All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 17, 2019 - RadixJournal - Richard Spencer
31:33
Tommy Boy: The Poverty of the "Anti-Jihad Movement"
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Final topic.
It's literally illegal now.
The group discusses Donald Trump's recent executive order effectively banning serious criticism of Zionism and Jewish influence on America's campuses.
They further discuss the evergreen issue of social media deplatforming, as well as the hyper-real that is when you only have a life online.
So the next topic is with regards to anti-Semitism and Trump.
And Richard, I believe you have some news for us.
Yes.
Well, Trump signed an executive order on negating birthright citizenship.
Breaking news.
Oh, wait.
That was just the lie that he told everyone before the midterms when he went on Axios television and announced that we have people looking into this and I can just do it with the stroke of a pen.
But that was all a...
He had a bubble with us, as the Kaktis might say.
And he instead issued a recent executive order.
He did it while he was surrounded by great lions of industry and sports like Alan Dershowitz and Robert Kraft.
I guess Jeffrey Epstein couldn't make it.
He's otherwise disposed.
He basically put forth an executive order that was actually kind of...
It was both very bad, just from a superficial standpoint, but I think...
Kind of on a deeper level, very good.
And it was a condemnation of anti-Semitism in the universities.
The universities are certainly a hotbed of leftism of all sorts.
And that actually includes anti-Zionism and the BDS movement that is about boycotting Israeli industry.
And I have known about these things back when I was at university.
I didn't know how impactful they are, but they clearly are making some kind of difference.
Otherwise, they would not be condemned directly by presidents.
And so he effectively outlawed these...
Clearly free speech movements of saying, let's boycott this country because we oppose their foreign policy or their domestic policy.
And he is denying those.
And one aspect of this executive order was the declaration that Jews are not just a I don't know, religious denomination or something like that.
However, they were kind of incorrectly conceived.
But they are a race.
And thus, something like the boycott Israel movement is a civil rights violation.
And that, I think, is actually very interesting.
And that, I think, will have a myriad of unintended consequences.
On some weird level, I support this executive action because things that were implicit are becoming explicit.
The first of those is the prohibition against criticism of Zionism, or you could say Zionist influence in America, or you could say Jewish influence.
We have known for a very long time that there are some things you cannot criticize.
You can have all sorts of opinions on Medicare or...
But you simply cannot criticize America's relationship with Israel, its funding of Israel's armed forces, its foreign policy, which seems to be at the very least skewed in the direction of Israel and to the detriment of having decent relations with countries like Iran or Syria and others.
If you criticize that, that was a step too far.
You'd be kicked out of the conservative movement, and you'd be kicked out of liberal movements as well.
You can do that at academia, which is an interesting thing.
And the fact that they made that implicit law explicit, I think, is a good thing.
I would prefer explicit, say, speech codes on YouTube, which we could at the very least follow, as opposed to this vague, you know, you're inciting hatred against communities, or however it's defined, where we don't know what we can and cannot say.
I support prohibitions that are in writing so that, A, it's made clear who you can and cannot talk about, and it's clear for the content creators of, okay, well, we can...
You know, dance around this issue a little bit.
If we want to go wild in this subject, we can do it somewhere else.
The other aspect is...
I would like to say that I think that YouTube's policy is kind of like, it's discrimination against people who are Asperger's, basically.
Who are a race, by the way.
People who should be regarded as a race.
A superior race.
But people who, like myself, who are interested in the truth and logic and reason.
I genuinely can't understand unless you tell me that something is hate speech.
I've had two videos taken down from YouTube.
The first one, as far as I can work out, it was taken down because you can criticise in detail.
You can talk about race differences in IQ and whatever.
You can criticise a researcher who has done research on that that is fallacious and is nonsense.
But not if they're a woman and Asian.
This is Angela.
This is old darling Saney.
If they're a woman Asian, then that's hate speech.
But if they're Steven Pinker, where I've done exactly the same thing, that's not hate speech because he's a man.
Well, it's bizarre.
I've had a few.
I am generally on YouTube, and I don't think I'm going to be kicked off.
But I've had videos taken down that are fairly innocuous.
They become who we are video that I did with Mark Brahman that had all this music and imageries of Excalibur and the Stone and people looking off into sunsets and women in wheat fields and things like that.
That was taken down.
A person I've spoken to I like quite a bit, Xerious, has done non-verbal music, and that has been banned from YouTube.
I don't know how that is possibly hate speech by any definition.
So the policies are ambiguous, and I think they're probably ambiguous for a reason so that they can have arbitrary ability.
And it kind of psychologically damages people.
We don't know what we can do.
No.
Two videos that they demonetised as possibly unsuitable for all advertisers.
I appealed.
They manually reviewed it.
They monetised it.
Both of those were taken down subsequently for hate speech.
So it's totally insane.
I've tried to argue with them.
I said, well, so you're saying something can be suitable for all advertisers and also hate speech?
And I've never received an answer about that.
The other one was the video I did of the speech to the Patriotic Alternative.
That was up for months and months and months and then suddenly it was taken down for hate speech and I got a strike.
And I don't think I mentioned any protected minority in that speech at all.
I just said that left-wing people are spiteful mutants.
And I guess any spiteful mutants saw that.
And got upset.
Right.
They are the X-Men.
But it's...
So again, to reiterate, I am...
I'm actually happy that this is done just because it makes things that are implicit explicit.
It makes things clear and obvious.
You can't criticize the Jews, and the Jews are equivalent to Zionism, and the Jews are a race.
And the other aspect which I like about it is that it correctly understands Jews as a race.
Now, I think, you know, we have this Protestant position in the United States and elsewhere of the separation of church and state.
And kind of like religion is something you do in your home, and it's all individualistic, you can convert and so on.
That's a very improper understanding of what religion is.
Jews are a race, but they're also We can understand, say, the history of Europe without understanding religious history and how that impacted us as a people, etc.
Jews are a race and they're a religion.
This is not a loosey-goosey, evangelical, goofball religion that's going and converting Africans.
To convert to Judaism is quite an ordeal, and it happens extremely rarely.
Judaism is a certain type of evolutionary strategy for a people.
And it has been wildly successful in the sense that this people is still defined.
They were defined in the Roman Empire.
They were defined before that.
They're defined in the Middle Ages.
They are still a people in the way that, say, the Visigoths really aren't.
So it is a race and a religion.
And so I commend Donald Trump for doing this, for correctly identifying Jews as a race, and not just as a religion, and correctly identifying Zionism as one aspect.
So, again, obviously this is dripping with irony, but I ultimately do think that this executive order was a good thing.
So my first thought when you told us this was...
Could this benefit us?
Because we've all seen, you know, Jews write on Twitter, my fellow white people.
And then when people say back to them, but Jews aren't white, then people say, you're not allowed to say that.
And now it's been made explicit.
So it's like, well, actually, you know, we can just point them towards this piece of evidence.
So, yeah, I'm with you on that.
Do you have any thoughts, Ed?
Well, yeah, I think it is good to sort out this ambiguity, because one of the things they like to go on about, they say, oh, Diane Abbott and Bernie Grant were the first non-white MPs elected to the House of Commons ever in 1997.
A, that's not true, because there was a Sikh that was elected in about 1900 or 1892 or something.
And B, there's been lots of Jewish people that were elected to the House of Commons, and they're not white, and they're the descendants of religious immigrants.
Well, the disconnection of Israel...
We're rolling in the mud.
My ancestors were, you know, I don't know, bringing the Ten Commandments down from Mount Sinai.
That's right.
His father was a convert.
But yeah, he was ethnically Jewish.
And lots of others as well.
So, of course, they're a separate race.
They're a separate ethnic group that is perhaps within the Semitic race, I suppose you could put it like that.
But always a Klein.
Perhaps one could argue that.
They are a Klein genetically, which they are actually.
They're about 40% white, sometimes more than that.
But then the rest is Smith.
So yes, it's a sensible thing to do.
It's a bit of truth in a world of lies.
So that's quite good.
Last.
Something stated to be true and clear and direct.
That's what we need.
Things should be clear and direct.
You can't criticise.
In Thailand, everyone knows you can't criticise the king.
Prime.
Whereas it's not clear here who you can or in America.
And keep in mind, you can criticize white people and the white working class or underclass, you could even say, and not receive any kind of pushback.
It's probably sort of Mary Douglas kind of degrees of power.
You say, I can't wait till these people die out.
Or the old white man.
I triggered some leftists on some Twitter debate recently where I'd argued about breeding patterns and this kind of thing.
I'd argue that the wonderful thing about these spiteful mutants is they don't tend to breed.
And various spiteful mutants got very upset about that.
And were saying how terrible this was.
And then somebody accused that person of basically being a...
You know, why haven't you got children?
They said you're a sort of failure as an organism or some term like that.
And the person said, oh, well, I've got more interesting things in life than having children or something like that.
And I said, OK, yeah, but you're not going to pass on your genes.
And then the guy said, yeah, well, have you heard of...
I've passed on my genes.
Yeah, well, have you heard of dysgenics?
And then he soon realised, and I just went, wow, just wow.
And he soon realized that he probably shouldn't have said that because he was, of course, implicitly saying, you know, you're dysgenic and whatever in this whole discourse.
And he deleted his comment.
He then deleted his comment.
So he was triggered into his genuine worldview.
It's very interesting.
So yeah, there should be a clear list of who you can and can't criticize, what words you can and can't say about who.
That would be a decent, honest aside.
During this...
You know, a signing ceremony of the executive order.
Actually, Mark Levin, who's this really annoying conservative voice, actually announced Trump as the first Jewish president of the United States, which I thought was also remarkable.
He's not the king of the Jews.
That was Jesus Christ.
That's something very different.
But he is the king of Israel.
As Trump announced in his tweet, he is the ultimate Gentile man for at least Israeli nationalism.
He's obviously hated passionately by the kind of more assimilated...
Not exactly Zionist, sometimes Zionist, liberal Jews in the United States.
He's hated by them with a passion.
But in terms of the Bibi Netanyahu type Jew, the Israeli nationalist, a man who reaches out to Christian Zionists and sees them as the foundation of his voting bloc, Trump is the king of Israel.
And that is quite remarkable.
Not exactly what I voted for.
But maybe I should have been smarter.
I should have seen it coming because there were more than enough signs to see it coming.
You should have voted for Hillary as we should have voted for Corbyn in an attempt to create a backlash.
Perhaps.
So regarding things being made clearer, we were going to talk about YouTube's terms of services being changed.
And I know we touched on the topic briefly a moment ago.
But five days ago, YouTube changed their terms of service to say that they could terminate accounts which aren't commercially viable.
No one seems to know what that means.
Have you read anything else about it?
I think this whole situation is terribly ambiguous.
Pulled in different directions.
YouTube, when it first emerged, before it was bought by Google, really was, as the name implied, user-generated content.
It was about people like us making these videos.
You know, expressing opinions and having fun, etc.
And YouTube, over the years, is increasingly going in the direction of, say, Netflix.
YouTube creates original content.
YouTube is now prioritizing mainstream content because the old-line media, the CNN, Fox News, etc., they understand that YouTube is the dominant platform, much, much bigger than TV at this point, and they want to take a part of it.
And I think there are, and then there's the kind of woke leftists working in the Google bureaucracy who are arbitrarily haphazardly censoring people and so on.
I think YouTube is being pulled in all of these different directions.
Just the other day, Susan, I can't pronounce, it starts with a W, I can't pronounce her last name, was on 60 Minutes, which is an old line media program in the United States, maybe the oldest line news program.
And she was being berated by this woman named Leslie Stahl for not censoring enough, effectively.
Whereas, you know, our perspective on this is that the censoring is absolutely terrible.
So there is just, YouTube is being pulled in multiple directions.
I think maybe five or six years ago, YouTube and Twitter wanted to be these free speech platforms where they would not censor even if something was kind of false or toxic.
They have now been forced into a position where they are now the mainstream media, and they don't quite know what to do with all this.
So I think that there's just going to be more ambiguity going forward.
I want to stay on the platform because we don't want to be cordoned off into BitChute.
It's great.
I love it.
We want to be where the action is.
We want to reach new people.
We want to reach smart people.
We don't want to just be in a ghetto like Gab or any of those things.
But it's going to be tough.
There's going to be more ambiguity.
And I do think it...
On some kind of devious label, the ambiguity is a feature and not a bug of this system.
By keeping things ambiguous, they keep us on our toes and on eggshells.
We're afraid to talk about something that we might want to talk about.
We feel kind of beholden to them.
We want to stay.
We kind of want to go and so on.
I think it is a kind of psychological warfare going on.
And so I think this...
Terrible, ambiguous status quo is going to exist for a long time.
But I would say this.
The catalyst for all this really was Trump's election in the sense that...
And it was Charlottesville to a degree, but it was really Trump's election in the sense that the concept of fake news...
The concept of you have all of these bad actors using social media and hijacking the conversation.
And there are people who are in these silos where they're feeding each other news, whether it's fake or not, or opinions, whether it's good or not.
And they're not...
They're not getting the dominant narrative, but maybe they're also not getting the truth either.
And this is a kind of social phenomenon which I think is genuinely problematic.
But that Trump winning by doing an end run around the mainstream media, that is the fundamental catalyst for all of this.
So I would publicly announce that I can't stand Trump.
I'm not trying to help him win.
YouTube and Twitter, you should just keep us on.
We are not helping the dictator-in-chief, the orange man, who is bad.
So I think it's very clear that they don't want us to know what the rules are, because obviously if they tell us the rules, we can make sure that we don't say the certain things, we don't get suspended.
And you do feel apprehensive about uploading content, because some of the videos that I make, it might take me 10 or 20 hours to make one, and I do sometimes think...
What's the point?
If I upload it and it gets suspended, what is the point?
And I know that a lot of content creators have sort of backed off themselves and moved over to other platforms such as BitChute.
Are you still on YouTube, Ed?
Are you still uploading regular videos?
I am, although I've got a sword of Damocles hanging over me until February for doing a video which they monetized and then left up for months and months and months and then decided to say a speech for no apparent reason.
But I think that these things work in cycles.
I mean, Facebook was the big thing in 2006, 2007.
Now, no self-respecting teenager would be on Facebook.
It's for the old silly people.
Once people like my parents, i.e.
their grandparents, went on it, then what do you do?
It's not fashionable anymore.
And I suspect that a similar kind of thing, YouTube's been going now for a decade, and I suspect that a similar kind of thing is likely to happen with YouTube, as it is realised that it's less about...
From the right-wing perspective, yeah, you can't express yourself.
It's anti-free speech.
And from the left-wing sort of...
I actually really disagree with that.
I think Facebook, despite the fact that Facebook is no longer cool, I do think that it's here to stay.
I think that chaotic period in Silicon Valley is now past.
And what is happening is consolidation on these platforms and also this just slow but steady linear decline of cable news, effectively.
They are moving towards YouTube.
They are moving towards the apps that you can buy on their channel away from cable.
Apps like HBO and...
Hulu and Netflix, etc.
And that we're kind of seeing a consolidation where 10 years from now, YouTube is probably going to be a lot more like Netflix and it is going to be mainstream.
And actually paying for cable or not to mention...
I think it's going to consolidate.
I agree.
I hope so.
And perhaps that thing will itself then become monetized and will become degenerate and will fall.
But there'll always be a space.
There's a space in the market.
And I think we're in a situation now of this change.
Personally, I've only been on there for a year, but I much prefer watching things.
I mean, BitChute is a difficult search and there's all kinds of problems with it.
But I much prefer watching content that's on there simply because it's on there.
And I feel kind of...
It's kind of violated having to watch something on YouTube.
And once people start uploading old TV programs and things like that, which are copyright infringements, onto BitChute, then there'll be, for me, there'll be no reason to go onto YouTube other than to watch Sky News or something.
Which, of course, I used to have watched on television.
Right.
So I think, yeah, I think it will work.
But it will be sad because we'll be giving it over to the left.
I mean, you know, there are major left-wing YouTube channels, the Young Turks, the, you know, majority reporters.
I don't think that would say that.
Something law, if something isn't explicitly left-wing, then it will always become left-wing.
Yeah.
Various reasons.
Things tend to get pushed.
People virtue signal, whatever, and this creates an arms race, and so things tend to get pushed in an ever more left-wing direction.
And they're not being censored.
No, and right-wing people, well, they can be censored on some things if they advocate terrorism.
Right-wing people are more kind of cognitively complex than left-wing people.
These Jonathan Hyde, these five or whatever it is, moral foundations, and we have all of them, whereas they only have three of them.
And so consequently, there's a degree to which we can empathize with them and they can't empathize with us.
And so things will therefore get pushed in a more left-wing direction unless it's explicitly stopped.
And that was the brilliant thing about the American Constitution or whatever, that you have this explicit no free speech guarantee since 1791 or whatever it is, and that's it.
And so it's kind of explicitly, well, not left-wing.
At the time, it was a liberal perspective, of course, but if that wasn't there, you'd be down the road of Britain or Finland long ago.
So you two might not know about this.
I would hope that you wouldn't anyway.
But the big thing on YouTube at the moment is makeup videos.
So there are accounts like Jeffree Star, Tati, James Charles.
Nikkie tutorials.
And they've got tens of millions of subscribers.
And, you know, there's so much revenue coming in through adverts and stuff.
So maybe YouTube will just end up being this platform that's full of videos of how to do the perfect winged eyeliner or what I bought from Topshop, that kind of stuff.
I've actually seriously thought about just doing an unboxing video while we're doing a live stream.
So I'm just like, look at my new iPhone 11 or whatever.
And then we just talk about, like, racing.
I did one.
When they banned me, I did this satirical video.
Perhaps a YouTube video.
Perhaps a makeup tutorial.
I talked about these toys belonging to my son, these two robots, and I thanked all my...
It was like, yeah, all this, you know, and I felt like I was inspired by this one I saw of this utterly vacuous girl who had...
700,000 views or something for this inanity where she just talked about her feelings and stuff.
And she was sitting there with this sort of goth-looking weirdo.
And I wondered if I should culminate by saying, I love you guys, you're so fun, I love you, and then just going, I cut myself sometimes because I'm sad.
Okay, bye!
But then I thought that might get another strike, you know, so I better not.
It's a weird thing that is, you could say, kind of...
It's related also to the hyper-real, which is this concept.
I mean, Zizek has talked about it among others, but it's...
It's not so much that social media or online video is a kind of extension of your life or a supplement.
It's almost a real replacement where you are living online.
And I see this a lot among millennials and Zoomers, probably a little bit less among my generation or certainly boomers.
But again, it's not just that they're online all the time or tweeting.
It's that that online clout that they create It becomes their life.
And that online persona becomes more important, more developed, more complex than who they are as a person IRL.
And again, I think this is a very bad thing.
But I think just in terms of niche culture, I mean, look, if this video gets 10,000 views, I'd be perfectly fine with it.
If it gets 20,000, great!
If it gets 100,000, oh my god, we must have really been...
But keep in mind that that's pretty much all this will get.
There are people doing insane...
Oh, Ira in real life.
There are people doing...
Insanely stupid, weird personal confessionals or makeup tutorials or unboxing of electronic items or so on that have audiences in the tens of millions on a consistent basis.
Much more than CNN or the New York Times.
Unlike myself and Richard, you've got some slap on there.
Did you have the foresight to film yourself putting it on?
I didn't, but maybe I should start filming myself, putting my makeup on, and I'll just talk about repatriation or something at the same time.
Yeah.
Subtly, I think that's the thing to do.
Talk about something that's base while...
So there are videos on YouTube which have, like, 50 million views where they're just talking about something so basic, like, I was going to make this eyeshadow palette and then somebody else did it with the same colours and now I've fallen out with them.
And people are so engrossed in this drama.
And it's a reflection of our society, really, that people are watching just such garbage.
And they're so engrossed in it.
But it's not just that.
Because, look, garbage TV is not new.
You know, people, guys watch...
Football games or whatever.
But it's that their online life has replaced their real life.
So there have been studies of millennials have no friends and literally have no connection.
But they have these false, hyper-real friends online where they care about this tranny putting on makeup or they care about some...
personal confessional.
That is their friendship.
So much of our own friendships are pretty mundane and You get that.
You got that to a lesser extent, though, with television, though, didn't you?
Sure.
Lonely people for whom the newsreader was kind of like a friend.
Or people who, when they used to have the clothes down at night on the BBC at about half past eleven, it used to go, and the weather tomorrow is predicted to be blah, blah.
Anyway, lads, I hope you're having a good time.
The football battle.
And goodnight.
And then there'd be God Save the Queen.
And then the television would shut.
And people would stay up for that.
Her Majesty put you to bed.
Now that they don't have it anymore, of course.
But so yeah, it's just become It's a hyper-real existence where you have no friends in real life or no connection to community, but you have a simulacrum by photographing yourself doing something,
putting it on Instagram, or listening to the mundane Personal confessional of someone that you feel like you know, but whom you don't.
And again, it is a truly bizarre thing.
We have these conferences that these people who I watch on YouTube or they watch me and we meet.
We normally get along.
So it's a real thing as well as a hyper real.
So can we wrap it up?
That's it.
I think we can just say, boom.
▲
Export Selection