All Episodes
Previous Next
March 23, 2021 - Radio Renaissance - Jared Taylor
01:09:15
Left, Right, and White
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey guys, welcome to Left, Right, and White.
I'm Gregory Hood.
And I'm Chris Roberts.
And we are going to start this today talking about why we ended up in this thing of ours.
Something that nobody really starts with.
I almost don't trust people who come in right off the bat and say, yeah, I'm all about white identity, brother.
Our whole society is built against it, and so the way you end up here is usually through a pretty long process with a lot of bumps along the way.
Yeah.
A lot of false starts, a lot of false consciousness, dare I say.
Yes.
Yes, you can see his Marxist background already.
But I mean, that is really what you have to break through.
I mean, I came through the conservative movement pretty standard.
Every dumb conservative ink cliché I believed.
That was what I was through college until I discovered kind of paleo-libertarianism and so model A of the paleo-libertarian alt-right pipeline.
I mean, I went through the same journey that countless others did.
It's not that unique.
But ultimately this is where it ends up and this is where it has to end up.
Yeah, definitely.
So, this is our first podcast of what we're hoping is going to be a weekly thing.
Not to replace the existing Renaissance Radio at all, but notice that a lot of websites out there have multiple podcasts on different themes and with different people doing it, and we thought that it was maybe time for American Renaissance to come out with a second one, hence left, right, and white.
And yeah, it made the most sense for Greg and I to be the hosts of it.
But I hope you'll bear with us here.
This is definitely a first time for both of us.
We know that the Renaissance Radio is so news-focused.
It goes over so many of the latest items of the week in terms of immigration, crime, or the latest woke madness.
So we wanted, with this podcast, to do something a little more theoretical, or at least a little more abstract, not something just so headline-oriented.
Which is part of the reason for the name of it, Left Right and White, because we want to talk about what's more behind the scenes, things like ideology and belief and stuff like that.
Greg here spent entirely too much time in the conservative movement, near as I can tell.
I mean, you worked in right-wing beltway politics for, I want to say, over 10 years.
I mean, it was maybe like a break here or there, but overall, I mean, like 10 years.
Yeah.
Double thing too.
I mean, obviously I've used so many pen names over the years.
I think what people don't get is that there's almost like a different consciousness with each of those.
Yeah.
Gregory Hood is not, James Kirkpatrick is not, whoever else.
And part of that is because when you're working in the conservative movement, and this really gets to the heart of why I think we had to do this, had to start this podcast and have this this way specifically, is when you're in the conservative movement, what you're doing, As you're pointing to the latest left-wing extremism and saying, isn't this terrible?
Look at this.
Send us money.
And it's basically been that for 40 years.
And we don't want that to be what white Advocacy is all about where oh, no, did you know that there are double standards on race like look at this Wow, and it's we get it I mean, yeah, and this is what Sam Dixon calls the game of ain't it awful or you just sort of back and forth go go over all of like the latest like
Cruelties all of like the latest tragedies, you know latest absurdities But it really I mean you want you want to talk about a dead end, you know, they're you know, there it is I mean, it's sort of like the we're playing a lot of a lot of horseshoe theory on I hope listeners will forgive us for for that a little bit as well But it's actually that game of ain't it awful, you know, especially when it's just focused on Stuff that's going on on college campuses or stuff that's
happening in like really woke cities, you know Like like Seattle or Minneapolis or something?
It's really kind of the equivalent of like MSNBC Just going over, you know, Russia gate or Trump's tax
returns or what have you. It's just this You just have this treadmill of stuff
You know some of which is true and some of which isn't That's definitely the weakness of this analogy is that Russiagate is totally bogus and a lot of what the conservative movement covers is true.
Putin is currently trending on Twitter.
Is he really?
Yeah, it's Putin and white supremacy.
Those are the two top trends.
But I mean, that could be any day of the last five years.
Yeah, that's right.
My friend told me, you know, like, if you're ever feeling depressed, if you're conservative, just read, like, The Nation or watch MSNBC and you're like, oh man, I'm living in this, like, right-wing nationalist dictatorship.
I'm like, I had no idea!
That's right, that's right.
It's a good way of feeling powerful.
I remember, yeah, talking with another white advocate about that in, like, 2017.
like into 2018 it was still easy to find like these huge write-ups in in mainstream publications
about how the GOP has been just completely taken over uh by by people like you and me uh and it's
just this big identitarian force um you know and that's something you see on like salon a lot is
how like the Koch brothers i mean because you know before there was before there was Putin
there was Charles Koch Right.
And the idea that Charles Koch is just, like, this, like, Holocaust revisionist...
He's just like hardcore white nationalist.
He's just got all of these, all of these, um, super facts just funding, you know, these ferocious right-wingers everywhere.
And it's just betrays this just like profound ignorance of, I mean, nobody who's ever worked in conservatism in like professional conservatism could ever, could ever believe that, you know, you just see these sharp dividing lines.
It's like, man, you think the Koch brothers are all about Rick Santorum?
I mean, much less somebody like Jared Taylor.
It's just so strange.
And I mean, they're so open about what they believe.
It's so easy to find verification.
There's just like absolutely unambiguous proof that the Kochs are all about open borders
and criminal justice reform, as they like to call it, and all of these things.
And it's like, yeah, why?
But you just, yeah.
It makes no difference.
Yeah.
I mean, the thing is, they've got this, and you can go back, I think it was Naomi Klein, back when George W. Bush was president, and like, the thing going around was like, 13 signs of fascism, and like, every single one has been checked off, you're living under fascism now!
It's Naomi Wolf.
Wolf, thank you, yes.
An easy mistake to make.
It's really frustrating, actually.
That's happened to me before, too.
It's like, how many Naomis are there?
Yeah, well, no, and I remember, you know, the idea that, like, Blackwater was going to become George W. Bush's, like, Victorian god.
Right, right.
Oh, incidentally, Eric Prince is also trending, I think, yesterday.
Dude, gosh, what did he do?
Oh, who cares?
I mean, it's just sort of one of these things where, you know, he's operating somewhere, and they have their little villain that they have to go after, and so they all go nuts.
I mean, this was also the thing you saw with General Flynn.
Where they're saying, oh, this proves that Trump is setting up this separate paramilitary thing.
And it's like, well, two days ago we had the Guam National Guard march in the Capitol and go to a sitting congresswoman.
To deliver a political message.
That's right.
I mean, that alone is, like, way more important than anything Trump did with the military over his entire administration.
And it also shows how politicized this thing's been with the attacks on Tucker Carlson and everything else.
But of course, here, we're risking just going into the, look how bad it is, look how bad it is, look how bad it is.
And one of the problems, maybe the problem of why conservatism failed, and I think we can definitively say that it has failed, Is there was never any ultimate vision.
What exactly are we trying to conserve?
Or failing that, what are we trying to restore?
And there was never any answer to that.
And part of it is because, as you said, the money comes from people like the Koch brothers and what they want to preserve is basically cheap labor.
And that's the end of the story.
Which gets us into why people like me... Preserving market choice.
Yeah, right.
Choice guy.
But this is also why we've gotten More into, especially, leftist economic theory and why the old left, I think, has more in common with the identitarian right than the people who call themselves leftist today.
It's weird, but it really, yeah, it really might be the case.
I mean, I got quite a lot out of reading a lot of the old school anarchists and Marxists in terms of the way to analyze society and ways of analyzing politics.
And I think even the New Left has a lot to teach us.
The New Left probably is correct in terms of how they describe society, how power is created and sustained.
But of course, they just never turn their analysis on themselves.
And there's just something inherently dishonest about some professor who makes $200,000 a year saying, oh, I'm explaining the power structure to you.
And it's like, dude, you are the power structure.
There's literally nothing you could ever do or say that would have the slightest negative consequences on you.
Well, Noam Chomsky is the ultimate example of this, because he's the most cited academic, I think, ever.
And he's constantly talking about how people like him are very powerless in the face of
tobacco companies.
And it's like, man, I wish tobacco companies had a whole lot more power than they do.
If they wanted to lobby to let me be able to smoke in diners again, that would be great.
I mean, talk about corporations looking out for the little guy.
That would be spectacular if R.J.
Reynolds did that for me.
Meanwhile, what does Noam Chomsky want to do for me?
It's like, I have no borders, have no money, no currency, live in an anarcho-collectivist
society, and be a feminist.
I don't think that really constitutes Like, looking out for me, you know, like, looking out for me by creating, you know, hate speech laws.
You know, looking out for me by making sure that we have, um, you know, economic sanctions against Russia, because that really benefits me.
You know, I just, I love it when we stick it to Putin for, what, being, being mean to gays, or, I don't know, putting troops in the Ukraine, or something.
Who even knows anymore?
I mean, things that I might not even necessarily like that Putin is doing, but still, it's this idea of these punitive sanctions.
But again, Chomsky will talk about how sanctions against Iraq are you know really bad because that you know
that can hurt kids and it can hurt people at the bottom of the economic
pyramid which is true but it's like you don't see that outrage when
the uh...
you know when the same thing is applied to russians because russians are
overwhelmingly white and he also was a i think recently coming out in support of
uh...
kurdistan because of course there's this whole thing there where there's this
quasi-anarchist uh... within what we could call kurdistan or the kurdish
autonomous territory right well the kurdish independence movement has always
been very left wing and like very very kind of like what do you
how do you call it third uh...
third something or other What is it, like the third wave of Marxism?
Oh, right, yeah.
Colonialist Marxism, third world Marxism, where you basically take Marxism and then combine it with a colonial independence movement, which of course is very identitarian.
And people like Chomsky are all for it, except when it applies to a white group.
Well, and also we see where it ends up.
I mean, if you said, what is the country in the world that has the strongest Nationalist, authoritarian, and arguably most effective, at least over the last year of government, would have to be China.
Yeah.
And of course, I mean, this gets into why we can't just say, oh, we're right-wing, we're right-wing, being conservative is great, this is the solution to all our problems.
It's also why we can't even just say, I don't know, go down the Evila-pilled route of saying that we just need to be as super right-wing as possible and everything will be fine.
If we look at the nations that seem able to sustain themselves, it's those who at least have a national mythos of supporting workers, of defying the power structure.
If you look at China, if you look at Vietnam, if you look at a lot of these other places where they are doing a lot better in terms of maintaining themselves, they weren't built on reaction.
And this is one of the interesting things about communism, especially once it actually takes power.
Leftists can never really think of themselves as being in power.
They always have to think it's inherent to the world view.
There's nothing you can do where they'll say, okay, we've won.
Joe Soberan said, you know, when would a leftist, in what kind of a society would a leftist say, I'm a conservative?
And there's no answer to that question.
It's just this constant thing of victimization.
I learned that that was literally true.
That's actually something I tried with when I was first starting to come out of the closet.
As an identitarian, I would ask left-wing people, in what kind of society would you be a conservative?
And they genuinely can't answer.
You get just absolutely absurd answers.
You know, like, answers that are basically non-answers.
Like, I remember one guy telling me... I mean, he was just spitballing, but still, there's a lot going on in his answer.
He said, in a society where there was no professional sports, no currency, and no airplanes.
Like, I would maybe be a conservative in that society.
Those are three very odd things to get particularly worked up about.
Again, he was spitballing, but...
I felt like our guys were getting too worked up about the sports ball thing.
If you watch the Super Bowl, you're a traitor!
Sure.
I just thought it was, like, you know, I've been, you know, for years I've been kind of working on this theory that I've never managed to fully articulate, otherwise I'd have some big essay on it by now of, like, contemporary liberalism and nihilism, like, really aren't that different, you know, both are motivated by just this sort of urge to destroy, especially anything that's sort of big, anything that's beautiful, you know, Anything that seems to bring a lot of people joy, and this guy's answer is the three things he wanted to destroy so that he could become a conservative are a really good example of that.
It's like, okay, so everybody would have to trade, which is just trade for goods, which is an enormous hassle.
It doesn't really sound like it would benefit anybody to just not have a currency.
It's like professional sports, which Lots of people enjoy, like, you know, I mean I can get seeing something like, you know, in a society in which, you know, they got, like, you know, every professional sports ball player, you know, got, like, you know, financial training or, you know, had, like, more, like, medical coverage for, like, concussions or something, but just, like, abolishing, like, sports, which, I mean, you want to talk about something, like, you know, innate to human existence, like, human societies, wherever they are, like, you know, they create sports, people, people like sports, and then, like, airplanes, like, okay, so people can't, like,
Travel the world.
It's like this is just... No, we already kind of have that now.
This is just sort of like an arbitrary kind of like...
Punishment against just like everybody, you know, like abolishing these three things and you see that a lot with You know with leftists with this just like push to just like abolish stuff or like we just shouldn't have X Y & Z You know, like there just shouldn't be cops.
There just shouldn't be ice.
There just shouldn't be borders There just shouldn't be white people of just like oh well like, you know this you know, there's just like identifying things in society that serve some kind of like practical purpose or like function and just being like Yeah, things would just be better without that.
You know, like, let's just get rid of that.
Get rid of hierarchy.
They think, and this is when you get into anarcho-collectivism and these types of movements.
And this is one of the things that always frustrates me with conservatives is where it's like, oh, the Antifa are the foot soldiers of Joe Biden.
It's like, no, these guys don't like Joe Biden.
I promise.
I mean, let's not be like liberal reporters here and just write our own narrative on it.
Let's be serious about what these guys believe.
Most of them do have, some of them maybe state communists, but most of them I would say are anarchists and there's a long theory behind it.
It's not just purely destructive, maybe in the way it manifests.
But theoretically what they're trying to do is abolish all social hierarchies and have an egalitarian society both economically and socially.
But the problem of course is that you get any group of ten people you're gonna have a hierarchy.
Yeah.
You have a group of two people you're gonna have a hierarchy.
Yeah.
I mean this is just something and it manifests in different ways.
It's not just one person is in charge of the other.
In different spheres of life the hierarchy may flip.
These are things that are inherent to existence and I think now I remember in college I used to, when I was sort of put my toe in the water as far as like racial stuff went and I was still sort of figuring out what I believed with this stuff.
And I remember talking to somebody about this and they were saying basically, and this is back when you could have conversations with liberals about this stuff and not be instantly killed.
I said, you know, the problem here is that these differences exist regardless of what we think about it.
So if we just try to ignore them, they're still going to manifest.
And the response was something along the lines of, well, what if we just don't talk about it?
Will these differences go away?
And I said, well, look, you wouldn't deny that men and women have different things that they're good at in the broadest terms.
Like most men are taller than most women.
Obviously there are some women who are taller than most men, but on a broad scale.
You would look at this and say, yes, this is a general social truth that has consequences.
So if you were setting up, let's say, a physical fitness test with the military, more men are probably going to pass that than women.
And this is just how it is.
And the other person was like, and this is back in, you know, 2003 or whenever it was.
Oh, yeah, of course, that's obvious.
Well, now, of course, we can't even have that.
We have to say that sex is artificial and it just doesn't exist.
And if we just like think hard enough, we can be whatever we want ourselves to be.
We're seeing this now with this creation of, I think, completely new identities that aren't even real, but are just a way for white people to kind of get in on the grift, because you don't want to be considered part of that oppressing class.
Right, you're talking about trans everything.
Yeah, well beyond that.
I mean, at least with the transgender stuff, you can point to some vanishingly small amount of cases where, what is it, sex dysphoria?
It is a thing.
It is a medical condition.
But it's not 10% of population or like whatever it is.
But now I mean you have even, it's just going to get crazier and it's not, there's never going to be a point, and this is another thing I think conservatives have wrong, there's never going to be a point where people are going to look around and say, wow this is nuts, we need to go back.
It's just going to keep going and it's going to keep going because There are real, concrete, material interests in pushing this as far as it goes, because if you can claim victimization, if you can claim to be part of this group, you get material reward.
And the more minute the group is, the higher status it has.
I mean, when you have hundreds of thousands of people rallying for black trans lives, Talk about a niche.
Yeah, but that's going to be conservative in a CPAC five years from now.
We'll be talking about the importance of black trans lives, but we need to prevent that from being a cause.
There are public conservative trans figures now.
Like there's one, like, what did she go by?
Like Lady Magga or something.
I don't even want to touch this.
She was just like an Instagram personality.
This is why I'm glad, not that I've ever had an Instagram, but I'm glad I've been banned from it immediately.
There are some benefits to being totally de-platformed.
I'd also like to thank all the leftists who forced me to buy Bitcoin.
I'm going to pay for my house with fake internet money.
Thank you.
Ha ha ha ha.
You know, your point about hierarchies is really valid.
It's something, you know, within sort of white antediluteran circles, it's something, it's like my go-to defensive position when people accuse me of just being sort of like a racialist left-winger or like a racist liberal, which is flack I definitely catch every now and again, like when I get really defensive about homosexuals or unions or something like that.
Look, I believe in hierarchies, even outside of the racial question.
Again, your point about if you have even two people, much less ten, somebody will just sort of emerge as a leader.
I find it so strange that that's not just a given.
If you just live your life socially, it's something I've always been really fascinated about.
them and it happens especially with men of like in any male friend group you
know whether you're like in elementary school or college or like you all know
each other from work or something invariably like kind of like a leader
emerges yeah like there's always a leader and there's always a runt like in
any in any group of men like even if you're not actually trying to do
anything even if it's not like a goal-oriented group you know it's it's
just like a friend group that just like hangs out there always ends up like
really quickly somebody who's just sort of like ends up being kind of like the
head honcho you know And there ends up being a collective identity, certain rituals end up being created.
This is why things like trying to get rid of hazing or something like that are a doomed quest.
Right, right, right.
I mean, you take any group of 20 guys who are, I don't know, they go out to a specific restaurant once a week and that's the extent of what they do.
You know, a hundred years from now, that might be some occult order that's taken over a country.
That's right, that's right.
It's just how these things work.
It's just what we do.
And the war against hierarchy is really the war against nature, because...
The idea that egalitarianism is a revolt against nature?
Yeah!
That was the famous Murray Rothbard essay that you and I are both very fond of.
Yeah, and that was step one on the path to salvation or damnation, depending on your perspective.
Yeah, for listeners who want to edge a friend of theirs into this stuff, that's actually a great place to start, because it was written by a Jewish libertarian.
It's not very, very explicit, but it is It does just reason, I mean, just very, very logically of this, like there's nothing equal about not only society, but like the natural world.
And like, we have to create some kind of political order that like acknowledges that.
And it's like flush with that, that doesn't butt heads up against that.
Otherwise you're just going to end up in a bad place.
Yeah.
Peter Brimelow said that, I think he said, I hope I'm not misquoting him, but that the United States wouldn't just fail like the Soviet Union, but would fail for the exact same reason.
I mean, when all said and done, what happened with the Soviet Union was you had leaders making claims about economic production or whatever it was that were just objectively not true.
Right.
And now we have an entire system built upon everything being equal.
when it's not, and then expecting these institutions to function. And then when they predictably don't
function, we have no other solution but to say, okay, well, we need to try more of these
egalitarian programs. We need to try more of these redistribution.
Yeah, you've got to compound the lie.
And so what ends up happening is not just that, oh, elementary schools in Baltimore or wherever
are terrible and are not generating any students who could read or something like that.
It's just creeping its way up.
Especially post-George Floyd and everything else.
Now even the good schools must be poisoned.
Now even the good neighborhoods must be destroyed.
Now you have to make a pledge of allegiance essentially to the new state cult.
And what ends up happening is, when there's no escape from any of these things, The whole system falls apart.
I mean, the only thing keeping America going, and I actually think is kind of a good thing, is hypocrisy.
I mean, actually, if these white liberals are like, oh, I believe all this stuff, but not in my neighborhood, it's like, alright, well, at least you're sane.
I mean, and you also have to have a certain, you have to have a certain acknowledgement of the way things really are if you're going to lead a successful life.
If you really believe your own nonsense.
You're just going to end up living in a slum and getting stabbed to death or something.
These things don't end well.
If you look at Students for a Democratic Society, how they initially started, their initial thing was, and this is a mistake leftists do over and over again.
I'm sure some groups are doing it right now.
Where they basically take a bunch of rich white college kids and send them into a ghetto and be like, oh, we're going to organize rent strikes and we're going to organize the community and we're going to do this.
And of course, nobody cares and they fall flat on their face and they waste all this time and money and everything else.
But then when they say, oh, well, actually, we could just stick to the universities and We're just going to live in a society without landlords.
there, suddenly that becomes a lot more successful. Because it's not tied to any real world outcomes.
You're just theorizing and you're just trying to capture an institution. That's a lot easier
to do and a lot more realistic than we're going to abolish landlords and make the utilities
work or something.
We're just going to live in a society without landlords.
We have a society.
Burnham talks a lot about this in the Machiavellians where he says, essentially, quoting through
the whole tradition from Machiavelli to Pareto to just about this, really everyone who is
a modernist and on the right.
That's a pretty small category.
By modernist I mean somebody who doesn't appeal to the supernatural to justify a social order.
And he makes the case, and it's obvious, but it's something that we just pretend we can't have.
You can't have real democracy in the sense of people collectively making decisions.
You're always going to have a ruling minority.
Always.
There's always going to be a ruling class.
And if you abolish that, you're just going to end up with a different ruling class.
And what I would argue now is that the ruling class in this country, in terms of the ideology it puts forward, and this is San Francis, you know, egalitarianism as a political weapon.
All this egalitarianism, all this anti-racist stuff, woke stuff and everything else, whether they mean it or not, I'm sure some of them do and some of them don't.
I'm sure the smarter ones don't.
It serves to justify their power and their existence and there's nothing new about this.
I mean if some king during the Middle Ages said, well God put me in charge and I have a divine right to the throne and therefore I'm able to protect people and have justice.
Every ruling institution is always going to say, look, it's for your own good.
There's no... I think a lot of liberals have this kind of cartoon version of history where they think people rise to power on saying, ha ha ha, like I am going to oppress the people knowingly and consciously.
It's like, no, every ruler...
Says that he's doing it for your own good, and probably 99% of rulers throughout history, no matter how crazy or monstrous, thought they actually were acting in their people's own best interest.
I mean, I don't know how many people get up in the morning and say, you know, gentlemen, too evil, that kind of thing.
Yeah, yeah, well, right.
That is like the ultimate cartoon.
They, I mean, you know, you mentioned like You know, some of our liberal elite believe these myths, and some of them don't, and it's not always easy to tell, you know, who really believes what or to what extent they believe it.
The interesting thing about that is, like, I think people, like, under the elite, you know, like, Like, you know, Antifa or, like, really woke college kids or, you know, like, the sort of lower end of, like, the staff of, like, all of these, like, non-profits, whether they be, like, explicitly left-wing or just kind of, like, bleeding heart, you know, like, we're gonna, you know, feed Africa or we're gonna, like, eliminate AIDS.
Like, all of those people really do believe it.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, like, they are just, like, so, so enthralled with this narrative and they do really think that, like, people like you and me and Charles Koch And Vladimir Putin are waking up every day on a Zoom call together and toasting to evil.
And I think that's part of the reason why they are so motivated.
I'm glad that he's going along with that.
I think part of the reason they're so hardcore is because they are just motivated by this imaginary evil that all of us from You know, all of us on this imaginary Zoom call really are waking up every day and conspiring on how to oppress women or trans people or blacks or what have you.
Incidentally guys, this actually will become the Zoom call.
It's not going to be imaginary anymore, we're just going to get on here and talk about how to- This is going to be the international broadcast.
Yeah, it's going to be like the Supervillain thing where we discuss in great detail our evil plan right before we- We'll be filled with codes and stuff so that all of our people in South Africa know what to do and when to do it and all of these things, yeah.
Comrades in Occupied Rhodesia, John has a long mustache.
John has a long mustache.
Execute Plan Delta.
I mean, this is also a source of their strength, though.
One of the big problems with conservatism as a mindset is that you're basically saying, look, we have traditions, we have institutions, they developed for a reason.
Even if we don't fully understand what those reasons were, we should be cautious about changing them.
And even for someone like me, who I think a lot of people would say is no longer conservative, I can point to a lot of specific times in history Where I can say, yeah, society like that.
Like, that's about right.
Like, I would take that.
In fact, there'd be, like, countless examples.
Sure.
Well, you know, we talked about this once, like, even contemporary Switzerland is in many ways kind of a model state of, like, if we could get to, if we could arrive at Switzerland, I might even like, you know, like retire and do something else.
Yeah, just be like, all right, it's good, I'm in my little Canton and speaking Romanish or whatever.
Right, you know, everybody's got a gun, you know, you got a lot of strong, a lot of strong rights on stuff like free speech.
There's a reason Germany didn't invade during World War II, and it wasn't just because he wanted an outlet for banking and stuff.
It would have been really hard to take.
There's a reason the Swiss still guard the Pope.
But that's a weakness, I would argue, because you actually want This utopian vision.
The conservative thing, I think, was a Weaver of Ogland who said, don't amenitize the eschaton.
Don't try to bring heaven to earth.
But I would say, yeah, I would think you do need that.
You do need that radical vision.
You do need something where you get up and you're saying, look, we're living for something beyond ourselves.
Or as Evelyn would say, life does not, mere life does not justify itself.
You have to go something beyond.
Because you have to have that inner fire that keeps you going.
Because from a common sense perspective, it's always better to take the easy way out.
It's always better to say, well, I'll put up with this for one more day because I don't want to lay my body or my career or whatever on the line for this greater cause.
But if you do have people who are more willing to do those things, even if the cause is stupid and irrational, they're going to win.
And in fact, the stupider and the more irrational the cause, the more effective it can be because it can never be realized.
You never win.
To his credit, Alinsky talks about this when he was organizing in Chicago.
And Chicago was of course where you had a lot of the great unionization drives, organizing the workers in the meat packing plants and everything else.
And he said basically the kids of those people had grown up to be the reactionary comfortable middle class.
And so now they needed to be challenged and everything else.
So what he was essentially pausing, and this is sort of the idea of like the Trotsky permanent revolution, we always constantly have to be hammering away at this thing.
And from a leftist point of view, you could say, if we define leftism as a political creed with egalitarianism as its highest value, which I think is reasonable.
Yeah, I think that's a really reasonable definition.
Then, you constantly have to be hammering away at society.
You constantly have to be hammering away at institutions.
Yeah, when you're always in search of new, like, enemy classes.
Right.
You know, that's why even like a state, you know, like, you're sort of...
You were like about to bring this up earlier, like, you know, even like a totalitarian communist state like the USSR.
It was just constantly discovering all of these wreckers, all of these traitors, all of these subversives from the inside.
No government on earth at that point, in the 1970s, had more power over its own people than the USSR.
And if there was a country that had more power, it was also just a totalitarian communist society like North Korea or Cuba or something.
But there's still this obsession with finishing the revolution.
And this is, again, egalitarianism is the highest ideal.
As Rothbard so eloquently spelled out, you cannot get there.
So once you have that inherent contradiction, the solution is to constantly find new classes
of people who are the reason why egalitarianism isn't working, and new theories to explain
why there is still inequality.
And new definitions of inequality.
Right, right.
I'm sort of stealing this from Sam Dixon, but there's a lot about contemporary liberalism that's just a conspiracy theory.
Yeah, they call us the conspiracy theorists.
Right, but the concept of white privilege or systematic racism, all of these are just enormous conspiracy theories that presuppose that there are these council of evil elders directing things.
There was this big anti-discrimination lawsuit against Denny's, the national diner chain, Don't tell them that we're getting orders from Denny's, man.
Revealed like the secret leader at the top of the pyramid.
It sought to prove that systematically across the country, in every state where there was a Denny's, servers were always bringing blacks to the crappier tables and it was like they were taking longer to serve them food and giving them low quality food.
They were doing this on purpose?
You want to talk about a conspiracy theory?
The corporate execs at Denny's are communicating to the staff at every Denny's everywhere, which has to have a huge turnover rate.
Once you get a job at Denny's, you're not staying there forever by any means to constantly do these itty-bitty injustices to black people who are showing up for 40 minutes to give you money.
You know, it's like, that's, you know, that's a conspiracy theory.
They really do believe.
There's that old Eddie Murphy skit where he dresses up as a white guy and goes out into society as a white guy.
And, you know, he's on the bus and the last black person gets off the bus, obviously the other whites don't know Eddie Murphy is there.
And they all just start spontaneously celebrating and champagne is produced.
He goes to the bank and there's a black bank manager who's like, sir, this is absurd.
You have no credit.
No, I'm not giving you a loan or something.
And this white manager looks panicked and shoos the black manager and says, no, here you go, sir.
We don't even want you to pay it back.
It's just free.
It doesn't matter.
And I think there's a lot of people who really think this is how it is.
I mean, they always say, well, white people have life on easy mode.
And to, as gamers are in fact the highest race, we will use a gaming analogy here.
If we are to say that this is life on the easy mode, what does that mean?
It means you get certain buffs, certain advantages built into the system because of what you have.
Extra weapons.
Right, exactly.
Plus ten armor or something like that.
But then if we look at how people actually behave, are people trying to identify as white?
No.
They're trying to claim identity in all these different groups to the point that it's becoming a big problem, like the Atlantic talked about today.
And we can think of a million cases of this.
Rachel Dolezal being probably the most infamous, but would we know who Elizabeth- She was a trendsetter.
Right!
I mean, she was way ahead of the curve.
People make fun of her, but she was like a vanguard of this.
Everybody does.
This is also the essential point, is that I would argue race is real.
It's a biological Reality, it has consequences.
That's a scientific theory, so it could be true or false.
Whether or not you think it's real or not, the system deals with us as whites, and so we have to deal with that in that sense.
So it's both a biological reality and a social construct in some sense.
But the social construct is coming from the people who are in power now, and they're not on our side.
But even given that I believe in race as a real thing, I would say that the line between sexes is a lot harder, a lot more defined I should say, than the line between different racial groups.
No question.
And yet, we are told, and you will lose your job if you say something like this on Facebook, we are told that if you don't think a man can become a woman just because, you don't even need to have surgery or hormones or whatever else, you just wake up and feel that way, and then that becomes an extremely rigid category that you're in.
And you should be able to compete in sports with this group and do everything else with this group.
You are part of this group.
We are told that is normal.
But we're also told that somebody trying to pass as another race is not normal.
In fact, it's actually a moral wrong.
Because there was real outrage against Rachel Dolezal for doing this.
But it still matters who you are when you fake it.
Elizabeth Warren suffered no consequence for faking her American Indian heritage.
The cookbook name was Pow Wow Chow.
I mean like that's right. That's right. Well, it's beautiful and also like
You know, it's like okay So like if you are if you are a liberal and you know
You're on the left and like all of these racial questions like you know
You believe that like what justifies like quotas and affirmative action and set-asides and all of these things
is like that's to make up the difference For like the systemic oppression you face, you know day in
and day out. So like if If you accept that, which Elizabeth Warren obviously does believe that to be true, then somebody who can pass socially as white
Taking, like, a job that was set aside for, like, a non-white is, like, super morally wrong.
Right.
Right?
Because, like, obviously, like, Elizabeth Warren has never faced any kind of discrimination for being American Indian.
Like, even if it had been true that she was, like, 10% Indian or something, like, she's still, like, nobody ever made any rude comment to her about that.
She never, like, didn't get hired because she was an Indian.
But then, like, she got this gig at Harvard, like, largely because of her non-white ancestry.
Would we even know who she is?
So if you're a liberal, you basically stole a job from a genuinely non-white person.
Horseshoe theory of immigration restrictionists.
And that's what Warren did.
She took the DNA test and was like, oh yeah, I guess it was just...
Got mixed up, you know, it's just a misunderstanding.
And all of the wokest people on the left still were like, oh, yeah, she's my candidate.
Yeah.
You know, there's no consequence.
I mean, Rachel Dolezal, or however you pronounce it, I mean, she lost, like, everything.
I mean... Oh yeah, her life got completely ruined.
Yeah, just totally ruined.
And I mean, she came out recently and said, like, she couldn't even get a job as, like, a maid because, like, she's so famous and everybody hates her so much.
Right.
Which is, like, sad.
I mean, she should be able to work as a maid.
The interesting thing here is that she really believes it.
And this is also something that, you know, you always see me debating with Mr. Taylor about.
Are people operating in bad faith?
And we do have to concede that some of these people really believe it.
And those are the saddest cases.
Yeah.
Well, I think, yeah, poor, I think poor Rachel.
I mean, she thinks she's black.
Yeah.
I think, I think that's probably, that's probably true, which is like so weird to even like acknowledge that like out loud that there is just like this goofy, woke white woman out there who like, is just like so mixed up in like the insane like politics of race in the United States that is just like came to really view herself as as black like I mean the picture of her holding the book how to be black has got I mean it's just a picture of the century as far as I'm concerned it's just too perfect
I mean, every once in a while I see things like this and say, is reality just my fever dream?
Like, is this actually happening?
I mean, I couldn't script this.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
Reality being stranger than fiction and all of that.
But it's something that proves what we've been talking about, where we say, look, obviously People don't really believe this stuff because nobody would try to be part of an oppressed class if they really thought it was a depression.
Some would.
Actually, let me pull that back a little bit.
We do have some cases of people in their 20s.
I think we had an article about this on American Renaissance.
Where people would go up to Harlem or something like that and they would say, oh, I'm actually part black.
They would really get into jazz or whatever else.
And so you did have a certain kind of bohemian element that would get into that.
Of course, you could also argue that what they were doing is trying to get social status within this subculture.
Yeah.
Social status that they couldn't obtain in larger American society.
I'd say, you know, as a fundamental premise of human existence, most people want power and status.
Right.
And that competition is eternal.
And the way they justify it, even if it's through using the language of equality, is still serving the same end.
We would also view these people as really ill, mentally unwell.
Some of them definitely are.
Or they're cynical.
Black people have it so horribly.
We hear all these things, like every time black people leave their house in America, they're looking over their shoulder to see if there's a cop pointing a gun at them.
Police are just randomly firing at them.
Yeah, and how it's impossible to get a job, and how even your best white friends won't just randomly give you money.
Well, and all whites are racist now, too.
Right.
I mean, this is the thing.
Somebody, a reporter, shows a mic in your face and says, like, are you racist?
Well, all whites are racist.
I've read my Robin DiAngelo.
Why haven't you?
It's like, if you think life is truly that miserable for black people and then, like, elect to try and be as black as possible, like, that would be, like, the equivalent of, like, there was, like, this, like, tiny minority of, like, gay men in the 1980s who, like, sought out to get AIDS because they, like, well, I mean, for whatever reason, I'm not a psychologist, but that's universally understood to be like, there's something wrong with those people mentally and spiritually.
Those are really unwell people.
Those are really, really sick people.
They need help.
They need therapy.
When people are self-harming or talking about suicide, we don't say, this is great!
We say, no, this is a problem.
And this is one of the things.
Nobody is really an egalitarian when it comes to something like, say, medical care.
You know, if somebody comes up to you and says, you have cancer, you don't say, well, it would cost a million dollars to cure this cancer, which could be used to help a million people overseas.
So actually, I won't take any care.
I mean, at the end of the day, people do have... I will make a gentleman's wager with you.
I think the first instance of somebody doing that is on the horizon.
I think within two or three years, we will read in the news about some case of somebody who you know like some like you know really wealthy really woke
person like from like the bay area or maybe new york city or something who like publicly
announces that they're going to like forego some huge operation that would save their life and
instead like give the money to like the NAACP or BLM or whatever. You could argue that's still a
pursuit that's pursuit of status though because media you know if yeah
I mean, this is the thing.
The question is not, alright, so like the one clip that everybody remembers when Trump was inaugurated, the girl screaming, you know, the, no!
Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
What a lot of people point out is right before she does it, she does a quick look around to make sure that people are watching.
Now, in the Bible, you know, what does Christ say?
He says, when you're fasting, don't be like the Pharisees and smear your face with ashes and go, you know, blundering about being like, oh, look how much I'm sacrificing, look at how I'm doing these things.
It's like, no, go to your house and pray to your father in secret because he'll see everything.
You're doing these things because you do it for its own sake or because you believe in God and God will reward you.
But what we have now is there's no point in victimization unless you can broadcast it to the media.
Which is why I'd say when all is said and done, it's control of media power that determines outcomes now.
And it's shockingly blunt.
It's just a case of Capturing an outlet in the same way that imperialists a hundred years ago would talk about capturing like, I don't know, a coaling station in some godforsaken place in the Pacific.
Right, right.
I mean if you have this thing and you just put out whatever propaganda, no matter how laughable, no matter if it's a complete lie, you're gonna get 60% of the people or so to believe it.
Yeah.
And the 40% who don't are gonna end up believing in a counter-narrative that might even be more ridiculous, which is like the whole QAnon thing.
Well yeah, and you end up with like a lot of You know, a lot of, sort of, like, symbiosis between, like, you know, sort of, like, left-wing outlets that just, like, rely on outrage and right-wing outlets that, like, rely on, on outrage.
Providing that outrage.
Yeah, like, they really do, they really do just, like, feed off each other to, like, such an extent that you could, like, even argue that, like, both are, like, reactionary.
Yeah.
Like, both are just, like... And that everything's fake.
I mean, this is sort of the, this is sort of the thing, is that so much of what we watch... Take whatever people are freaking out today.
I mean, the fact that I don't know, some celebrity will make a tweet or somebody will mutter something about like Putin or some other stupid case or you'll see some criminal case but it's not even like a really serious criminal case like somebody was walking through a store and felt like somebody was following them because they thought they would shoplift and this is a national crisis.
We do have real problems in this country, and we do have cases where people die, easily avoidable things happen because of bad government policies.
I mean, just to take one example from the COVID pandemic, there was that case which everybody saw on social media, people saw it even though the media didn't really want to report on it, where you had that old white man who was in a nursing home in Michigan, And this younger black guy who had clearly had some professional training as a boxer, because you could tell the way he was breathing out when he hit, and he filmed himself beating this guy.
And unless I'm mistaken, a few weeks later, the older man died.
Of course, no follow-up from the media.
So everybody on our side, so to speak, immediately went, oh, black-on-white violence and everything else.
But I did a little digging, and it turns out that the reason that black guy had been put in the nursing home is because he had been suffering psychiatric episodes.
His father had said, wait a minute, there's something wrong with my kid.
Went to the hospital, they found out he had COVID, and only then did somebody make the decision to say, oh, let's send him to a nursing home.
So like what I mean on two levels why would you send a guy with COVID to the population that's the most vulnerable and a guy who's like mentally unstable and was literally brought to your attention because he's mentally unstable?
I mean it would be like this guy's mentally unstable like let's give him a machine gun and let him run loose in the hospital.
We're seeing the same sort of thing with Cuomo now.
Where the scandal, the real scandal here is that a lot of people are dead because of the way he mishandled the COVID pandemic.
This is the same guy that President Biden said was the gold standard of how these things should be handled.
And just when that story is creeping up, all of these accusations, all of which were made years ago apparently, suddenly come out.
Now I'm not saying these women are wrong or that these things didn't happen.
But I'm saying that, why weren't we hearing about these things in 2017, 2018?
We're not the ones covering it up, it's the journalists who weren't reporting on these stories.
Right, and still, the real scandal is the handling of COVID.
It's not these random accusations of misconduct, which might be true and might not be true, but as far as real genuine like harm to the world like the COVID thing
killed like you know like thousands of people tens of thousands of people
Like you know versus you know like all of these me too allegations
It's just like you know maybe maybe they're all true, and maybe he should resign because of them like you know
But I don't know you should But that should have happened three years ago if they're all true.
Right.
And again, it's still nothing in comparison to the damage he did to the city.
Or to the state, yeah.
Yeah, right, to the state, excuse me.
And you see that just over and over again.
This is something that the anti-woke left, or the more populist left, Talks about a lot, and I really agree with them.
Two days ago, Mumford & Sons was trending on Twitter, Mumford & Sons being this hipster band, and one of the guys tweeted out praise for Andy Ngo's book on Antifa, so he was made to resign from his position in this band because he liked a book.
Um, you know by like a gay Asian guy You know and like that was like a story I mean that was like reported on and like written about and it's like oh haven't you heard though when Andy Nego tweets out You know, the photos of these guys who get arrested.
That's actually a kill list.
They think these things are real.
This is what kills me.
They think these things are real.
That there are guys hiding in the bushes like Delta Squad guys who are waiting for the signal from somebody.
It's also just like, you know, to the extent of which like tweeting out somebody's mugshot is like a dox, it's like, well, it's not a dox in freakin' Portland, you know?
Who's, you know, it's like, okay, so then everybody knows you got, like, arrested, like, at...
And got immediately released, right?
Right, at this big event in one of the most liberal cities in the country, what's going to be the negative consequence?
As far as arrest records are concerned, the way that really affects you is if you're trying to get a job or housing and they do background checks so whether or not Andy No tweets about it or not is totally irrelevant.
Right.
With all these people I get obsessed with, this is a kill list and somebody from the Mumford & Sons tweeting about it amplifies the kill list.
What were the most recent deaths because of the opioid crisis?
That's something that really affects people, right?
That's really impactful.
That's really tragic.
People die.
This is an ongoing crisis.
This is really, really sad.
We've got to do something about this.
This is an ongoing crisis.
This is really, really sad.
We gotta do something about this.
But it's like, no, we're gonna talk about what a D-list celebrity tweeted about.
Well I think the biggest thing is that these fake stories affect normal people more than
the stories that actually matter.
I mean, when you see a celebrity or something like that... Why do you think that it is?
Try and blow my mind on those things.
I don't get it.
I was really struck by that History Has Begun book, which I reviewed.
That's right.
His case that essentially hyper and this isn't unique to him.
I mean, this is pretty common among like theorists and stuff, but hyperreality is more real than reality.
And so this idea of it's not that you're living vicariously through media experiences or through these things you watch on television everything else like this is your life.
And in fact, it's the only life that really matters.
So when people when you're hearing about people dying of opioids or you hear about A typical small story like a crime or something like that, that doesn't have a moral significance, that doesn't have like a cosmic meaning.
And people need meaning, and they need myth, and they need these kinds of things to get like value out of their life and feel like they're doing something.
And I think the media has the power to provide those things.
And they are.
We're recording, we're recording.
Okay.
Theogic, uh, theocracy.
I mean they, Paul Godfrey said, We live under what he called the secular theocracy.
Multiculturalism and politics of guilt.
Absolutely agree with that.
And this is why the whole distinction between Black Lives Matter, All Lives Matter, and all those stupid games is actually important.
When they're saying black lives matter what they're saying is not that they're not literally saying white lives don't matter what they're saying is that black lives matter and we have to say that because they are the ones who are suffering under this system of oppression and therefore we need to draw extra attention to it and make it our life's work to remove it that kind of thing.
But really what's happening is it's some lives matter because we can point to cases in our country I would argue pretty much all Black-on-white violence in this country could be laid at the media's feet because you're just feeding these people grievances decade after decade about how they're being oppressed, how they're being killed, how they're being beaten in the streets.
And how evil white people are and how implicit all whites are.
And now we're at the point where it's inherent.
This is a key point because now There is no escape from it.
You can't not be racist.
It's deep into your bones.
There's no way you can be forgiven for it.
It doesn't matter how many classes you go to.
It doesn't matter how many self-criticism sessions you go to.
We're all in this big racist boat together.
And so, if you have it where racism is the most evil thing imaginable, and we are all guilty of it, no matter what we do, what's the takeaway from that?
And so when you see these cases, and there is something kind of lurid, we're conditioned almost to be like, ugh, I don't want to get into this, when you read some case of a white kid shot by a black guy or something like that, and try to make it a big crusade and everything else, because if you want to get into it, there's always, okay, there's this personal thing, or there's this whatever circumstance, or this is just one of those things that happens, but we actually have to keep ourselves from falling into that, because we look at these other cases, like the George Floyd thing, I mean, there are, what, thousands of those cases, like every year, where you have uncomfortable interactions between a black guy who keeps lying to police, and the police trying to subdue the guy without being a giant thing.
Most of American life is organized around trying to move away from guys like George Floyd, and like commit petty crimes, and just generally make life annoying for everyone.
Then you have this, and now he's a Christ figure.
I mean, they actually had a ruling in the trial where they, I think the defense somehow got the judge to rule that the prosecution can't explicitly compare Floyd to Christ.
You're kidding me.
No, no, that's a real ruling.
So like, that is where we're at.
And so the reason why these media narratives are so important is because it is the center of their moral view.
It's the center of where they get meaning out of life.
I mean you read these cases about so-and-so gets caught at the Capitol or so-and-so does this and immediately the friends and the family and all this stuff starts going nuts and going crazy and I think it's No different than the Middle Ages, if somebody was accused of being a witch or a blasphemer or something like that.
Yeah.
No, I think there's a strong analogy to that, but... I don't know, I, uh...
Why so many people care more about what one member of the Mumford & Sons tweets about versus, like, all of these, like, very real and, like, very tragic, like, injustices that, like, there's no shortage of, you know, even if you're not, like, a white advocate or something, I mean, just things like, you know, like, stagnant incomes for the middle class or, like, you know, like, the generational differences between, like, you know, millennials and baby boomers and, like, how easy it is to, like, buy a house even if you have, like, a normal middle class job.
To me it's like...
One income family, so that's probably impossible now.
Sure, sure.
You know, the double income trap, which is an Elizabeth Warren book.
Yeah, she used to be...
You know, these are, to me, these are really interesting stories and there is this really
like human hook to them.
I mean, they are like, a lot of them are really salacious.
I mean, I guess not like the income stuff, but you know, with like, you know, heroin use.
Yeah, with J.D.
Vance, you know, when they made his book into a movie, and of course now he's being spoken of as possibly a Republican Senate candidate for Ohio.
That's right.
The response on social media was outrage that this movie had been made.
Because you're not even supposed to know about these stories.
The very idea that white people can face obstacles is in itself white supremacist.
So yeah, this is why I work for American Renaissance.
It's because we live in a world as evil as that.
There's outrage over reporting on You know, horrific situations that face, you know, almost exclusively, you know, the opiate crisis is almost entirely a white crisis.
You know, the fact that, like, reporting on that is viewed as evil by, like, so many powerful people, it's like, yeah, this is, this is why, like, Amaranth's mission is, like, really important.
We need to, like, we need to change that.
Like, that's not okay.
And, like, we're like, you know, whites are gonna have to stick up for themselves as whites to, like, to fight back on that narrative.
The thing is, nobody starts here and You end up here because this is where you have to end up.
I mean it doesn't matter if you don't believe in race, race believes in you.
They're coming after you for these reasons and you can call yourself whatever you want.
You can invent whatever religious denomination you want.
You can create whatever stupid category you want.
You're even seeing this within the woke circles where among gays or among transgenders or whatever or just among progressive groups where If a white person has a leadership role or says something, you've got to get to the back of the progressive stack.
I mean, your concerns just do not matter.
And so your choice is basically put up with that, and you're not going to get any moral credit for it anyway, or fight back.
Take your own side.
That's right.
I mean, this kind of is also the broader thing of why we need to pay more attention to the old left, and I think the valid critiques and lessons it has teach us.
But I mean, the old left, the old progressive movement, I mean, even the old Marxist movement just have nothing in common with the Jacobin magazine type socialists of today.
I mean, you would probably know more about this than I do in terms of, I mean, is it, can we even speak of them as being part of the same tradition anymore?
Yeah, I mean, you sort of grapple with this question in regards to almost anything, you know, there's, I mean, we can sort of arbitrarily pick a date on this, but like, There is this before and after, the question of race and racial equality in regards to everything.
Say after, I don't know, 1969, everybody suddenly magically, overnight, the big narrative becomes we are all equal and racism is bad.
Socialists like Jack London would have disagreed.
Right, again, I know I'm picking an arbitrary date, but you've got to, for the sake of You know, like cohesion, like you have to just sort of like pick a line, you know, at some point in like the late 60s or the early 70s, like kind of everything about Western society starts to move in this direction of like any kind of discrimination is evil, all the races are equal, and like that affects everything.
There's no segment of society that isn't changed and isn't affected by that.
Like we could talk about, you know, you say like how much does like, you know, Jack London have in common with like people who write for Jacobin Magazine today?
It's like you can play the same question of like, How much did the Pope of the 1920s have in common with the Pope of today?
There's no corner of society in the West, there's no subculture that doesn't have this big before and after.
So how much does anything before, you know, like 1969 have in common with anything after 1969?
Yeah, I was thinking of the May 68 riots as sort of like the departure point.
In Europe, I know, they always talk about, what was it, generation identity?
Yeah, abolishing 1968.
But even in the 68, that is, but even with 68, I mean then, with the rise of surrealism and a lot of these things that they were talking about, the whole new left intellectual milieu that had been created, It was less focused on race than it is now for the simple reason that you just didn't have that many non-whites in France.
I mean it was really after de Gaulle gave up Algeria and he did that actually to prevent mass Muslim migration into France and obviously that didn't work out too well.
I mean I think that one of the biggest problems, the problem, is that we can't talk about any problem If we're not allowed to point out the most obvious thing in the room, which is the racial question.
And we can't talk about income inequality, we can't talk about healthcare, we can't talk about education, we can't talk about competing with China, we can't even talk about who we are.
Who's the we in this question when they say the United States of whatever?
It could possibly have less relevance to my life than whether the United States is screwing around in the Pacific or not.
The only thing that could happen if quote-unquote we win a victory is like my taxes will go up and the people who are doing everything they can to restrict my freedom of speech and my freedom to operate Everything that I like to do will gain more power.
Yeah.
And so, I mean, this is why I like to say, you know, it's not the Kurds who are the world's largest stateless people.
It's us.
Yeah.
It's whites.
And it's all whites.
And I include the Europeans in that because, I mean, can we even meaningfully say George Orwell, who, of course, was a democratic socialist.
He was not this conservative that conservatives like to pretend.
Of course, conservatives also like to pretend Martin Luther King.
Orwell wrote a lot during World War II about how there were going to be great social changes after the war.
The destruction of the old aristocracies and everything else.
Me, of course, thought this would be a good thing.
But he said that there would still be an England.
I think the essay was called England, Your England.
I think it was England, Your England.
He basically said that a nation can't be unmade without some dramatic catastrophe, and it's like, no.
No.
There is no England.
There's a reason why Churchill's statue and Lord Nelson's column and all the rest of this, they haven't been taken down yet, but they eventually have to come down.
There's a reason why when we say, oh, they're going after Robert E. Lee, they're going to go after Washington, then they're going to go after Roosevelt, they're going to go after Franklin Roosevelt eventually, too.
Yeah, that's right.
It has to go this way, because the nature of the ideology is that there are no breaks.
It has to go all the way to full negation.
Yeah, so it turns out there were breaks on the Trump train, but there are not any breaks on this train.
No.
Was there ever a Trump train?
The real train is the platformings we made along the way.
Right, that's right.
The thing with President Trump is that I've just never seen anyone who...
The reason I think so many people liked him in 2016 were the reasons that conservatives said he was bad.
Because he talked about in his books about loyalty being the number one virtue and getting even with people who screwed him over and all this kind of stuff.
And I was like, yeah, that's actually what I want.
I want somebody who's not going to forgive betrayal.
Now, I have never seen anyone just People fall over so many times.
I mean, like Sideshow Bob walking on the rake just over and over again.
People just keep doing this to him and he keeps going with it.
And at a certain point it's either they have something on him or he's just not that smart.
Well, we'll have to do another episode on Trump and the Trump legacy and presidency and everything.
He's a catastrophe and yet unquestionably he was the best president of my life.
And it's not even close.
We'll cut that sentence and we'll have that be the opening for the next one.
I dare say we've got to wrap up our pilot here.
I think that one of the big things we have to talk about when we talk about right and left and why we have to get beyond these categories is look it's obviously nothing new when people in our circle say things like beyond right and left and that's almost become sort of a Oh, third position, that just equals racist.
That's how it plays out.
But really, right and left, I used to think of myself as just ultra-right because, and Julius Evola, who of course had a big influence on me, talks a lot about what it is to be a man of the right and everything else.
But ultimately I would say, if the left's primary order is egalitarianism, the right's is hierarchy and the idea of greatness.
But even that, you're just defending the establishment.
You're defending a situation that may need change.
I mean, really, instead of right and left, we should almost be talking about order versus chaos.
And you do need both those forces to some extent.
I would just say that the latter is way more prominent now than it has any right to be.
But I mean, even the question of conservatism at this point, this is the most obvious thing, What exactly is there left to conserve?
I mean, do we want to conserve this order?
And to me, as far back as Barack Obama's re-election, the answer is no.
Yeah.
No, there's not a whole lot of institutional anything that I seek to conserve.
I mean, what, like protect the Supreme Court and its power and everything?
I don't get it.
There are ways of life and like you know they're like people i want to protect and like you know they're they're regions of the country that i don't want to be like further molested but conserve is like way too strong a word because there are things i also want to like change about those right i don't i don't want to
Nor do I want to just, like, you know, pedal backwards and just, like, you know, make Ohio great again by somehow finding a weird policy way of, like, maneuvering it back to where it was in, like, you know, 1970 or something.
Right, right.
You know.
And again, I mean, it's been said before, but, like, you know, even if you could rewind the VHS tape, wouldn't the movie play out the same way again anyway?
Right.
So, yeah.
But, um, anyway, I think we'll maybe leave it there for now.
Thanks everyone for listening to what we hope to be a new weekly podcast on Ameren.
This is Chris and Greg and this has been great.
▲
Export Selection