All Episodes
Previous Next
April 10, 2021 - RadixJournal - Richard Spencer
40:37
Where Are They?

Ed and Richard discuss the possibilities of alien life in the universe. If they're out there, where are they? And if they come here, might they conquer and kill us? Moreover, will we ever be "they"? What historical cycles prevent humanity—and maybe all life in the universe—from achieving galactic dominance? 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

| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Michio Kaku, that's his name.
Michio Kaku.
I have a book by him here.
He thinks we will discover alien life in the next 100 years because he's very, very optimistic.
He writes books with titles like The Physics of the Impossible.
But he thinks that if we do so, we should probably be quite cautious about...
About it because they might wipe us out.
And he gave the example of Cortez and how Cortez was welcomed by the king of the Aztecs and then Cortez just displaced the king of the Aztecs and they all died of disease and whatever and were generally conquered.
So the Aztecs didn't do very well from coming into contact with a superior civilization and nor might we.
Oh, of course not.
No.
And that's what's got us thinking about this, folks.
We'll be right back.
All right, Ed, how are you?
Yes, all right.
Did you have a good Easter?
I did, yes.
I went to church.
You know, I'm an Episcopalian, as you know.
Kind of the ultimate Episcopalian in the sense that we don't actually believe.
No, the ultimate Episcopalian simply believes in wasps.
Yeah, exactly.
He believes in and worships wasps.
That's it.
Yeah, exactly.
Our wasp god.
No, it was very nice and ate way too much candy.
I'm kind of starving myself for the next couple days because I ate so much candy that I was like, by 5pm, I was on the verge of total collapse.
Right, but my experience of American chocolate is that it doesn't have any sugar in it anyway, so I don't suppose that it would have had that much of an effect, would it?
Well, we did have Cadbury Cream Eggs.
Oh, do they have those in America?
Yes, they do.
Well, I think so.
I love them.
They're only available around Easter time, but I love those.
Yes, they are.
We used to have a boy on my road when I was about 10, and we used to call him Cadbury's Cream Egg because he had brown hair, but he had a white circle of hair at the top.
His nickname was Cream Egg.
That's nice.
So have you been vaccinated yet, Ed?
No.
Have you?
I've taken my first dose.
Oh, no, no.
We don't have any of this up our way because we don't have much corona up our way.
So there's no sort of pressure to get vaccinated.
I haven't received anything about this at all.
Interesting.
I took the first dose.
I think I did the Moderna, so I was a little bit sore in my arm, kind of weirdly.
Never been sore from a shot for that long.
But, I mean, not that it was a major thing.
But, yeah, no side effects.
Well, except, of course, Bill Gates now knows everything you think.
Well, I mean, if we want to reach stage three civilizations, microchips in our heads controlled by overlords is...
Step one.
I mean, your former fellow Montana resident, Mr. Kaczynski, who of course lived outside Lincoln, Montana, would not be happy about this at all.
I mean, this is exactly his nightmare coming true, and the only solution would be for him to send parcel bombs to random caretakers.
Yeah, absolutely.
Well, as you know, once you get a vaccination, Windows 95 basically plays in your consciousness.
Now, some people think that's a side effect.
I think it's a feature.
It's excellent to wake up in the morning and you wake up and you know it's time.
Anyway, should we move away from this nonsense?
All right.
So this is going to be an off-beat, off-the-beaten-track discussion.
Or maybe it's not.
Maybe it actually gets to the heart of what we care about.
So you sent me an interesting article from the scientist.
And he's really a public scientist.
He's kind of a Carl Sagan.
Michio Kaku.
You're holding a book of his.
I have actually never read one of his books.
I probably should.
I've seen a lot of his interviews and videos and he seems like a enlightening and also generally kind of fun guy as well.
I do consume a lot of popular science books but I haven't.
Read one of his.
But he basically said, he gave a warning, which is that, well, he showed optimism and a warning, which is that we likely will meet intelligent life out there of some kind, but actually we should be careful what we wish for.
So you can go on this, and then I have a couple of different things I want to talk about.
Fermi's Paradox, and then...
Stages of civilization.
But why don't you go on this?
Well, first of all, if the life was...
If he's saying this is going to happen within our lifetimes or whatever, which is what I inferred from the article, then it won't be us that is reaching this.
I mean, our intelligence is declining and we haven't...
We're not seriously sending people into space or even contemplating trying to find intelligent life anymore.
We've become decadent and focused, therefore, on harm avoidance and on equality and things on Earth.
So it would have to be, for the civilization to find us, they would have to be, not only would they have to be much, much more intelligent than us, which is extremely dangerous, because they might see us as dispensable and not worth bothering about.
And that was, the parallel he gave was when Cortez...
I found the Aztecs.
And the Aztecs, okay, I mean, they were in the ruins of a more advanced civilization, but they weren't a particularly advanced civilization themselves.
And as far as he was concerned, they were just rubbish.
And he was perfectly content to just...
The king of the Aztecs was quite friendly to him.
He simply displaced him, took over, tore down their shrines, spread all kinds of diseases they weren't used to, and killed them.
So it didn't go well, because there was a substantial difference in civilization, and therefore they looked out on them.
So I would think that that's going to be tenfold more if we're talking about a species that's capable of inter-solar system travel.
Well, I mean, but have you considered the fact that we invented feminism?
And they're going to need that.
So, you know, they would come with advanced interstellar technology.
We have feminism, so you're welcome.
Well, that brings me on to my second point.
First of all, it's very likely for them to be able to do this.
They would have to be far more intelligent than us.
Maybe they would have an average IQ of 120 or 130.
Maybe if we had the technology at our disposal that we had in the 60s, or now, and we had the same IQ that we had when we began the Industrial Revolution.
Then if that happened, then maybe we would be doing things like going to Venus.
Well, you couldn't land on Venus.
It's too viscous.
So just going there.
Mars, definitely.
Whatever.
We don't.
We did have that, but we don't.
So we don't have that.
So that's how much more intelligent they would be than us.
And that is a huge difference, 30 IQ points.
That's the difference between us and primitive tribes in Africa.
So that's the first thing.
That doesn't mean because we don't see them as dispensable, but when we were in our exploration phase...
When we were in the phase where we were not decadent, where we were in the autumn of our civilization, where the fruits of the civilization were coming in, then we did see ourselves as superior.
We did see ourselves as better.
We did see these other people as dispensable and beneath us.
We had our racial theories and stuff like this.
We were into eugenics and all that kind of thing.
And so we approached Africa with that in mind.
And that being the case, we were happy to exploit them.
We were happy to just take over their lands.
We were happy to enslave them, although it should be emphasised that they also enslaved each other.
But there we are.
We were perfectly happy to do that.
We were happy to treat them as a sort of, not a subspecies, but as a lesser kind of human.
And these were people that were genetically closely related to us, that were genetically similar to us, relatively speaking, as part of a religion which preached that we're all equal in the eyes of God or whatever.
I mean, it's later the 1950s that the Archbishop of Canterbury in England stated when he came back from Africa that all are equal in the love of God, but not in the eyes of God.
And he said that with reference to these Africans.
So that would be, if they were in that phase of civilization, they would be high in group-oriented values, high in ethnocentrism, high in cold, rational logic and classification and all this stuff.
And so they'd be perfectly happy to enslave us, or at least to exploit us and take us over and take charge of us, as we did to people with that kind of IQ difference.
But they're a different species.
They've no genetic similarity to us at all.
And one of the things that predicts being nice to people and being kind to people and bonding with people is genetic similarity.
So in that sense, we shouldn't compare our relationship to them to the Victorian white man's relationship with black people.
It's more comparable to our relationship with dolphins or something.
Yeah, I mean, when we go to bees, we don't have any trouble basically taking them out of their natural habitat, putting them into giant boxes, and then harvesting their honey.
No one has any moral qualms with that.
I was just guessing on that IQ difference that would be necessary.
I mean, it's probably more.
It might be more and it might just be different.
I mean, okay, here are some...
Because I want to add something about the intelligence.
I actually don't...
Obviously, intelligence is an indispensable quality of this, but I don't think it's actually sufficient for this kind of adventure.
But let me just mention a couple of things.
And this is basically Fermi's paradox, which can be summed up in the line, where are they?
So there are 100 billion galaxies that we can, at least estimated, that we can...
But we're separated from them through such distances that into some of them it would actually take millions of years to get there, even if we were traveling at close to the speed of light.
So now, might there be some other form of travel that we haven't...
Quite grasp a kind of dune-like folding space or something like that.
Maybe, but that is obviously beyond us.
But there are, in the Milky Way, there are basically 500 billion stars.
So the Milky Way itself, our own galaxy, is huge.
And then the estimate from scientists, and so obviously take all of this with a grain of salt, but this kind of gets us.
The estimate is that there are 100 million stars that could have planets that resemble, say, our solar system that could thus have life.
Now, if only a tiny percentage of these did actually develop through...
This miracle of life generating on a planet, then there should be people out there, and they've had enough time to evolve and to conceivably begin a colonization project.
So Fermi's paradox is a kind of, where are they?
Are we alone in the universe?
Yes, life to develop is already, you know, the odds are against it.
It's already a kind of miracle.
There are enough chances for it to develop.
Go ahead.
But the potential solution to Fermi's paradox is that, well, there's two solutions.
One is that these different space-going civilizations will never meet because they...
Because they will all go through the cycle of civilization, of the rise and fall of civilization, always.
Even if they get a species that's intelligent enough to have civilization, it won't have civilization for more than fleeting periods of time.
Followed by long periods of dark age and then a fleeting period of time where it might be possible to do something like that or even get close to it.
And so they will therefore never come into contact because for them to come into contact realistically in anything other than a destructive way, you'd have to have two civilizations that were in exactly the same sort of place.
At the same time, that's very unlikely.
The second solution to Fermi's paradox is simply that it is impossible to ever...
The evolutionary forces necessary to achieve that kind of high-level intelligence, intelligence is never able to go far enough to engage in that kind of interstellar travel.
Because civilization always collapses before we become that intelligent.
When we're in the phase where we might be intelligent enough to do something like that, that's when our breakthrough of the Industrial Revolution takes place.
And therefore, by the time we have the sort of technology that might allow us to do things like that, we've become decadent and we've stopped bothering and we start to go backwards.
And then I think the third thing which might be relevant is simply that the nature of intelligence precludes this ever happening.
Because the level of intelligence that would seemingly be required to do that would be so massive.
And it seems that intelligence is maladaptive when it becomes too high.
Because what you invest, you take away.
Energy from other things.
And so people that have super high intelligence.
Again, I refer you back to your fellow Montanitan, Ted Kuczynski.
This was a person who had an IQ of 170, something like that.
He was super, super duper intelligent.
And look at the result.
These are not the kind of people that seem to be consistent with building up civilization.
High intelligence is associated with autism, it's associated with mental illness, it's associated with all kinds of things being wrong.
So I don't think we could ever become intelligent enough, or if we could become intelligent enough, we would become intelligent, that intelligent, in the wake of an appalling ice age.
And therefore, at the end of that appalling ice age, we would be sort of hunter-gatherers or farmers or something like that.
And it would take us time to get the technology.
And by the time we got the technology, our intelligence would be falling.
So I think there's a number of reasons why it can't happen.
Yeah, well, there does seem to be these recurring tendencies.
And we can talk about spiteful mutants and so on, but...
If you look back at world history, it's something like the Bronze Age collapse.
Remember, we shouldn't underestimate the intelligence and engineering genius of the distant ancient world in the sense of these Bronze Age civilizations.
Egypt being one of the most magnificent.
I mean, the ability to create the pyramids.
But that's not Bronze Age, though, is it?
That's Stone Age.
I'm talking about the Bronze Age.
No, Pyramids is not Bronze Age.
Pyramids is earlier.
Okay, well...
And that's why...
No, it's important, because that's why there is this belief among certain, what's called conspiratoria, there's a guy called Hancock, his name is, and he's done a series of books in which he argues that there was a technological civilization that existed in the Stone Age, and that actually it wasn't the Stone Age at all, and that they had lasers.
And that they were a high-technology civilization.
And some people have gone on from this to argue that they were actually aliens.
And so aliens have come here, and aliens built the pyramids.
Okay.
All right.
I'll leave that there.
That's not even opposed to what I was trying to say.
But what I was saying is the Bronze Age collapse is one of the most...
Mysterious events.
And it does seem to lead to a kind of collapse of complex societies thesis, in which societies get to a point where the intelligence is not high enough to maintain them.
That in some ways, the technology that they're developing is leading them into a certain...
is leading to certain demands that the people aren't...
Successful enough to accomplish.
With the Bronze Age collapse, you had the collapse of all of these magnificent empires.
You had the rapid decline in literacy, rapid decline of history writing so that we can actually know what is happening.
All of this happened over the course of about a generation.
It's a remarkable thing.
Then we, of course, had the ancients as we generally think of them, in the sense of the development of Greece and Rome.
But we had similar collapses of these amazing imperial structures.
I think a reasonable hypothesis for it is climate change.
So you had a situation where it had been extremely cold.
That creates intelligent people.
Those intelligent people create the Bronze Age.
Then it starts to get warm.
That means the intelligence starts to go down, but the population can grow and can grow hugely.
And then it starts to get cold again.
And when it starts to get cold again, you get an absolutely catastrophic collapse.
It seems that there's some evidence it got cold because of a volcanic eruption.
So there was a nuclear winter.
And this set off all kinds of things, this movement of peoples known as the Sea Peoples and all of this sort of stuff.
You don't know who they are.
This is such an amazing...
Yeah.
There's speculation who they are, but we don't know exactly who they were.
Pirate.
And so you end up with these harried inability to get the whole system, which was based around bronze, starts to be replaced with iron.
And so people, the whole system falls apart very, very quickly.
And loads and loads of people die.
Huge collapse in population.
Once that happens, then all these people whose jobs are based around the city don't have jobs.
So they flee the cities.
The cities...
All these people die.
They go back to a simpler way of life.
800-year dark age.
And then towards the end of that dark age, people have no idea how they built these tall buildings and they believe that giants built them.
Right.
And you get that again and again throughout history, this belief of giants built, this belief in giants, because the people become so stupid that they don't comprehend how these things are built until later when they rediscover their history and they work out what went on.
Right.
And we're worshipping a god that emerged during that period, I'll just mention.
It isn't that kind of problematic.
I think that's the period in which this religion emerged, the Bronze Age collapse, and presumably the previous collapse, whatever it was, Egypt, 4000 BC, whatever, every thousand years or so you seem to get some kind of collapse.
Would be similar.
And you get these giants again and again, even in the Bible.
And there, there seems to be a reference.
That was written towards the end of the Bronze Age, sorry, around that time of that collapse.
And you seem to get this reference, this mythology, whereby when humans were put on Earth after the fall, there were these people there called the Watchers, the Nephilim.
And they were giants.
And they were gods.
They had sex with men.
So you've got this idea of this older civilization, which is believed to be giants.
I wonder if that's a reference to the pyramids.
I'm not understanding how they got about.
But it's fascinating.
But as I say, I think that the Fermi's paradox can be solved by the rise and fall of civilizations.
We have this belief, scientists have this belief that we can just progress forever because they don't understand how necessarily how these civilizations...
Isn't what's holding us back?
There's Fermi's paradox, which is about them, which is why aren't there other species of some kind?
I mean, maybe even non-carbon-based life forms in the sense that we can't fully understand who they are.
There's also another solution to Fermi's paradox is that they're already here.
And we don't know about it, or they visit us in previous times, etc.
But then there's also the question about us.
And I think...
You know, intelligence is obviously an essential component of rising to a stage where you're not just controlling energy on this planet, but you're actually harnessing the energy of our star, that is the sun.
And this is the Kardashev stages, which I was just reading about.
He was actually a Soviet scientist who was exploring this.
But there is this question about us and why can't we do it?
I think there are some kind of...
Built-in, natural aspects that will create cycles.
You can think about climate change, complex society being impossible to maintain at some point because intelligence doesn't catch up.
The general population intelligence doesn't catch up to the kind of IQ that is needed to maintain civilization.
But there might be other factors just in the sense of political factors and moral factors.
The United States did have a kind of autumn period, which is a good way of putting it, where we were harvesting all of these things.
And there were politicians like JFK talking about a new frontier, the space program.
even if you want to view this as kind of, you know, competition with the Soviets or vainglory or whatever, it at least was...
It seems to be now that, I mean, there's first off a push towards private enterprise and space.
Bezos is involved in this.
Elon Musk is more famously involved in this.
But there seems to be these political and moral dimensions which hold us back from completing a stage one civilization that is harnessing all of the power of the earth, and that would include nuclear power.
Yeah, I think that what did it was that we became too individualist.
And I think there were two...
So you've got to think about...
People don't think about the history of the space race.
All the men that were killed.
All the men that were killed in an attempt to get to...
In accidents and things like this.
And the risk that it would go wrong and people would die.
And we're just averse to that now.
We're too individualistic.
Now, why has that happened?
Well, one reason, as you say, spiteful mutations or mutation in general, which is a mutation away from being highly group-oriented, which means that we're more individualist at a genetic level.
And the second is that because of...
The better conditions collapse in religiousness because of low stress.
Religiousness promotes group orientation.
And a third is that these individualistic genetic people spread their maladaptive ideas throughout society.
Whatever the reasons, eventually you get to a tipping point, and I think that happened in about 1963, where you tip over into being a highly individualistic society.
It's not the first time this has happened.
I mean, you had something like this perhaps around about the fall of Rome.
In which, indeed, Gnosticism was very similar to modern-day multiculturalism in a lot of ways.
And so then there's this focus on individualizing against the good of the group, and that's what seems to be inevitable.
That hadn't happened yet.
It was happening, but it hadn't fully happened yet by the time we managed to get into space, which was the 50s in the Soviet Union, and then get to the moon in 1969, and then go to the moon again a few times in the early 70s.
It's all petered out.
There's this man, his last name is Zubrin, he's actually a Jewish emigre who makes very compelling Obviously, nuclear power...
Is sitting out there as something that people are irrationally afraid of, which also that irrational fear leads to this dependence upon the Middle East.
Well, again, America produces a lot of fossil fuel, but still a focus on the Middle East as this place that we need to care about, a place of huge wealth as well.
And there just doesn't seem to be any political will.
And I know this is a small thing, but there was a tweet not too long ago from Bernie Sanders, and I have some sympathy towards Bernie Sanders, I think.
A lot of what he says is very decent.
But it was this tweet against Elon Musk of basically, well, space travel is all fine and good, but we've got to take care of these problems down here on Earth.
There's a famous song during the space age of Whitey on the moon, which is like, we're down here being oppressed and all you bastards are flying into outer space.
There just seems to be this resentment.
And again, I understand the resentment on some level, but it's resentment which will endlessly hold us back.
So it's not just a matter of intelligence, it's a matter of psychology.
Yeah, yeah, precisely.
But that psychology is, well, it's partly a matter of intelligence in the sense that as intelligence goes down, you trust people less and you become more resentful and nasty and selfish.
So it could partly be a matter of declining intelligence.
But secondly, yes, it's not just intelligence.
It's the crumbling genome, which means greater individualism, which means less trust, which means less cooperation, which means more of these focusing on these individualizing values of equality, runaway individualism, and general madness.
And there's another factor which we should forget as well, which is what we had with the space race was the most intelligent minds of the time getting together in a meritocracy, basically, and coming up with these brilliant ideas and putting them into action and doing them.
Whereas what you get, and that was in a period where we had it under our highly group-oriented system that you had that held sway until, I don't know, 1850 or something.
You didn't promote the best under that system.
You had the religion and you promoted the people on almost a religious basis.
So the aristocracy was upheld by the religiosity and people would get positions in society, not because they were the best, but because they were nobles or something like that.
Now, then this system collapses.
You have a period of meritocracy where you believe in truth and you promote people because they're the best.
And now we have a new religion, individualism.
And so even if we were intelligent enough...
To be able to come up with these things, which I doubt.
We no longer encourage genius.
We suppress it because of individualism trumping it.
And we don't promote the best anymore.
We've gone back to a system of promoting the aristocracy.
But it's the new inverted aristocracy of women and black people and homosexuals.
And so even if we were intelligent enough, which we're probably not, still we've got that problem as well, which is that we're not even trying to be the best anymore.
I mean, you see it even in all areas of life, even in commercials on TV.
They've stopped trying to persuade people to buy things.
I mean, how are you persuading people because they want to score woke brownie points?
How are you persuading women to buy a product if you're getting a load of fat, ugly women in their pants?
And saying, oh, they use this soap, so should you.
Well, they're going to think, I'm not a fat ugly woman.
People want to be associated with success and beauty.
And so I think that all of these things come together.
And the period in which you might have a combination of the necessary intelligence and the necessary group orientation and the necessary martial values to do things like this and possibly reach another civilization is such a narrow window that in the expanse of space, the possibility that you're going to get far enough to meet another...
Remotely advanced species, you know, maybe animals or something, but a similarly advanced species is just vanishing.
Unless, I mean, again, there are answers to it, but these answers are, they make too much sense in a way.
They're obvious, but...
They're also seemingly impossible.
I mean, one of the answers is eugenics in the sense that we have passed through a singularity in the sense of just natural selection of the environment holding sway.
And things that used to hold in natural selection have actually been reversed.
Up until the Industrial Revolution, the most intelligent, the most successful were outbreeding the least successful.
The aristocrats were outbreeding the peasants and they were doing it by a lot.
I think this is my little pet theory that this was the origin of the prima nocta myth, in the sense that the aristocrat was always, he's breeding even with your own wife.
You know, pre-Menochtone, yeah.
But pre-Menochtone never actually occurred throughout history, but that myth was always there.
It gave us operas like The Marriage of Figaro, so it was worth something.
But we've gotten to a point where really the reverse is the case.
The most intelligent are not breeding successfully.
The least intelligent, the more likely to be on welfare, the more likely to not be self-sufficient or productive are outbreeding.
They're productive.
It is horrifying.
But we are conscious of it.
We were conscious of it in Rome, and we were conscious of it in Greece.
I mean, they write about it at the time.
I know, but still, can't it be different this time?
I mean, when you're conscious of something, that is how you solve that problem.
A, the eugenics program is absolutely necessary.
But B, we might need to have a new type of religious paradigm that doesn't emerge.
From a scattered, wandering people after the Bronze Age collapse.
And it might need to focus on the sun in the sense that to get to a second stage of civilization, it will be in some ways harnessing the power of the sun without destroying it.
And thus, a new kind of solar religion would be the one that would help us get there.
Because I think that...
Unless we are reaching stage two or a galactic civilization, unless we are the them in the sense that we are the ones traveling beyond our sphere, then what are we even doing down here?
We're literally down here to help people avoid harm or just live their...
Content, yet ultimately meaningless lives just rumbling around in the mud?
Unless we're advancing, then what are we doing?
That's exactly right, but that's why so many people have this melee of late civilization, because they've just given up and there's no point.
And that's how a lot of people, the aristocracy anyway, in late Rome would have felt.
And so they would engage themselves with these silly mystery cults and things like this, sort of surrogate activities.
But ultimately, there was no point.
And we create this evolutionary mismatch.
And then it was actually Ted Kaczynski, I mean, mad and vicious as he was.
He did make a number of...
I hate to say it, but he did make a number of good points, which is that you create an evolutionary mismatch and you give people antidepressants to solve the evolutionary mismatch which you've created.
Right.
Or which the system has created.
I'm interested in...
I'm researching for this book we're doing on zombies and the zombie apocalypse.
The future of this.
And what I see is that the more intelligent and the more right-wing will come apart.
And they will be group-selected.
And so whether they, from their retreat...
Of civilization into smaller areas will learn.
It's possible, I suppose.
Well, we need to, and we have to.
We're conscious of it, therefore we need to do it.
And I think maybe what we need to do is conquer this planet, in the sense that we've allowed this planet not to be under our control.
For too long.
And we've created this unhappiness and this kind of, you know, medicine that cures the poison in the sense of, you know, here, let me give you antidepressants for the problem that I've just solved.
This is the Caducean in a nutshell.
We haven't been in control for a long time, actually, of our own planet.
And, you know, maybe we do need to kind of...
Get away and go to a redoubt and reform.
But at the end of the day, we're going to have to force all of these people to our will in order to advance our mission on this planet, which is interstellar travel.
Sorry, as usual, I'm being bombastic, but I usually get there around the 30-minute mark.
Well, you've taken 40, but it's all right.
It's all that chocolate.
Slow down your metabolism.
But, yes, I think that is...
You need to have a mission, and normally that mission is to just get enough food.
And once you've got...
I'd get sex.
And those are the most basic missions.
And as long as you've got those, then you can see how melee...
It hits in.
And it doesn't hit in if you feel you're on the up.
And that's what we felt for a very long time, that we're on the up.
It's getting better.
It's getting better.
We've got into space now.
We've got to the moon now.
And then there's this change.
And even when we were going into space, you have people campaigning, moaning about, we'll concentrate on black people's rights.
Why are you on the moon?
No, widely on the moon.
And no, the next step just needs you to keep going.
And I just think that it's impossible unless all of this current woke stuff is reversed.
It will reverse itself in that those people, those individualists, whatever, they don't breed.
But the problem is that clever people also don't breed.
And they're more likely to be sucked in by whatever the dominant ideology is.
And so I think...
I can only offer a sort of grey pill.
There's not a white pill.
There's going to be a collapse in intelligence.
There's going to be a movement backwards, but it might not be as bad a collapse as before.
As more intelligent people move out to places like...
Refuges in parts of America and whatever.
I mean, the next stage, I'm thinking as well, that's another thing.
As everything becomes more woke-ified, I mean, you're going to get a situation where doctors now in America are going to be taught to be woke, but not actual useful medical knowledge.
So the result of that is going to be people fleeing to places that do have proper doctors.
And the police are taught to be woke.
So the result of that is going to be the rise of militias.
It's going to be the rise of sort of retinues where you pay protection.
And once you get that kind of thing, then you get effectively separate states.
And I think we're moving towards that.
And so intelligent people separating themselves off from the stupid people would be a start.
Do you think that China, because it is a nation run by engineers as opposed to a nation run by lawyers and academics in a way that...
The United States is.
In China, there's at least a potential for the type of technological advancements that are necessary.
They've been faster implementing a lot of things because they don't give a damn.
They just kind of do it.
But they only have a short window as well because we have data on that.
We know their indigenic fertility intelligence is next to the associated breeding in China.
So we know that's happening.
They're in their autumn, basically.
They've got to get on with it.
They need us, I think.
They can't think originally and creatively.
That's not what they're good at.
So we would be kind of like Greeks to their Romans, and they would have to bring us in to do things.
And if that were to happen, then yes, that perhaps would...
And they would promote the best as well.
That's another thing.
There's a problem there is they are corrupt.
So do they promote the best?
Not always.
But then they are further behind in the decadence.
But the decadence is definitely coming.
So if they're going to do something, they have to strike out quickly.
Or they won't be able to do it because it's coming.
▲
Export Selection