All Episodes
Previous Next
May 1, 2024 - Human Events Daily - Jack Posobiec
48:45
EPISODE 726: THE SECRET HISTORY OF UNGENTLEMANLY POLITICS

Here’s your Daily dose of Human Events with @JackPosobiecSave up to 65% on MyPillow products by going to https://www.MyPillow.com/POSO and use code POSOGo to https://www.BlackoutCoffee.com/POSO and use promo code POSO20 for 20% OFF your first order.To get $5000 of free silver on a qualifying purchase go https://www.protectwithposo.com with code POSOSupport the Show.

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey folks, I want to remind you that the Turning Point Action People's Conference is coming up this June 14th to 16th in Detroit, Michigan.
Get your tickets and then go to unhumansbook.com to come to a special meet and greet for the launch party of The Unhumans Book with myself and Joshua Lysak.
I'll see you there in Detroit.
This is what happens when the fourth turning meets fifth generation warfare.
A commentator, international social media sensation, and former Navy intelligence veteran.
This is Human Events with your host, Jack Posobiec.
Deliver us from evil.
We've been categorizing these communist revolutions throughout the ages.
We've put up a huge series of podcasts called The China Files.
Many of you may have seen that.
We put up another one earlier this year, The Chronicles of the Revolution, and we're getting all the way up to the cultural Marxists of today.
And so tonight, Proud to announce that we have signed a deal with a publisher.
We are going to be publishing all of this in a new book that will teach us all how to identify the cultural Marxists, how to use their playbook against them, how to crush their revolutions, and we will specifically call them that which they are.
Because they reject the human rights of others.
They reject the humanity of their oppressed classes.
I submit to you that they themselves have become the un-humans.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome aboard today's edition of Human Events Daily.
We are live from Washington, D.C., and I wanted to do a very special episode today.
Today, we're going to be talking about the secret history of un-gentlemanly politics.
And I'm joined today by the co-author of the upcoming book, Un-Humans, The Secret History of Communist Revolutions and How to Crush Them, Joshua Lysak.
Joshua, how are you?
Pretty dandy, Jack.
Thanks for having me on.
Let's get into this good stuff.
And so this is something, and we only got a couple of minutes here in a short first segment, but we'll expand on it later, where you and I in the book get into these communist revolutions, cultural Marxist revolutions, these uprisings against order, these overturnings of society, overturnings of civilization.
But there's also, you know, the counterforce, the reaction force, and we talk about this a ton in the book, that rises up in response to these activities.
It is a force of nature, as Newton has taught us, that for every action there will be an equal and opposite reaction.
And sometimes, because the pendulum swings so far to one side, When it snaps back, it goes a bit further than people would normally like in the course of usual politics, and that's why we refer to this as ungentlemanly politics.
I've got a quick list of some of the people.
We're not going to go in depth on all of these individuals, but perhaps we can give some context To a few historical figures that we believe have been unfairly maligned or just at least unfairly described by history because of their, shall we say, ungentlemanly nature.
Napoleon Bonaparte, Piotr Wrangel, Francisco Franco, Chiang Kai-shek, Joseph McCarthy, Gusto Pinochet, and President Somoza of Nicaragua.
Just a couple of names out there.
There's more individuals like this in general.
But Joshua, when I say ungentlemanly politics, what does that mean to you?
It means the opposite of the nice guy stereotype.
The so-called principled conservative who is always willing to make concessions, who shows undue mercy and grace despite what the situation calls for.
One of the reasons that the book is entitled Unhumans is because this is what subversives Do and always have done for more than a quarter of a millennium that they have attempted to seize power and overturn civilization.
They are the forces of anti-civilization, regardless of time, place, or the space it's occurring in, or even the race of the people that's involved.
And we trace back the foundation of civilization itself and the guarantee of human rights to the Code of Hammurabi, which is the most complete legal text from And the one principle that underwrote, that undergirded, that was the foundation of the first civilizations of humanity was reciprocity.
If you rob from someone, your stuff is confiscated.
If you attempt to kill someone, you will be executed.
And this is what maintained public safety.
This is what protected life, liberty.
And perhaps you might have to be a little bit ungentlemanly.
world and today.
And so when there is a force who is attempting to seize the property, the liberty, and the life of good, normal, everyday people, are you going to be nice to them?
Or are you going to do what it takes to stop them?
And perhaps you might have to be a little bit ungentlemanly.
We'll be right back with more Human Events Daily continues.
The Hidden Tales of the Communist History I want to know the truth, what really went down, so I'm jumping on my computer, going to pre-order town.
It's in a mystery, the hidden tales of the communist history.
I want to know the truth, what really went down, so I'm jumping on my computer, going to pre-order town.
Pre-order me like you and I can't wait to get my hands on that book.
All right, folks.
Got a quick question for you.
How would you survive a communist apocalypse?
Basic question.
Simple question.
Well, I'll tell you what.
First, you got to watch Human Events Daily every day.
Check.
Follow Posts0 on X. Check.
Pre-order Unhumans on Amazon.
Check.
Well, there's one thing you're forgetting, and it could make the biggest difference in your future and your family's financial future.
That is checking out today's show sponsor, Allegiance Gold.
Since 2020, Bidenomics has obliterated the American economy.
Imagine what four more years will do to interest rates, debt, and labor disputes.
You need something stable so that you can take a breath and know that the money you earned and the retirement you worked for is safe.
You have to proactively protect your assets, and that's when the supply chain gets rocked.
And the Biden administration has decided to print a few more trillion-dollar bills and that it won't impact your family's bottom line.
The only way to do that is with the one true beacon of stability that so many patriots use to preserve their wealth, and that, my friends, is gold.
Over the last five years, it's almost doubled in value, and the way things are looking, the sky is the limit.
Allegiance Gold has done things the right way from the beginning, so it's no coincidence that they've earned the highest trust ratings in the precious metals industry, five stars with TrustLink, and an A-plus with the Better Business Bureau.
Allegiance Gold can help protect your IRA or 401k with physical gold and silver, Or you can have it delivered securely to your doorstep.
Get up to $5,000 in free silver on a qualifying investment when you go to ProtectWithPoso.com or call 844-577-POSO.
Don't risk your financial future betting against these forces.
Act today.
ProtectWithPoso.com.
That's ProtectWithPoso.com or call 844-577-POSO.
All right, folks.
We're talking about the secret history of ungentlemanly politics.
That when politics goes too far to the left, too unhuman, too much against civilization, You must use ungentlemanly politics to correct it.
And then once it is corrected, it is returned.
By the way, Joshua, even before we get into this, because we're going to talk Napoleon, but there was even someone who went even further than Napoleon, or I should say was even earlier than Napoleon, and who was a bit ungentlemanly, depending on who you ask, and his name was George Washington.
Isn't that right?
Yes, that's right.
There are a couple of figures in the book that we liken to being a George Washington, a General George Washington in their own time and in their own place.
And these are these are figures that are quite reviled.
For example, General Francisco Franco could be thought of as a George Washington type of figure.
But a lot of what's said online and documentaries and universities about Franco alienates him as being the bad guy.
He was Fascist.
He was fascist-adjacent, the sort of terminology that's used.
However, what Franco did is rather akin to what George Washington did in a military rebellion against the duly ruling government, that is the British colonial authorities.
And yet, There is no description of George Washington as being a fascist military dictator conducting a military coup d'etat to overthrow the government.
That sounds absurd when you describe it that way.
What both of these men had in common was a father's heart and a patriot's resolve.
They saw themselves as having responsibility for those who would not be able to rescue themselves.
They were effectively fathers of their countries and of their countrymen and women.
And they also had an iron resolve to do what it took to protect their countries.
Washington famously came out of retirement having had a, to put it nicely, moderately successful career as a British officer and had returned to life as a planter.
And Franco, at the time that the Uh, that the Spanish civil war broke out was, was not even, uh, on the mainland at that time.
And he had to give a radio broadcast from outside of Spain proper that was heard by who knows how many people.
And yet that radio addressed has the same spirit as the words of the founding fathers in the declaration of independence.
I won't, I won't spoil it.
I'll just tease it right now that we print some of.
Franco's radio address to the people of Spain inside of the book on humans as he lays out the reasons for overthrowing the communist government, but they were democratically elected.
Yes, and they were robbing and killing everyone and it was allowed.
Lands were seized, priests were being arrested, torture in prison was occurring, and you're just gonna sit by and be a good little conservative with your principles and play nice and say to yourself, well, What if the roles were reversed?
What if the tables were turned?
Wow!
Look at what the left is doing now.
Wow!
We need to share this daily outrage with everyone just so they know.
So they can do what?
Well, they should just know.
And this is the sort of strange, let's say, malaise in the modern conservative movement, and on the right, and even in the center, that the far left is going to keep going further and further left until they are stopped.
This has been the case in every far-left rebellion, revolution, uprising, and so on.
They have not stopped unless they, and until they, were stopped by a strong man with ungentlemanly politics.
And that's kind of what it comes down to.
And, you know, it's funny, too, because probably one of the most subversive lines that's in the book, and of course the book is not out yet, but I'll just throw it out there, is when we go through and there's a segment, and full credit that you were the one who came up with this, that we describe the American and full credit that you were the one who came up with this, that we
And it's like, whoa, wait a minute, the US Revolution, that wasn't a military coup, that was freedom, that was the birth of liberty, that was the outgrowth of the Enlightenment, that was, you know, all of these things, how dare you describe that as a military coup?
And it's like, well, do you think the British described it that way?
Do you think the British, you know, think of it that way?
Go ask a British person.
I'm, you know, Rahim Ghassan and I have had great conversations about this, where to them, well, number one, they obviously view the American revolutionaries as traitors because they had sworn oaths to the British Empire.
But in a general sense, you know, they say, oh, just because they had the, you know, the Support and the endorsement of some illegal revolutionary council that we're supposed to go along with the military war that you launched against us?
No, this was military officers who rose up and decided to overthrow their government.
And if it were a different situation, if they had lost, we'd all be British citizens right now and be referring to that as the failed military coup of 1776.
Yes, that's right.
A fantastic... It is outside of the scope of the book, too much into the American Revolution, but I do like to recommend the... Well, because the American Revolution wasn't a communist revolution.
That's right.
That's right.
Although we do make reference to the American revolutionaries here and there as necessary.
A fantastic documentary I can recommend.
It comes from the pre-woke year of 1997.
Liberty produced and released it originally on PBS.
It's available for free watching on YouTube.
I watch it every year.
And like I said, it's a pre-woke, let's say, glimpse into the real world of the pre-, and during-, and post-American Revolution.
And that's something that's going to be super jarring for people.
And so, you know, when we talk about these names like, like a Napoleon, and they'll say, well, wait a minute, Napoleon wasn't elected.
Well, neither was George Washington when he ran the, when he ran the colonial army.
He was appointed by the council, but you know, at that point, was the council legitimate or not?
And it sort of becomes one of these situations where like, Well, this is how countries are formed.
This is how governments are formed in the first place.
And it's, you know, it would be really nice and it would be really cute to be able to describe these is just a context of contest of ideas.
And it typically what happens is that the Revolutionary War, I feel like takes a backseat.
I mean, people don't realize that thing was eight years long.
And so when we go through the rest of this, Discussion, we're talking about these people.
I really want to start it off with the context of the fact that this is how the United States was founded.
A war was fought against a government.
Military officers rose up and decided to take power.
Now, in the American context, did they give that power to a legitimate government, a government that gained legitimacy?
Well, sure it did.
But it achieved that power in the first place through force of arms.
To be clear, we're not advocating for that in any way in this book, but what we're doing is we're trying to get you to think about these things a little bit differently.
Yes, that's right.
There's a common expression that the winners write the history.
That is true except for communist history.
The losers write communist history.
This is why the vast majority of Americans don't know the truth about what really went down in 1917 Russia or in the 1920s and later 60s and 70s in China.
Why we don't know what happened in Cambodia.
How there was a tiny minority, a few thousand people, were able to slaughter 10% of the entire country's population.
Just a few thousand people.
Because they were able to make the entire population feel the most useful emotion for the communist, which is terror.
And of course, red terror, French terror, that emotion comes up.
And that's one of the most powerful tools that can be used.
Often conservatives, people on the right, normal people, or even as we might call them, normies, or as I like to call them, NPR Americans, believe that In the marketplace of ideas, the best idea wins.
That's not the case.
The side who wants to win will win, regardless of how good or bad their ideas are.
Hold that thought!
Because we are coming up on a break.
Finish your sentence.
I was going to say, that's how a few thousand people can murder 10% of the population, including the women, the children and the infants, is because regardless of how good or bad their ideas are, they're willing to fight for them.
the willingness to use political action.
You're right there.
I want to know the truth, what really went down, so I'm jumping on my computer, going to pre-order town.
It's been a mystery, the hidden tales of the communist history.
I want to know the truth, what really went down, so I'm jumping on my computer, going to pre-order town.
All right, Jack, we'll be back live here from the Men's Daily.
Folks, the world is in flames.
Bidenomics is a complete and total disaster.
But it cannot and it will not ruin my day.
And do you know why?
Because I start my day with a hot America First cup of Blackout Coffee.
Blackout Coffee is 100% America.
100% committed to conservative values.
From sourcing the beans to the roasting process, customer support and shipping, they embody true American values and accept no compromise on taste or quality.
Folks, Blackout Coffee is delicious.
I love this stuff.
Tonya Tay loves this stuff.
My dad loves this stuff.
Go to blackoutcoffee.com slash poso.
Use promo code poso for 20% off your first order.
Mother's Day is next month, and it's never too soon to give mom and those close to your heart the gift of being awake, not woke, with Blackout Coffee.
It's blackoutcoffee.com slash poso.
blackoutcoffee.com slash poso.
Promo code poso20.
So, so Joshua, let's get into it.
You know, You've got these people who fight the revolutionary politics, the revolutionary anger, these individuals.
Napoleon, you've got Rengel, Franco, people know that people know that Napoleon, of course, is, you know, he went on and founded the French Empire, etc, etc.
But he is the person who ended the French Revolution, and people need to realize how crazy and insane the French Revolution got.
They're just executing people, priests and nuns and going off and wiping out vast swaths of society, turning everything upside down.
Things that didn't happen in America.
And Napoleon comes in and puts a stop to all of this.
This is an example that we find throughout the history of these when it comes to people like Rangel.
Of course, in fighting the Bolsheviks, he was not able to get there fast enough to stop what was going on.
but then Franco was.
So, it's a mixed bag, but they do all share certain qualities, isn't that right?
That's right, yes.
Like we were saying before the last segment, the men who fight communists and do what it takes to defeat them have an iron and unanimous resolve to win.
At any cost, whatever it takes, because they understand that the extermination of their culture, their tradition, their civilization is the price of defeat.
And I think in our modern day, irregular communist culture revolution that we're seeing unfold in the United States and being exported around the Western world and even outside the Anglosphere, I don't think our duly elected leaders, right or left, Understand what the price of losing to the forces of inhumanity is, how steep that price is.
Rights to life, liberty, and property being rolled back.
And so allowing the far left to do as they please, sometimes putting up resistance, sometimes not, saying, well, okay, we're not willing to do lawfare back to them.
You know, they can do lawfare to us.
Oh, that's, that's bad.
They, they just shouldn't do that.
It's allowed to take place.
And as we go through the book on humans, we look at Rangel, we look at Napoleon, we look at Franco, we look at Pinochet, we look at Somoza.
And these are people who believe that as great men of history, they were tasked with the responsibility, even the obligation, to end it.
In the words of General Francisco Franco, wherever I am, there will be no communism.
Not live and let live.
Okay, well, as long as communists are democratically elected again, I guess it's okay.
Wherever I am, there will be no communism.
And that will to win we see in Napoleon defeating the French revolutionaries and setting himself up as having a peaceful military rule.
over the country, restoring the Catholic Church, undoing all of the year zero destruction of tradition and order and even laws that the French Revolutionary had done, rewinding that clock to allow Catholic France to be Catholic France once again, which was, of course, the objective of the atheist revolutionaries to do away with all manner of religion in public life.
And he allowed that to be brought back.
And we see this with other figures.
They do what it takes to win.
Now, the reason we believe that they get a bad rap from the losers who wrote this communist history is that they were so effective.
So Pinochet in Chile was effective at getting to the communists first.
The plan in Chile was to ultimately kill between half a million and one million people.
In order for the communist revolution there to be successful.
Now Allende had been elected this socialist communist character.
And ironically, it was he who had appointed Pinochet to his post.
And then of course, it was Pinochet went through the process as the Congress began to see how destructive These communist policies were in Chile.
They said, yeah, no, this is a bad idea.
We're not allowing this.
And then they said, Pinochet, would you mind taking over here, please?
Bringing back that law and order in sort of Napoleon-esque fashion.
He said, okay, fine, sure.
Helicopter go brr, we like to say.
And of course, he was successful at wiping out communists.
So successful that your Far-left so-called human rights watch organizations have to get involved and write up their reports, like they also did in Nicaragua with Somoza.
And by the way, we have reason to believe that many of those allegations of human rights abuses under President Somoza, the fierce communist fighter who was successful for years at pushing back against the Cuba-trained, Soviet-sponsored Nicaraguan communists, We have reason to believe that some of the claims made about his army's human rights abuses in the country were in fact false.
Because it would later come out, only after he had been assassinated by communist forces, after stepping down unfortunately, it came out that there was Soviet-style disinformation being peddled in the country and then being spread by American journalists.
The original fake news, where they would exaggerate claims, Or they would take claims at face value without doing the due diligence to back it up.
These sorts of things that they do today.
And just for anyone who doesn't know, President Somoza was the president of Nicaragua who fought the Sandinistas.
So even before Reagan and the Contras and all of that in the 1980s, back in the 70s, the original guy who was fighting the Sandinistas down in Nicaragua, we're kind of jumping around here on the timeline folks, but the guy who was fighting them was Somoza.
He was faced with the Sandinista threat, and Joshua, we go in throughout the book so that the communists, of course, people know how Castro got in.
There's a section on Castro in the book.
People know who he was and what he was about.
What they don't necessarily understand is that Cuba was then used as a launch pad by the communists, and particularly the KGB and KGB funds, To go throughout Latin America and throughout South America, we go through this in the book, we cover Africa as well in the book, where they were able to then fund and finance and even train these organizations throughout Latin America, throughout South America, in Nicaragua, of course it was the Sandinistas and there were multiple Sandinista propaganda outlets, newslets,
Newspapers, pamphlets, this type of thing, even before they were able to become more powerful and then get radio stations and eventually TV stations.
And all of these had the hallmarks of Soviet disinformation campaigns.
And one of the one of the key things that we see throughout all of these, are just horrific atrocities, horrific, you know, terrible things that are claimed that the communists will claim, and you can go to the Jacobins today, who take their name, of course, from the original proto-communists of the French Revolution,
Jacobin Magazine's still out there, anyone can go read it, praising Antifa Jacobin Magazine's still out there, anyone can go read it, praising Antifa and praising anarcho-communists like this guy who lit himself on fire a couple weeks ago in front of the Trump trial, that they will always claim, right, these are the same people, by the way, who claimed that January 6th was an insurrection, these are the same people, by the way, who claimed that January 6th was an insurrection, that's just another Yes, exactly, right,
Where what it is that they intended to do, they will often project in terms of blame or in terms of shame, this sort of thing.
And of course, we make the case in the book, in the section on the January 6th event, that that was in fact an insurrection against the Trump administration.
And of course, we lay out why we believe that to be the case.
And of course, it was immediately claimed to be an insurrection of The Trump administration.
Against what exactly?
Irony.
The will of the commander-in-chief was not obeyed.
The wishes had not been followed.
So what do you call it when military personnel make a decision that goes against the will of their commander-in-chief?
Would that not be called a military coup or something like it in any real history book we have here?
But of course, we don't have anything like real history when communists write it.
There is a section in Zimbabwe, a section on Zimbabwe, of how the communists who rule that area, Vugabe specifically for 40 years, committed all number of horrific, horrific crimes against the people, depriving them of life, liberty, and property.
And of course, this is after his party had been saying for years, we need to push out these terrible white oppressors.
This is when the country was called Rhodesia, after Rhodes, the great colonizer in Africa.
They had said for years and years, we need to take power.
We need to be a country of black Africans, for black Africans, by black Africans.
And of course, as soon as the communists get power, they start killing their own people.
We saw this in the Haitian Revolution as well, when the white French outlawed slavery, One of the first things the Black Emperor does after the slave revolt is to reinstitute the slavery system and to send the slaves back into their plantations.
It's just absurd.
But of course, this is the history that's not known.
Why do you think it's not known?
It's because we would see the hilarious and also terrifying similarities between the far left of today moderates of the Democratic Party.
Coming up on our, coming up on our break and I'll, and I'll just throw it out there that what they don't tell you about Haiti, Haiti was a genocide.
It was a white genocide where the slaves rose up and cut little children apart, raped women, all for the color of their skin because you were the oppressors and we are depressed.
Coming up the next segment, we're going to talk about someone who fought back against the infiltration in the United States.
All right.
All right, Jack Posobiec back here at Human Events Daily.
We're talking about the secret history of ungentlemanly politics, and we've been kind of jumping around a few places.
We talked about Napoleon.
We talked about Piotr Wrangel fighting the Bolsheviks.
We touched on Francisco Franco in Spain.
We mentioned Chiang Kai-shek.
We could talk more about Chiang Kai-shek a little bit, who fought Chairman Mao and then eventually went on to found the Republic of China in Taiwan.
We talked about Pinochet.
We talked about President Somoza down in Nicaragua who fought the Sandinistas.
But there was a man who fought the communist infiltration here in the United States.
There was a man who warned us that the communists were, in fact, taking over every institution in America.
And think about it, dear listener, that if you're out there in the audience thinking, gosh, how was it that communists were able to infiltrate every single institution in America and take it over without anyone noticing or anyone warning us?
Well, let me ask my co-author Joshua Lysak, Joshua, is that true or was there someone who noticed and did in fact warn us about this eventuality?
Yes, that's correct.
It was Senator Joseph McCarthy, who has been, as have other figures like Franco and Pinochet, much maligned by the institutional left-wing media, education, so on and so forth, because he was correct.
At the very beginning of his so-called McCarthyist, so-called witch hunts, McCarthy went on the record saying that he identified the forces, not only of communism, but of atheism, of godlessness, coming to wage a bitter conflict against Christian civilization.
This is the way he characterized it.
This was not a, oh look, there's a bunch of commies here.
We got to stop them.
Or there are people who have left-wing views much further left than mine.
We know of course that he was very friendly with the Kennedy family.
Robert F. Kennedy Sr.
worked in fact under McCarthy.
And so this wasn't a Republican versus Democrat or left versus right thing.
It was Christian civilization against the subversives who were doing whatever it took to destroy it.
And he had, A list of names and it had not been published and of course this terrified people who wondered if they were in fact on that list.
Now, of course that concerned about their own guilt.
This is a powerful weapon.
Making a list and checking it twice of who the people who are possibly allied with or adjacent to or maybe even have allegiance to the forces of anti-civilization.
Which at that time was the Soviet Union and all of the propaganda that they had been exporting.
What most people don't understand is that the socio-political revolution that communism brings, there is a great effort to win before fighting.
And one of the techniques that we found is what's called the operational preparation of the environment.
And this is a military term before actual battlefield fighting is done, be it in the streets or in the jungle, there is both intelligence gathering and intelligence deployment.
And there are often covert operations that are conducted in order to make victory far more likely.
And it's done without the enemy recognizing it and being able to prepare a response.
And one of those activities is the infiltration of key institutions in a culture in order to establish inside of those institutions, people allied with the revolution, be it an socioeconomic revolution or a culture revolution, people who be it an socioeconomic revolution or a culture revolution, people who believe in the oppressed versus oppressor The oppressed versus oppressor model is a worldview.
It is a lens.
It is a frame.
You You could even say it's akin to a religious belief in that people who are oppressed or claim to be oppressed, they're the good guys.
And those they blame as their oppressors are the bad guys.
And that thinking pervades all decisions.
That's why hypocrisy or injustice are in fact good and just according to those who have the oppressed versus oppressor mindset.
When, for example, let's take a silly little meme, for example, and one that's pertinent here.
It's been known over the last 20 years that in entertainment, Characters who were originally depicted as being redheads, as being genders like myself, have been replaced by non-white actors.
Sometimes the gender's even changed from, let's say, an Irish-American red-haired individual to a black woman.
The character has been changed.
That doesn't make any sense unless you understand that institutions such as entertainment have been, since the 1950s and beyond, Infiltrated and are now owned by people who believe in the oppressed versus oppressor model that is an implementation of Marxism in an intercultural, intersectional context.
Where, okay, men oppressors, women oppressed.
White people oppressor, non-white oppressed.
Okay, so we have... Go ahead.
Oh, as you can see, the situation has gotten completely out of control.
And, of course, they've made many movies, even Robert De Niro, decrying McCarthy.
How dare you!
How dare you put us on the list!
How dare you come after us!
But, you know, just to go back to it, Joseph McCarthy runs this investigative hearing.
A series of them.
And he has two lawyers that are running it.
And this is this I find is so interesting.
One of which is Roy Cohn.
When you're talking about ungentlemanly politics, you've definitely got to bring up Roy Cohn, who also later worked with Roger Stone and later also became Roy Cohn, the personal lawyer to a young, successful New York developer named Donald Trump.
Joseph McCarthy as well had another chief investigator who was a Democrat and himself a member of a prominent Democrat political family named Robert F. Kennedy Sr.
So a young RFK Sr.
and I believe you can see him in that photo.
I'm not sure if that's the right photo or it's another one where they're together.
It was when his brother, I think his brother, JFK, had just been elected to the Senate and Bobby had not yet, had yet to take political office, was working for McCarthy.
And so this was a bipartisan thing that people were looking at, talking specifically about the communist infiltration within, and this is key, within the ranks of the United States government as well as the United States institutions.
One of the House counterparts to this was called HUAC, the House on American Activities Council, and in that committee.
And on that committee, Walt Disney, the Walt Disney himself, actually comes up and testifies before Congress.
We've talked about it on the show before.
Testifies before Congress that, and as you say, Joshua, that communists were coming into Hollywood.
They initially infiltrated through the crews, through the unions, through the, you know, kind of the labor, the intensive labor that goes on on a lot of these sets, particularly live action.
But even on the animated side, Walt Disney said that he was seeing it there.
And this goes to show you how crazy it came.
Just two minutes left in the segment, Joshua.
What are the Verona intercepts and what were the Verona papers that came out in the 1990s?
Why is it that we don't hear about these things and how does, how do they reflect or should they reflect our view on McCarthy?
Yes, this is another manifestation of the fact that communists, the losers of communism, write their own history.
So not many people know that four decades after McCarthy, he was proven accurate.
And in fact, there were declassified cables originally from the once the Soviet Union fell much of their, let's say, curtains were pulled back and much was revealed about what what really went on in their society and in their intelligence gathering.
And it turned out that a number of people that McCarthy claimed were either in direct contact with the Soviets or were spies or were, let's say, informants, or were at least allied with the views of the Soviet Union, they were mentioned in these intercepts as, yes, he was right about them.
And of course, it was claimed, well, you have no evidence, you have no proof, this is a witch hunt.
And the one moment that took McCarthy down that eventually drove him to being censored and then into alcoholism and ruin and an early death, unfortunately, was the following, let's say, a counter argument.
And And it was this.
So Senator McCarthy, it was said, Have you no decency?
Have you no decency?
Have you no decency, those of you who will fight back against the inhumans?
Have you no decency?
No.
No, we don't.
Are you going to be gentlemanly and ask them to stop?
Or are you going to be un-gentlemanly and make them stop?
All right, Jack Pazovic back here.
Final segment, Human Events Daily, The Secret History of Ungentlemanly Politics.
Now, Joshua, we've covered a lot of ungentlemanliness here in this show thus far.
We've talked about Napoleon.
We've talked about Franco and Pinochet and Joseph McCarthy.
And nowhere in the book do we describe these guys as gentlemen.
In fact, we describe them as If we're talking about un-humans, these are the un-gentlemen response to the un-humans.
And I'll put it this way, I guess.
You know, and it's to your point as well, right?
If someone is threatening your home, if someone is threatening your family, if someone is threatening your children, are you going to respond to them with gentlemanliness?
Or are you going to protect your family?
It's as simple as that.
And in no point are we trying people say we're gonna be apologists and and this that and no we're not We're we're pointing out that you can't take these things out of context and it's as simple as that That which is done in self-defense should be read in a different context as that which is done in in cold blood or that which is done intentionally for example the the brutal murder of the Romanov family the Christian leaders of Russia this was a
an act of cold-blooded murder of children, as well as the parents.
There's no claim of self-defense there whatsoever.
Of course, they would argue in their insanity-addled minds that it is.
But Joshua, when we talk about ungentlemanly politics in the modern era, we're not advocating violence and the violent overthrow of things, but what are we advocating for? - Yes, we're advocating for a little bit of reciprocity.
This is what we began this episode with, talking about how reciprocity in law and order is what maintains law and order.
It's what protects public safety.
It is what keeps innocents safe.
And without a threat of a reciprocal or more than reciprocal response, the young humans will do what they always done, which is to rob and to kill.
Now, in a digitized civilization like ours, Sometimes that is e-sass-ination.
Where they will dox, they will debank, they will deplatform, they will destroy one's reputation and their ability to provide for themselves and their family.
They will lawferent them into ruin, into prison, or even, unfortunately, to suicide.
They will attempt to place a wedge between that individual, their target, and their spouse, and then their children, to isolate them, to ruin them.
And this is what communists have done recently, as they have launched micro-revolutions against key Individuals.
So what if, like McCarthy, we made a list of those suspected of unhuman activity?
Those people who demonstrated a track record of lawfare against good, normal, innocent people, their political enemies?
What if we made a list of people who were known propagandists and mass manipulators?
Those who called for, let's say, a new white genocide.
Those who have the Oppressed versus oppressed model as their way of operating in reality and in treating people across the institutions.
What if we made that list?
What if we popularized it?
Would it be nice?
Would it be polite?
Would it be gentlemanly?
Or are we far past any words like that?
The good little conservative gets to grow up a bit in this context and through This book is some of the tactics we recommend.
One of the most powerful that anyone can use, not someone, let's say, who has the influence of a Senator McCarthy here, but that anyone can do, is whenever the unhumans come for you, you can do what they cannot stand.
And that is to laugh at them.
When there is an HR brigade against you, or you find yourself facing imminent cancellation laughing at them, mocking them, insulting them, making fun of them, standing up against them, and rallying your mates, your colleagues, so on and so forth, to do the same.
Put them on the defensive.
Now, what's interesting about the Unhumans over the last quarter millennium is they have been incapable of doing anything but organizing they and their classes of people, the malcontents and discontents, organizing them to rob and kill.
They cannot stay organized.
So as soon as they face an actual conflict from serious, organized people, it falls apart, they flee, and they run, and the communist revolution collapses, fortunately, under its own weight.
What about lawfare these days?
Why don't we use lawfare against these people as well?
They say, oh, you're going to come after us as you and I were talking about with Dr. Drew the other day, he said, nobody's even nobody's even thought to file a personal lawsuit against Dr. Fauci over COVID.
They say, oh, we can't do anything.
We can't do anything.
We just have to argue about it.
Why not?
Why not make some of these people feel the financial Yes, exactly.
Why not make some of these people feel the time and energy wasted when you're going through a lawfare situation?
And it's so interesting to me that the reason it seems that people are so wedded to gentlemanly politics is it's just pathological.
It's just pathological.
Two minutes left.
Yes, exactly.
Now, what kept a nuclear World War III from occurring was what was called atomic diplomacy, which is what?
Mutually assured destruction.
Well, we best not nuke Washington because they might nuke Moscow, for example.
And that is what kept the peace, that threat of mutually destructive reciprocity.
So what can keep the far left, the subversive, the radicals Who would otherwise ruin the lives of good, normal, everyday people and their families and their fortunes and their honor?
What if they said to themselves, well, we can't launch lawfare against them because they would do it to us.
Unless there is such a threat, they will continue to do so.
What if Alvin Bragg and Fannie Willis, for example, were concerned about the possibility of what they're doing unto others be done unto them?
There is no such threat.
There are good little conservatives who have their principles and who are shocked.
Shocked!
And they wonder, well, imagine if the roles were reversed.
Imagine if they were indeed.
Joshua Lysak, go follow him.
The book is Un-Humans.
Un-Humans, The Secret History of Communist Revolutions and How to Crush Them.
Joshua Lysak is our co-author.
We're both co-authors, actually.
Go follow him on X and all other platforms.
He's written a lot of other un-gentlemanly books, and I guarantee you his timeline is extremely un-gentlemanly, as is mine.
Ladies and gentlemen, as always, you have my permission.
▲
Export Selection