All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 5, 2025 - Know More News - Adam Green
01:51:04
Richard Spencer & Mark Brahmin on the Christian Question | Know More News - Adam Green
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, Adam Green here with No More News.
Thank you all for joining me today, Monday, August twenty-fifth, twenty twenty-five.
Got a huge show today.
So much has been happening the l since the last show.
Got two huge guests on today, returning to the show, Richard Spencer.
He's uh in the car and will be joining us in studio or on his in his studio in a minute.
And first time on the show, we got his friend and co-author of the upcoming book about Apollonianism and REM Theory, the founder of REM Theory.
I've been on his their podcast a couple times.
We've been following each other on Twitter for a while.
Mark Brahman is here.
What's up, Mark?
Good to have you finally, bro.
Hey, Adam.
It's a pleasure to be on.
Yeah, finally.
At last we get to uh talk on your show, so apologize for the delay.
I've kind of I've kind of sworn off podcast.
In theory, I'd sworn off podcast until the book was released.
But then Richard pulled me into doing this class on Sundays.
And so I've been doing that, but I haven't been going on other people's shows.
So if anyone who has invited me on a show is irritated that I'm on Adam's show and not yours, I apologize.
This is a kind of one off.
And I will return to my schedule of not being on podcasts.
Um, except on Sundays on um the Substack sponsored Substack, uh Alexandria.
Well, I appreciate your time taking away from the book.
I I know how it feels to have distractions to getting your book done, but my mine's very close.
I'm actually about to start the very final uh concluding chapter and then just a read through quick edit and it's gonna be out.
But yeah, these spaces, I'm I'm it's it's hard to stay away from these spaces and all these debates we've been doing on the spaces and everything else going on and the in the shows and all the news always happening, but as you may have seen, I think we've talked about this before, the title of the video, The Christian Question.
I wanted to get your just initial takes on the Christian question issue that's been like at the forefront of of a lot of the discourse recently.
Yeah, I mean, what I would say, I mean, and obviously in the dissident right, uh on the online right, there are two camps broadly.
There are Christians and there are uh pagans who we might also call um well there are Christians and there are anti-Christians, right, who uh often identify themselves as pagans.
Um and the camps are I mean, there is a kind of non-reconcilable difference between the two, because on one hand uh the pagans or the anti-Christians view Christianity as the problem, as one of the big problems facing uh the white race.
I mean, to speak very frankly, or the world, even worse not exclusive to our problem.
Sure, that's a fair point.
That that's a fair point.
Um and the other side though sees Christianity as the solution, as a kind of uh necessary solution to kind of motivate or moralize or to make whites cohesive and to return to tradition, as it were, right?
Um and to be honest with you, I like I came, I don't I don't know that I was ever sort of strongly in uh the latter camp.
Um, but I think for a while I considered that Christianity was the solution to many of the sort of societal problems that we're having in America.
Um so I have empathy.
I understand their position, and I understand the sort of the logic um uh and how they arrived at their position, so I get it.
Um and that's not to, you know, and I'm not trying to, you know, and I I don't intend that as a sort of kind of insult toward them as to imply that I'm you know wiser than them because I've been where they were.
But I don't know, maybe to some maybe I am kind of implying that um because and I think that um I think that that initial conclusion, which I moved away from, was a conclusion I made when I was a young man, you know, in my early to mid-20s.
I was like, you know, and I think a lot of these guys, a lot of these sort of uh Christian zealists, these uh Christian zealots who are also white nationalists are basically guys that are in their teens or twenties.
Um and they've come to the conclusion that well this or at least I can describe sort of my conclusion, um they are looking at on one level, I would argue, and maybe they would argue against this, or some of them I certainly think would, but I was looking at Christianity almost in a kind of uh utilitarian way.
It it was a kind of instrument, right?
So whether or not Christianity was true was not really the question.
Whether or not, and this was before I got into mythicism and and so forth, whether or not Jesus, you know, was the savior or you know, there is an afterlife, and to attain the afterlife, you have to believe in Jesus, was kind of um secondary, or was it was sort of beside the point.
The the question was, does Christianity serve civilization and create a better civilization if people adhere to Christianity?
Um do they become more moral?
Uh and in in and frankly, if I'm being honest, do they become, whether explicitly or implicitly, do they become more racialist, do they become more tribal if they become Christian, right?
Um ultimately the answer, I believe, is no to that question.
But I think early on I was like, well, you know, even if Christianity itself is not true, the mythology of Christianity is not true, uh, it could have some function or some positive benefit in society or in the world.
Um and therefore, in a way, you could argue that it is true, right?
Because it it is serving, for example, uh, you know, and I I hopefully I'm not speaking in too direct or vulgar a way on your show, but it would serve the continuance of the white race, the afterworld of white people, right?
The literal afterworld on earth.
But I don't think that Christianity is capable of serving that function.
I think that ultimately what directs uh breeding and directs the ethos and direction of the society is ultimately who controls the media, right?
And this was true in the medieval period, it's true in the modern period, it was true in Rome.
Who controls uh the uh the cinema houses or the cinema, the theaters, who controls the temples, all which are a kind of you know, ancient synonym of uh media, essentially, right?
And I think that that really is the question.
So it's not really a question of you know what God we well it is to it is that is of course an important question, but in terms of directing the ethos or morals of the society, it's a question of who is controlling the media that people are consuming that the society is consuming.
That's really the question, and what messaging, what their intent, what their telos is, what goals do they have for society, and how are they developing an ethos in directing society toward that telos.
That's the important question, a kind of media creating elite, uh, which in the ancient world would be priests and so forth, uh whether pagan or in then you know, eventually Christian and so forth.
Um but I think you understand my point.
Uh so I do have a I do know where they're coming from, I but I just think that they haven't um considered the problem uh deeply enough or closely enough.
I do think it is problematic.
I mean, let's consider the first problem with Christianity is that you're worshiping a foreign god, you're worshiping a Jew.
And I think that that there's something inherently demoralizing about that and problematic about that.
Um I think it also in Jews emerge as an ethnic competitor towards what you you would say the world, and I think that's correct, but to whites maybe in particular, and it doesn't help us in this sort of um, you know, this sort of ethnic conflict that they've forced us into also be worshiping a Jew as a god.
There's something inherently kind of demoralizing about that, or sacrilizing their race and saying essentially their race is capable of producing gods, is unique in this regard and is capable of producing gods.
Whereas our race is not capable uh capable of producing gods, is inferior implicitly in this relationship.
And I think it's just inherently demoralizing, and it gives us a disadvantage in this competition that unfortunately they've uh pressed us into with them.
And in any case, that's sort of the long and short of it.
I don't know if you you had uh comments that you wanted to add to that, or if you or points of disagreement or whatever may be the case.
Uh I I took a couple notes.
Like number one, I agree it is very demoralizing.
When you say demoralizing, I think about how a lot of Christians, especially like internet Christians, that they elevate Jews to like supernatural villains, that like they're the children of Satan and they killed God and they're drinking baby blood and they have black magic, like sorcery type of powers, right?
So that's I feel like that's a little demoralizing.
All we can do is pray to Jesus and pray that Jesus comes and saves us.
And like in their end times prophecies, not just the Protestants, but all the major denominations, they all believe in the second coming of Jesus.
They all believe that the antichrist has to rule before Jesus returns.
So it's like that's the base case scenario is that the antichrist rules and the Judaism fulfills their prophecies, and then Jesus is going to come and save us.
Like that all feels very demoralizing and passive.
It's not only just that we can't have gods, it's that they say that our gods are all demons as well.
You're gonna say that.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, ultimately, Abraham is it it's uh it's it's symbol laden, and essentially we're the villain in Abraham, right?
We're the villain.
And I mean, there are we play different roles.
So if you analyze the symbolism of Abrahamism, whether in the Hebrew Bible or Christianity, we play different roles, and the role is either one of a kind of servant or slave, uh uh, effectively a Shabbos Goyom, right?
We think of I so for example, I would class Abraham as a goy, but it let's use an obvious obvious example of Esau, right?
Uh Esau is the servant of Jacob, essentially.
That's the hierarchy there, right?
So we're either the slave, uh, so to the extent that we're good, we're good because we're serving the house of Judah, or we're serving the purposes of Judah.
And then, and then alternatively, of course, we're evil, we're bad, we're uh Amalek or we're Edom or the Edomites, right?
So it's just not like it's their story, and we're the bad guy, their story.
So we can't, and and ultimately, of course, it's it's fiction, it's a Jewish comic book.
And so we're so it's ridiculous, in addition to being sort of like mentally unhealthy and demoralizing, it's also kind of absurd and ridiculous on some level, right?
So we've sacrilized this Jewish comic book, right?
That's the ridiculous part of it.
Uh but the the terrible and kind of psychologically demoralizing in in like on a deep cultural and religio-cultural level is that we're the bad guys.
And at best, we're like sort of these obsequious servants of Jews.
I mean, it's just a kind of ridiculous, like or at least of Jesus, which is the king of the Jews and the son of the God of the Jews.
Right?
And it's like, yeah, the Christians are the slave, talk about demoralizing and like subjugating, we're slaves to Christ, we're sheep, we're meek and mild and turning the other cheek.
And and that's the whole role of the Messiah in Judaism is to make us the footstools, to rule in our lands, to have every knee bow.
Like that's and that's the whole ultimate goal of Judaism.
Yeah, it and that's the conquest of the world by their God.
Yeah, and and you what you're saying is absolutely correct.
And what you can I and that's what you're saying is relatively exoteric.
It's explicit, right?
So, in other words, Jesus, we know that Jesus is a Jew, it says it in the Bible and so forth.
But but the the Bible itself, both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament are these kind of rich symbolic works that are esoteric and have layers.
But let's deal with the exoteric layer, which we've already discussed to some extent.
So our God is a Jew, right?
So the Jews, it was uh for us to have a God, it was required that a son of the Jews emerge to be our God, basically, right?
So they're this kind of divine race that's capable of creating gods.
We can't create gods, our gods are false gods that are abominations before the true God and so forth, right?
So uh the pagan gods are false, the gods that represent our ancestors are false, and so forth.
And there's all kinds of terrible language in the in kind of shocking language as you're familiar with in the New Testament, where you know, Jesus is come comes to take a sword to like turn brother against brother, father against father, and so forth.
All this terrible stuff, uh, where it's it's basically explicitly saying that the the sort of the family, the house or the of uh the gentiles or the family, whether the smaller unit and implicitly the broader tribe of Gentiles is going to be turned against each other uh through the adoption of Jesus.
And then there's all kinds of other terrible mess uh messaging in the New Testament where uh we're supposed to not resist evil people, we're supposed to turn, I mean, it literally says that do not resist evil people, right?
It's a kind of it's sort of the messaging that you think uh it would be of you know, if assuming Jews uh to be our antagonists and to be a kind of ethnic adversary, it's the sort of messaging they would want us to believe.
Don't resist evil people, be passive, turn the other cheek.
They would want us to be dormats in this way, right?
Much as uh Job is described in the book of Job.
And that's ultimately a Gentile character, right?
That's a kind of you know, and that and that's actually a kind of more obvious example, but to stay on the exoteric level, so we we're worshiping a Jew explicitly.
Um, and then uh, you know, the only way To get uh to go to heaven is to worship this Jew and so forth.
All this is demoralizing messaging, and there's also this messaging of being basically a pacifist before enemies.
Um, and in the context of the gospel, implicitly, you know, there is a kind of petty anti-Semitism in the gospel where the adversaries, the uh um the Pharisees are um an adversary of Jesus.
So implicitly our adversary is the Pharisee, the tribalist.
The Pharisee, uh even that word Pharisee means the separated one, right?
So they are these kind of ethnic racial tribalists, and they're contrasted with Jesus, who's a kind of MLK figure.
He's like uh Martin Luther King, right?
He's a universalist, he wants everyone to be part of the group.
Uh and the Pharisees don't.
They want to be exclusionary.
And our model is Jesus.
We want everyone, we want to include everyone.
We want to um proselytize to the Jews.
We want we want to sort of beg them to be part of our group, and they want to be uh exclusionary, right?
There's something inherently, you know, just demoralizing.
What you know, why are we chasing around these Jews to be in our group?
Uh why don't we be the ones who are exclusionary?
And of course, that's the fear of Jews, is that that's that's a kind of explicit fear of Jews uh that's made clear in messaging in their films in the 20th century, for example, we see Woody Allen, where they don't want to be excluded from the country clubs and so forth.
So we should be excluding or exclusionary, and we should have a kind of you know, view our groups as ways of developing eugenically and uh developing an elitism and so forth.
And Christianity is absolutely opposed to that.
Anyways, I I see Richard's on, so I'll let him jump in.
What's up, Richard?
You back at home?
Uh almost.
I'll be there in two weeks.
Okay, I'm sorry.
Uh I'm sorry.
Uh, but I guess I'll I'll I'll let you respond to that.
I mean, maybe some of those things you don't agree with, uh, and that's fine.
Uh, but that's my perspective, is that in in it's related to a Nietzschean perspective, essentially, on Christianity, right?
Christianity, uh, Nietzsche, Nietzsche viewed uh Christianity as a slave religion, as I'm sure your callers will be familiar with that term.
And um, and I think that that I in Nietzsche was right about many things, and I think he is right about that.
And so far as Christianity um is so far as we interact with Christianity, it it certainly is that.
It is a slave religion.
Uh it's a religion uh that's egalitarian in its messaging, so liberal in its messaging, the first shall be last.
Uh it has a kind of socialist outlook.
You know, the rich man can't go to heaven.
Uh for the rich man to go to heaven, it's it's like a camel passing through the eye of a needle.
So, I mean, implicitly, if you're rich, you can't go to heaven, right?
I mean, that's sort of the the messaging now.
You can, it's just harder.
Yeah, I mean, if you can you know, I guess some camels have passed through eyes.
Right.
Yeah.
It's almost basically impossible.
I'll be able to do it.
I'll grant that it's a kind of uh exaggeration that's going on with that metaphor, but um you understand my point, and that in that it is there, so we could argue that Christianity is a proto-liberalism, um, and that's a case, for example, that uh someone like Spangler makes.
So Spangler says that Bolshevism is uh the grandson of Christianity or something I'm I'm paraphrasing there.
Um but it's though, I mean, what we call liberalism, I mean, to some extent we can say that liberalism is a synonym of decadence, and that is existed before Christianity.
In fact, it existed in some of the cults and religions from which Christianity is evidently derived, such as the cult of Bacchus and Dionysus and so forth, right?
So in it's not wholly derived, of course, from the cult of Bach's and Dionysus, it's also taking myth from, as you point out with your work, is taking a lot of myth from the earlier Hebrew Bible, right?
And Christians, as as you point out all the time, Christians see that as prophecy, right?
It's predicting, well, look, uh Jesus must be the real uh savior because the Hebrew Bible predicted it.
No, you know, it as you explain, it's it's because um the New Testament is a myth based on the Hebrew Bible, and evidently so, right?
So you know, there are these people in I'll I'm gonna let Richard jump in and then uh I'll I'll let you sort of direct the conversation to wherever you want to go.
What's up, Richard's here in studio?
Good to see you, man.
Good to good to have you back.
Oh, you're on mute.
How are you doing?
Doing well, glad to be here.
Yeah, good to have you.
Uh you were listening.
You have any uh you chomping at the bit to uh say something.
I I agree with most everything that Mark said.
I mean, I I think he lays it out uh quite accurately.
I I would say this.
I uh when I was younger, I think I did have a Nietzschean or sort of Ion Randian perspective on Christianity, and in the sense of, you know, oh, it's the religion for the weak, it's a religion for wimps, it's stupid, you know, all that kind of stuff, or a new atheist perspective of you know, it doesn't make sense, it's not scientific.
Show me the evidence.
Um, a bit like Darth Vader, right?
Right, right.
I took wolves or sheep, man, like the meme, wolves are sheep.
Right.
I had to I have I had to suffer through a cucked uh Luke Skywalker phase.
Um I would say this that I maybe as I've gotten older my perspective has been a bit muted, or or I guess maybe a better way of saying is that I I like to give the devil his due, so to speak.
I understand why Christianity is so compelling.
And there were Christianities before Christianity that were equally compelling.
Um Euripides the Bacchae as a play, it's uh it's performed in the Dionysian theater, and it offers a sort of cautionary tale of how powerful these types of orgiastic egalitarian movements can be.
That it's all fun and games until you get torn to pieces by your own mother, basically, is the uh uh moral of that story.
And so I understand why Christianity is compelling.
Uh I do think it it's been refined, of course, but I do think that there is a semblance of the Bacchanal orgy in Christianity.
The the notion of losing yourself, going with the flow, dissolving into the crowd.
And you might not see that exactly at hoity toity churches today, even though they are passing around the Eucharist and and all of that kind of stuff.
Uh, but you definitely see it in a lot of the Christianities that are growing and that are very popular.
Christianities in South America, Christianities for uh lower classes in in the United States, um, Christianities, I'm sure in Asia, are getting at that tent revival, waving your hands in the air, losing yourself, speaking in tongues, all of that kind of stuff.
I understand why this type of movement is so compelling.
Um, I understand why the message of Jesus is compelling to someone who feels broken and so on.
That there's someone out there who's forgiven him.
There's someone out there who can listen.
So I I guess this is a long-winded way of saying that I've I passed through my uh juvenile callo uh Nietzschean stage of just bashing Christianity.
And I I sort of uh appreciate and understand why it's so compelling and why Abrahamism and Christianity in particular are the dominant religions of the world.
And I I think it's really on us to first off analyze it with a great deal of seriousness and discover its symbols, discover its inner language, esoterica.
And it's also incumbent upon us to do something better that's equally more compelling.
And I think that's where there's so much work to be done.
And that's where there's so much opportunity.
There's been an opportunity for at least 200 years in terms of the death of God.
Educated people no longer take Christian theology seriously.
They might still go to church, they might still quote the gospels, etc., but they don't really take it seriously as a historical account of what actually happened.
That there is a God man who came to Earth, he sacrificed himself in order to save you from the wrath of God or himself.
I don't think educated people really take that seriously.
We've we've been in this death spiral for quite some time.
I mean, Nietzsche wrote himself that uh the shadows of the Buddha remained on the wall of the cave for centuries after his disappearance, and and I think that's very much the case with Christianity.
It's been this powerful that is it is inflected in everything.
It's inflected liberals, it's inflected atheists who claim to uh you know uh debunk Christianity, yet ultimately are professing Christian values and uh Christian morality, and are dominated by Christian symbolism.
And so, you know, Kyle Kalinski is a Christian, Richard Dawkins is a Christian, and uh, I like both of those people, but that is a reality of the depth at which Christianity has infected them, as it were.
The the shadow of Christ is still on the wall of the cave long after his death.
But regardless, I do think that there is a major opportunity in the next century and going forward to find a way out of this.
You know, for better and for worse, Christianity is sort of dying and reviving at the same time.
I think it's it's making appeals online, you have these stories of conversion.
Um it's uh no longer playing the central legitimizing role that it has in the past in the United States and in the Western world.
Um maybe it'll have a second life.
I I can easily imagine that in our age, a new sort of age of anxiety that we're living through, much like the age in which Christianity first arose.
Uh, but regardless, in terms of serious people, there is just this gaping opening for something new.
People really are ready for something new, but no one is really able to convincingly give it to them.
And I, you know, before you want to change something, you have to analyze it.
And I think that's step one with the the school of thought that Mark launched and that I'm now a part of.
Uh but step, yeah, RM theory is an an analytical tool.
Um more than anything else.
There because this is one of the questions I wanted to get to at the beginning.
If if Mark could explain it to me like I'm five years old, what is REM theory?
Simple as possible.
Okay, well, he's gonna say, yeah, I don't know.
Sorry to interrupt, Spencer, but yeah, I just simple as possible.
Very elevator pitch, just give us an idea, because he mentioned REM theory.
So yeah, so REM theory is uh basically the theory that um groups and Jews in particular uh have been very gifted in the use of symbols to the end of creating uh culture,
art, and religion uh in a way that is uh psychologically powerful and influential on society, uh both on their group uh internally and on uh external groups.
And the goal appears to be within this, so a Jewish expression of REM we would call Jewish esoteric moralizations of Jem.
And the goal there appears to be a moralization of Jews as a type and to further their success in the world and a demoralization of groups, outgroups that they view in an adversarial manner, essentially.
There is something called AIM, which is Aryan intermoralization, which is sort of the equivalent from an Aryan, a white, Jewish, Gentile, or non-Jewish, Gentile perspective.
But for thousands of years, it seems to have been relatively dormant.
And it finds its kind of clearest expression, I would say, in Greece, but especially in Rome.
And Rome is a kind of reform movement, I would say, of Greece.
And even a kind of, in some ways, it's even a kind of rebuttal to Grecian culture, I would say.
So, I mean, that's the kind of long and short of it, but it has certainly found, there have certainly been artists, for example, that have essentially been,
consciously attempting to create aim even though they didn't have the term for it and have done it in a kind of imperfect way I would say artists like uh Robert E. Howard who created the Conan saga Wagner would be another example uh Tolkien would be another example but then Tolkien you know is part of his design is Christianity and eventually with Wagner that also becomes part of Wagner's design and so forth.
Okay so let me try to do this like if I could say that in one sentence this is what I heard I heard white people need to come up with their own stories.
Is that it?
Or is that missing what you said?
Well, that's a big part of it.
I mean, you know, if you want it, like, and I have no problem with people sort of simplifying it, essentially.
Yeah.
And so, yeah, and in fact, I mean, I think that the best sentence— How would you say it?
If you could say it in one sentence or two sentences, how would you say it?
Well, I would just add here— Let Spencer do—let me hear Spencer's— Yeah, it's racial esoteric moralization, but also one of the boldest aspects of it is that there is an international, perennial, you could say, millennial—going on for millennia—language.
And this is a codified language.
It's not like Jungian psychology in the sense that there are these deep archetypes that come from the very base of our soul and emerge in art almost unconsciously.
We're saying the opposite of that, in fact.
It's a consciously cultivated symbolic language that you can find, certainly, in the Hebrew Bible.
You can even find— find it in the uh Homer and Homeric hymns and you could no doubt find it elsewhere and it's a cultivated language that is passed between initiates and it stretches from Alexandrian 250 BC to Hollywood of 2025.
They are coherently using a recognizable language in the in the symbols to themselves and the symbolic logic of the way that they speak to you.
and something's esoteric.
You could think of that as, Oh, it's hidden.
Like it's, it's, uh, no one could ever perceive it.
No one gets it.
It's this esoteric reading a poetry or whatever.
So subtle message.
We're not quite saying that you are feeling it.
Your, your, your brain perceives the language unconsciously and you are being incepted as it, as it were.
like different morals to the story like all so the common theme in our stories in our culture is the savior right the messianic savior.
Yeah for instance So it's got everybody waiting around, like primed and conditioned, waiting around for like Jesus to come and save us.
Exactly.
And that savior might be Superman.
You know, in the sense that it's a it's a similar character, a character who's based on Moses, who evokes Jesus, uh, etc.
But he is playing the same role in that story.
There's a new, there's an old Jewish comic book that is the Tanakh.
There's a new Jewish comic book that is Hollywood cinema that is actual comic books as well, which are very similar.
And even in um even in uh uh novels and uh and and other forms of media from the uh 19th century on uh Dune explains that the meaning of his series is to not have trust in a savior, like waiting for the savior, the messianic figure actually is gonna get you destroyed.
I I saw him in an interview saying that.
So that's kind of the reversal the of it's warning you against the original Jewish comic book of the Messiah.
Arguably Frank Herbert was almost the first uh Rem theorist, and um I I don't I don't think Frank Herbert inspired Mark.
I I think that they uh had an insight in parallel, which is very interesting because in the Dune saga, there's the missionaria protectiva, and what that is is that the Benedict witches,
the Jesuits you could think of, but they're females and cooler, uh, but they incepted a society with ancient artifacts and stone tablets and shards of culture that they would incept in, say, the planet Erachus m uh uh hundreds or thousands of years ago, knowing that there would at some point be a people, uh, like the uh the um uh what do they call again?
The free the Fremen and the free man, Fremen, yeah, like the Fremen that would pick up these shards and begin to develop a prophecy.
So there would be a kind of arrow in your quiver.
There'd be a prophetic, there'd be a prophecy waiting for you to arrive, and you could use it a hundred years later, a thousand years later.
And I think this is directly parallel with Marx's conception of these things.
So it's not symbolism in a sort of you know, poetic way or merely personal way.
I mean, arguably, from one standpoint, Freudian dream analysis, that symbol means something to you personally.
It's reminding there's something about, say, a wolf that uh is very peculiar to your own upbringing, and a psychoanalyst can determine what that is, and you can recognize what the symbol is covering over, but also referencing, and then you can confront your repression and overcome it, or at least manage it.
Uh this is something different.
These are symbols that do have you could say immediate meanings, like the color red uh referencing blood and passion and so on, but they have cultivated, refined, deeper meanings.
So that the authors of the Bible in Alexandria, uh 250 years before the age of Caesar and the so-called age of Christ, uh, could use this language.
Uh, this language can be picked up in the authors of say uh say Thomas Mallory and the Arthurian legend.
These these symbolic language can be picked up by Hollywood producers and writers and directors in the 20th century.
It's there for the taking.
It's a deeply uh embedded old initiate form of communication, and it's powerful precisely because it's esoteric, but it's not too esoteric, you could say, or too arbitrary or or or too personal, it's solvable.
It's solvable, but also even if you don't solve it, it's communicating it to you on an unconscious level, when you're admiring Superman, you're becoming a Christian.
Yeah, yeah, being conditioned to wait for a supernatural savior, foreigner from a different people to come and save you, but from another planet, an alien, an alien hero.
You know, if it's actually in the new Superman, I don't want to spoil it for anybody.
Did you guys see it?
Yes.
So spoiler if you're gonna if you want to watch it.
Oh, that's right.
We did talk about it on your podcast.
Yeah, how like the plot is that it turns out that Superman was actually sent to rule over Earth.
Just like Jesus is kind of has he come to saving Earth, or is he actually just gonna be the ruler of Earth?
So really interesting that they put that into the new plot.
Right, the crypto.
He's a crypt, he's a crypto, he's a crypto Jew, is what Superman is.
He's from Kryptonite.
Krypton means hidden one, right?
So he even has a dog named Crypto, which is a kind of humorous name, right?
On the Dune thing, here's one of my favorite sound bites I always play on the show when I'm covering This Prophecy is how they enslave us.
Sums it up right there.
You know, you could be uh earlier, Mark categorized the two camps as like pro-Christian or anti-Christian, and you can also view that as like do you believe in prophecies or do you not believe in the prophecies?
And the prophecies are how they control us, it's how they control Christians, it's how Jews and Muslims are controlled.
And like the Orwell quote, whoever controls the present, controls the past, controls the future.
Like that's describing religion to a T, the fake Torah, the fake new mythical New Testament.
It's got all these people today believe in a fake history, and then controlling uh hyperstition controlling the future through the prophecies.
Yes.
And so this is what this is what I would posit to you, though, Adam, and you may or may not agree with this, but I think that basically that kind of um that psychological space is or is a sort of fact of life.
So and nature abhors a vacuum.
So it would be better if we were the ones to assert a prophecy, essentially.
Well, what's the Apollonian prophecy then?
Give me the new ones.
Give me the what was the aim, the air we give me the Aryan prophecies.
Why does that go?
Do I want to know?
Well, I I'll let Mark take it.
I I've I have some answers to this, but sure.
Oh, okay.
Well, um, look, I I think two fundamental myths of ours.
I in my opinion, and Mark can certainly add to these, um, are the assaults on Delphi by Apollo and also Zeus's escape from the belly of Kronos and his liberation of the Olympians.
And uh I think these are two very interesting stories that can be retold in uh thousands of different ways.
Um so uh briefly, the assault on Delphi is done by Apollo who flies in on a chariot shooting silver arrows.
He destroys Python, a snake.
So as opposed to being tempted by the snake or having the snake bite at your heel for the rest of eternity.
Uh Apollo kills the son of a bitch.
Uh, it's a little bit different.
And he basically finds this decaying culture, this culture that has become decadent that's been corrupted, and he revives an Olympian system or establishes an Olympian system on the ruins of something much older, and that is by killing the snake, thus releasing the the the women who are uh inebriated by his fumes.
You see clear metaphors here of drug use, the the Dionysian uh corruption uh that's inherent, and he basically the brings back the world and creates an Olympian system based on on reason and clarity and goodness on top of this corrupt temple of Delphi.
I think that's a very powerful myth that could be retold.
Uh Zeus is the his well-known escape from Kronos.
You know, Cronos is his father in the sense, Saturn is Zeus's father, in the sense that the Olympic system might very well have been a kind of reactionary attack on an existing thonic system.
That there was a you even see this in like Hesiod of a golden age of vegetarianism and peace and so on.
That's the the the vegetarianism and peace of communism that's being described.
And he actually sees it as a decay, a move moving away from Kronos is everything keeps getting worse.
We we see it very in the opposite direction.
That even the Olympian system, it might be calling upon deeper sky god figures, but it was a reaction to a dominant thonic system, or maybe perhaps even Dionysian system or a Saturn alien system, a harvest god harvesting up resources.
We know what that means.
And it was escaping from his belly is kind of playing, you know, beating Saturn at his own game, tricking Saturn, putting the stone into Saturn's belly, as opposed to this evil narcissistic parent, you know, consuming his own children, you somehow escape and humiliate literally or figuratively castrate Kronos and then establish the Olympian order.
So all of these stories, or both of these stories, are stories of rebirth of overcoming, which is basically what the those generational stories in the Greek myths are.
Zeus and the Olympians are a new generation, maybe a new people coming in with a new system and overcoming their quote father, which we all have to do on a personal level.
But this is on the level of generations and on the level of religion.
You move past what happened before, and you establish something bright and clear and good on the ashes of the old system.
And I think that's an excellent metaphor.
I don't want to be too bold here, but that's obviously an excellent metaphor for what we want to do to America.
I mean, America needs to, and by America, I sort of mean the Western world at this point.
It needs to decline.
It needs to fall into decay and corruption.
Once that happens, there's going to be an opportunity to establish something on the ruins or on the ashes, some ashes, something much greater and better.
And so I just nationalism that's the last gasp.
Christian nationalism is the last gasp of something that was, I think, very implicit in the United States and now is sort of explicit and gaudy even.
So everyone was a Christian nationalist in various subtle consensual ways in the 20th century, no longer.
And so now they have to like hammer it home.
Like the even this thing that happened today where Trump is like, you know, you're in prison if you burn the flag, uh, kind of thing.
It what is that except some last ditch effort to assert something that is already declined?
Like if you have to tell, if you have to make a law establishing that you won't disrespect this deity, the flag, which is a sort of deity in this case, then you've sort of already lost the game.
It's already lost legitimacy.
You're you're you're forcing it late in the game, once the game is already over, in fact.
Would you guys both agree though on the Christian question that it's it's fake, it's Jewish myth.
It needs to be replaced, and we shouldn't be tolerating it.
Do you guys agree with that that physician?
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, it's not so.
Well, I mean, we are sort of fish swimming in you're being very blunt.
You're you're being me 20 years ago, Adam.
Yeah.
Um look, we we are fish swimming in Christianity at this point.
So it we we I think we need to recognize that.
Christianity, even if it has dissipated, it is inflecting our lives and the way we think in untold ways.
We are all cultural Christians on some level.
Every liberal is a cultural Christian.
He He's a kind of ideological Christian.
It's Christianity without Christ.
And I think we need to recognize that.
We need to recognize what we're up against.
This is an extremely powerful force.
It's a force that might have a second act or a third or fourth or fifth act to it.
It might resurrect itself.
It is, it's not, I mean, I would agree with you if you're just talking about like marijuana or something, like don't smoke it, shouldn't be tolerated.
That's sort of easy.
But with something as powerful as Yahwehism, it's I think we should be aware of the task that is before us.
Yeah, I mean, we I mean ultimately we're polytheists.
So in other words, in the way that we recognize that Bacchus is a force in the world, we recognize that Yahweh is a force in the world.
And a kind of different face of the same force, ultimately.
I agree, it's a force in the world.
I'm not disputing that.
It's a force that we need to reckon with.
That's what I'm saying.
Yeah, and have respect for it in the way that you have respect for an adversary.
Right.
So in this way you're honoring it.
But not to follow it, of course, right?
We're not the followers of that God.
And that's why we call ourselves Apollonians, right?
And that in that is a sort of it in some ways we've uh we're certainly inspired by Nietzsche, but we and we've learned greatly from Nietzsche.
But I think that we've recognized some errors in Nietzsche.
And but and also just have in maybe even come to some conclusions that he wouldn't he wouldn't have necessarily come to, or he may have come to.
Maybe, you know, I mean, uh we don't know necessarily, we can't say for certain where Nietzsche would have ended up.
Um we're in a much different time than he was, definitely different circumstances.
Yeah, and we have a we have a lot more information actually than he did.
Oh, yeah, way more a lot of ways, right?
We were able to kind of cross-reference things in a much more rapid manner.
We have a lot more information at our fingertips.
So in this way, we're able, you know, through the internet in particular, we're able to kind of correct some of the errors that he was making on a kind of mythological level, right?
Um Nietzsche sympathized with Dionysus.
I mean, that's very clear.
And I do think that that was a profound error and misunderstanding.
He uh in a late letter, he actually said um it's Dionysus versus the crucified.
And um also Prometheus uh as an image appeared on I think the second edition of the birth of tragedy or something like that.
Now he also disowned the birth of tragedy later in life, but uh did he really reject its findings?
I'm not sure.
And uh so yeah, I I do think that Nietzsche had profound misunderstandings uh of the dynamic, but you know, no one's birthing it's even also human, I guess.
Yeah, even that I'm not even sure that his instincts had completely failed him, though, because I think that like even if, for example, he'd come come to the conclusion that Dionysus is a sort of Aryan god, right?
Uh and is a kind of is the other sort of half of Apollo.
Um even if that was his conclusion, I think that I think that what he was looking the reason that he saw Dionysianism as valuable is he saw it as a kind of instrument against Christianity, right?
So, in other words, in we would look at Christianity and Dionysianism or Christianity and Hollywood as a kind of caducean, effectively, or uh Christianity and liberalism and liberalism coming from Liber, Dionysus and so forth, as two snakes in a caducian, essentially, a kind of false opposition, in other words.
Uh, and he was basically favoring one of these serpents in the caduces, uh, which for the time may have been valuable because I mean, certainly, as uh liberalism has ascended, uh Christianity has declined, right?
So it Bacchus did serve that role of helping to do To diminish Christianity, essentially.
And I think that I think in my guess is that he that is the reason he was kind of putting force behind Bach's as a kind of foil to Christianity.
That's my sort of interpretation of what he was up to.
Now, you know, so it became maybe in assuming that that assuming that had a valuable role in sort of um weakening Christianity, uh, then the effort was he acted on a kind of good instinct.
So I can't like I can't like so what if he misidentified Dionysus', you know, I mean, it's it's a kind of error uh that I think that we've usefully corrected, but um it I mean I think his instincts were kind of on the money on some level, right?
Like there is there is that sort of nihilistic element, but the nihilism is directed toward Christianity, is directed to an adversary, effectively.
Right.
I w I want to ask you guys about some of the Christian copes we see, which we we clearly have a Christian problem.
There's a problem with big big Christianity, Jesus Inc., right?
The establishment of Christianity, the Christian Zionists in America, the Catholic Church with their NGOs and their mass immigration and their you know everything they're doing, right?
And then we see the copes from the internet Christians, which are never going to overcome this with stuff like you know, arguments like Jesus wasn't Jewish or Jews killed Jesus, so we have to hate him, and Jews aren't real Jews, you know, all of this nonsense stuff that's so easily disprovable.
Running it, they're just like running cover for what actual Christianity is doing.
Do you guys see what I'm saying?
Do you agree with that?
You want to take this?
He's on mute.
I kept muting myself on your show, too.
You had to tell me, stop muting, you know.
Yeah, it is.
Yeah, you've done it twice.
It's interesting how uh just due to the dynamic of Christianity, they are able to see themselves as the underdog.
And as I've just established, I mean, we live in a Christian culture, and that remains the most powerful force uh informing and inflecting America and the Western world, even among an atheist.
They sort of don't see it that way.
I I think in some ways, like Christian nationalists think of themselves as like oppressed or persecuted, like meeting and meeting in houses and uh late at night uh to do the the most rebellious thing possible, which is to worship Jesus Christ and not the false idols.
That's how they view themselves vis-a-vis liberalism.
And so it's it's a sort of it's a cope, there's no doubt about it, but it's a it's a powerful dynamic for them to constantly see yourself as oppressed and pushing again outside forces.
Again, we are able to see the the forces that they dislike as Bacchanal forces or in fact just outright Christian forces.
Liberalism.
It's a it's Christ, it's the crucified and the wine goding together.
Sometimes there are contradictions between Jesus and Bacchus, but many times there are simply not.
And that is what they're fighting against.
It's a caducean battle where they're fighting against a kind of shadow of themselves or a reflection of themselves that they see in liberalism.
Okay, I got a clip for you guys I wanted to watch and play.
It's J.D. Vance talking about Catholicism and immigration.
So you guys can see the screen.
Oh, wait, hold on.
Chat can't.
There we go.
I actually hear it.
I hear it.
Okay, good.
Great.
Here we go.
The vice president of the United States calls out Catholic bishops in front of a Sunday morning national audience, accusing the church of being more interested in the federal money they receive than its humanitarian mission.
The vice president said, as a practicing Catholic, he was heartbroken by the way bishops are responding.
And I think that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops needs to actually look in the mirror a little bit.
Vance then seemed to question the bishop's relationship with the U.S. refugee admissions programs.
With an executive order, President Trump has halted refugee admissions, but the federal program provides funds to a number of nonprofit and faith-based groups who for years have helped the government resettle vetted refugees after they've been accepted into America.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is one of those organizations.
That's the one that worked with uh the Jewish uh JN what group was it?
One of AJC, American Jewish Council, and can put out the statement condemning the Groipers, the U S C C B, by the way.
Yes, let me keep going a little bit.
100 million annually.
You may receive over a hundred million dollars to help resettle illegal immigrants.
Are they worried about humanitarian concerns?
Are they actually worried about their bottom line?
Does the president intend to be?
They're worried about humanitarian.
You can stop this.
This makes me want to defend Jesus when I hear these JD Vans like, oh, are they are they worried about you know the bottom line?
No, it's a charity.
I mean, everyone's a little bit greedy, I'll grant you that.
But clearly they are doing what Jesus wants them to do.
Like, what do you where do you think Jesus Christ, as we know him through the gospel literature, where he would come down on the refugee question?
Do you think Jesus would be standing at the border riding a horse with an you know an MK uh uh machine gun, you know, firing at people trying to cross?
No, he would be hugging them.
He he would embrace them.
The cherry these Catholic charities are doing God's work as they understand it.
And it is absurd for J.D. Vance, he he's making a non-essential argument because he's not actually addressing the issue.
He's at this little escape clause.
Oh, they care more about their bottom line than they do about humanitarian concerns.
No, no, what are you talking about?
They clearly care about humanitarian concerns.
They believe that Jesus is enjoining them to help the needy.
The first shall be last, and the last shall be first.
This is at the basis of their ideology.
And if there's something worse than a true believing Christian, it's this sort of like ignorant or hypocritical or mendacious Christian that doesn't think that his religion is what it clearly is.
He doesn't think that his religion is exactly what is explicitly stated by Jesus, your Lord and Savior, in the Sermon on the Mount.
They think apparently it's not about that.
It's about smells and bells.
It's about, you know, uh uh the the church uh putting on a performance of Handel's Messiah at Christmas, and it's about some like deep mystery that we have to ponder about the afterlife.
Well, it is about those things to some degree.
I'll I'll give you that, to be fair.
But it is fundamentally about reaching all of humanity so that they might be saved and rejecting your own wealth, giving the shirt off your own back to a refugee who is penniless and starving.
That is your religion.
Period end of statement.
If you do not see that, you are engaging in your own form of esoterica, which is basically just obscuring the obvious freely stated mission of your Lord and Savior.
I mean, I I just I I really I don't have any time for these people.
You know, if you talk to one of those, a Catholic who's working in one of those charities, as opposed to J.D. Vance, he actually has a clear understanding of what his religion is about.
And I bet that you could have a free good faith discussion with that person who is a true believing Catholic or Protestant or whatever, who's helping out the poor.
I bet you could engage in good faith open debate, which is what we want.
With JD Vance, you can't, because he he he is either unable or unwilling to see things clearly, and thus he's endlessly acting in this little like house of mirrors reflection, deflect and deflection manner with regard to his own religion.
You can't talk to him about that.
Because he's just gonna say some he's he's gonna have some little escape clause who'll be like, they care more about money than they do about humanitarianism.
So he's again, he's refusing to address the essential issue, and he's making a non-essential critique of his own church.
I it's just I I just have nothing but contempt for people like JD Vance and Catholics like this, and some Protestants as well, who just obscure.
They make it more difficult to actually get at the truth of the matter, to have a real discourse on what Christianity is, what Jesus meant, what Jesus wanted.
I guarantee fucking T you if Jesus came back, JD Vance and the rest of these Pharisees would reject him.
This is pretty funny.
Watch this eight years ago, J.D. Vance talking about that this was a racialized discourse, unlike any that we've had in a really long time, but I don't blame Trump's voters for that.
The people that I blame for that are actually typically well-educated coastal elitists, people like Richard Spencer and the alt right.
It's telling that the alt-right is driven by primarily very well educated, relatively smart, relatively stable people.
It's not driven by people in the Rust Belt who go on 4chan, relatively stable and talk about Obama in these really nasty ways, right?
It's not a good thing.
Yeah, first off, JD, I'm a lot more intelligent than you because I am actually coherent in what I say.
Un you are not.
So apparently I invented racialized discourse, and the Rust Belt, like again, I invented it.
Like it never occurred.
The Southern strategy, Michelle Obama, too.
Is that his uh European fascism?
Whatever.
No, none of that occurred.
I invented it circa 2016.
And uh that's an absurd claim, uh, first off.
But uh secondly, like he wants to just make his people, like the hillbillies, these like innocent babes in the woods.
Like, they don't they didn't do nothing, they know nothing, and it's just Richard Spencer.
Appalachian drug addicts don't see race.
Well, they might not, to be fair.
Um but he didn't with his choice of wife.
They can't see anything.
But yeah, it it's it it is just utter and complete nonsense.
And you see this like instinct upon him.
I mean, he got into Yale, congratulations, that's great, but it's all about like wasp elites harming the hillbillies.
The hillbillies are innocent and pure and good.
And they're the what the other notion that he said in there, which is just so absurd, is like people from the Rust Belt lose their jobs at the factory and then they go on 4chan.
Whatever.
I have no idea what he's doing.
But he was basically a kind of white Obama populist who claimed that you know the those good people out there, they're not racist, they've just got a bad culture.
They know more about making cornbread than they do about uh becoming a lawyer in a Silicon Valley VC.
Um that was basically the line that he was promoting in 2016.
And then now he uh has continues to embrace them as innocent and and then just embraces the worst aspects of Trumpism.
So he's my least favorite politician, the one that's just irredeemable in my mind.
And the front runner, I saw the polls actually.
Uh Gavin Newsom took a huge bump in the polls the last couple of weeks with everybody just comparing pictures of the two.
That's interesting, right?
Yeah.
Are you gonna go team Gavin?
Oh, yeah.
I mean, I voted for Kamala, so what you know.
Let's finish this up.
I want to hear what the point of this, I hadn't watched this yet, but I thought the point of it is just exposing how much the Catholic charities are instrumental to the mass immigration into the West and the Pope's rhetoric is is completely about multiculturalism and not building walls but building bridges and stuff.
But then the Catholics, the the e-crusaders online say white people won't survive without the Catholic Church, and you're anti-white if you criticize Catholicism.
And that's that's our only solution, or for birth rates or whatever, and then when this is the reality of it.
Let's hear what there are.
Settle illegal immigrants.
Are they worried about humanitarian concerns or Are they actually worried about their bottom line?
Does the president intend to permanently cut off funding to NGOs that are bringing illegal foreign nationals to the country, such as Catholic charities?
And remarks from members of Congress like Republican Marjorie Taylor Green, who said her quote, subcommittee will be calling in Catholic charities.
Find out why and to what extent they were helping illegals invade America.
Steeritz says it's unfortunate to hear those remarks, especially since Catholic charities has nothing to do with immigration policy.
We have no uh direction in how people come here.
Um or the immigration policies that have them come here or not.
So if the question is, are we going to serve people who come to us, the answer will always be yes.
Because the gospel to do that.
Like, don't wouldn't you rather have a conversation with this decent man than with a just lying annoying son of a bitch, JD Vance.
Like, at least you can talk to this guy because he's speaking clearly.
You know, we're gonna serve the poor.
We're gonna serve the needy, we're Christians.
I I get it.
That that is who you are, and I appreciate the fact that you are so transparent about it.
JD wants to obscure matters.
And there's nothing worse.
Richard, to be uh a little fair to uh Vance, I mean, it's not I I don't think he's framing it in a Catholic perspective, right?
So in other words, I think he is a hypocrite.
I agree with you that he he models himself a Catholic.
If he were a true Catholic, he would be agreeing with this guy, right?
And he would be on this guy's side.
So I agree with that a hundred percent.
But um, you know, here he is not framing uh he's not framing it as a Catholic position intelligently, because it's not a Catholic position, and he's not a good Catholic by opposing the uh uh this type of mass immigration.
The good Christian is welcoming the non-white uh immigrants to the country, as you point out.
You know, so I I mean I agree, I I I have uh a similar dislike of Vance as you do, obviously.
Um and I in but from my perspective, I think that the real thing, and this is a kind of more practical or utilitarian consideration, because I think that everyone that calls themselves a Christian uh uh who is a Trumper is is not really a Christian, right?
Especially if they're a nationalist or they're race fading and this sort of thing.
This is not Christian behavior.
I think that they're all hypocrites, and that does disgust me.
Uh but I from a kind of practical uh perspective, the thing that I dislike about Vance is that he's not going to do anything when it comes to like there isn't going to be a kind of effective immigration reform, you know?
I mean, the uh uh he's just not the guy to do that.
The guy was a never Trumper to this to the extent that Trump was never really serious about it as it turned out.
But he was he seemed at least like at least it seemed like there was some genuine element of Trump.
This guy is completely full of shit.
You know, whether he's a Christian or not.
He's not even a uh, you know, he he's gonna promise one thing and deliver another, as the Republican Party has been doing for decades.
You know, it's just they're just I mean, I I find both parties, dare I say, uh kind of irredeemably corrupt at this point, uh, and that there needs to be an injection of if not a new party, new people who are serious, uh, you know, about um changing the direction of the uh the country, but I don't see it in either party right now.
Um I mean, I I can understand you like Newsom as a foil to uh these assholes in the GOP, and I I get that.
Um snake will bite off the other snake's head, is I guess I hope.
So it's maybe it's a kind of Nietzschean, it's favoring Bacchus against uh Christ is is logic, essentially.
Yeah.
But in any case, my real I mean, I I uh like the fact that they're all Christian hypocrites and f uh the uh GOP across the board, I just it's just sort of a given.
Uh the thing that I hate.
This guy's got a way different take on me than this.
I see this as Trump and Vance made promises about immigration, they're trying to enact that, and they're getting pushback from the cat from Catholicism and Catholics.
And but that's the correct Catholic position.
So I think that we we we there's some similarity in our perspective on this.
Yeah, but it just shows, oh, we want to have you know less money for immigr immigration, less immigrants, and then the Catholic Church is mad about it and standing in the way.
I think it shows you know that there you guys are like angry at Vance here, but I I'm just more like this is just illustrating the problem with Catholicism and the role that they've played in what's happening to the West.
Now, Richard's irritation, which I agree with was that this guy builds himself as a Catholic, right?
So why is he supporting the Catholic position?
So he's just some insincere GOP asshole.
But on top of that, he's not gonna do anything useful as as it concerns him.
I'd rather have him do that than fun the Catholics more, though.
That's a fair point.
Yeah.
Hold on.
I want to give them another rope to Christ commanded us to do that.
That could work too.
And he says the church will continue to fulfill that gospel mandate, whether or not the government provides assistance.
Okay, so there's a lot of people talking about the Christian role in immigration.
A lot of people online want to blame it just on Jews, and then we see, like, where is it right here?
This guy who I talked to on a space yesterday, Doomer Natz, rose to recent fame because of the Jubilee show.
He says, We're not going to talk about the role of the Catholic Church in immigration until we have a conversation about the Jewish role.
We've talked about the Jewish role.
We're not deflecting away from the Jewish role.
It's Christians trying to sweep it under the rug.
They're not fixing this.
They're not gonna fix it.
They got the new Pope in charge for another twenty to thirty years.
So it's the Christians that are deflecting from the Christian responsibility here.
Exactly.
They're engaging in scapegoating right there.
They're not looking at themselves.
They're trying to put all the sins under one people, that is the Jews.
It's yeah.
It's not serious.
Uh did you guys see this one?
This is great too.
Uh Masonic Lodge of Benai Brith holds a memorial for Pope Pius the uh what is that, 11th, right?
Exise 11th.
He they honor him for his greatest humanitarian of our time standing against paganism and racialism.
So I don't know how the e Crusaders online are gonna recover from that one.
This is okay, and this did you guys see this?
The Catholic propaganda, the Catholic organization, like one of the biggest Catholic organizations in the 1960s and still today, teamed up with uh who was it?
Bonai Brith, anti-defamation league to do the most crazy pro-Jewish propaganda thing I've ever seen in my life.
Let's watch this.
Okay.
It's it's a little repetitive, but it is wild.
Watch this.
National Council of Catholic Men in arrangement with the ADL of Benai Breath.
The ADL of Benai Breath The community club, you see, is a private organization formed by thoughtful and discriminating people.
Oh, discriminating, of course, in the aesthetic sense.
Membership in our club has been historically and by custom restricted to Christians.
Just what is a Christian?
Oh, Christian is Christian's a Christian.
You mean he is a regular attender of a Christian church?
Well, not necessarily.
He has he why he well perhaps you mean that a Christian is a follower of the teachings of Christ.
Certainly, yes.
I should hope so.
If you're talking about the same Christ that I'm talking about, he sat down at table of all races and religion.
He preached love, or even the most outcast of races.
And of course he was himself a Jew.
He was.
Yes, madam.
In fact.
He was a Jew.
Oh my gosh.
Actually, not that unrealistic.
Oh, it's very realistic.
Based on the interview that we've seen you conduct in uh the in California, it's actually not that unrealistic.
I would say 80% of churchgoers are like this woman, basically.
Wouldn't you say?
Oh, yeah, for sure.
Well, well, not anymore, not since the decades of this type of uh conditioning.
Uh in my experience in Dallas, Texas, they're all like this woman.
Aren't they all Zionist in Dallas, Texas?
Well, you get some of that too.
That's there's almost like a class distinction between like Episcopalians and Presbyterians and so on, and then the fundies and the vange.
But um let's just say that this depiction is quite accurate.
Yeah.
Yeah, and I want to acknowledge uh Devin Stack uh found this and did a show on this on his show about full breakdown in depth, but it just it is cra it is brutal.
There's no overcoming this.
This was uh what is it, 1960s, 40, 65 years ago.
They're not turning this around.
These these crusaders on the internet that are saying Jesus isn't Jewish are not gonna ever turn this round.
They're destined to lose, they're destined just to play the villain in and mobilize and rally all the real Christian and Christian institutions to be the defender of the Jews.
Yes.
That's all they're gonna do.
We'll watch a little bit more.
We won't do the whole thing.
The membership rules of your club would automatically exclude him.
Jesus Christ, his mother who was born a Jewish girl, his apostles and friends, including the first Pope, Saint Peter.
Oh.
Well, I'm not sure about popes, but as for the rest, we could stretch the membership rules for them.
I think.
I suggest we use love.
Whatever love we can muster in this community.
Love and respect and some common sense.
I doubt you'll find Eddie.
This will skip that end.
New hope and newfound peace in a household because a family has faced some unpleasant facts and decided to do something about them.
Thoughtfulness has been restored in this town, and that can be a beginning.
Some small movement has begun to open all doors to all our neighbors, including God's chosen people.
Wow.
This was a big thing back in the day.
Um, even up through the 80s and maybe even the 90s, that the notion of the country club and being excluded from that was a major force.
I'm not abusing.
I'm certain that there still are country clubs that are in effect all white or all Christian and you're Jews.
But like yours.
No, no.
No.
Well, uh, yeah, I I would never be a member of a club that would have me, I guess, to quote Woody Allen.
But um yeah, it there i i it was a major force, and it reminds me actually of what Marcus talked about, the the gymnasium, basically in uh ancient Greece as uh an analogous institution that Jews were trying to gain entrance to.
It's it's fascinating that this this seems to all be about where you go and like serve tea or eat hot dogs by the pool or something.
But those consensual social institutions are actually extremely important, and it's interesting to see what followed once they were integrated or made tolerant.
Here's another one now, the same propaganda.
Well, it's not even propaganda, it's just the truth being weaponized, showing how Christ Christianity and Jesus can be exploited for their support for their benefit.
So watch this.
This is just one minute long, some Jewish guy trying to rally support through Jewish Jesus.
If you hate Jews and you are a Christian, you've got a problem because Jesus Was a Jew.
He was born to a Jewish mother, raised in a Jewish family in a Jewish town.
He was circumcised on the eighth day, went to synagogue every Sabbath, and celebrated Jewish holidays like Passover and Sukkot.
All of his disciples, Jews, the writers of the New Testament, every single one, Jewish.
Even the term Christ comes from the Greek translation of the Hebrew word Messiah, meaning anointed one.
So if you remove the Jewishness from Jesus, you're not left with the Jesus of history.
You're left with something else entirely.
And here's the kicker.
The story of Christianity is deeply rooted in the Hebrew scriptures.
Without the Old Testament, there is no New Testament.
So if you're a Christian and anti-Semitic, you might just be hating the very roots of your own faith.
Thoughts, guys?
Correct?
No, I think he basically suffered it up.
There's no escaping this, right?
I mean, I think that this is the best messaging.
Um, or this is the best way to basically talk to uh Christians on the right, uh, and you know, use those talking points effectively.
I mean, I think that as um I think that the figure of Jesus symbolically is more rich and complex than he's just a Jew, right?
Uh so I think that there's interesting symbolism going on there.
Um, but it's obviously a Jewish myth.
And it was obviously created by Jews toward a particular psychological and spiritual end, toward a particular telos or goal.
Uh so it is Jewish through and through the Christianity, the myth of Christianity, and the intention and telos of Christianity is Jewish.
Um, but I think that uh for our purposes when we're talking to, you know, I mean, what he what he's saying, none none of nothing he said is untrue, and you can verify everything he said uh with the scriptures, right?
Is he Jew descended of the house of David?
He was circumcised on the eighth day.
We all all it's all there, right?
Yeah.
It it's rabbi.
He's even a rabbit.
Because it's true, but it works.
The reason they do this is because it's true and it works.
And denying that Christianity came from Judaism or Judeo-Christianity is like a term, meaning it it's a branch of Judaism, or denying Jesus is Jewish, is never gonna work.
You're not gonna overcome the reality in the institution with these copes and lies.
Which is why we can't even tolerate, like, oh, they're base, they're anti-Semitic, they're they're racial, whatever.
It still isn't gonna cut it.
They're they're a weak link.
They're vulnerability that is only exploited.
And they're an impediment to actually us actually addressing and undermining the Christian establishment.
They control the debate.
Like the debate with Christians and Jews, it's a limited parameters of the debate.
It's limited in scope, where you're only arguing over what the scriptures mean and who the Messiah is, not if the scriptures are even real and if the chosen people are real and if if we should worship Yahweh or not.
So it's completely limited in that degree.
Control.
Yeah.
Okay, you guys ready for the other hot clip?
Mike Huckabee talking to some rabbis saying that people that oppose Jews oppose God.
The ambassador has a very interesting view of anti-Semitism.
Grew up uh in America, there was anti-Semitism, of course.
Uh, my experience of all experiences.
The ambassador has a very interesting view of that.
He says, People are you can't understand that you Semitism.
If it's people who are anti-Semitic, it's because they're against God.
Against the Rabbi Shalod.
And we are represented as his people, and that's why they're anti-Semitic.
Otherwise, it doesn't make any sense.
Interesting view.
It's interesting you.
Christians that are anti-Semitic aren't against God, though.
They're so for God that they're anti-Semitic.
They love God so much that they think they're supposed to uh hate his chosen people.
I love how they frame this as this is Mike Huckabee.
This is the Christian ambassador's point of view.
Like this isn't what rabbis say all the time.
You're against us, you're against God, you're Amalek, right?
This is peak groveling, peak Christian ambassador groveling to rabbis.
Another view that uh since we can say that it's the chosen people, so people are very who are you?
What are you uh taking big shots?
Yeah, Chosen people.
And that's part of it is that uh because you are the chosen people given a chosen place for a chosen purpose.
And if someone is angry at God, he'll be angry at the people who represent him.
So I tell people anti-Semitism is irrational.
There's no reason for it unless you understand the spiritual reason.
Which is what I believe is at the heart of it.
It is not the left versus the right.
It is good versus evil.
It is the creator versus those who rebel against the creators.
I mean, on some level he's correct.
I mean, it is opposition to the false Yahweh, the false God of Abraham is the God they made that show they invented to chow to choose them for them to have hegemony over the nations.
And this reminds me of like Noahide laws.
The first one is no blasphemy or no idol worship, one of the first two.
So no blasphemy, blaspheming the Jews is blaspheming God and not believing in God, blaspheming God or wanting to be an idol worship is an assault and anti-Semitic on Jews.
So and if you oppose them, you're evil and you're the darkness and you're Amalek.
So this is the paradigm that they have set up where and because of Christians, they're getting away with it because of the actual Christians with the real power.
We hear all the time they're not real Christians from the Ain on Frog accounts online.
They're they're not real Christians, they're satanic, but he's the one with the real influence.
Any other thoughts on that one with you guys?
No, I I do have a question for you though, uh Adam.
Uh do you feel like it's uh like a lot has changed from the discourse?
Do you think a lot of people have basically come over to the anti-Christian tradition, essentially?
Tons have come over.
And they are coming over from either the uh Christian side or the like let's not infight side.
They are coming over.
Yeah, it's every live stream, every comment thread, you know, uh all the different influencers, they're all chiming in with their takes on the Christian question, definitely.
I think it's the it's the our the most central issue of our time right now in the discourse surrounding what's what's happening.
What do you guys think?
Have you seen it?
R Richard doesn't seem like he's he's been I've seen Mark a little more than Richard engaging in the uh I guess pagan Christian wars, if you will.
Yeah, yeah, I mean, I I've I've listened to CQ radio a little bit, and it it gets a bit harsh, I guess.
Um I I don't know.
Uh but I I do agree with what you're saying.
I I do think that the the Christian question is going to emerge as the important question, and it's just taking some time.
But we've got to allow, I mean, I just saw you you're glancing through your tabs here.
Oh, so we've got to uh we've got to allow Jay Dyer to have uh theological debates about philiqui.
Uh uh he hasn't had enough of this.
We need at least ten more before his position is is totally uh yeah.
Let's have a four-hour debate on if uh the Holy Ghost of the Trinity has a cause or not.
Like those are the real important issues of our day, right?
That really matters.
It's just it it genuinely is intellectual masturbation because it has no connection to the real world.
You you it it's like abstract painting or something.
It it's it there's there's no relevance to this whatsoever.
And look at the divisions they're getting into these VM V vehement discussions about uh something that it's just utter pedantry.
They're they're in a monastery arguing with each other, it's it's absurd.
And they like hate each other over it.
That this schism, the wars of this schism, and how it they can't even unite because of minor differences in interpretation of of Jewish scriptures, it's it's disgraceful what it's done.
What what are the consequences to the Holy Spirit emanating from the Father and the Son as opposed to emanating only from the Father?
Like what what is the consequence to that?
I I guess you could say the consequence to that was one of the schisms uh between orthodoxy and Catholicism, but there's no doubt that these abstract disputes work window dressing on uh w what are ultimately power plays and geographic dis you know the disputes and that they come up with these little weird things of you know I don't know like you it's it you might as well be arguing of of like what is it?
Well I remember at um in high school, like the mini skirts, it it had it could be like one inch above the knee, and if it was two inches, it was illegal or something.
You're arguing about these just petty, just seemingly irrelevant matters.
Because the mini skirt length is actually far more relevant than Philokwey, in my opinion, at least.
It'd be like arguing if Superman, if kryptonite hurts Superman because it like weakens its cells, or if because it's like you know, does does something else, it weakens his immune system, like something so irrelevant to everything fighting passionately, vehemently over these things is just it's sad.
It's sad to see that this is what the central issues being debated is stuff like that.
Don't you think it's also like a magic show in the sense that we all like magic shows because you're you're impressed by the the waving of the wand and you know, pulling a rabbit out of the hat or the scarves or something.
There's something impressive.
But if anyone has ever done any magic, you learn that these tricks are actually far simpler than you would imagine.
That's sort of the ultimate trick, is that it's just very simple, it's just little sleight of hand things, distraction.
You slip the card behind at the bottom of the deck while you're while you point over there and get them uh focused over there.
I guess the the point, the ultimate point that I'm making here is that who watches that with any seriousness.
You're just watching someone, they might as well be speaking ancient Greek or or speaking a language all to their own.
That they're just like waving their hands in the air and saying words.
It has no relevance, no consequence.
It is the definition of a ridiculously abstract dispute that has no meaning beyond itself.
But people watch that and they're like, ooh, ooh, he got him on that one.
Like slam dunk alert, Jay Dyer just posterized his opponent, or like, ooh, Jay Dyer took a body blow with that comment from the Catholic.
It's it's just it's absurd.
Talk about watching shadows on the wall of the cave.
That is what you are doing.
It is I I cannot imagine sitting through that and pretending that there is any modicum of relevance or interest in that discussion.
And yet people watch this is really important stuff.
I mean, what what they're saying is obviously is just completely convoluted sophistry and horseshit that has no meaning or bear uh bearing on reality and no consequence, really.
Um but putting that aside, the I think that what is happening, why someone would decide to watch that is because it's a kind of it's church, essentially, right?
So that they feel like they're engaged in the divine, they're engaged in a kind of worship because they're trying to understand these sort of arcane, you know, disputes in the church between Catholicism and orthodoxy and so forth around the Trinity, right?
And so they they feel like they're trying to understand their religion and therefore they're demonstrating a kind of devotion to it through an attempt to gain a kind of wisdom.
And in this way, it's a very kind of platonic exercise, right?
Because the goal ultim of Plato, of course, is to be wise, right?
That's the ultimate goal in life, to become wise.
And in his schema, where we have, you know, he he postulates a reincarnation, but the wiser you are, uh the better your next life will be, right?
And so people they're they're attempting a kind of they're attempting to become more wise in this, you know, very Uh sophistic, you know, uh meaningless way where I think you understand my point.
But there is something very platonic about the exercise.
Well, we're not going to church anymore, and so we're listening to Jay Dyer on our smartphone talk about uh emanating from the father alone or something.
It I I agree with that point.
People feel like they're engaged in something, much like going to church for 99% of the people is sort of staring at something they barely understand.
Yeah.
Hey Richard, did you see the other day uh over the weekend I had an interaction with uh Mike Enoch and the TRS guys that they were uh taking shots about Jesus mythicism, saying that you are people are uh wrong and really dumb to say Jesus didn't exist, but then didn't want to talk about it any further and just cited Bart Ehrman believing that he exists.
So my again Mike Enoch wants to deny that Jews died during the second world war, uh, but thinks it's dumb to suggest that Jesus is a figment of literature, it's bizarre.
The the notion that on any other matter he would point to experts is ridiculous.
I I think he clearly I I think he fears offending people in his group or something.
That's always so he's also with all these Christian.
He's not pursuing truth, in fact.
But you but in in the sort of esoteric realm of TRS, you can deny the Holocaust, and it's like based and red-pilled or whatever, but they're not willing to take that sort of uh or apply that sort of scrutiny to any other issue, which just it it thus becomes a matter of of special pleading.
You're focused on the Holocaust because you love Hitler, you think Hitler's cool.
Okay, fine.
Uh go go for it.
Have have fun with that, guys.
But you're not actually serious about anything.
You're you're just in engaging in special pleading for a cause you admire, and you're saying, oh no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, don't go there with a cause that you don't find uh inspiring.
So fine, okay, you're not serious.
I knew that before I saw that dispute between you two.
So, you know, good luck with that.
Yes, so you did see it, and it's it's odd that I think you know, just everybody's gonna be able to do it.
So the MO though.
Oh, please, I'll let you continue.
That's kind of Enoch's MO, right?
So he'll do he in part of it, honestly, I think it's just competitive grifting.
I mean, I just hate to be honest.
And he's he doesn't uh in I think it's just a kind of TRS policy.
And to me, it's disappointing because you listen to Mike Enoch, and I I like I don't I think that he's an intelligent guy, and I think he know he's like I think he's well versed in the JQ from like uh uh Kevin McDonald perspective, and I think he does his research and he's very serious about communicating his ideas and so forth.
I think he does a fine job.
And so I don't really have a kind of criticism of what he's engaged in per se.
Now the approach is not an approach that I would myself pursue, but whatever, you know, uh let a thous uh let a thousand flowers bloom.
Who gives a shit, right?
Um, but I think that the I think the problem, and I for a while they were pursuing this closed system where they basically wanted to sort of monopolize the DR and be like the DR. And that eventually fell apart.
And I think that they're still attempting to uh pursue a closed system where they're engaged in this sort of competitive grifting where they just want to kind of throw shade at people and say, ah, don't listen to that guy.
Listen to me.
You know what I mean?
It's like we actually know a fuck ton more about this than you do, Enoch.
And honestly, and this is not an insult to your intelligence, it's not an insult to your uh to your knowledge, because I think that you are knowledgeable in certain areas, and in certain areas you have greater knowledge than me.
I'll concede that readily.
But when it comes to like religion, the analysis of film and culture, like I'm fucking leagues above you, dude.
So just don't throw shade in my direction.
I'm just telling you, man.
You know, and it's like, and here's the thing is you throw your shade, but then you won't talk to people directly because you know that you'll get schooled.
You'll get fucked.
Exactly.
It's unproductive.
Yeah.
And I'm just, yeah.
So it's fine to disagree with us.
Yeah, you're you're you're it's a free country.
Last time I checked.
But yeah, just this sort of throwing shade, trust the experts.
Uh uh, we don't talk about that here.
It's like, okay, so you're not serious, and you're not offering anything productive.
Okay, that's fine.
So don't get mad at us when we have no interest in you.
Yeah, and honestly, living like I so I've given the guy compliments, and they're sincere compliments.
I think the guy is doing a kind of beoman work, he's in a certain area in the DR. I think that uh the conversation that the general conversation, the broader conversation is moved on.
Not everyone has moved on.
Uh, and I think I I think that their role is valuable in maybe the role way that Jared Taylor's role is valuable, right?
He's like at a certain point, and he's got his kind of dogmas, and he's not going to move from that point.
But we've moved on into this vanguard, and we're doing very productive stuff.
And, you know, uh like I mean, we didn't, we weren't the ones trying to design a closed system.
Uh we were open to having conversations with you.
Uh and so I would just say just you know, don't throw shade and you'll be fine.
We don't, you know.
I think that I have no objection to what the guy's doing.
And yeah, I had never talked shit about him.
I've never been uh had a problem with them, and then that he just out of nowhere says people who say Jesus didn't exist are wrong and really dumb, but then doesn't want to talk about it any further.
And this bugs me a lot, especially with people that I know aren't Christians.
Like it's just a fact, not just with them, but just with everybody.
I've always been saying this for years.
I was in the same uh position years ago too, is that these people online, you know, maybe struggling to go by a little bit.
If half of your audience is Christian, uh you do you want to lose half of your supporters by saying Jesus didn't exist or saying Christianity, we we can't tolerate Christianity in your copes and you're uh you're going nowhere.
And with a lot of people, that is that is too much.
So he's on a space with two Catholic guys telling saying, I'm dumb.
Like, is it not dumb to worship the king of the Jews and and to continue making excuses for a Jewish religion or trying to like look at the silver linings of the Catholic church to like appease your co-host?
Yeah, no, it's it was an unfair attack on you, but it was also a subt uh sub-tweet effectively of Richard and I, because we're all from we're also mythicists.
And the truth is everyone is a fucking mythicist to one degree or another.
Even people that are you know, practicing Christians, unless you're completely insane and you believe every word of the Bible to be true, you're a mythicist on some level.
If there's obviously myth in the Hebrew Bible, right?
Now, the degree to which it is mythological, that is a kind of academic discussion.
And we in Richard and I, and I think I don't know what your position is on this, Adam.
I tend to think that he is essentially just a mythological character.
So the idea of a historical Jesus, it's not really relevant because what we see is basically a mythological character based on Dionysus, Adonis, uh, and these earlier uh mythological or rather these earlier Hebrew uh archetypes that are developed in the Hebrew Bible and so forth.
That's what we're seeing, a kind of composite God that is literary and it's it and it emerges from those sources.
That's what we see with Jesus.
Now, is it possible that there was some martyr or uh uh multiple martyrs, an archetype of a martyr that inspired him uh, you know, during that period that was crucified by the Romans and so forth?
Absolutely, of course, right?
I mean, there could have been a war.
We're just a philosopher who was sort of doing Judaism 2.0 and taking it in a new direction, and uh and had a kind of hippie cult surrounding him.
I can believe that.
That seems quite plausible.
Sure, but he's not just really dumb to think there's a kernel.
Oh, I don't think it's dumb to think no, of course not.
I mean, what Robert Price, I I think he hammered the nail home.
Let me finish.
For example, we we we could look at uh Zeus, or we could look at Hercules and say, well, isn't this based on a kind of warrior archetype that you know existed in the Greek world?
Sure.
But it's also they're also mythological, right?
They're also essentially mythological figures.
Anyways, sorry to interrupt you.
Yeah, I mean, Robert Price, I think, nailed it when he said, you know, many Christ historicists basically say, well, he wasn't Superman, you have to understand.
He didn't actually walk on water, turn uh water into wine.
But he was Clark Kent.
Do you see?
So he he was a real guy who worked at a jerk as a journalist in the Daily Planet.
Robert Price points out Clark Kent is an equally fabulous character as Superman is.
Like the historical Jesus is just as undocumented and just as plausible or implausible, or he's far more plausible, in fact, than the man who walked on water and who could raise the dead.
So even finding an historical Jesus, you're engaging in a sort of literary imaginative exercise.
You know, you're like bringing it down to earth.
You're doing like a dark and gritty reboot of Batman in effect.
Like, what would happen if Batman were real?
You know, like how would he actually do it and and so on?
You're doing that with Jesus.
That that's an imaginative exercise.
You know, Superman doesn't exist.
Clark Kent doesn't exist.
I hate to break it to you.
Yeah, it's like the Sainer of the Christian or former Christian theologians.
They think like you can just remove all the supernatural, magical Superman things, and then you're left with a real historical Clark Kent.
But that's pres that's presupposing that this is there's some truth at the bottom of this to begin.
Exactly.
Exactly.
So here's the thing with Enoch.
So he has I think he's cultivated a kind of cursory knowledge on the topic.
We have deep, everyone on this call has deep knowledge on the topic.
Um, and so he's formed his conclusions based on that.
Um and but then you know, but I think he he has this instinct to be sort of the the sage of the TRS cult.
So he wants to kind of like basically say, hey, only listen to me.
I am the authority on all these topics, whether cultural, religious, or political.
And I in I would say to him that I think that his real like strong suit is the JQ talking about Hezbollah, talking about Hamas, and the guy does have encyclopedic knowledge about those topics, and he should just focus on that and just stay off topics where he's not specialized, essentially, and his knowledge is inferior.
You might be giving him poisonous advice there, Mark.
You're like, just stick to embracing and endorsing Hamas, Mike.
That's the road to riches.
You're gonna take my advice an answer.
You know, whatever.
I mean, I I honestly though, I don't, I don't I I actually was rooting for those guys, NGP.
I uh like I I was never gonna be part of NGP, but I was hoping that they would have some success.
I I hope these different groups have success.
I mean, it's honestly the truth that I hope that they have success.
If they don't like me, uh uh, they don't want to talk to me, they want to throw shade and I'll actually talk, but it's fine.
But I do actually hope that they have success, and I would encourage them not to throw shade because we'll just get on a podcast and and clown on them.
You know what I mean?
It would be like if I out of nowhere counter-signaled and tweeted at Mike and said, Oh, you don't think that the Holocaust existed?
Well, this the consensus of scholars says it is does, and you're wrong and dumb, and no, I'm not gonna talk about it anymore.
That's the equivalent of what he tried to pull.
Yeah, I mean, it's probably we probably should have ignored it, but I think that you know, whatever.
I mean, it's it's good also just to kind of wipe back and just say, hey, listen, dude, you know, you there's no there's actually no reason for you to attack us, and there's no reason for us to attack you.
You're doing your thing, and we're doing our thing.
So let's just move it on.
You know what I mean?
Adam, I actually have to run.
Um let's wrap it.
Thanks for coming, dude.
Let's wrap it.
Okay, good.
Yeah.
All right, great.
Thanks a lot.
Yeah, thank you.
Good show.
Give your plugs where where they can find you, where they can follow you.
Uh Alexandria and Substack, or just look at my uh Twitter account, and that's the easiest way to get in um to follow me.
Okay.
All right, Good to have you on, Mark.
Good to finally be on.
Thank you for having me on.
Cool.
All right.
We'll see you guys later.
All right.
I'll be back tomorrow, guys.
Oh, okay.
I'll say bye to you guys, and I have a couple super chats.
I realize I gotta read.
So um let me close this out.
All right, later, guys.
Bye.
Okay, let's get the Super Chats turned on.
I told him an hour and a half, and we went it almost two hours, so let's see here.
Power chats.
Getting to the power chats.
Got it.
I'll have a big news show tomorrow.
Working on setting up a big debate, an in-studio debate next month with the big name Christians.
It's gonna be huge.
Yeah, it's like this is I I think also with the TRS guys is the Christian question is bubbling up.
The idiot sent five dollars.
I will catch you later on AG and Joy everyone.
Catch you later, bro.
Uh oh.
The idiot sent five dollars.
I will catch you later.
The idiot.
No viewer of mine is an idiot.
Indomitably Base sent twenty dollars on Rumble.
Very good points, Mark.
But there's actually something even worse to Christianity.
Even the New Testament indicates that Christians, Edomite goats, will still be damned a demoralizing Easter egg.
Thank you, Indominably Base.
Trevka sent $5 on Rumble.
Julius Evola fixed any issues we might have with Nitesh.
As far as I can tell, the West has no choice but to get off the Abrahamic plantation.
I'm going to read some of his books once I'm done with my book real soon here.
Thefunny Truth sent $5 on Rumble.
Videos of Christians groveling to the Jews is the best way to deprogram Christians.
I can feel the struggle in my mind and these are breaking the Christianity.
Thank you.
I know.
That's why we do it.
A lot of material there too.
It's not hard to find them, especially when I go out on the street and do the interviews.
It's like almost everybody.
Okay.
Thank you, everybody, for watching.
Let us know what you think in the comments below.
Like, share, subscribe.
Clip it up.
share it.
I'll be back tomorrow with another big new stream.
Tons of stuff still I didn't get into since we were chatting with the guys today.
And I appreciate you all.
Hope you have a nice night.
See you tomorrow.
Down with Yahweh, hail Odin.
Great Odin's Raven.
Where's my outro?
Here we go, this one.
Rumble.
We'll be clear.
Apolloism is not about creating prophecies.
It is about moralizing whites.
Thank you for the clarification.
Moralizing.
▲
Export Selection