
I don't know if that's apocryphal or real, but it's quite fun.
Why do you think aeroplane is Simalyot?
No, well, fly is litit.
So, liot, samo, liot, it flies itself.
It's self flying, is basically what it means.
Best Way To Support Me00:03:30
I got it wrong.
Samo is on your own, so it's a self flyer.
Yeah.
Yeah, you see, that's another thing.
I kind of almost learned the words, and then I was pronouncing tijoli, and then I realized it's the yasam, tijoli.
So, I was getting my heavy wrong.
There's a lot of pitfalls in there, so stick with it.
So many, so many.
Alex, it's been great talking to you.
Tell us where we can find your stuff.
So you can write to Alex at thinkingcoalitiononeword.org or info at thinkingcoalition.org.
And on Substack, it's Thinking Coalition.
I've written a thing about the possible, what's happening with fiat currency.
And I'm going to write about this Markovitz hoax from 1952 as well.
So.
My content now is much more to do with finance and money and markets than it was previously.
Right.
Well, I hope it goes well.
I've very much enjoyed talking to you as always.
Everyone else, obviously, you like my podcast because it's better than most of the other shit out there.
It just is.
You know it is.
And that's why you want to support me because you love me and you want to help me.
So do it.
You can go to my website now, which is jamesdellingpole.co.uk.
I think you can actually sign up.
I know you can sign up there.
So maybe think about doing that.
And you get access to all my archive and some of the naughty stuff that I don't put up anywhere else.
I think some of my Jesse Sabota ones, I think, may be only on my website.
Okay.
Thank you, Alex.
And bye bye, everyone.
Thank you for listening.
A lot of you have very kindly been asking, what's the best way we can support you?
So, thank you for caring and thank you for wanting to support me.
There is now a new, better way of supporting me.
Some of you subscribe via Substack, some of you are on Patreon, some of you are even on Subscribe Stuff, and those all work in their way.
The problem is, I find, I mean, take Substack as an example.
Substack has been a great community for like minded folk, but it is heavily controlled by the enemy.
They de boost.
People like me.
They want normie voices.
They don't want really alternative people being given any prominence.
Plus, of course, they get a cut of your generous donations.
So here's an idea.
If you want to, you can now subscribe direct on my website at jamesdellingpole.co.uk.
The website's been running for quite a while, but thanks to my assistant Andrew, it's now got new features where you can subscribe directly to me.
You get access to all my old archive material.
You get My podcasts as they come out.
And you can comment on the podcasts and you can communicate with me probably more directly than you can elsewhere.
I think it's probably the best way forward.
Also, it obviates the risk of my being suddenly randomly closed down by some of these other websites.
I mean, they're not our friends.
So if you want to support me direct, go to jamesdellingpole.co.uk and sign up there.
Thank you, my sharklings.
I love you all, but I love.
You know, I'm not supposed to have favourites, but I do kind of extra love those of you who make the effort to support me.
Because without your support, I wouldn't be able to do what I do.