Know More News - Adam Green - Non Schizo Nationalism - Keith Woods & Adam Green

All Episodes

Previous Next

Dec. 5, 2024 - Know More News - Adam Green

01:25:52

Non Schizo Nationalism - Keith Woods & Adam Green | Know More News

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to No More News.
	I am Adam Green.
	Thank you all for joining me today, Thursday, December 5th, 2024.
	The year's almost over, and we're bringing you another big-time influential guest, a heavy hitter, the powerful Keith Woods.
	Wanted to have him on for a while.
	He is a writer, content creator, and activist.
	He is Ireland's most wanted.
	There's my background music.
	Ireland's most wanted.
	He's got a new book out.
	He's the author of Nationalism, The Politics of Identity.
	He just sent me over the digital copy.
	I can't wait to read it and discuss that with him today.
	He was kind enough to have me on his stream to debate some good opponents on Christianity.
	So it's good to finally talk to him and hear about his new book.
	And there's lots to talk about.
	So thanks a lot for being here.
	Keith, what's up, man?
	How you doing?
	Hey, Adam.
	It's good to be here.
	Yeah, I know we've been waiting a while to do this, but yeah, you had a couple of good debates on my channel.
	I think it was, if I'm remembering right, it was Tyler Hamilton and Arville were your two opponents, right?
	Yep.
	Yep.
	Two of the better opponents.
	The Arville debate was the one that ended up going on for like three and a half hours or something, and it's just turned into a long discussion on every imaginable topic.
	Yeah, we did a follow-up too.
	He had me on his show, and we did a follow-up.
	It was cool.
	He's a cool guy.
	I like him.
	Yeah, yeah, I like Arville.
	And just let everybody know, I like Keith, too.
	I think he's a great follow.
	I think he's definitely one of the more intelligent guys in the sphere.
	I'm sure we agree on some things, but I don't think we agree on a lot of important things.
	So it's good to have you here.
	And how's the book going?
	Well, I think, I mean, there's probably not a whole lot of people you're in full agreement with, you know, so I think it's the fact that we've never had a fact that we've never had a huge bust up on the on the timeline is probably that's that's kind of enough for me you know you know uh yeah i like and retweet you we've never had a had a beef so that's we're basically besties in today's day yeah i think that's as good as it's gonna get honestly um but yeah the book's going well uh getting good feedback good reviews you can see us all five star reviews there that's helping the
	sales and yeah got a burst of early sales it kind of helped with discovery a bit which is good because obviously you release something like this the idea is to reach a new audience with it and yeah from what i can gather it's getting suggested to a new audience a lot on amazon if you search nationalism i think it's the top non-sponsored result or if you search terms like identity politics so it's good that was the idea you know get something out there that's digestible that's presentable for people that aren't fully
	with us and maybe they'll pick it up out of curiosity or maybe they'll be on a kind of red pill journey and it'll appeal to them and uh yeah seems to be going pretty well in that regard awesome good to hear it happy to hear i'm writing a book myself so i'm hoping to uh get some good reviews and i'm sure i'll have some hater reviews for sure but uh also interesting is this going to be like a christianity takedown or what's what yeah the jesus deception isn't there isn't that
	the isn't there a name isn't that um who's that guy who wrote the biography of ted kaczynski i think you've talked to him before yeah yes gurbina yeah his book is the isn't that the i thought that was the name of his book the jesus okay yeah okay there we go yeah close but different good good book yeah yeah we definitely uh agree on the main premise but there's differences and i'm going into a whole lot of different stuff his is a very introductory it's a
	short book but um i need to get him back on actually i've had him on a few times and it's been a while you should have him on that'd be good uh or or i was thinking also like i could suggest some cool books about christianity for you and you could do uh if you want if you like as my daughter says write up a one on your uh sub stack i think that would be cool i was reading one of your sub stacks the other day the the war eight bring me over to your team well aren't you already bring me to the dark side i've heard
	you're you said you're a lapsed catholic i read this article you're talking about evolution i i hear
	people saying that you're a platonist so yeah you liked the war apps article did you yeah i thought it was cool definitely yeah yeah and um so so your book the politics of identity instantly it makes me think of identity politics which is like you know a term that's got a really negative connotation especially in the right like the idea that you're not allowed to identify as a people with your people basically only white
	people aren't allowed to identify with white people everybody else is like praised and you know encouraged to to a large degree so is that was that on purpose it's it's trying to read recapture and and rehabilitate the image of identity politics uh yeah i was trying to think of a sub pattern for a while Someone else actually suggested that and I liked it.
	I just thought I just thought it fit as a nice kind of uh one-line explainer but yeah i mean a lot of the book i have a few a couple of essays in there that is basically a defense of white identity politics so you know i guess part of the book is like kind of me theory selling about like you know uh there's all these kind of academic deconstructions of nationalism, mostly from like Marxist academics, that this is like a 18th century invention.
	This is like a thing that the elites create to generate mass culture and control people.
	Or nationalism was this thing that was necessary for the development of capitalism because you needed to have like educated workforce and you needed to bring people into mass society and you needed to bring these people together that didn't have anything in common or they only had kind of local loyalties.
	And so you invent this idea of the nation state.
	So these are kind of the dominant ideas in academia.
	And I've kind of spread from the sociology departments out into the popular consciousness.
	You know, you'll find like the popular YouTube video essayists will kind of spout this kind of thing as if it's super insightful.
	But there really isn't much to back it up, but there's very few dissenting viewpoints on that.
	There's very few people that want to defend that in an academic way.
	Some of it is me kind of theory selling.
	I have a couple of historical studies like the Roman Empire, the Holy Roman Empire.
	But yeah, some of it is arguing for the necessity of identity politics for white people in the here and now.
	What does it say about that?
	What do you say about the Roman Empire?
	Yeah, so I have an ethical ethno-politics in the Roman Empire.
	So it's become popular.
	I mean, you see a lot of, there's a lot of left-wing historians, especially in Britain for some reason.
	This is very popular.
	They have, I don't know, there's a history, BBC and stuff, they do a lot of coverage of the Roman Empire.
	But they'd like to promote this idea that Rome was this like the first multicultural state.
	And they'll point to Rome and say, you know, it was just about citizenship.
	They just had the civic conception of identity.
	And it's like the perfect example of like nationalism is this new modern thing.
	Rome was this cosmopolitan empire.
	So yeah, because I had this viewpoint, that was some of these examples were curious to me.
	It's like, okay, well, you know, if ethnicity is something that is important, I think, through history and always informs the way people think and act, and race is such a clear reality, then there must be more to this story.
	So I started looking at the Roman Empire, and you actually find that, you know, the idea of race and even a kind of proto-Italian nationalism was always there in the Roman Empire.
	I was actually surprised, like the extent of it.
	You know, I was expecting to find that there'd be some kind of like racialism or ethnic hierarchy.
	But what I was surprised to find was that actually like in the middle Roman Empire, they had a clear understanding of what Italians were.
	And they would talk about the Italian race.
	And okay, they had different like Italic ethnic groups.
	You know, you had the Romans and the Etruscans and different groups.
	But you find these writers like in the middle of the Roman Empire that are talking about like the racial qualities of the Italians and why they're superior to like the Greeks or the North Europeans.
	And they also have like a clear idea of the boundaries of what that is, which is basically modern-day Italy.
	And you find even in like the later Roman Empire, which is supposed to be this super, you know, cosmopolitan, multicultural place, you still have like Roman empires and senators.
	They're like, they trace their genealogy to show that they're Italian or to show that they're, you know, even one of like the privileged Italian groups like Romans.
	So, you know, racial thinking, uh, sense of Italian nationhood, that was always at the center of it.
	And then I realized as well, you can't really understand a lot of the history if you don't recognize these basically racial differences.
	Like even if you look at the history, um, when Hannibal was invaded in northern Italy, you find that he's he's actually making appeals to some of these northern tribes that are under Roman rule saying, you know, you guys, you Celts, like you're a proud race.
	You shouldn't have to live under the rule of these foreigner Romans.
	You know, we'll give you freedom.
	And you find that every group that joined him and turned on the Romans was like a non-Italian ethnic group.
	And every group that joined up with the Romans and continued to fight, even when it looked like totally impossible odds, they were Italians.
	So it turned into this kind of racial conflict of like Italians are fighting these outsiders for their survival.
	And that's the kind of appeal they're making because, like I said, it seemed like they had no chance of winning.
	And then you have these other groups that are turning on the Romans.
	And it's this appeal of like, well, the Italians and the Romans treated us as second class.
	So, you know, it's like it was like the more I looked into the history, the more it's like, not only is this idea that these like pre-modern empires were colorblind and multi-racial, not only is that wrong, but it's like race, ethnicity is like central to every aspect of the history.
	So I thought that was a good example to use to demonstrate the point.
	You know, I had a debate with an Orthodox Christian and he like made a video trying to demunk my points.
	And one of the things he kept repeating over and over again that was he said the Jews invented the ethno-state and the idea of race.
	And he kept saying the Roman Empire was multicultural and they didn't see race and it was the Jews.
	So he was like, oh, if you think you're a pagan and you want an ethno-state, like you're Jewish.
	That's what he was trying to say.
	Which is complete nonsense, of course.
	Right.
	What did the ancient Romans think of our ancestors, the Gauls in the Northwest?
	A different race, a different people?
	Obviously, weren't they at war for hundreds of years?
	Oh, yeah.
	Well, I have I did a follow-up one on the Holy Roman Empire about the origin of German identity.
	And it's kind of interesting because they kind of constructed the German identity out of Roman sources.
	You know, in terms of like German, like German tribes, you know, there's so many of them.
	They're so scattered.
	They're, you know, identifying them exactly.
	How do you do that?
	And by the time of the Holy Roman Empire, they did have a sense of Germanness.
	You know, they had the German language.
	They had the sense that they're a distinct race from French or the Italians.
	But they went to Roman sources.
	And Caesar and some of the other writers that were writing about the Germanics, I think it was Tacitus that wrote Germania, right?
	But he gave like a clear boundary to Germany.
	And that's kind of the Germans kind of took down and ran with it.
	And, you know, obviously the Romans portray their enemies as much more barbaric.
	But there was kind of respect for the Germanics in that like the warrior culture, the hero culture, the fact that they were so independent and so resistant to.
	Can you talk about like families and mono he talked about families too, Tacitus did, right?
	And like honor, their honor, and their something.
	Yeah, that was the big thing the German writers took from it is like you had you had like sort of an intellectual project in the Renaissance of these German scholars were trying to intellectually defend, okay, what is the German nation.
	And they were responding to Italian writers that had this great Roman history to draw on and the great achievements of the Italians.
	But yeah, the Germans basically took these Roman sources and were like, yeah, Tacitus said that we were heroic.
	We had this honor culture, this focus on family.
	And all of the things the Romans might have said were negative about them, that they were base barbaric.
	Yeah, yeah, they flipped that and were like, yeah, this is base.
	You know, this is more based than the Italians.
	So it is kind of interesting how, you know, from the Roman Empire, you get the construction of these nationalities after a lot of it is drawn on those Roman sources.
	So I just looked it up, Chat GPT.
	In Germania, Tacitus says that Germanic tribes practice monogamy with adultery being rare and severely punished.
	He contrasts this with other cultures.
	German strict marital fidelity set them apart.
	There you go.
	That's what I thought.
	And according to your northern Europeans, that their main strain was like Western European hunter-gatherers and that monogamy was a big thing with them, like a strict small family unit, that that was like that was like the ideal unit for like, you know, the harsh conditions of northern Europe and being hunter-gatherers.
	So I read your whole strands play out.
	Right.
	So this like identity and tribalism, like you'd write about in this article, goes back like the last million years, back to a huge clash with Neanderthals and Homo sapiens and how modern man evolved.
	And you make a good argument that it's through war, communicating through war, being hunters, surviving the winters is another one I've heard a lot.
	Oh, by the way, of course, you got the nationalism book.
	I see you just all over the place, like going all over the world to all this nationalist stuff, conferences, protests, demonstrations, and stuff.
	So you really are like the top nationalists in the world.
	Right?
	Do you give yourself that title, one of the top nationalists in the world?
	It's no question.
	I'll say one of the top, sure.
	But yeah, I mean, I guess that's a fun thing if you're covering this topic is you can equally apply some of it to like writing about the Holy Roman Empire or pre-civilizational early hominid warfare, which is actually a very interesting topic.
	Because again, it is a place where you find there's a lot of ideology.
	I think I even mentioned in that article.
	It might have been what made me write it originally is I was watching this Netflix thing about Neanderthals.
	And it's just so ideological.
	It's like, oh, you know, the terrible white guys that originally profiled the Neanderthals said there were these aggressive brutes, but actually they were like this harmonic society and probably feminists.
	And we destroyed it and wiped these people out.
	Aren't we terrible?
	I even saw something today.
	Some academic institution had to come out and make a statement of academics on Neanderthals to say Neanderthals were a separate species to humans.
	Because apparently there's been a big push from leftists to say that these weren't distinct species because they're concerned that if you start categorizing these different species of humans, that it like reinforces ideas of different subspecies of humans and basically enforces racial realism.
	Right, right.
	Well, they say that about evolution, right?
	They say if you believe in Darwin, he was a racist, so you're a Nazi, basically, is what I'll say.
	And that's another thing is some of the schizo, right?
	This is no schizo nationalism.
	People that deny evolution, I think, are basically schizos.
	If you're saying Genesis explains creation and not evolution, I consider that a form of schizo.
	Did you get attacked for doing an article about evolution?
	Not really.
	I mean, you always get a few replies of people like, you know, the world is 6,000 years old or whatever.
	I mean, I didn't come from no monkey.
	Yeah, yeah.
	I saw some of the UN's comments weren't happy about it, actually.
	It was published on Uns Review.
	But I think a lot of that was more like it was kind of like boomer anti-Semitism.
	I don't know how to describe it.
	They were like, they were like, oh, you're describing Neanderthals as violent stuff.
	They were like, this is how Jews describe Goyem.
	And I didn't even understand the argument exactly.
	Apparently, the Jews had invented these stereotypes, Neanderthals.
	It was actually right now.
	I'll hear it.
	Atheism is Jewish science.
	That's what I'll hear.
	The Christian.
	Yeah, but I mean, I mean, as far as like, well, taking Genesis, I mean, I wouldn't call that schizo necessarily.
	I mean, I think there's, you know, there's obviously you can adopt a religious worldview wholesale, and there's a certain, there's a certain rationality in, you know, taking a shortcut on some of these positions and not looking into them.
	But I mean, yeah, if you look into seriously, I think if you seriously look into the science, I think it is kind of hard to deny some kind of evolution.
	Even the Catholic Church now accepts evolution, right?
	I believe they do.
	Yeah, well, that's the thing.
	I mean, someone did take issue with it.
	But it's like, yeah, the Big Bang was formulated by a Catholic Jesuit priest, right?
	I think his name was Lefevre, a Belgian guy.
	And evolution, I mean, the Pope, as far as I can get from his statements, pretty much accepts it.
	I mean, it gets tricky because obviously the fall is very important to Christianity, and that gets kind of difficult if you accept the story of evolution, you only have like the first two humans.
	So that makes it difficult.
	But I mean, at the same time, the early church fathers and theologians never read The Fall literally.
	And even something like evolution, I'm not sure they would have had such a problem with.
	Some of the early church fathers, the fall was this thing that was supposed to have happened before time.
	And it was this kind of metaphysical transition and it explains why people are embodied in the world.
	So, I mean, this whole thing of like, you know, you have to take a non-literal approach to it.
	Otherwise, it's schizophrenia.
	This literalist stuff is very modern, really.
	Right.
	You know, I think like Luther was one of the first young earth creationists.
	He might have been the first because even Saint Augustine was saying, well, obviously Genesis isn't literally like seven days.
	Obviously, this has to be read mythically.
	So it is funny how modern it is and that they're like they're sort of in revolt against science.
	But it's like these like pre-scientific church fathers and stuff wouldn't have even seen a contradiction there necessarily.
	So in a weird way, they have like a very kind of modern way of thinking where they're like, well, I have to prove like materially that every word of the Old Testament is true to maintain my faith.
	It is kind of a weird modern like empiricist way of thinking.
	Do you write about Christian identity in your book?
	I did write a bit about birth rates, the birth rate collapse, and what those trends will mean in terms of the growth of smaller religious sects.
	But actually recently my sub-sec published an essay titled Secularism is Here to Stay.
	And I kind of revised some of the arguments I made around that.
	And I think, you know, I think people, I kind of concluded the more I looked at it that some of the, there's some of the people that have argued, you know, religion is going to have this huge rebound because of conservative people have more kids and stuff.
	Edward Dutton wrote a book about this.
	I've debated Andrew Wilson and Arvill about this, the birth rate.
	That was their go-to argument.
	That Jewish guy that wrote a book about what's this guy's name, Kaufman.
	He wrote the book about the white backlash to identity politics.
	He wrote a short book about this as well, The Religious Shall Inherit the Earth.
	But yeah, I got a bit more cynical on that the more I looked at it.
	I found a lot of the arguments for this big religious rebound are very misleading.
	I hope so.
	I hope you're right.
	I hope you're right because I say all the time we need a secularization on the right because the Bible thumpers, the Christian schizos, the opposing Israel and Zionism with more messianic apocalyptic Judaism that's rooted in a Jewish religion, I don't think is ever going to cut it.
	So we do need a secular right wing of regular non-schizo people.
	I say that all the time.
	So secularism is here to stay.
	I love it.
	I hope so.
	Yeah, I mean, one of my best, basically, my main argument is like a lot of the stuff that the like anti-secularization thesis bring to argue that things are going in the other direction are just misleading, basically.
	And that's the key problem with the whole thing is like all these arguments are basically built on bad data.
	And if you look at the rates of secularization, it's actually much worse than most people think in terms of, okay, you've European countries where maybe 70, 80% of the population says they're Christian.
	But if you look at the more relevant things to look at is like church attendance.
	And you find countries where it's like, you know, 3-4% of people are going to church on weekends.
	And one thing that one example that was always used, and this is what kind of made me originally look at like, well, okay, the secularization thesis must be wrong.
	These people that say religion is rebounded must be right is looking at the U.S. constantly books this trend.
	You know, it's the most modern, most developed place.
	It's been that way for decades.
	And yet, supposedly on the number of super religious.
	But even that, the more you look at that, that thesis kind of crumbles.
	Like, for example, people report in the U.S. that they go to church.
	Like 27, 28% of Americans say they go to church every weekend.
	There was actually two different studies done on this.
	One was a huge study that looked at like cell phone data and could actually check how many people were attending church services.
	And another was a big sociological study that did the same kind of thing, you know, looking in one region, like how many people are entering church.
	And both of them put the number at around 45%, which actually puts it in line with Europe.
	So there's a lot of stuff like that where it's like on paper, the U.S. seems like this big exception.
	But then it's like you look at it and it's like, well, you know, 60, 70% of people are pro-abortion.
	More than that are pro-gay marriage.
	And the church attendance rate is like the same as Europe.
	So it's like, okay, on paper, the U.S. is this big exception.
	But then you look at it and it's like, not really.
	And you find actually a lot of the religiosity is in these kinds of pockets of more homogeneous communities.
	And that's kind of an exception to Europe.
	But in terms of like a mass scale on a mass society, no, actually, every trend is going towards secularization in the U.S. as well.
	Christianity is collapsing in Europe.
	And as you say, oh, he just disappeared there for a second.
	And are you still there, Keith?
	You just took down the...
	Okay, cool.
	Just want to make sure you could hear me.
	So, yeah, it's collapsing in Europe, especially like in the last hundred years.
	And you're saying it's also collapsing in America, but there's definitely like a big, it seems like there's a resurgent on the right with Trump and Republicans and Trump selling his Trump Bibles and Alex Jones and Tucker Carlson and all these big E-celebs.
	They all promote Christianity as the solution.
	And Christianity is only really growing in non-European countries, right?
	But it seems like there's a resurgence.
	I hope that you're right, and it's not.
	I think that's misleading as well.
	I mean, you know, Trump took, I mean, Trump is like the most pro-gay Republican president ever, right?
	He's he normalized being pro-trans.
	You know, he was even using people's pronouns in the elections, and he had to do it because he's a politician.
	But he like he took abortion out of the GOP, you know, at the at the RNC last year.
	He took that was just to get elected, though.
	Now he's going to bring in Project 2025, probably.
	And Bibles in schools.
	Look at how even the, I think this was something I mentioned as well.
	I mean, look at how even the referendums went on abortion and even like super red states that are, again, like on paper, they're supposed to be like 90% Christian.
	But, you know, they're voting pro-abortion.
	So it's like, when you look at secularization or the question of how powerful religion is, I mean, the number of people that say they're Christian really means nothing.
	Because what secularization is, is that religion becomes less of an authority.
	So, you know, a lot of people have new age beliefs.
	Like you talk to the average young woman, you know, they believe they'll probably believe in all sorts of like pantheism and reincarnation and karma and stuff.
	But you still have a secular society because it doesn't really influence their behavior too much.
	It's just a kind of abstract belief.
	So if 90% of people say they're Christian, but then like 70% of the population are pro-abortion and gay marriage and, you know, there's just no rolling back of any of the secularization that's happened in government, it doesn't really mean anything.
	And yeah, when those things have gone to votes, like I said, even Republican areas have voted heavily in favor of abortion.
	It's cost politicians that were on the wrong side of that.
	It's, you know, Democrats put it front and center of their election campaign for a reason.
	And I don't know.
	I mean, I think if you just look back at like in 2012 or 2008, you look at like the Republican field.
	And it was like, you know, the evangelical Christian stuff was really front and center.
	I think Trump has led to a real decline in that.
	Even like, you know, Alex Jones, you mentioned him, but like, I don't know, if you listen to him, it's a very kind of like new age-y kind of Christianity.
	You know, it's not like this dogmatic Bible thumping thing.
	You know, he's also talking about like interdimensional beings on DMT when he's on Rogan and all this kind of thing.
	Those are the demons that attacked Tucker Carlson when he was in bed with his four dogs.
	The demon that scratched him.
	It's a real shame he didn't get any photos of that, right?
	The huge demon clause that he woke up with.
	No one thought to take a photograph.
	But yeah, I mean, it's that kind of, it's that kind of vibe, you know, even like Candace Owens, like it's this kind of, you know, Christianity is like one part of the package, but it's like, it's just kind of a part of this whole pile of beliefs.
	It's very new age-y.
	No, and I think, you know, you say Christian, like there's people are voting for abortion and gay stuff.
	Like, I think there are a lot of Christian believers.
	Christians will say they're not real Christians because of that, but Christianity evolves and progresses and changes.
	So they still may believe in most of the stuff of Christianity and go to church, and then they can just be, you know, accepting of that because that's the direction Christianity is going.
	But, you know, I want to read the super chat real quick.
	Alabama Yeoman for 100 says, I appreciate what you do.
	Take care of yourself and your beautiful family.
	Thank you so much for that very generous contribution.
	No, Keith, you mentioned the stats about Americans going to church.
	I remember seeing some statistics from the polling.
	And the more likely, the more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to be extremely pro-Israel and anti-racist.
	And I mean that, you know, like that's not how they worded it.
	But so it's not even a good thing of people going back to church.
	If this is dying, we should let it die.
	And don't be a nihilist and say we can't survive without the Bible.
	Let it die.
	Quit trying to salvage it.
	And we can move on.
	Don't you think?
	Well, I mean, at the same time, I mean, our kind of politics, like nationalist politics, in my experience, it's about 50-50 like Christian, non-Christian.
	And then I guess the non-Christian is a split of different things, like pagan, atheist, whatever.
	But certainly, I mean, there's definitely a bigger pipeline to our kinds of politics.
	Not your kind of politics, of course, but like nationalist politics in general of people that are conservative, traditionalist in temperament, and they tend to be Christian more.
	I have seen those statistics.
	They're kind of blackpilling, honestly, if you see like the rates of like pro-miscegenation and just basically like anti-racism of religious Christian people.
	It is kind of blackpilling.
	But at the same time, those people that are kind of out of lockstep with the modern church, a lot of those people are attracted to our politics.
	So I know you're all about alienating the Christians.
	I don't really agree with that.
	But the kind of broader trends you're talking about, unfortunately, do exist.
	I'm just for telling the truth.
	I think we need to put the Hebrew fairy tales behind us.
	They've been disastrous, and we're in the predicament we're in largely because of that.
	Look at the clash throughout Irish history of Christians versus Christians, Protestants versus Catholics.
	That unnecessary.
	Yeah, but that's really a proxy.
	I mean, that's really an ethnic conflict, you know, that you have Ulster Scott settlers in the north and you have Irish nationalists also sharing the island with them.
	And religion became a proxy there.
	I mean, religion in a certain sense, like in scenarios like that or in like the collapse of the Balkans, it does become a proxy for identity and like a way to strengthen identity.
	I think it kind of weakens identity, though, right?
	Because, you know, we're all one.
	We're all brothers in Christ.
	Like we have the controversy with this Christian guy that was calling out one of your friends and saying he adopted or fostered like a black kid or something.
	And they're like, oh, that's what a real Christian does.
	You're against that.
	Oh, you're not a real Christian.
	Like, most Christians are colorblind, especially today.
	In times of like racial, ethnic conflict, religion becomes a proxy for identity.
	And you can get this more like a hardline approach to faith.
	Like I said, with the even like the Balkan conflict, you have Croatian Catholics and you have Serbian Orthodox.
	And then religion suddenly becomes a lot more important to people because it's along this tribal division as well.
	And losing your religion is like losing, basically losing the fight to this other group.
	And in that case, it can be sort of a healthy sort of masculine expression.
	But yeah, I think it is.
	I don't necessarily agree with the thesis that Christianity necessarily led to liberalism in this colorblind society we have.
	I know Richard Spencer would make this argument, but I think certainly once you're there, it's difficult to then argue for a return to a racialist way of seeing things when people have the Christian idea of the universal dignity of man.
	Because, you know, and again, but my sympathies are with the nationalist Christians on this.
	You know, I'd like to support them and make that argument.
	But obviously, you know, you do see a lot of trads where we're siding with that guy and saying, well, yeah, you know, if the scripture, they're arguing that the scripture is on his side and that, you know, the black children being fostered have the equal capacity and dignity of the white children.
	So, yeah, that equality thesis is certainly a barrier for a lot of people.
	But like I said, at the same time, people that are of the temperament to be like traditionalist Christians tend to be attracted to our politics more.
	Yeah, I would say that they're heretical, not real Christians.
	If they're not putting Jesus first, then I would say...
	But we can agree to disagree slightly there.
	I want to ask you...
	I mean, you know, we're kind of already at the point.
	I mean, I'd share some of your criticisms as it goes for the Old Testament.
	I think the worst kind of Christian sects are the ones that are basically they kind of bring back the Old Testament, you know, in a way.
	Like it was better when Christians weren't reading the Bible and the Catholic Church was just interpreting it.
	And it was much more New Testament, Jesus-centric.
	But it's like the more literalist and the more Old Testament-centric you get, the more like Jewish in character.
	That's the problem.
	You can't get it's Christianity, the Christian identity is inextricably linked to Judaism and the Jews and the Old Testament.
	And like you said, you agree with the criticisms.
	Christians will only criticize the Talmud, but they won't criticize the Torah, which is like the root.
	Yeah, but I think, but I guess I guess where I disagree is I think like most Christians already, I think if you talk to the average Christian, they kind of have a way of expoping the Old Testament or making sense of it in a way that it's kind of metaphorical or it's secondary to the New Testament.
	And I think like most Christians, if you talk to them, it is much more New Testament-centric, Jesus-centric.
	That's different in the U.S., of course, because you've all these evangelical, upstart, like literalist churches, and they're heavily like, you know, boggle bashing Old Testament.
	But yeah, I mean, you know, I'm very sympathetic to kind of like, I guess, Marcionite reading of Christianity.
	You know, I think like if the, I think if Christianity was just a New Testament, I feel like we would never have had the same crisis of faith in the West.
	I feel like a lot of, even like a lot of young people that get attracted to like Buddhism and Eastern spirituality, like you kind of have that like universal teaching there in the New Testament.
	But then where people trip up is you have this much more like Bronze Age morality in the Old Testament and stuff that seems much more mythological in character.
	And I think people struggle psychologically trying to fit those together.
	And you kind of go two ways of either kind of go this New Age, like, well, you know, Jesus was just like a nice guy that was preaching love and peace, or you go this weird, like biblical literalist Protestant thing.
	And I think very few people kind of fall in the middle on that increasingly, especially as you have everyone reads now and can choose their own religion and stuff.
	But yeah, I think any issues I have would be some of the Jewish mythology in the Old Testament more so.
	Oh, I mean, the New Testament's Jewish mythology, too, based on the Jewish mythology of the old.
	This is your argument.
	Well, it is.
	I don't think it's not my argument.
	It's what the vast majority of all Christians believe, like without questioning.
	But let me ask you, let me shift gears a little bit.
	I don't want to get into a theological debate with you, but I do appreciate you for having me on to do those debates.
	I saw you had a sub stack about your case for Trump.
	It might have been somebody else's case that you were summarizing.
	That was an interview.
	I was interviewing Hunter Wallace.
	I let him make the big case for Trump.
	I don't know how convinced my audience was.
	A big part of his argument was like, we need Trump to win so he'll get off the stage and he won't run again in four years' time and we can just be done with him.
	That's a funny angle.
	That was one of his main arguments, but I felt like he wasn't.
	I was like, no, come on, Hunter.
	You want him to win.
	Come on, give me the real reason.
	And then I also saw you had an article saying that Trump would lose if he didn't change something.
	I had thought Trump was going to win for so long and he's going to come in and be another huge Zionist again.
	What do you think?
	What's your overall view of Trump's nominees?
	And he hasn't taken office until another month and a few weeks, but it's already looking.
	How is it looking in your view so far?
	Oh, well, I did a podcast on it recently, and I said, I think it is going to be the most Zionist administration in history.
	I think it already is if you look at it.
	That's what I've been saying.
	Yeah, and it's bad in a couple of ways.
	I mean, one is just the fact that, yeah, how extreme these people are.
	I mean, Mike Huckabee, the ambassador to Israel, like, I don't know if there's, I don't think there's ever been someone in that position that has those kinds of beliefs in terms of like he's full like Armageddon.
	Like, we need Israel to conquer all this land and bring about the end of the world.
	Like, I don't think anyone has ever, with those beliefs, has been put in that kind of position.
	It's an abomination to appoint somebody like that for that position.
	It's crazy.
	I mean, he won't use the terms for Palestine.
	He won't use terms of Gaza.
	He won't use terms for locations within the West Bank.
	He'll only use the biblical terms.
	It's really insane stuff.
	And the thing that he advocates for is Israel literally expelling every Palestinian, like just complete ethnic cleansing.
	And this is the guy they're sending as ambassador.
	And then Trump also recreated this position that he gave to Jared Kushner, special envoy to the Middle East.
	And the name escapes me right now, but he just appointed this Jewish banker, real estate investor.
	Hick Smith or something like that.
	He had no experience at all.
	Yeah, it's just he organized Jewish donors to support Trump.
	And so he gets his position.
	So, you know, it's bad in just how Zionist it is, but I think it's also bad in the fact that when the Biden cabinet was appointed, it was the most Jewish cabinet in history.
	But they weren't expecting Israel and Palestine to kick off, right?
	That was kind of a frozen thing.
	I think they were expecting that to basically just go on as it had.
	And then, you know, suddenly Israel is like front and center for a whole year.
	Everyone turns on Israel.
	Everyone is, you know, on the left and many on the right are frustrated with how much their governments are supporting Israel.
	And then you just have this like flood of noticing, you know, where it's like, okay, well, Blinken is Jewish and Victoria Newland and all of these people down the list.
	And, you know, that was getting to be a real problem for them because obviously the left wants to uphold this, you know, it's just Zionism, especially like during the Bush years, it was like, oh, it's Christian Zionism.
	It's because, you know, George Bush believes in this Gogamagog stuff.
	And, you know, the Jews are just like pawns in this, right?
	It's just, it's these like Texan oil barons and evangelical Christians.
	But that was getting really difficult.
	And even saw a lot of leftists that were always, you know, well, I'm just an anti-Zionist.
	You know, Jews are against Zionism.
	Even a lot of leftists were like, okay, you know, Blinken is going over to Israel saying, I'm coming here as a Jew and we're going to give you unlimited support.
	Like it was getting difficult for them to have a good cover story for all this stuff.
	You know, it's like, you're going to tell me like Jews have no power and they're just pawns of evangelical Christians.
	But then I look at the cabinet and it's like 50% Jews and all the foreign policy positions are Jews, you know?
	So people were noticing.
	But now it's like, yeah, we're going to see the horror in Gaza.
	Trump is threatening the biggest response ever if the hostages aren't returned.
	And we're going to be seeing all the stuff we've seen for the last year.
	But now it's going to be like, oh, well, look at Trump's cabinet.
	You know, there's no Jews there.
	It's all these white people.
	Well, there is.
	There is a few.
	Charles Kushner is the ambassador.
	Kushner's dad is going to be maybe the ambassador to France.
	There's Stephen Miller.
	There's Lee Zeldin.
	Yeah, there's a few, but it's not the glaring over-representation where you can flash up the chart of Biden's cabinet and it was like.
	The Christian Zionist in his cabinet are almost more, more worrisome.
	Like Pete Hegg, Seth, who's talking about rebuilding the, are, Sorry, go ahead.
	Yeah, I mean, compare Mike Hookaby's statements on Israel to Blinken.
	Because Blinken, at least with those kind of leftist, like internationalist Jews, they understand how it looks.
	Their people are elite liberal Democrats.
	They understand there's this kind of tension of like we're supporting this Jewish religious ethno-state.
	And they have a certain way of selling it to make it palatable, you know?
	And they know to pay the right lip service to Palestinian statehood and to present the U.S. as this kind of neutral arbiter.
	I mean, it's not believable, but they can put a certain gloss on it.
	But, you know, compare that to Mike Hookabee where he's like, well, there's no such thing as a Palestinian.
	And, you know, they can just go and live in other Arab countries.
	And Israel has to take all that land so we can fulfill biblical prophecy and bring about the end of the world.
	And they're God's chosen people, and that's the Holy Land, like, like, literally believing that and saying that and acting on it.
	I mean, let's go.
	There's Gorka just got announced, ultra-Zionist, counter-terrorism czar, Gorka, Zionist in.
	Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, Edelson Puppet, always been a Zionist.
	There's Christy Noam, head of Homeland Security.
	She signed that bill ensuring the protection of God's chosen people.
	Elise Stefanik at the UN.
	Yeah, she wanted a nationwide.
	Now, the head of Homeland Security wants anti-Semitism laws.
	They're pushing this IHRA definition everywhere.
	Elise Stefanik at the UN, another hardcore groveling Zionist.
	Pete Hegseth.
	Well, the Stephaniek that did the big thing with the heads of the universities getting them to condemn River to the Sea.
	That was her big claim to fame, right?
	Yeah, she tweets every day about the hostages as well and went over and groveled Netanyahu after October 7th, the big one, Pete Hegseth, the Department of Secretary of Defense, is in Israel on film saying he wants to rebuild the Turd Temple.
	Like I did that.
	Well, you should love that one, right?
	Because he has, I don't know if you saw, he has the tattoo on his arm in Hebrew and it's the Hebrew for Jesus.
	I think it's Yeshua, right?
	Oh, I didn't know he had a Yeshua.
	I know he had like the Jerusalem cross, like the Jerusalem Crusader cross and the Deus Volt.
	Also, but I didn't know he had Yeshua on there for Yeshua, which is like, it is so perfect because it's like, you know, he's the religious Christian that's in the cabinet.
	He's a super religious Christian.
	And it's like, it doesn't even make sense to get that in Hebrew.
	Like, Jesus wasn't speaking Hebrew or anything.
	So it's just like the total like Jew worship fronted center.
	It's crazy.
	Seeing if I can find that one.
	I wasn't aware that he had Hebrew.
	Are they going to show us a picture on here?
	Jerusalem.
	Yeah, I know one of those Israeli publications did a thing on it.
	Yeah, Yeshua.
	He's called it Yahweh.
	He doesn't even know the name of Yahweh.
	Okay.
	Wow.
	I think he got it done in Israel, did he?
	I thought I read that somewhere.
	Yeah, yeah.
	He got the tattoo in Bethlehem, Jesus' birthplace, located in the present-day West Bank, where he was reported for Fox Nation.
	You know, the Christians that lie about me all the time.
	When I went to Palestine in 2018, I went to the Church of Nativity.
	And it's an Orthodox church with Orthodox Christian priests in West Bank.
	Christian tourists line up there to touch where Jesus was supposedly born.
	With my group, we got to cut the line and go through another door and see everybody touching the thing.
	And I said, oh, we got the back door hookup at the birthplace of Jesus.
	These Christians circulating that, spinning it, that I said I had a Jewish hookup.
	And it's literally the birthplace of their God.
	So just some of the schizo stuff out there that we see, of course.
	Did you, did you encounter much, like when you're in the West Bank, is there much, you know, Israelis kind of keeping you separate from Palestinians or like surveilling you?
	Because I've kind of heard that they kind of don't want you to see exactly how Palestinians live.
	Did you experience that?
	They have checkpoints before you get in to the West Bank.
	And there was like military vehicles that would like drive through real fast.
	They would kind of like invade for a little bit through Ramullah, which is the Palestinian capital of the West Bank.
	But it wasn't like that big of a deal when they did that.
	At least when I was there, it wasn't that big of a deal.
	Nothing.
	Did you see shootings or anything?
	Did you see the whale and wall?
	Did you go into Jerusalem?
	I was up on a street like far away up above it, but I didn't go down like inside of it.
	I think you have to wear a yarmulke to do that.
	And plus my Palestinian tour guide was apparently like viewed as a terrorist or something.
	So I don't think they would let him into the Jewish areas.
	There's never going to be a leaked photo of you like kissing the whale and wall.
	No, no, I got one right here.
	Actually, I went to the mosque.
	Here's another way the Christians lie about me.
	There's a photo of me that I posted when I got back of me in the cave of the patriarchs, which is the mosque in Hebron where supposedly Abraham and some of the patriarchs are buried.
	And they say that's at the wall.
	So they're just complete liars.
	But I did make a fake me at the wall.
	When did you go?
	I mean, were you already kind of sussed on Israel at this point?
	Or what was your feeling?
	It was real early, like once I was on YouTube, like having anybody notice me.
	So I was like, I'm still relatively unknown and not viewed as a terrorist, also an American citizen with American passport.
	But in 2018 to six years ago, I was even more unknown.
	So made it through.
	Although it was a risk at that point, were you?
	I was, but like, you know, I was new on the scene, basically.
	I wasn't like, I wasn't written up in ADL and other things like I am today.
	But here it is.
	For all the lying Christians that want to lie about me, there's your proof.
	Me at the wall.
	And it's AI for the idiots.
	They're going to try to take that out of context like they will for the schizos.
	So, Turd Temple, you think that they're really like these religious fanatics.
	You've seen the rabbi clips.
	You've seen this Christian Zionist cabinet.
	Possible war with Iran, which they also believe is an end times war.
	Annex in Gaza.
	What do you see in the next four years?
	What's your predictions?
	Nothing's going to happen.
	I already know.
	Nothing's going to happen.
	Mr. Nothing's going to happen, right?
	Yeah.
	I hope you're right.
	It's hard to predict with Trump in office because it seems like he is just going to give them literally everything they want.
	And yeah, if that's the case, it's like, well, what is Israel going to want to do with Iran if it has complete U.S. backing?
	You know, that's, I guess that's really the big question for the next few years.
	Because, yeah, there has been kind of a default there.
	I mean, even since even since this war kicked off, you know, there is this thing where they do the big response and they fire missiles and then they do a big response back.
	And Iran does something kind of just to save face.
	You know, it launches these missiles and really gets killed.
	There's maybe an airbase somewhere has a rocket land on it and it's kind of a face-saving thing.
	And it's in their benefit to drag things out as much as possible because they know what's happening to support for Zionism in the West.
	And, you know, obviously they're working on these weapons programs and so on.
	So yeah, it seems like Israel feels like they're against the clock and that this has been like a concerted strategy to deal with all of these threats to secure their north, secure Gaza, to deal with Iran.
	And, you know, if that's their plan, if that's what the effort is, if they feel like there's a short window to do this, well, they're never going to get a better opportunity than the Trump administration and the most Zionist cabinet ever.
	So I definitely wouldn't be confident in a nothing ever happens prediction.
	Because, yeah, I'm sure there's going to be some kind of direct U.S. strike in Iran at some point.
	You know, Trump kills Soleimani.
	Just how much will they escalate is the question, I guess.
	I mean, what's happening in Syria right now is really unexpected as well.
	And I think there's probably direct Israeli-U.S.
	involvement there as well.
	But, you know, the speed at which the Islamists are advancing, it's not looking great for Assad.
	I mean, he'll have the U.S., sorry, the Russian air support and so on.
	But this seems to be a bit more centralized and a bit more organized than some of the offensives in 2012, 2013.
	So, I don't know.
	I even saw some of the Islamist commanders were on Israeli TV.
	I don't know if you saw this going around.
	They were crediting Israel for, they said their strikes on Hezbollah were a huge help to them.
	And this offensive wouldn't have been possible without that air support.
	So that was kind of a funny, funny thing to have going around.
	You have these extreme Islamists like praising the Jews, praising the Zionists.
	Noahides, good Ishmael Noahides.
	I want to ask you, shift gears again.
	I've heard you're a Platonist.
	Is that true?
	And also, do you know Uber Boyo?
	He's another Irish lad over there.
	I was on his show a couple months ago.
	We talked about the Torah being fake and fabricated in Alexandria, Egypt, and based on Plato's Noble Lie.
	Have you heard that thesis that Judaism and then by extension Christianity is rooted in Plato's Noble Lie?
	I have heard, I've heard that there's a thesis that it was based on Plato's laws, a lot of the Torah.
	It was actually Erval told me about this.
	He told me, he recommended a book on this.
	Gemerkin, probably.
	I know a guy.
	Yeah.
	Russell Gamerkin.
	Yeah, he's the one that does that.
	Yeah, I never did get around to reading that, but I've heard that thesis.
	But yeah, no, I would describe myself as a Platonist.
	I mean, I guess I'm, you know, the kind of broadest possible term is I'm an idealist philosophically, and that I think, you know, consciousness is the ultimate substratum of the universe.
	I don't believe in like subsistent material matter.
	I guess I'm not a physicalist as such.
	I think consciousness is the ultimate fundamental.
	I think Platonism is the best kind of metaphysical system that makes sense of that and gives like a coherent cosmology to that.
	I am familiar with Uber Boyer.
	I had him on my channel actually for Sam as you to debate Ervol on Christianity.
	No, actually, funny you mentioned it was actually Platonism versus Nietzsche, but of course it turned into a big Christianity debate.
	Yeah.
	Those kinds of debates tend to be.
	Are you a Nietzsche guy too as well?
	That's something else I had in my notes here to talk to you about.
	Not quite.
	No.
	Nietzsche was like the first philosopher already.
	He did kind of set me off on I think like the questions Nietzsche asks are probably more interesting than his answers and that he kind of the idea of Nietzsche is kind of light a fire in you and send you off on intellectual quests to deal with him kind of throwing your whole worldview up in smoke.
	So I guess he influenced me, but I wouldn't say I'm a Nietzschean.
	No.
	He's got some really good quotes about Christianity.
	Uber Boyo is a big Nietzsche guy.
	And Spencer, by the way, I'm doing Spencer's podcast tonight.
	Partly to talk about that Ben Shapiro clip that you had that went real viral.
	I don't think we'll probably have time to talk about it today, but tune into Spencer for that.
	For our hot takes on that.
	I want to have your book out before Spencer's and Brahmins.
	Their one has been in the work for like five years.
	And we've, you know, we've both got our books at what's going on.
	Yeah, mine's been delayed as well, so it's a little bit of a sensitive subject, but hopefully it'll be done soon.
	When did you start on yours?
	I mean, really five years ago is when the research that's going into it kind of began.
	But writing, it's been two years, pretty much.
	And it's about done.
	I just got to finish it up.
	Maybe when we're done, I might have a couple.
	Excuse me?
	Do you know what the word count is?
	I've got it separated on different documents still right now, so not the complete.
	I haven't been paying attention to that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah.
	So Nietzsche's got some awesome ones.
	You who hate the Jews so, why do you adopt their religion?
	That's the banger.
	Also, this one, too, he says, I wonder what you take on this one.
	Uber Boyo's awesome.
	Did you see his video speaking of Roman?
	I'm just going to knock off my camera for a sec.
	I just need to get a light.
	Okay.
	Uber Boyo had that video.
	Christianity was the woke movement of the Roman Empire.
	Curious if you saw that one.
	It was pretty epic.
	That's when I first had him on.
	I don't think I saw the video.
	I remember him writing a big tread.
	Maybe it was just a big post on Twitter about that.
	So here it is.
	Here's Nietzsche.
	That Israel must itself deny the real instrument of its revenge.
	So Jesus, the Messiah, is the real instrument of their revenge on Rome and the Gentiles before all the world as the mortal enemy and nail it to the cross so that all of the world, all the Goyem, namely all the opponents of Israel, could unhesitatingly swallow just this bait and could spiritually, subtly imagine any more dangerous bait than this.
	That nails it.
	And one more.
	This is precisely why the Jews are the most disastrous people in world history.
	They've left such a falsified humanity, the Torah and the New Testament, in their wake that even today Christians can think of themselves as anti-Jewish without understanding that they are the ultimate conclusion of Judaism.
	Some of the...
	Are you okay?
	You know, some of the schizo stuff I see that I think are non starters and counterproductive and a dead end is like the Christian copes that saying Jesus wasn't Jewish and the Jews aren't the real Jews and Christianity didn't come from Judaism and, you know, stuff like that.
	Does that frustrate you at all as much as it does me?
	Well, I mean, I think arguing Jesus was non Jewish, like ethnically is is definitely a non starter.
	Yeah, I think you really have to be kind of reaching into the schizo anti Semitism basket to justify that one.
	But at the same time, I am sympathetic to the idea that like, you know, the teaching of Jesus is basically a complete repudiation of Judaism, which puts me it's it's at odds with like an Orthodox Christian interpretation.
	But also at odds with the totally anti Christian interpretation and that.
	But hold on.
	OK, go finish.
	Sorry, I won't interrupt you.
	Yeah, well, I think, you know, I think this is something Nietzsche didn't recognize and that he saw the ultimate expression of man's highest consciousness as just this kind of like expanse of will, like an ultimate like animal consciousness, like ultimate domination.
	But that's kind of I don't know, that's kind of circular.
	There's no hierarchy there.
	I think there's like a hierarchy of consciousness.
	I think the teaching of Jesus is very much in line with like what we call the perennial philosophy or mystical teachings from other parts of the world.
	I think the story there, to me, at least, is, you know, you have in the axial age, you have these teachers like Buddha and our spiritual teachers that bring this new form of of spirituality or religion.
	That's like individual focused and focused on like the liberation of the individual, higher consciousness of the individual and not just a kind of command, collective command structure, polytheism.
	I think like Jesus was preaching a doctrine that was coming from that kind of place, you know, forgiveness and universal love.
	I think that was like a total repudiation of the beliefs of the Jews and what was found in the Torah.
	And, you know, I think there's something kind of poetic about I think I don't know if Ervold made this argument to you or Uwe Boyle.
	But yeah, there's some kind of grand irony that he incarnates in these people that view religion as purely like Schopenhauer said to him.
	Old Testament is like a race war manual for the Jews.
	People that view religion in this purely kind of instrumental way, and they're expecting this violent prophet to arise and destroy the Roman Empire and give them ultimate worldly goods.
	And instead, they get this Jesus preacher.
	So it's still the Messiah.
	It's still the Jewish Messiah that theologically conquered the Roman Empire for the God of Israel and the Torah.
	So I see that still as a victory.
	And look at what it's led to today.
	It outlawed paganism and European gods, which was like, I don't see Christianity as the ultimate repudiation of Judaism.
	I think it's the fulfillment of Judaism.
	The whole core.
	But don't you think that could have gone the other way, though?
	Like, what if, you know, like, there was all these expulsions of the Jews, and at times, you know, with the Inquisition at different times, they were treated pretty badly.
	I mean, what if what if they were just expelled out of Christian Europe and they never would have got this foothold in the first place?
	Like, it just seems for them to have that foresight that like in two millennia doesn't collapse.
	I don't think they had the two millennia foresight.
	I think it's they call audibles and it changes how they go.
	And it's a meme that picks up and has a life of its own, I believe, a messianic Jewish prophecy meme.
	But like the ultimate goal of Judaism was to have the nations not worship their idols and worship the God of Israel.
	So Christianity worships the Messiah and the God of Israel, which is the whole objective.
	Some of the early interpreters of Jesus were super anti-Jewish, really.
	Like I mentioned like Marcionism, like Marcion was like, you know, he's like super anti-Jewish in terms of like the fact that they worship this Old Testament God that's like a complete repudiation of everything Jesus teaches.
	And even in St. Paul as well, like Paul makes some kind of pretty anti-Jewish people.
	He says they're the oracles of God and that they're the root that supports the Christians.
	Like you can find, it's polemics.
	It was a schism.
	It's one Jewish sect arguing over how to be the right type of messianic Jews.
	So in that degree, the fact that Christians agree that the God of Israel is the one true God.
	They believe in the prophecies, the power of the prophecies.
	They believe that the Jews were once chosen and they're bowing down to the Messiah that was always meant to conquer the nations.
	So I don't see that as like a.
	It's not opposition to Judaism.
	It's fighting within Judaism, but it's still messianic and apocalyptic.
	What do you think of like, you know, when they dug up the Nakamadi scriptures and they got all these Gnostic gospels, and a lot of these were like the first interpretations and some of the first, some of the very earliest texts on Jesus.
	And, you know, they even say Marcion might have that, well, no, he did.
	He compiled the first canon, right?
	He had the letters of Paul and he had a shortened one of the books.
	Some people actually argue he probably, yeah, some people argue that Marcion was the first gospel, that the Luke was actually his, and that he's the Q gospel that they were copying from.
	That's an interesting thesis that's out there.
	But what do you think that you have all these Gnostic writers that they had a very different, you know, it wasn't like, oh, the Jews set the seeds and then Christ was the fulfillment.
	It was much more like, you know, the Jews were following a totally evil path and the Old Testament God was quite evil and Jesus was a complete repudiation.
	Well, they don't all say that.
	Not all of the Gnostic texts say that.
	Like the Gospel of Thomas doesn't have that.
	Just like the New Testament and Paul and the Gospels.
	Thomas is like very mystical, isn't it?
	Like it's sort of just Jesus' teachings, right?
	The sayings of Jesus, yes.
	It literally says like you're written about in all of the prophets, like showing that that's they were searching the scriptures and created basically a fan fiction fulfilling prophecies.
	Let's see.
	I've got another 10, 15 minutes with you or so.
	So let me get to some of these super chats.
	Information domain says, question for Keith.
	Do you have any worry in regards to too much nationalism causing another war in Europe?
	Should people adopt a European identity instead of avoiding it?
	No, I don't worry about that.
	I mean, you know, the you talk to nationalists in Europe.
	I mean, people aren't super motivated by like, you know, want to reinvade France and take back Alsace or something.
	I mean, there is a kind of pan-European consciousness there with most nationalists that they recognize.
	I don't think it's the correct reading of either of the two world wars to say that they were caused by nationalism.
	That's a whole other thing, but I don't think that's the only guess.
	I think if there was a respect for basic principle of nationalism, it would have avoided the two world wars, actually.
	Absolutely.
	Did you see the tweet of Pamela Anderson people have been circulating since Myron attacked her?
	She called for some type of European identity.
	What do you think of Myron saying how she hit the wall and how white women age so poorly?
	Well, it was bad.
	It was a bad example to make.
	It was a bad example to make his point.
	Yeah, I mean, the idea of the wall thing is supposed to be like single women that have run out of dead and market options.
	And I think she has like two or three kids or something.
	So it's not the best example.
	She was a big, she was a big supporter of Julian Assange as well, wasn't she?
	I think she was like staying with him in the embassy when he was locked up in there.
	Right, right.
	Keeping him company.
	As only Pamela Anderson could possibly.
	Yeah.
	So she's, she's, yeah, I guess she's some kind of leftist of some sort, but I guess kind of more, maybe an more old school leftist.
	Yeah.
	I think she could use a little makeup, just a little makeup, and she'd probably be hot again.
	She doesn't have to go over the top.
	Hey, what's up with the pump cover, man?
	How's the weights going?
	I saw a picture of you the other day and everybody talked.
	I said, who is this guy that ate Keith Woods?
	Because you're a young guy.
	You're a tall guy.
	But now, what are you hitting the gym now?
	Becoming a base Chad nationalist?
	Completing the look?
	How's that going?
	Yeah, I'm finally going to do it.
	So I can't lose arguments on the internet from people telling me to post physique anymore.
	That's what really convinced me to go.
	Yeah, no, it's going good.
	I gained, I think I've gained like 30 pounds this year.
	Wow.
	And then I was actually, I have a crazy metabolism.
	I was away traveling for a couple of weeks.
	And when I came back, I'd lost like two, two and a half kilos in that time.
	So I really have to work hard against.
	I'm like, I can't relate at all to people that are fat, you know, because my natural thing is to eat one meal a day and be like my lowest possible weight.
	But no, no, it's been going pretty good.
	And I have, yeah, it definitely is kind of rewarding in itself to get into the world.
	You're addicted.
	You're a Jimbro addicted now.
	Is that right?
	Yeah, I mean, that's the worst aspect of it is I hate to kind of prove the Jimbros right that were telling me to lift for years.
	And I just was not doing it out of like resentment to them.
	So try not to talk about it.
	I'll try not to talk about it too much on the timeline.
	You know, I'll try not to start giving people health advice.
	Yeah, you could turn into a bodybuilding account.
	That'd be funny.
	Rebrand his self-help account.
	Yeah, maybe.
	You'll be the new Golden Boy.
	What's his name?
	Golden Lion.
	He'll be the Golden Rye, the nationalists.
	I need some product to sell.
	I'm going to have to think of a, Sell creatine.
	Are you on creatine?
	One product, one magical product that saved me.
	Yeah, I am taking creatine, but it has to be something a bit more quacky, some kind of tree root or some kind of rare flower or something, and then I can just sell bottles of it.
	Deer antler oil or something.
	Something like that.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, something masculine sounding like that.
	Yeah.
	Okay.
	ABX89 says the God of Israel is a mythical figure created to encode and justify the destructions of all other nations.
	The non-Jew who believes in the God of Israel is a fool.
	The non-Jew who preaches the God of Israel is a traitor.
	Thank you, ABX89.
	You're the man.
	Oh, wait, hold on.
	Juman Baseworld says, what does Keith feel about the nuanced anti-Christian actions some people from the 1930s took?
	Yeah, that's a big debate.
	Were the 1930s Germans pro-Christian or turning against Christianity and pagan?
	What's Keith's view on that?
	Yeah, there were religious Christians within the NSTAP.
	Goebbels was a religious Catholic.
	I think Herman Goering, I think he was Catholic.
	He was definitely Christian.
	But I don't agree with people.
	People that say Hitler was a Christian.
	I think that's just wrong.
	I think, you know, what this comes down to is they deny that table talks are legit.
	But from looking into that, I mean, every historian seems to affirm the table talks.
	Even people like David Irving affirmed them.
	And any argument I've seen that the table talks are fake seems to be basically just like basically national socialists that want Hitler to be pro-Christian.
	And they have an issue with the statements he made about Christianity.
	Or else statements he makes about other whites, like he makes a lot of disparaging comments about Slavs.
	He talks about basically turning Ukrainians into a slave race after they've conquered Ukraine and Russia.
	And so obviously this doesn't jive very well with people that think Hitler was just like peace-loving, like pan-European white nationalist or Christian nationalist or something.
	And that seems to be the two kinds of people that deny the table talks, but I've never really seen a good case for why they're fake.
	It basically just comes down to people saying, well, it doesn't sound like him.
	You know, he would never say this.
	I know him too well.
	So I think, yeah, I think if you take the table talks as a legit source and also people that knew him closely, I think he definitely was anti-Christian in his view.
	He wasn't like a esoteric German pagan or something.
	He had a pretty basic Enlightenment view of things.
	I don't think he gave a great deal of thought to metaphysical questions or anything.
	But yeah, I think definitely it was trending in that direction.
	I think if they stayed in power and they consolidated power, I think it would have trended in a more and more anti-certainly anti-clerical direction.
	And there was already signs of that with the positive Christianity and stuff.
	So yeah, I've always thought people kind of twist themselves in knots trying to be like pro-Christian NS type.
	I think you have to manipulate stuff a lot to make that work.
	I usually go to public speeches he made where he says he's a believer in God.
	But again, it's like he's talking to an audience that's like 99% Christian.
	It's like, of course he's going to say that.
	You can't really treat election appeals as like this is his true beliefs.
	And then all the private correspondences and what people said about him in private, that's all fake.
	That's all Jewish lies or something.
	I never found that convincing.
	I don't think it all hangs in the balance of the table talks either.
	Anyway, there's lots of other sources and quotes to see the clearest one.
	But yeah, even without, yeah, even if the table talks were fake, I would still be pretty convinced that he was anti-Christian just based on other.
	In regards to the table talks, you know, Richard Carrier, he's like the top mythicist in the world that did on the historicity of Jesus.
	He researched the table talks as well.
	I thought that I haven't looked into it for a while, but I thought he said that they were real, but a comment here said that he said that they weren't real.
	Are you familiar at all with that?
	His take on, no, I don't think it's him.
	Or maybe it's possible it's him, but I know a book came out like two or three years ago because I know the guy who's an academic was actually engaging with some people that were debating this on Twitter and stuff.
	And he argued that they weren't a reliable source.
	But I read some of it.
	I looked into it.
	And even the even his claim wasn't like a hard, like, you know, this is all fake.
	He didn't believe any of this stuff.
	It was much more like, well, with the different translations this passed through, it can't really be treated as a primary source where you can say, like, you know, word for word, he said this, or you can treat like any single quote or page as like, okay, this is the truth.
	This is what he believed.
	In other words, like, you have to treat it with extreme skepticism because an individual aspect of it could be mistranslated or misleading.
	But even with that, that's kind of like a weak thesis against it.
	But even with that, you would still assume that the bulk of what you're getting is basically what he believed, right?
	It's like, okay, maybe you can't treat an individual statement as he said this, but there's a lot in there that's super anti-Christian.
	I think that's clear.
	Yep.
	Yep.
	Lisa Renison for five says, to Keith, your book is on my list.
	Awesome.
	It's on my list as well.
	I need to pick up some good nationalist talking points.
	There it is.
	Lovely cover there.
	How long did it take you to write it?
	A year, basically.
	I mean, the good thing was, I mean, it's an essay collection, and a couple of them are just for the book, and I wrote them for the book.
	But, you know, it's good.
	I was publishing them as I went on Substack.
	So that was a good way to still be putting out content as I was writing.
	You know, I can just take a year to stop doing content and write a book.
	But yeah, about a year.
	I guess I was hammering out an essay every two or three weeks.
	Cool.
	We got a question in from Uber Boyo.
	He says, most important question, who is taller, Adam or Keith?
	I'm 6'4.
	I'm 6'4.5, 6'5 ⁇ .
	I'll say 6'5.
	I think I. And blue eyes, too.
	Yeah.
	Do you have blue eyes?
	I do, yeah.
	Okay.
	Very blue.
	Can't tell?
	Not contact.
	Yeah, but you see, I don't have the Jewish name like you.
	You know, I saw people in the comments explaining that you have a totally Jewish name.
	So I guess by default, I'm the most.
	That's what they say.
	It annoys me so Much when people say that all you got to do is Google it, and it says it's primarily an English, Irish, Scottish name.
	And you also Google it.
	It says only 5% of Greens are Ashkenazi.
	And I've got my DNA results out there.
	There's no Ashkenazi.
	English, Irish, Scottish, German, Nordic.
	Keith knows.
	I think I've heard more English people with that name than Irish.
	Yeah, there was.
	Yeah, there was an Irish football player that had that surname, but I think I've definitely heard it more with English people.
	Yeah, only 5%.
	One in 20 Greens are Jewish.
	So it's just, it's so annoying.
	These people.
	How do Ashkenazi Jews adopt?
	Was that just them anglicizing something that was more Jewish?
	Or how does that happen?
	I think they just copied it to fit in.
	Or they just adopted colors just because colors was a common word or something.
	I'm not sure.
	Yeah, that makes sense.
	But it's just so annoying.
	You know, the schizos out there.
	Like, I put out all this information.
	I'll debate people in good faith.
	And then my points and my information and my arguments almost never get addressed.
	It's just, you know, personal attacks and slander and lies.
	Which I'm sure you disavowed.
	Those type of schizos.
	Yeah.
	Welcome to the internet.
	All right, here.
	A couple more here.
	And Drum and Base World says, Carrier said that the table talks are unreliable, but that they're not fake.
	Michael Nilsson also wrote a book on it, but admits they are real, just unreliable.
	Tick history has a fantastic book.
	That's what I thought.
	Yeah, I guess it probably was Carrie that wrote that book then.
	And yeah, that's like I said, you know, people say, oh, you know, they'll point to someone wrote a book that the table talks aren't legit.
	But yeah, it's like your super chatter said there.
	They say it's unreliable.
	You know, you can't just pull out a quote and say, you know, primary source, Hitler said this.
	We know it for a fact.
	But they never say they're fake.
	They say, no, this was, you know, it was correspondence that was written down.
	You know, it's likely reflecting the sentiment that's there, but okay, you can't take a single statement out of it and be like, this is Hitler said this on this day.
	So it's a much weaker thesis than the people that say Hitler was a religious Christian, pan-European that loved all whites equally and loved Jesus, and the table talks are fake Jewish lies.
	It's not quite what they say, you know.
	Yeah, there's so much other evidence, too, that shows that they do align with how he was probably talking at his table.
	Yeah.
	Table talks, talking at his table.
	Okay.
	ABX89 says, excuse me, Plato said that an astronomer cannot learn anything about the stars by observing them, but only by thinking about the stars.
	Republic Book 5.
	He rejected objectivity.
	Platonism is the philosophy of prejudice and arbitrariness.
	Any thoughts on that?
	I don't agree with that.
	I don't agree with that.
	I don't think you can get that from an isolated statement.
	A lot of the, you know, a lot of the people behind the scientific revolution were kind of influenced by Platonism, actually.
	There was kind of a rebirth of Platonism, like the English Platonists.
	Judaism and Christianity, I believe, were too.
	On the...
	Oh, you mean Platonism influenced Christianity?
	Yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
	I mean, Arval talks a lot about that, actually.
	I mean, the church fathers kind of just adopted wholesale, like Neoplatonist metaphysics and just applied Christianity to it.
	I mean, there's a lot of suggestions that some of the church fathers, like Pseudo-Dionysius, is a famous one, and then Thomas Aquinas quoted a lot from him.
	He influenced him a lot.
	I mean, there's a lot of suggestions that he may have just basically plagiarized Neoplatonists like Proclus.
	But I mean, even, you know, forget plagiarism or whatever.
	I mean, that basically is the story.
	You know, they just adopt Platonism kind of wholesale.
	Well, Keith, I want to keep this relatively short just so people are more likely to click on it.
	We could always do this again sometime in the future.
	Why don't you tell everybody the best places they could find you?
	Or if you have any final thoughts or questions you wanted to run by me since I was doing all the questions tonight.
	Well, I enjoyed this.
	You can find all my stuff, bio.link slash Keith Woods, active on X. Keithwoods.pub is where I publish.
	And yeah, buy my book, Nationalism, the Politics of Identity.
	Leave a positive review.
	There'll be lots to keep you occupied here.
	Lots of different topics that you'll be interested in and lots of different sources you can follow, get super educated on all these different topics.
	Oh, and your podcast, Woodstown?
	Woodstown, also, right?
	Of course, Woodstown.
	How could I forget?
	Yeah, if you go to woods.town, it'll take you to my Rumble channel.
	If you like what I did, go ahead.
	Oh, yeah.
	I didn't even notice you had the Greenwoods, yeah.
	Green Woods.
	Maybe if I fire a Paul Town, that can be, we can make that happen.
	I could be weekly on Rumble and X. We do like a weekly review of what's been happening on Saturdays.
	But yeah, if you follow me on X, you'll find everything I got going on.
	Cool, cool.
	And I have been following, and Keith is clearly one of the most non-schizo intelligent guys in the sphere.
	Yeah, I thought Greenwoods went nice, kind of like Woodstown.
	Flows off the tongue.
	Just a couple Irish lads out on the countryside.
	Yeah, so we already have a title if we ever start doing a regular show.
	Yep, yep.
	All right, guys, we'll check out his book.
	Maybe your book will get me fully on board.
	You know, maybe we'll be doing a weekly show or read your book.
	I'll send you the audio book.
	I'll send you a copy for the full Woodstown Woods green pill session.
	I think you're already basically there.
	I mean, could you agree with the premise that Christianity is Jewish and largely fictional made-up stories?
	Like all the miracles, all the 300 prophecies that were fulfilled.
	Like, it's obvious they knew the prophecies and wrote a story fulfilling the prophecies, not a magical superhero did all of these miraculous things, right?
	So if you agree with that, you're basically already there on the level.
	Well, I'm cynical about, I'm more cynical about the Torah, but I don't think I have your same interpretation of Jesus.
	I think I'm much more likely to say that.
	I got to take Arville's grip off of your hat and your brain.
	I'll work on Arville again.
	I'll have to have him on and try to get it.
	Yeah, you'll have to do another debate and do a little lesson.
	Once I win him over, Keith will follow, maybe.
	Yeah, you're going to have to take down the Marcionites and the Gnostics.
	Oh, the Marcionites.
	No, I do need to get in.
	I was just watching a debate the other night about did Jesus exist?
	And the yes person was arguing from a Marcionite perspective.
	And they're always in my comments giving me a hard time.
	Oh, Big Tech says he has a super chat.
	Sorry.
	Okay, he says, last question.
	Sorry, Keith.
	From Big Tech, my buddy Big Tech.
	If secularization is rapidly increasing and worse than people think, is it subversive to associate white identity politics with Christian nationalism and Catholic fanaticism since it will analyate the non-believers and the secular people?
	Good question.
	Good question.
	I wonder who that super chat is about or what movement that's about.
	I have no idea.
	I can't think of anybody.
	Well, no, not necessarily, because like I said, there is a group of Christians that are more traditionally minded that are open to white identitarianism.
	And, you know, I think like the, it's obviously, I'm sure he's directing that against the Gripers, but I think it was quite successful what they did in terms of being able to challenge the conservative movement from the right.
	And there is a background Christianity to that whole conservative movement that if you're just not participating, then I guess you don't have the same rhetorical force as when they could challenge someone like Charlie Kirk and say, well, you know, you're supposed to be a Christian conservative movement.
	Why are you promoting like Rob Smith and these people?
	So, no, I don't think it's subversive, but I think there has to be a place for non-Christian nationalist movements as well.
	I think, especially in Europe, it is much more secular.
	It's a much more secular environment.
	I think the politics has to be kind of its own project.
	And if you try and run a nationalist movement in Ireland or Germany or France and you say we're going to install a Christian government, that is a road to like, you know, 0.01% or something.
	It's just not really going to get off the ground.
	Unless there's a huge cultural shift.
	You know, that's the thing is like people sometimes say, well, need a, you know, Christian nationalist politics.
	It's like, you know, culture just isn't with that right now in Europe.
	And it would have, it's some things I think can't, there's only so much you can do with politics.
	And that kind of change in terms of like bring back a traditional society or something.
	That's like, what was the quote from Heidegger?
	Like, only a God can save us now.
	Like that level of cultural change, I don't think can be downstream from, you know, small upstart political movements.
	Jack DeRipper says, God damn, I love Adam Green.
	That is so nice of you to say that.
	Love you too.
	Zionist Cuck says the Arval debate was amazing.
	Fuck the Abrahamics.
	Hail Asatru, the one true faith.
	It's time to visit Uppsala, my brothers.
	Thank you.
	Zio Cuck, as always.
	Little Bit says a person with a color name may adopt it from the color of their Lord's crest.
	Interesting.
	Or like a slave adopts their slave master's name.
	All right, cool.
	That is all.
	Appreciate everybody for support.
	Great talking to you, Keith.
	Finally, happy to finally do it.
	Probably way too long.
	I'm a bit of a procrastinator, and you're in such an intimidating guide.
	Didn't know if I was ready for Mr. Woods, but appreciate you.
	Wish you well.
	Look forward to what everybody has to say in the comments.
	And I will see you guys again probably tomorrow.
	Thanks, everyone.
	Keith, thank you.
	And if you could stay on the line, I just want to say bye to you during the outro.
	All right.

▲