RadixJournal - Richard Spencer - Perverted Victorianism

Sept. 25, 2018 - RadixJournal - Richard Spencer

01:11:01

Perverted Victorianism

Richard Spencer and Don Camillo discuss the turmoil surrounding the nomination of Bret Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court—in particular the #MeToo as a perverted form of Victorianism. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit radixjournal.substack.com/subscribe

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	It's interesting how this is basically a restatement a century and a half later of the Victorian mindset in which women are still the perennial victims and it's the supposed hypersexuality of the male that is corrupting the woman.
	So the woman is never wrong.
	It's a replay 150 years later.
	Don Camillo, we're back.
	How have you been?
	Long time no see.
	Good to hear from you again.
	Yes.
	We've seen each other a couple of times, but we have not talked a couple of times.
	Just to compare mustache growth.
	Yes.
	You won.
	I think you won in girth where I won in length.
	Well...
	When Kavanaugh was first suggested, I was left cold, to be honest.
	A lot of people I saw on alt-right Twitter were getting excited.
	Oh, he's our guy.
	Look how much the liberals hate him.
	And I was like, look, this guy is the ultimate expression of establishment conservative boring legalist.
	I'm not that excited.
	That doesn't mean that he's...
	That doesn't mean that he's worse than most people or many of the people in the Supreme Court.
	That doesn't mean that he is an admirable in some way.
	Sure, I'll grant all of those things, but I've just never...
	Really been excited by the legalism.
	And he does seem to check all the boxes for the conservative movement.
	And I thought that we were about to go into a retro 1980s, 1990s Roe v.
	Wade culture war battle.
	But instead of Roe v.
	Wade, it has been the nerds versus the chads.
	I mean, it's obviously post-MeToo.
	I mean, no question.
	But I think it's almost deeper because Me Too began in a way that I think more or less most people had at least some sympathy.
	I mean, with Harvey Weinstein as the poster boy of this total creep.
	He's jacking off into potted plants.
	He's just disgusting.
	I mean, you know, it was just like, look, this guy's awful.
	But we've gone to this extremism.
	I mean, it's almost, we could even compare it to the French Revolution, although no one's getting their head cut off.
	Not yet, at least.
	Yeah, not yet.
	And it's just gotten, it just keeps going deeper and deeper and more and more intense to the point that, you know, it really is about an attack on normal Though I will admit, rather chatty and rather, you could say, stupid.
	But ultimately, normal male sexuality.
	Which is often stupid.
	It is often aggressive.
	It's often crude.
	It's nothing to write poems about.
	But it is what it is.
	And the level at which it's no longer even a sexual assault.
	I mean, whether he put his hand over her and she thought she might inadvertently die or something like this, it's no longer even sexual assault.
	I mean, I was looking at the New York Times.
	This was on my iPad, the front page of the New York Times digital version.
	They're parsing, like, doing exegesis of his yearbook, high school yearbook, where they're like, oh, look, I think this little...
	You know, innuendo or inside jokes seems to indicate that he's bragging about having sex with some slut at the Catholic girls' school or something.
	And it's like, maybe he is, maybe he isn't, but who cares?
	This kind of behavior is so normal, so, like, you could even say healthy at some level, because it is what it is.
	We're animals at some level.
	We want sex.
	We want conquest.
	We want to have fun.
	There's a kind of male-male competitiveness that goes into this of like, did you get to first base?
	Did you get to third base?
	Did she like you?
	Are you going to do a keg stand for two minutes as opposed to break your own personal record?
	I think in his yearbook he even listed himself as king of the kegs or something like that.
	Or king of keg city, I think it was.
	And this is what is expected of people.
	And, you know, I tweeted out this morning that I was like, I've just discovered this week that I have been the victim of multiple assaults by toxic females throughout college.
	I don't know how many times...
	Which is definitively true if we're going to use their standards.
	Exactly!
	Unironically true.
	Multiple times in high school and whatever.
	There has been some situation where a girl has grabbed my crotch, grabbed my ass, flashed her boobs, made weird bedroom eyes while chugging a tequila shot.
	I could go on.
	I'm not proud of it.
	Yeah, it's stupid.
	It's crude.
	Whatever.
	But again, this is...
	It is basically the pathologizing what is ultimately normal behavior, and it's like criminalizing what is ultimately normal behavior.
	I mean, part of what you and I believe is that, yes, we should discipline young people, and yes, we should set examples, and we should look to great heroes, and also...
	Treat people, everyone, with a certain decency.
	Of course we all believe that.
	But that's all in the context of a lot of the time, not all of the time, but a lot of the time, we act kind of stupid.
	Yeah.
	It's a reason why they're called formative years.
	These experiences that we've just been discussing are what make a man a man.
	to graduate, if you will, from boyhood to manhood.
	There's a lot of this that needs to happen.
	Does this mean I'm somehow apologizing for, you know, aggressive, drunken groping?
	No, but it happens.
	And unless there's an actual victim in the true sense of the word, it's not a crime, period.
	And the, what do you call it, the litigiousness of the current, you know, the current year, trademarked is, is ridiculous.
	And, you know, basically to, to riff off of your, I guess your opening, And one of them that you used, two of them that you used were normal and healthy.
	And that's actually what we're getting at here, is when we entered this nomination process, you mentioned how it might become...
	A rerun of the Roe View Wade years.
	And actually, there was enough coverage out there in the Normie press that it did seem that that was going to happen.
	That was the first angle of attack they wanted to get him on.
	And you had all these signs, you know, he's going to fuck with your reproductive rights.
	It's another white male trying to tell women what they can do with their bodies.
	So it did start that way.
	And that's what's funny is it degenerated into different attack patterns by the left because they know they weren't getting any traction.
	So once they tried the first sortie, which was a replay of Roe, and that didn't work, then they went at it with the Anita Hill attack because that's kind of me too again.
	He's a waspy, normal dude who happens to be...
	He's not even normal.
	He's more boring than the vast majority of men.
	Especially since I'm a Washingtonian.
	I know the references.
	He went to Georgetown Prep.
	He lives in Chevy Chase.
	He's Catholic, but he may as well be a Presbyterian Wasp.
	He's a George Bush appointee.
	He's boring.
	He's a DC neocon boring.
	But, yeah, so anyway, the third angle of attack is just when nothing works.
	Because, I mean, we all know how poorly the sexual assault allegations have gone.
	So much so that the first girl, Blasey Ford or whatever her name is, she couldn't remember the year, the place, the day, the time, what house, with whom she was.
	So now they're suddenly pulling up these new girls, you know, because they're back up.
	Crisis actors, if you will.
	I'm using that very tongue-in-cheek, but yeah, they're pulling out new girls now to accuse him.
	The latest one said that he exposed his genitals when she was at Yale.
	They have yet to find someone to corroborate that story.
	So at the end of the day, it is now what you said earlier, kind of the virgin neat versus the Chad Yale-y, you know.
	Whatever, frat bro.
	And that's what it's become, because now we're finally getting to the essence of what this whole cultural Marxism attacks.
	Exactly.
	Which is an attack on male sexuality.
	Male sexuality, which is pretty fundamental.
	I'm not going to brush that off like that isn't something that's huge.
	But if I could even go a step further, it's an attack on the words you used earlier, which are norms and healthy.
	The very fact that you have a norm, norm implies normality, What do you hear from, you know, the fucking disgusting land whale, you know, blue-haired, armpit-haired, nose-piercing, tattooed girls is, you know, heteronormativity.
	These made-up neologisms of the 21st century.
	Norms is always a part of what they're attacking because they, much like, you know, you have certain ethnic groups who only thrive in societies that are no longer homogenous.
	That's one angle.
	The other angle is you have certain, you know, kind of fucked up sexual perversions and people who aren't all there mentally who can only thrive in a society where there are no norms.
	And so those, you know, two groups, you know, ally because they go very well hand in hand.
	If you're able to pull down the barriers, the retaining walls, the dams of heteronormativity and of ethnic homogeneity and linguistic.
	coherence, because now words don't mean anything anymore either, then you'll be able to, you know, there'll be fish in water.
	These people that are, you know, not normal.
	The trannies, the gays, the lesbians, the bi's, the polyamorous, the et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
	Yeah, I would take I agree with everything you said.
	I would take a slightly different angle as well.
	And, you know, we obviously live in a...
	It's decadent, degenerate culture.
	And conservatives point this out.
	They're of course right, but to be honest, it's kind of easy to point it out at this point.
	It's not a hot take.
	Surprise.
	Right.
	Every streaming show, which I think are interesting because that really gets at like...
	You could say the vanguard of the mainstream.
	That's kind of showing where the mainstream is going.
	It is about multiple hookups, manipulation, random sex.
	It's just all totally out there.
	The sexualization of teens and preteens has gotten to a point that I...
	Never even imagined.
	I mean, I remember the problem in the 90s growing up was that a lot of these girls who were like 13 or 14 wanted to be like Britney Spears.
	So they were dressing like...
	You know, sluts-based strippers when they were 14, and it was like, oh my god, this is terrible.
	That almost seems wholesome at this point, because that in itself is heteronormative.
	What we're doing now is questioning their sexual identity when they're 12. So, I mean, put aside...
	12 of her lucky.
	I know these are outlier examples I'm going to cite, but you know as well as I do because we have the same reading, I guess.
	You know very well that there are kids that are beginning hormone therapy at like 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 years old.
	So, like...
	Yeah, I mean, I know I'm picking...
	I'm explicitly picking, you know, extreme examples of which there were, thank God, very few.
	But, like, 12-year-old girls is like, you know, wait, you're not...
	You're not knocked up by the Mexican dishwasher yet with whom you will not be married?
	That's ridiculous.
	What are you doing?
	I guess what I was getting at is that yes, I agree.
	We live in a society that you could think of as sexually insane and degenerate and then also decadent in a higher sense of that term of people just indulging.
	and consumerism and going to Vegas and whatever.
	But our society is still deeply puritanical.
	And it's puritanical at the same time that it's degenerate and decadent.
	And to misunderstand the...
	Puritanism at the heart of this is to misunderstand everything.
	Because we aren't entering this world where, oh, anything goes, and you can just go.
	and have sex with anyone who's in your apartment building or your workplace, it's all fun and games, go at it.
	Go have sex with your dog or whatever.
	We don't really live in that situation.
	We live in a highly, almost Victorian level...
	Like, hypersensitivity towards sex.
	And so, like, again, a woman who sleeps around and so on.
	Oh, this is great.
	Don't slut shame her.
	She's a hero.
	Stunning and brave.
	Blah, blah, blah.
	But the moment that, you know, Jim in her office at the, you know, at the office Christmas party and has...
	Three eggnogs and gets a little creepy and puts his hand on her arm or something.
	Oh my god, this is like a literal holocaust.
	She has PTSD.
	And I'm not even joking.
	That kind of stuff is entering the mainstream of human resources departments.
	Which shouldn't exist in the first place.
	Exactly.
	But again, it's this weird...
	We live in this...
	In order for it to...
	Maintain order.
	It's got to flip between degeneracy and Puritanism.
	I think I've mentioned this on our podcast before, but I remember someone sent this to me, or I think they sent it to me on Twitter, and there was, right at the height of Me Too, of hashtag Me Too, post Weinstein, all that kind of stuff, there was this BuzzFeed article that came out that was like, read all our sexy stories about...
	You know, these are sent in from real BuzzFeed readers, sexy stories.
	And there was one in which a girl said, oh, you know, I stayed after work with my boss, with one of my bosses, and we actually had to do a project.
	And so we were there, you know, past midnight.
	And, you know, after we had completed the project, you know, we were both, we've been into each other.
	And so we just went at it, and I came in with no panties under my dress, and we had sex on his desk, and we just did everything.
	Yeah, right.
	Typical little liaison.
	Yeah, Mad Men basically.
	Yeah, Mad Men era, you know, whatever.
	And again, what was so interesting about that is that she's bragging about it.
	She's publishing it anonymously on BuzzFeed.
	Ten years later...
	If she wants to decapitate her boss, figuratively and maybe literally, she could come back, cite that BuzzFeed article as evidence of sexual assault.
	Because there's no question, he was her boss.
	I imagine he was older than she was.
	He's her superior in the workplace.
	He maybe got to choose whether she got a raise or a bonus or whatever.
	He was her superior in this.
	Right, there's a whole bunch of implications there.
	Yeah, and yes, this kind of little sexual liaison, these things are normal, you know, whatever.
	I don't even really judge them, maybe.
	It's whatever.
	He took a little trifle.
	But it's like, that kind of stuff is fun when the woman says that this is her choice and it was so great.
	It's horrifying and criminal.
	The moment that she decides it's not her choice.
	And the same certainly goes for college date rape.
	We know the stories of you regret getting drunk, you wake up with some doofus, and he's not the hot quarterback that you imagined, and so you claim rape out of regret, out of bitterness, out of inner nihilism, maybe out of who knows, shame, whatever.
	But it's total bullshit.
	And so we have this weird...
	We're both degenerate and decadent and hyper-Puritan at the same time.
	This is very foundational in the American psyche because obviously I would be condescending to our listeners if I had to go through and explain what Plymouth Rock meant, but they know about the founding of this country.
	They know very well about the foundational ethos, the myth of these stiff upper lip wasps in the Northeast who basically applied these norms.
	they weren't degeneracy back then, but that same Victorianism as you put it, basically we're using the same mental framework, the same matrix, but we're just inverting, There's new rules.
	There are new codes.
	There are new little tongue-in-cheek references that you have to tailor to each generation.
	For example, let's go back to...
	The original Victorian era, under Queen Victoria in Britain, a girl was supposed to arrive virgin at marriage, obviously, that goes without saying, and she also had to marry within her class, preferably above her station if she could, because the mothers were constantly acting like Jewish matchmakers looking for the best bang for their daughter's buck.
	Yeah, right.
	Exactly.
	And in essence, you had all these stories where you could, as long as those three or four things I just said remained at the bottom of every marriage story, you could tweak You could actually have a lot of extraneous factors, as long as you could still fit them in the narrative.
	So, alright, she was virgin at marriage.
	That doesn't mean that she didn't go to the south of France, which back then was very far away from Britain before telegraphs and telegrams and telephones.
	And you could hang out with either your lesbian school friend from your school days, or you did have a male lover, but he only put it in the butt.
	Or you slept with a man, but at least he was of a higher social standing than you, so it suddenly became okay.
	You know, Victorianism had ways of playing with its own rules.
	And this is kind of what we're talking about today here in this context as well.
	The new Victorianism is, as you put it, Richard, a girl can, you know, whore it up, up and down, left and right, six ways from Sunday.
	But then, of course, you have the...
	Oh my god, was it your boss?
	Did he make some move that was unwelcome?
	So I think the comparison of Victorianism is a very good one because you have base rules that are the same, but then you just tweak them to fit the current social paradigm.
	And back then they were just as hypocritical as they are today.
	The left of today is the inheritor of that kind of Jesuitical double talk.
	But it's a little bit different because it's in a way not hypocritical.
	Because, you know, like what you were saying of, oh yeah, I'm a virgin, or like, I'm a good bride.
	Maybe I'm not quite a virgin, but I'm decent and beautiful and I'm going to be a good mother.
	but maybe I had this little tragic tryst, you know, in my past or something that we don't speak.
	That's the stuff of a novel.
	That's hypocritical in the best sense of the word, in the sense that you give value to the norm.
	A norm in the sense of an ideal.
	You give value to the norm, but you maybe can't reach it, because no one can.
	We're all human, after all.
	What we have now isn't really, it's not hypocritical in a way.
	Like, it's good to go be a raging slut.
	Like, that's hilarious and fun.
	You should just get what's yours, girl.
	Yeah, slay queen.
	Right, but the moment there's, A, men doing the same thing is viewed as just completely toxic and awful.
	So a woman doing it is stunning and brave.
	A man doing it is toxic and evil.
	But also, it exists within it.
	You do this openly.
	All of these women, Dr. Ford, and all these people, these weird Gen X cat ladies...
	I can say that as a Gen Xer.
	We're no longer bashing the boomers.
	We're now bashing my generation.
	She can have multiple affairs, multiple one-night stands.
	It's all fine.
	It's all in the open.
	It's all expected.
	It's not hidden.
	It's not hypocritical.
	It's this weird puritanism that exists within degeneracy.
	The other aspect of it, which is that...
	The Victorians, to a fault, men did not understand female sexuality, and they had a prudish understanding of women.
	They thought of them as innocent flowers who could be corrupted by male fatality, and they're just, you know, something like that.
	That's a wrong understanding.
	Women are intensely sexual.
	They have sexual desire.
	It's certainly different.
	It's a different sexual desire than man's, no question.
	But because it's different, we are almost blind to it as men.
	Whereas women always understand male sexuality.
	That's one thing about women.
	Women, they get us and we don't get them.
	Women know exactly how to push our buttons and to attract us.
	They're amazingly good at it.
	They laugh behind their backs about how easy we are to manipulate.
	But the Victorians basically promoted this prudish, sentimentalized, Naive vision of the female.
	And we're doing that again.
	I don't know.
	I know this sounds kind of funny, but no one has asked in all this, what about, is Kavanaugh a victim?
	Let's say that the second story is actually true.
	And to be honest, if it is true that he...
	Rubbed his dick in the girl's face or something like that.
	If that is true, I don't think that disqualifies them.
	I think it demonstrates that he was acting like an idiot.
	But let's imagine his story.
	Again, this probably isn't true, but let's just imagine that it is.
	So they're all there.
	They're all young 19, 20-year-olds.
	They're immature.
	They lack confidence.
	They don't know who they are.
	They're making these life decisions.
	Whenever you're in college, you change majors.
	You change what you want to be when you grow up every week.
	I mean, it's typical.
	And they're getting drunk.
	They don't know how to...
	They don't know how to enjoy alcohol.
	They just chug it away.
	Maybe someone had some marijuana.
	Maybe he's a victim of this weird, stupid dorm room sexual abuse.
	There are no male victims.
	It's all these precious women who are inherently innocent to these evil, conniving men who are doing this.
	And this is just total nonsense.
	It's interesting how this is basically...
	A restatement a century and a half later of the Victorian mindset in which women are still the perennial victims and it's the supposed hypersexuality of the male that is corrupting the woman.
	So the woman is never wrong.
	It's a replay 150 years later.
	It's actually quite fascinating.
	Yeah.
	So we actually haven't overcome the past.
	All of these progressives want to pat themselves on the back.
	They're just on this moral wave.
	We just keep going forward.
	We just keep understanding more and more rights.
	We keep learning more about the human condition.
	We just keep getting better, etc.
	And it's just all nonsense.
	We actually haven't overcome some of the basic weaknesses of the 19th century West.
	And that includes the utter sentimentalization of...
	Females, as inherent victims, as innocent, as guileless, and so on.
	And that's just, again, it's a total misunderstanding of women.
	It's funny not to...
	I know you're gonna probably call me back to order after I derail this for a second because I'm gonna leave the the realm of Human sexuality, but I just wanted to riff off of the the comment that we really haven't moved past the 19th century in many ways
	We have the same foibles that our, you know, our ancestors, 1,000 generations removed when we were, you know, branching off our monkeys.
	We still have those same foibles.
	But the 19th century is an interesting, The late 19th century, beginning of the 20th century, I'd say pre-World War I Europe is the world we still live in.
	And a normie would hear that and say, this kid's retarded, I have an iPad, what does he mean by that?
	What I mean is a lot of the norms that we still adhere to subconsciously...
	The car, the tramway, the metro...
	Yeah, they didn't have jet planes, but we were basically using the same methods of transport.
	The Westphalian system of nation-states respecting the lines on the map to an almost retarded autistic extent, that's also a holdover of that era of Europe.
	And I could go on.
	It's just interesting how we – there's two major fault lines in the white European psyche that we haven't been able to overcome no matter how much societal and civilizational therapy we put ourselves through.
	And that's 1914 and 1945.
	1914 is where we're stuck when I – all those things I just mentioned, the suit, the car.
	The Westphalian lines on the European map.
	And then 45 is because we then replaced, we did something catastrophic and life-altering, is we replaced the conventional, traditional religions of Europe with the religion of what was supposed to have happened to...
	The most oppressed race of people of all time during that war having replaced everything else as the central religion of our times.
	And so those two big fault lines in our minds, we're still PTSD'd from it.
	And it's funny that basically sexuality comes in in the sense that if we are able to hold over everything else I just cited from 1914 or before...
	Then it makes sense that sexuality would as well.
	We are still living the long century that was supposed to have ended 1815 to 1914.
	I think we're still in the Congress of Vienna mindset.
	Yeah, yeah.
	Eric Hobsbawm, I think, called it the long 20th century.
	Yeah, I'm not sure it ended in 2001.
	I don't think it ended in 1989-91 with the fall of the Soviet Union.
	I agree.
	I think we are still in it in many ways.
	We're still certainly in the shadow of the nuclear age and so on.
	So, yeah, we're still in the 20th century.
	Geopolitically, the two dates you cited are watersheds.
	1991 is a watershed and 2001 is a watershed.
	Sure, for the purposes of the big risk board at the UN, in a way, we've...
	Those are watersheds.
	But in our minds, deeply, profoundly, in the reptilian back mind, the mind that's connected to the spinal cord and that teaches us about sex and propriety and mores, we're still in the 19th century.
	European man hasn't left.
	And because the world, basically, despite itself, despite the left's best efforts, is nothing more than an aping parody of European man.
	As a result, everyone is still stuck in this Congress of Vienna, Europe.
	Sexually as well.
	And we're still going through a religious crisis that we haven't fully overcome.
	I mean, the kind of thing that Nietzsche was reacting to in the mid to late 19th century in terms of the loss of faith, we're still there.
	Yeah, definitely.
	And again, I think also just to even go back, we've...
	We've certainly lost traditional Christianity.
	And what these American conservatives think of as Christianity is just like mall self-esteem theology, basically.
	But we basically have adopted liberalism as a form of public Christianity, where we all talk about St. Martin Luther King and our belief in democracy and equality and so on.
	Yeah, I saw today one of the future icons where you and I will once be in the future forced to pour libations to just went up today in Geneva at the UN.
	They unveiled an enormous bronze statue of Nelson Mandela.
	It's much fanfare.
	So one day when, you know, during the famous persecutions of Diocletian, the last and arguably most bloody of the persecutions during the...
	The end of the Roman Empire before Constantine didn't make the Christian religion the state religion but at least passed an edict of toleration.
	During the Diocletian persecutions, the way you would do it is you would, if you had a suspected Christian, you would drag him in front of a...
	A pagan idol, whether it was the statue of the emperor, Augustus, or one of the very many subaltern gods, and you would force him or her to pour a libation or pay a coin in guise of, what do you call it, of sacrifice.
	And if they refused, they would kill them.
	And in a way, every time I see one of our guys' statues go down, you know, whether it be a Confederate general or someone else, and when I see statues of Mandela and other shitbags like him go up, I'm always struck by that example because I know that one day that's going to be...
	They are the god emperors to whom we will be expected to pour libations, and if we refuse...
	We won't be killed in the same way, but we will be killed in the 21st century way, which is depersoning electronically, financially, fiscally, jurisdictionally, etc.
	Yeah, it's shocking.
	Yeah, no question.
	And it is interesting when we go back to Kavanaugh, the degree to which he is helpless in all this.
	I was just watching his Fox interview, because we're recording this on Monday night.
	I was watching his, you know, he did a friendly interview, you know, it was on Fox, but it was, you know, she was Gretchen, it was one of those blondes, I can't remember which one, but yeah, they kind of are.
	But she, you know, she was diving in there a little bit.
	He indicated that he was a virgin throughout high school, into college, and so on, which is pretty...
	Full cell supremacy.
	Yes, full cell.
	But he's so helpless to this.
	At one point she asked, she goes, where is this coming from?
	And so on.
	He goes, I don't know, but I just want a fair process.
	He's like, I won't speculate on motives.
	He kept saying that over and over.
	That's his nerdy lawyer.
	I know, he's a legalist.
	And it's all about being fair and following the law and all this kind of stuff.
	But that's nonsense.
	This is about power.
	We know where this is coming from.
	They want to destroy you.
	They want to destroy normal male heterosexuality.
	And they are doing it, and it's not about fairness.
	Like, you can keep claiming fairness.
	But the fact is, in any kind of normal society, I mean, you know, in the ancient world, or in most America, if you learned about some person up for a big job, what he got drunk and grabbed a girl's...
	Tits when he was 19. Who cares?
	Who conceivably cares?
	We'd be kind of worried if someone hadn't done something stupid when they were 17. My grandfather would tell me, well, did you get some?
	And if I'd say no, he'd be like, are you kidding me?
	What?
	I'm paying this much for you to go to school and you're not?
	Yeah, and he gets into all of that Christian sentimentality that, again, jives with feminism.
	So he's like, I have always treated every woman with decency.
	I mean, have you talked about treating men with decency?
	I mean, it's just like this, again, it's this women are this special, precious being.
	Non-human, almost.
	Like, angelic and...
	To quote PewDiePie, it's the world of respecting women.
	It's become nonsense.
	I like using his ridiculous Swedish accent because it's as nonsensical as its accent.
	Respecting women has become like a mantra.
	It has been completely...
	It's a mind control tool just like racist and sexist and anti-Semite and homophobe and transphobe.
	They're literal words that were very intelligently cooked up by people who have an excellent revolutionary understanding of language and they know how to weaponize it against us.
	And so respecting women is one of those things.
	It's – and to your point about it not being applied to men, and you'll notice as all our listeners have noticed over the last 10 years or so that we – probably even more than 10 years.
	It's just it's accelerating the last 10 years.
	But, you know, how long has affirmative action been around?
	40 years?
	45 years?
	Something like that?
	Yeah.
	The Nixon administration, I think it was suggested by Kennedy – So yeah, let's look at 1970.
	Yeah, that sounds about right.
	And so basically, let's assume, I'm doing the same thing you did earlier when we assumed a totally bullshit point is valid.
	For the sake of argument, let's assume that there is some sort of disparate outcome among the races and genders where it comes to higher education, whatever.
	We've decided now in America that it's no longer a question of freedom of opportunity.
	It has to be equality of outcome as well, which is ridiculous.
	But because of that, we've constantly been giving a leg up to everyone and their mom except straight white men, and recently Asians as well, East Asians.
	But we don't even question that anymore.
	And now we've gotten to the point where the reverse problem...
	is such that even if we wanted to question it, because now we're actually encountering cases of, and I'm sure most of the kids listening in of my generation who were part of that bump, that demographic bump in the mid-2000s that tried to apply to the Ivy Leagues and got waitlisted or rejected or, you know, whatever, can commiserate with me on this point.
	We're now reaching points of insanity on race and gender where affirmative action is concerned that you even have The Asians bring in court cases.
	I know the Supreme Court accepted on their docket this year.
	They're going to hear a case out of Harvard where I think it's a bunch of Korean-Americans that are complaining about reverse discrimination.
	The sex thing is also part of that nebulous class of perennial victims where, like you said earlier, Richard, women are perfect blossoms that can do no wrong and never lie.
	Men are starting to question that.
	It's not going to end well for anyone, just like the race thing won't end well for anyone, because for too long we've been written off as we are born into some sort of nonsensical privilege, and there's nothing we can do about it.
	You can't keep an entire class of people down like that for long.
	It will blow up, and they don't know what's coming to them.
	It's going to end very poorly for everyone.
	Well, there's going to have to be a reassertion.
	Of patriarchy, I mean, to put it mildly.
	And it's not going to be the beta, you know, Christian patriarchy that we see.
	You know, whenever people are like, oh, there's traditional values among Americans.
	Like, it's not just going to be, you know, beta providers.
	That is great.
	And that is actually something to be aspired to.
	And that is, they truly make the world go round.
	Everything has to work.
	Everything has to run on time.
	They are essential and indispensable.
	No question.
	But just working 9 to 5 so that you can afford a flat screen in your exurban home, that's not it.
	That's not what we're talking about.
	There's nothing truly traditionalist.
	It's monogamous, but it's not really traditionalist.
	And there's going to have to be a reassertion of patriarchy, or this revenge is going to start to take on pretty extreme proportions.
	And again, I don't like most of the victims of Me Too, I don't like.
	Weinstein, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer, Val Franken.
	I mean, no, I don't like any of these people.
	I don't shed tears.
	There was actually some Antifa journalist who's now like a toxic man.
	I'm forgetting his name.
	What is his name?
	Nick?
	I can't remember.
	It's this guy who wrote for Mike.com or something.
	I'd heard his name before.
	I can't remember what it is.
	He's just been outed.
	They're not even accusing him of beating, slapping women or raping them.
	There's nothing even like that.
	It's like he's being manipulative and gaslighting.
	He's acting like a woman, basically.
	All the names you cited, I'm not going to go through them all, but the list that began with Weinstein, and they're all pretty despicable characters.
	No one was going to stand up for them.
	But that's the case with this Kavanaugh guy.
	The contrast is such that he's literally the good guy, the boring Bob next door.
	You know, he's like one of these guys that I'm sure a lot of our listeners are upper middle class white guys from suburban areas around the country.
	Our listeners are 80% African American females.
	Of course.
	For some of the white guys listening.
	No, especially in that...
	Shout out.
	We love you guys.
	Not just the racial angle, which I could have guessed, but just also that socioeconomic bracket.
	He's the dad in the tracksuit.
	He's a high-powered attorney in the weekdays.
	And on the weekend, he wears the New Balance, and he looks like a nerd, and he's got the Starbucks, and he's bringing his daughter or son to lax practice.
	Like, this is who we're talking about.
	So he's not a Weinstein.
	This is Richard's point from the beginning when he was talking like half an hour ago about this is an attack on actual...
	We've gotten down to brass tacks.
	This is where the left actually wanted to bring us.
	A specific part of the left.
	The really rabid, really Talmudic left.
	This is where they wanted to get to.
	This is the kernel of truth that they've been trying to hide under.
	Words like...
	Equality of outcome.
	It's going to be kumbaya.
	We need to be a little racist against whites and a little sexist against men and a little ageist against old white men because it'll lead to a fair world.
	No, that was yesterday's narrative.
	Today's narrative is if you're a man, period, you are wrong.
	And that's what we're getting to.
	It's ridiculous.
	And so there's going to have to be a reassertion of power.
	This isn't just about being a nice beta provider and not rocking the boat, paying your mortgage and your car loan or whatever.
	No, that is actually great.
	I don't mean to demean anyone, but that is not enough.
	There is going to have to be a reassertion of...
	Political, social, and cultural patriarchal authority.
	Or our society will degenerate into this just insane version of what we have now.
	It's not about this.
	I get this sometimes.
	I've gotten this from even some of the older people in the movement.
	Someone was reacting to the fact that I've said some off-the-cuff stuff.
	I don't want women to be voting.
	I don't want anyone to be voting.
	Also, one of my more famous lines was, every woman wants to be taken by a strong man, but also...
	If females get control of foreign policy, we're not going to have world peace.
	Their vindictiveness knows no end.
	We're going to have total peace.
	Some of the boomers in the movement are like, oh, we need to reach out to women.
	They're part of a race.
	You're trying to divide us.
	It's just like, guys, shut up.
	Look, at the end of the day, there is going to have to be an assertion of power.
	Neither of the two things you just brought up, the exurb wage cuck who has to work extra hours to get his flat screen and be a beta provider, and the women example, how we would literally be in a state of pandemonium should women be in power.
	Literal pandemonium, yes.
	Demons.
	Yeah, I mean, there's a reason to kind of off-road my own railroading right now.
	Yeah, demons, there's a reason why ancient Sumerian priests at the top of the ziggurats used to have to take women's virginities before they could get married because they were demons living in their vaginas.
	That was the fear.
	That was literally the fear.
	Also, those priests, I think they cooked that up because it sounds like a pretty great deal.
	But, um, whatever Me Too is, an ancient Akkadian cuneiform.
	Their motives are pure.
	Do not question, do not question this priest.
	Right, do not, do not look at the Semite behind the curtain.
	Um, since we're talking about Mesopotamia.
	But no, so back to your two examples about the Beta NPC.
	Even though, even though he's aspiring to be tried, there's, you know, nothing wrong about that.
	And the woman in power.
	If any woman in our movement wants to be in our movement and believes what we believe, and she is, I'm sure, of good faith, goodwill, and I'm willing to...
	I personally know a lot of very...
	Smart, attractive, hardworking, and respectful women in the movement who deserve to be there, they have to recognize that that's true, and they do, because they know themselves better than we know them.
	You pointed that earlier, Richard, how they have an innate understanding of not only their own sexuality, but of...
	Oh yeah, they get us, and we don't get them.
	And we don't get them.
	It's totally asymmetric.
	Totally asymmetric, but they also know, I mean, any woman knows, especially the women that are hip to our ideas, they know what it's like to be under the protection of a man and also the latitude that that gives them.
	I have an elderly grandmother who, bless you, up to whom I look for a lot of things because she's wise beyond her very many years.
	She's a constant reminder to me, because sometimes I'll watch her do what she does around the house.
	It's funny to see a woman doing what she does, especially when it's so out of place in my own generation's lifestyle.
	I'll watch her do what she does, and I realize, in a way, even though she's very elderly and could choose not to do these things, she's doing them because she could be doing anything right now, and she's never had to work a day in her life.
	For money, she's done housework.
	But she's gone from her father's household to her husband's household, and now that her husband is deceased, to her son's household, in basically an uninterrupted life of luxury.
	And that's what an actual, not LARPing trad woman realizes, is the latitude.
	That patriarchy gives them.
	They have freedom to read, to knit, to learn languages, to go play tennis with their girlfriends.
	All we ask in return, which is a big ask, but they know it's worth it, is you don't need to vote.
	You don't need to be in control of your paychecks or whatever, your bank account.
	And they know that if they were in charge, they would constantly try to keep up with the Joneses and fuck with the other women in the community.
	The international community works much the same way.
	Men are standoffish to other men and they know how to look at the bromance had it been allowed to happen between Trump and Putin.
	These are two guys.
	They saw each other.
	They sized each other up and they're like, alright guy, we can work together.
	This fucking serious situation is a joke.
	Let's do it.
	And it was shrieking women for the most part in the West that fucked it up.
	I don't even remember her name.
	Chrystia Freeland, the foreign minister of Canada.
	A fake job for a fake country.
	She's ridiculous.
	She called out Saudi Arabia for human rights abuses.
	Is Saudi Arabia a cesspool where human rights abuses are rampant?
	Yeah, absolutely.
	No one questions that.
	But does...
	An allied country that does billions of dollars in business every year, that actively sells them weapons, that uses them to base their troops abroad to reach other foreign policy objectives, even though we in the movement don't agree with those objectives.
	Is it normal and healthy and is it not terribly gauche to call them out on live television in front of the world stage for something that no one actually cares about?
	No, but it's the feminine instinct to make snide, backhanded remarks.
	And the more women and the more gays we have in the various chanceries of Western capitals, the more we're going to see that.
	And that's the comment on women, but the comment on the neats now, not the neats rather, I'm sorry, much better than a neat, much more respectable than a neat, the beta provider.
	We know that NPC in the current meme is supposed to englobe, encompass the unthinking, progressive, city-dwelling, disgusting soy boy who goes along with narratives without thinking with no inner voice.
	But it's also applicable in a way to the wannabe trad NPC who is the cog in the machine, who is an honorable cog, but a cog nonetheless.
	Yeah.
	Who's actually allowing this thing to keep going.
	Yeah, and that's what's shocking.
	Yeah, like who's actually far more productive than the urbanite hipster who hangs out at coffee shops all day.
	Yeah, and who's not gainfully employed, you know, four-fifths of his life.
	But pretends to be, because he opens his Apple laptop in a Starbucks with a sticker on the laptop that says, this machine kills fascists, and types up the nth time he tried to get a job with BuzzFeed, but he's just not talented enough.
	And that's saying something.
	No, these guys make me sad.
	Not the soy boy...
	the former category we're talking about.
	They make me sad because they are unwittingly the architects of their own destruction.
	Because they allow on the backs of their work, they keep this, you know, For lack of a better word, the Zog system, there's so many euphemisms I could use, but the system going.
	They are paying for unproductive people of color, even people of our own color who are unproductive, single moms, the mentally disabled, etc.
	The list can go on forever.
	And these guys, there's a certain noblesse oblige to wanting to help your social inferiors, I guess.
	That does exist.
	But in a way, when those ideas were actually enacted in the West, several centuries hence...
	The people that were working to keep the system going at least had a life to show for it.
	Your feudal lord, yes, he made sacrifices.
	He fought for.
	He would have to give men to the king in times of war.
	You would have to arbitrate between silly peasants fighting over a tiny piece of land, whatever.
	But he got to live in the big house, the proverbial big house, and he got to slaughter a pig more frequently than the peasant who only saw meat once or twice a year, and he got to probably take a few advantages with his comely chambermaid, whatever.
	That's not the case anymore.
	These beta males have no...
	These poor guys that probably have wives and kids, I work with a few of them, they have to live way on the boondocks in order to afford a house because the current real estate market is such that if you're a married man with a wife and two or three kids, there's no way in heck you're going to be living anywhere within an hour and a half of a major urban center unless you're willing to live like an illegal Mexican 15 to a room.
	It just doesn't work that way anymore.
	And so these guys have nothing in return.
	They're keeping the system afloat and they get nothing but disrespect.
	They also get not paid as well because inflation is moving more quickly than standard of living adjustments.
	And also the Brett Kavanaugh example plays into this.
	We're finally going full circle.
	They also are presumed guilty before being proved innocent because they're men and because they're white and because they're hardworking.
	And they don't know how to fight back.
	They fight back using the system's language.
	So, Brett Kavanaugh, as a legalist, fights back using the system.
	So, he's like, I just want a fair process.
	I coach girls basketball.
	I've hired more women than men at my firm.
	They've had more female clerks.
	Like, he's just a system man who is surprised that the system wants to destroy him.
	I mean, it's tragic, you could say.
	You could also say that it's pathetic.
	And he's not willing or able to oppose it or fight back.
	It's both of those things.
	It's tragic and pathetic, and it's a good comment.
	Both of those adjectives you used are good comments on not just his situation, but more meta.
	What is tragedy and what is pathetic?
	The tragedy is that you have a lot of good goys out there who are just literally not more ambitious in the lives that they have.
	And that's fine.
	That's a function of who they are in society.
	It's a function of their IQ.
	It's a function of their upbringing.
	It's okay.
	It's okay to be an NPC as long as you're an R guy NPC.
	And that's not a bad thing.
	A lot of guys just want to have an easy life.
	But if you look at Kavanaugh, you see what awaits you if you choose that life.
	Because the tragedy part of this two-parter example we're doing, the tragedy part of it is you have a guy who gave his life to the system.
	He wears that Stars and Stripes American flag pin on his lapel like every DC neocon cuck that I've ever known my whole life.
	And he's got that smile pasted on his face.
	And he does his fucking court job his whole life clerking and being someone else's bitch until he finally gets a moment of glory.
	the system just destroys him the very same system That's the tragedy aspect of it.
	And the pathetic aspect is...
	If you go along with that, knowing now what you know, it's no longer a tragedy.
	Now it's a farce.
	Now you're pathetic.
	You can't have your eyes open to the situation and still pledge fealty to a system that takes you for granted, that actually worse than takes you for granted once you're dead.
	Either take that as you will, physically dead or otherwise.
	Yeah, certainly spiritually dead.
	It's kind of one of those you fool me once, fool me twice kind of situations.
	It's tragic if it's your first time, like Kavanaugh.
	He probably wasn't aware of the weight of Talmudery that was awaiting him in the build-up to this nomination process.
	But the second time you're fooled, it's pathetic because you can't keep working for these people.
	You're not going to get anything out of it.
	Even when you're good to them, they will kill you.
	Alright.
	Let's do an exit question.
	Do you think Kavanaugh will be confirmed by the Senate as a Supreme Court justice?
	I'm going to go out on a limb and say yes.
	I agree, actually.
	He's going to just get by limping.
	And I would say this, if that does not happen, I mean, if the Republican Senate caves on this, I mean...
	Yeah, which they could.
	very well.
	It's well within the realm of possibilities.
	I just have, I'm just, you know, I'm, I'm using my mind, but I'm also using my gut.
	I do think he's going to survive this, but if he doesn't, I mean, I don't even know what to say.
	Like my, Of all the people in our sphere, I'm probably the one, at least the most prominent person, who is anti-conservative movement.
	Throughout my entire career, I have been anti-conservative movement, vehemently.
	And I've said this is wrong.
	We cannot trust any of these people, even under their own terms.
	Liberals and losers and so on.
	I mean, if they can't confirm this person, if they back down to Me Too pressure and they do it under the guise of Christian moralism and be like, oh, we need someone who respects the decency of all women.
	Respects women.
	Yeah, I mean, respects women.
	Yeah, at that point, it's just like, what are they even?
	Like, they can't even confirm their own...
	Douchebags.
	Milk toast.
	Yeah, milk toast.
	Yeah, stand-ins.
	They're not putting Don Camillo up for the Supreme Court.
	You know, they're putting up...
	Right, so would I, obviously.
	But they're not...
	Right, they're just...
	It's their own guy.
	It's their guy.
	Yeah.
	And we talked about over the phone the other day, you and I, the implications, the wider implications it would have on the Trump presidency thereafter.
	So my first answer was yes, I do think by the skin of his teeth he will make it.
	I think there's enough precedent there.
	I also think the angle of attack that the left chose to use with this is they had a chance to really...
	Put a nail in the coffin and they didn't and now their accusations are being proven more ridiculous by the minute.
	So I think that's just going to, you know, it's still going to be there.
	The furthest left in the Senate and in the media establishment will try to make hay of that until the last second.
	They really will.
	But the weight behind it, the momentum behind it is gone.
	So that's why I think he will make it.
	But in the in the chance that he won't make it, the the arguments are actually, you know, if you if you, you know, put up a pro and con column, the con column is actually pretty substantial as well.
	And the reason why is you have guys like, you know, the Senate from the leadership down from the leadership, you got guys like Mitch McConnell who have gone.
	and he could give way any minute.
	But then you have guys that are even less...
	They're worse than Mitch McConnell, whose main, my main criticism of him is his spinelessness.
	You have guys in there who, in addition to being spineless, also viscerally hate Trump.
	And by that, I mean Ben Sasse, I mean Ben Corker, Bob Corker, sorry.
	And those are Republicans who are not running again for reelection.
	And this is kind of their, this is their I am Spartacus moment.
	I could see both of those guys doing that.
	The only thing is, again, I would go back to it.
	Brett Kavanaugh is the conservative's conservative justice.
	He is not Trump's guy.
	This is one interesting thing about Trump, which is that Trump was wild, totally out of the mainstream in a number of different ways, foreign policy, immigration, just general nationalism and tone and all that kind of stuff.
	But on a few ways, he basically said the shibboleth and was just a total conservative Ben
	Sasse, those guys will just be destroying their own movement.
	Just to make a fucking point.
	And the wrong one at that from their perspective.
	Yeah.
	Because he would be their guy.
	And I think, you know, I wasn't going to go this route.
	I was going to talk about the impact on the presidency afterward.
	But just to digress for one second on what you said, Trump nominating first Gorsuch than this guy.
	I think, and I hate to say this because, you know, I'm going to sound like I'm reading a book by its cover.
	So this is a pretty, you know, normie tier criticism of Trump here.
	Look, the guy, he's no legal scholar.
	Let's not, you know, I know he talks about knowing the best words, quote, because he went to Wharton.
	He's got the best words.
	Very smart guy.
	Tongue in cheek.
	But beyond that, he doesn't have any legal knowledge.
	And so I think when he saw Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, he just saw two white bros, preferably Wasp in the first example and High Church Catholic on the other example.
	And they just jived with his general external aesthetic for what he, as a 71-year-old white man who would like to see white men back in the – I think that's why I went with him.
	Beyond that, he probably didn't even know that both of them were just your average milquetoast conservative's conservative, because he probably spent less than five minutes looking into their...
	He has an aide who liaises between him and the Senate Judiciary Committee, and that's We probably hit it off talking about Melania.
	And then that was that.
	That's that comment.
	But now I guess the thing with which I'd end the exit question section of the show is what does this mean for the presidency, for Trump in particular, if Kavanaugh isn't, you know, by some weird whatever act of history, act of God, isn't confirmed?
	I think...
	There are two possibilities, and I think, unfortunately, the latter is going to happen.
	The first is kind of lulzy.
	Is Trump going full, you know, wounded beast?
	Gets really angry.
	This, combined with the fact that Rod Rosenstein was revealed by the New York Times to have apparently, allegedly, walked around the White House with a wire and recorded Trump and tried to orchestrate a 25th Amendment insurgency in his cabinet.
	Or contemplated that.
	Contemplated that, right.
	I don't think anyone suggested he did it, actually.
	Oh, interesting.
	But yes, I mean, just the culture of doubt remains in the White House.
	So I guess you could see, and I'm not saying this is the probable one, this is the lousy one.
	Trump go, you know, full, you know, just fuck it all.
	They've given me one of the main...
	The platforms I ran on to get the normie conservative vote was that I promised them Supreme Court nominees that were in line with their thinking.
	They hamstrung me.
	I am now punished Trump.
	Now we're just going to go full napalm.
	That's it.
	We're firing the DOJ.
	We're firing half of the White House staff.
	And we're going to take care of this presidency the way I wanted it to go in the beginning.
	Unfortunately, I think there's another side to Trump, which is not punish Trump.
	And I think it's going to be the more probable of the two.
	He's also a capricious 71-year-old man who likes things to go his way and is not very comfortable with delays both in time and in ideology.
	I think people that don't see eye to eye with him.
	I think he might just show himself the door.
	I think he might just say, you know what?
	I'm too good for this country.
	I'm Donald fucking Trump.
	I went to Wharton.
	I know all the best words.
	And I could have given you this gold guilt, you know, Chinese prefab palace.
	And you spat in my face.
	You didn't want it.
	So I'm going to resign like Tricky Dick Nixon did.
	And you're not good enough for me.
	Wow.
	I could see that.
	I would say the immediate effect, because we are going to know what is going to happen with this nomination.
	If not this week, definitely by next week.
	Because I think Dr. Ford will be testifying on Thursday.
	We keep these delays.
	Let's just say by the end of next week.
	We'll know.
	If they do buck Kavanaugh or something and just, you know, the level of how demoralizing that will be for the midterms, I think it can't be underestimated.
	I think the whole thing is just already demoralizing.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And I think the one, this is why the one positive, regardless of the route Trump decides to take, Trump isn't going to be here forever.
	We don't live in that kind of system, fortunately or unfortunately, depending on where you stand on that question.
	He's not going to be here forever, and what we're left with is the I think in that world, this is demoralizing because it shows truly how powerful the forces of the media and the inertia of the deep state and how powerful they are at not doing anything,
	at actively stopping our kind of progress, if you will.
	And I think the only white pill you can get out of that black pill is the fact that a lot of people are, to use an overused word, are woke to it now.
	I think you have the vast majority of the American population that are not alt-righters, just your average Joe, before this election, I think would have viewed the term deep state if he knew it at all.
	Because it wasn't a very known term.
	He or she would have viewed it as a tinfoil hat word only used by Alex Jones watchers.
	And I think here we are two years in, Tucker Carlson at 8pm every night on Fox is using the word deep state three times a sentence.
	And it's become a known knowable, to paraphrase...
	Who was that?
	Kenneth Starr?
	I don't remember anymore.
	Donald Brunsfield.
	There you go.
	Old Rummy himself.
	Yeah, so, yeah, I think it's become a real enlightening moment for the American people.
	So, if and when Trump recedes from the stage, that will stay.
	I think people are really fucking fed up, and I think that the demoralization we're feeling over something as stupid and silly as Kavanaugh, who, you know, before and after this nomination process will recede from our minds, we don't care about this guy.
	But it's an indicator.
	They served as litmus tests, Trump and Kavanaugh.
	Yeah.

▲