In this very special New Year's episode of Alexandria, gifts are both given and requested. While Richard has generously made Alex U a free gift to all subscribers, a question must now be asked of us all in those “immortal” words of Walter Donovan, it's time to ask ourselves: "What do we believe?"Apollo’s cause is one that the powers that be will forever be unsympathetic to. If the days of the alt-right proved to us anything, it is that we cannot rely on a secret allied billionaire hiding just across the horizon; for the cavalry is not coming over the ridge. It is up to us to free ourselves and save ourselves.With that in mind, every one of us can make a difference for our people. We can all support this noble cause. Though an unemployed college student, I have been, for years, committed to giving $25 a month to Alexandria for the enlightenment of the Aryan race. Surely, there are some among you can do better than my meagre sum.Mark, Richard, and myself want nothing better than for more and more of our people to feel the warmth of Apollo’s light. With your help, my comrades, brothers, and sisters, I believe that can be achieved. Together, and only together, can we create real change, real growth, and real truth in this world. Hail Apollo, Hail Victory, and Hail 2024:The year of Apollo’s Golden Dawn!https://donorbox.org/membership-2021 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
Just going to grant myself a cigarette on New Year's Eve.
Haven't smoked one of these in a while.
But, you know, you have to indulge a little bit.
No, I have to go in about two hours.
Maybe I'll save this.
Once things start to get interesting.
I have to go in about two hours to eat dinner with the family.
My sister and friends are up here and we're kind of doing a lot.
It's been interesting.
There really hasn't been much snow at all.
It's been remarkably dry.
I've never seen anything like this.
I've heard someone said it's like the driest it's been in 30 years.
So I went skiing once over the holiday with my son, and it was pretty remarkable.
Usually around this time, there's tons of snow and powder, but the mountain is not even open, and you have to kind of pick your way down.
It wasn't quite as bad as I thought it might be, but it is very unusual.
But it's actually snowing right now.
Just a little bit, though.
So hopefully something will happen.
Ul, the Norse pagan god of snow.
Maybe that's actually why this happened, because all of this coincides with our publishing that article on Norse paganism.
You're being punished.
Yeah. There's even a god of skiing, I think, in Norse myth as well.
I'm forgetting his name.
But yeah, there hasn't been a lot of snow around here either.
Nowhere across the country.
So it's like El Nino.
So it's a particular weather system.
And La Nina, and they're just these cycles that involve the, like, I don't know, vaulty oceans, I'm sure, and all sorts of things.
So supposedly nowhere in the country has gotten snow.
So it's very odd.
You were going to say the global warming hoax.
I don't know.
Yeah, I don't know.
I mean, that's not something I have studied very closely, the global warming controversies.
My father was a scientist, though, in a related field, and a kind of leader in a related field.
And I remember him, this was a while ago, though.
He's since passed away.
He said that he thought it was bullshit, and he was a kind of leading person in his field.
What did he think was bullshit?
The man-made quality of it?
The idea that we could fix it?
Or climate change?
Or the fact that it's happening?
Climate change is, I mean, that's a known phenomenon, of course.
Yeah. There have been ice ages and so forth, right?
So we know that the climate hasn't been consistent through all periods.
yeah so i guess the main the man-made element of it but um my mom would later say that he gave it some credence later on so i guess she had some conversation with him about it i mean i only had um one or two conversations with him about it so maybe he changed his view but i don't know i think that he might have also i don't know he might have also been being diplomatic with my mom or something i don't know uh but i remember i uh When it was becoming a
thing, he was sort of like,"This is horseshit," or whatever.
Or there was an element of bullshit, at least.
I don't doubt it.
And there's also a great deal of groupthink that goes on with these things, and you get funding, you get grants basically based on this.
Yeah, they're in study to fudge data, essentially.
Yeah. And it's self-serving on the part of climate change deniers to deny it because they are being funded by big oil or whatever.
Or they just want free capitalism everywhere.
So I think they're self-serving, but then the people promoting it are also self-serving.
And they've also made these claims that just...
I don't know.
I mean, 20 years ago, it was, you know, we've got 20 years, and it just starts to ring very hollow after they keep doing that.
I mean, I've talked with some true believers.
I mean, again, this is just totally outside of my field, but I mean, I've talked with new believers who just genuinely believe that there's going to be catastrophe coming very soon.
And it probably did come from a certain religious desire for that catastrophe.
Yeah. But you're right to say that it's, of course, politicized on both sides of the climate change debate.
So that's certainly the case.
But I think it was earlier politicized on the left, and then the right was kind of a reaction to it.
Yeah. So, and yes, it's definitely, there's an interest in getting grant money for research and so forth, right?
So it's incentivized from the left, from that perspective.
From the right, it's more, yeah, it's pandering to big oil and so forth.
Yeah, I mean, I just think it's really ill-conceived in the sense that it would be so much better to change the words that are used.
Such as to discuss nature as opposed to discussing the environment.
So to talk about how we must protect nature and we need to have a connection with nature and we want nature to be beautiful and livable.
We don't want to pollute it.
We don't want these just endless stores of plastic bottles going in the ocean and polluting the ocean, drowning.
Animal life, ruining the environment, even ruining the environment in the way that we participate in it.
I just think there's a lot of better ways it could have been done.
And it's conceived in this kind of like...
What's the right way of saying it?
it's conceived in this like quantitative way where it lends itself to doing things like, you know, carbon credit markets, et cetera, that are just clearly benefiting these, you know,
big companies where, you know, Goldman Sachs can create a market for carbon credits and companies can trade them.
And, you know, your pollution is worth this.
It's just awful.
I think we should just have a vision for what we want to see in the world and implement it.
And talk about people's participation in nature as opposed to talking about climate change is getting so bad, it's going to destroy us all imminently, etc., etc., etc.
It just becomes old.
Hold on one second.
I'm just going to let my dog out.
Bert, what's the latest?
What time is it there in Australia?
It's just after 10 a.m.
So I'm coming to you from the future, really.
And it's a whirlwind.
Yeah, yeah.
What happened?
Well, he's talking to us from 2020.
Oh, I know, I know, I know.
From the future.
Nothing's really happened except the local city councils declared an emergency weather warning.
So we might be guessing.
In keeping with the climate change theme for just a moment.
I was actually going to say on that point, probably to your work, Mark and Richard, I think climate change would actually be, I'm not sure how time-poor or otherwise you are, but if you were to sift through some of the paraphernalia which is put out there,
I think it would only add to your work because it is kind of a quasi-leftist.
I mean, the language sort of gives them away, to quote Daniel Dennett, because so much of it is sort of like quasi-religious or sort of outright religious.
It may be not quite in keeping with Christianity, but in certain respects it is.
I think there's almost like an out-of-Eden theme in a lot of their language, like previous to Catholicism and the Industrial Revolution, we were in Eden, and now we've departed because we've sort of...
Obtain this satanic knowledge.
Like, it does sort of flow from that without having to extrapolate too far and wide to get to those points.
But a lot of them are sort of quasi-gayer followers also.
Like, I remember everyone was heaping shit on Ellen DeGeneres where she was in front of this waterfall after a flood and she was sort of off on this lunatic rant about how we've angered the gods and Mother Nature is angry at us now.
But it might be a rich field for you to step into for a few hours, because there'd be some hilarious anecdotes you could under...
Well, is it Christian or pagan?
You know, conservatives always say that it's pagan, that they're worshipping Mother Earth, and etc., and kind of denying God.
Technically, it would be, technically, right?
Yeah. But you were almost suggesting that there's a Garden of Eden-like quality to it.
And that there's this sin of industry that we're paying for and God is angry and he's going to bring on the end times or something like that.
Yeah, well, a lot of its proponents originally in the 60s, 70s, 80s, from what I've sort of looked back at, were sort of original far leftist, you know, communists and stuff like avid anti-capitalists that sort of used it to pile on again.
Capitalism, for what you were just talking about.
I mean, for sort of like, you know, being right for the wrong reasons, I suppose.
I'm going to add to climate change.
I'm going to add to climate change.
Yeah, once a year.
No, no, no.
Keep talking.
I didn't want to interrupt you.
Well, that's all the material that I had prepared.
My other topics are Barbie and...
The state of footpaths and non-loaderals.
Okay. This is one thing that I did want to talk about.
I don't want to spend too much time begging, effectively.
But I do think that it's worthwhile going over...
What we did in 2023, what we're doing, because there's a lot that's just like these are horses chomping at the bit about to get out or go on their race.
And then I want to talk a little bit about how you all can support this stuff and become more participants, you know, more lively participants, that is, in all this.
I didn't know what was going to happen when I first got started with Substack.
And I kind of avoided Substack, to be honest.
So I had gone through just terrible trials trying to maintain anything because of post-2017, there was just a deplatforming war on and it just would not stop.
And I...
I think it was 2019 when this Russian company came out that was called Subscribestar.
And I still think Subscribestar exists to some degree.
And they were promising, like, you know, we're not Patreon.
You know, we will allow everyone.
We love free speech.
And it was, of course, a Russian company doing this.
And we went on there for about two or three months.
And it went actually quite well very quickly.
So we got going and we had a few hundred people jump on board.
And I was very happy with it.
And of course, some article was written and then the Subscribestar people just chickened out effectively.
And I was just, you know, I don't know what to do.
And it continues to happen.
The leftists just won't leave us alone.
But what we did is we stuck with that initial group of people and we built just a kind of consensual but also off-the-beaten-track way for us to have a sort of subscription service in a way.
It was like this, but it was something that wasn't publicly advertised.
And that went quite well.
Maybe I'm mixing up the years.
Maybe it was like 2020 when this happened or 2021.
I can't remember exactly.
And we would do calls like this.
We did some early...
I think in early 2021, we...
Yeah, cigars for the new year.
Yes. I actually...
When I go up to eat dinner, we have some cigars up there as well.
So that will be fun.
And we...
We got going.
We even did some early stuff.
I remember reading over a 10-week period, we actually read Plato's Republic and things like that.
All of the things that I'm pushing towards now started then.
It's interesting.
And it was in 2022, it was March in 2022, that Substack had by that time become a thing.
So there was a ton of people with Substacks.
And it was something that I didn't exactly like because I saw the people dominating it being Glenn Greenwald.
And I just, it wasn't, my favorite people, the early adopters were not my favorite people.
Let's just put it that way.
But I just decided that it's a platform which is better than having a website.
And it's just always better.
So I got on and I put up some articles and we started to get subscribers.
And I was pleasantly surprised.
But it really did show that the platform is the thing in order to reach people.
And so I started putting more focus on that.
We kind of combined the group, so we moved beyond what was the subscribe star.
We started having focus on Substack.
And we're doing quite well.
It's making it able for us to have a salary, effectively, and to...
Even, you know, Alberto, who started this call, I mean, he's getting paid a little bit here and there.
And he's going to relieve a lot of burden off me of having to edit these calls.
You know, edit them lightly, of course.
But, you know, edit them, put them up, describe them, etc.
And, you know, Alberto would love to do more as well.
It's made a lot of things possible.
I do think, you know, knock on wood, fingers crossed, I hate even saying it.
I do think that Substack is going to be...
They're going to be...
They're serious about free speech.
I also don't think that the spotlight is on me.
I think Antifa is not as obsessed about me, etc.
So I think we've survived a bit of the rough waves and we're in calmer waters.
Although I hate even saying these things because it seems like the moment you say that, it's the moment that I'll be emailing you all.
Oh, by the way, we've been deplatformed.
Yeah. And I don't think we will be, nor of course should we be.
If we get deplatformed now, that is just purely an attack on free speech.
We're doing...
We are being open about what we think and believe in sincerely.
Again, any sort of...
There's no activism involved.
I mean, I could go on and on, but an attack on us would be absolutely unjustified.
So, there it is.
But, I mean, I would like this to be more.
I've... I think doing exactly what we're doing, if we continue to do that for the next five years or ten years, I think that would be great, actually.
I don't think that would be a failure of any sort.
And what I mean by that is that we continue to post some excerpts from the book.
We do two podcasts a week.
And then we also do Alex Yu courses where we develop these interesting courses.
We all read something together.
Mark or myself will present a lecture on it, and then we will discuss it.
I think that is great.
And again, if we continue to do that, then that's all fine.
But I do feel like, I mean, there are these endemic problems with the movement, and I guess we're part of that movement.
I don't really feel like it, but of personalities.
And I think that's fine.
I think if someone is contributing to discourse, that is excellent.
But then there are also these guys, and I've seen dozens of them throughout my life, where they come out of the woodwork and they say, oh, we're going to get serious here and we're going to start doing political action or...
meeting up in the real world or something.
And these things fizzle after six months.
Maybe they last a year and a half, maybe longer.
But there's just no real there
There's a kind of call to action or call to pragmatism, but for no real reason.
And there's nothing you can plausibly say that you're going to accomplish even if someone threw a million dollars at you or something.
I believe I saw Sam raise his hand.
Maybe not.
If you want to speak, you can, but if not, I'll just keep flowing.
Okay. Sorry, I just meant to wave hi.
Oh, wave.
Oh, you just waved and you didn't raise.
Excuse me.
He was merely raising his hand in a spirit of jubilation.
Oh, I see.
You were raising your hand in that way.
Yes, I see.
Well, salutations to you.
So, where was I?
If we continue to do what we're doing right now, I think that would be great.
And I'm definitely willing to do that.
But I think it's important to have bigger goals.
So we all have these big goals that are, in effect, dreams.
We want to change the world.
We want to save America.
We want to...
We want to change the rotation of the earth.
We want to solve climate change.
These things are big dreams.
Maybe even the latter one was more realistic than the first three.
I think it's good to have big dreams, but it's also important to articulate those dreams in a way that they can be accomplished, that they are real in this way.
I think a lot of the The problems with white nationalism, if we're going to use that word, is that there's no real there there.
There's no serious intellectual impulse or motive or school is maybe the best way outside of being edgier than conservatives or outside of kind of vagaries like waking up the public or saving America or saving France or whatever.
And I just don't think...
There has been a lot of money raised for those things, but there might as well not have been any money raised because it doesn't accomplish anything.
And it never fundamentally will.
So I would suggest that what Mark and I are doing is fundamentally different in the sense that there is there there.
There's obviously the personalities, there's the...
You know, ability to look at the world and understand it and analyze it in important ways, of course.
But there are two things in the sense that REM analysis is a school of thought.
And this is something that's been...
Brewing with Mark for some time.
It's been brewing for me for some time.
It is a way of thinking and a way of analyzing the world.
And that can lead to new...
It generates new projects.
It leads to other things.
It can generate interesting controversies and disagreements in terms of analysis, etc.
It is like the formation of something like Platonism or Christianity or Protestantism or Marxism or Nietzscheanism or Freudianism.
We might have various opinions on all of those isms I just mentioned, but what's essential about those is that they're able by By their own force of their thought, they're able to generate new material.
And so you can correctly understand someone as a Marxist, or as a Christian, or as a Protestant, or as a Platonist, or as a Nietzschean, etc., etc.
And dare I say, I think we are doing something on that level.
It is a school of thought in the sense that there is there there.
To be honest, in terms of contemporaries, I don't really want to bash people here, but there's no there there.
There's a kind of desperate call to action to save something.
There's critique, maybe to some degree, of existing political institutions, but often that critique is better described as whining.
I do fundamentally think that what we're doing is different.
To be honest, I wouldn't want to be involved in any of this if it weren't.
I'm not terribly interested in much of anything else at this point.
I've published some things that I think are important in my life.
I've worked hard on them.
Ed Dutton's book on race is a very good example of an excellent, accessible book that you can just hand someone.
It just discusses these matters very clearly, and in some cases definitively.
It's done.
I don't really want to do it again.
I don't see that type of thinking leading anywhere outside of what has already been said.
And so I just...
Don't have any interest.
It bores me.
I would do something else if that were the only path.
But I don't think it's the only path.
And I think what we're doing now can lead to ways of thinking five years from now, 20 years from now, 100 years from now, etc.
It's bigger.
You know, in terms of dreams, I also think that, Alex, you...
Which, again, is available to all subscribers going forward.
We'll be talking about what we're going to start doing in January and onward.
Alex, you is...
Well, okay.
First off, I just saw some...
Yeah. I'll need to turn off the chat because I'll look at it and then I'll want to say something else.
Yeah. The HPD stuff.
It's been done.
Someone's aristocrat was mentioning it.
HPD stuff.
It's been done.
I don't know what else...
It's very interesting to me that mainstream conservatives are now picking up on it and rehashing stuff that was said 40 years ago.
Good. Good for them.
But it just doesn't need to be done anymore.
It's there.
We all know it.
Everyone's known all of this stuff since the beginning of time, in fact.
But anyway, they don't know what we talk about.
In terms of REM, and they don't know or they certainly don't even comprehend or they can't even comprehend what we're doing in terms of Apolloism, which is kind of like the positive thrust forward.
REM is, you could say, is negative.
It's an analytical tool.
Apolloism and actual spirituality is a thrust forward into the unknown.
And something that we should do very carefully and seriously.
So another goal of mine is to have an actual school.
Not just to be a school of thought, but to have an actual school.
And I don't think we should bother with any political stuff.
Activism, we don't need to discuss.
In a way, how useless it is.
Playing politics, can we play it better than others?
Like, are we going to create a lobbying arm and reverse immigration or whatever?
This kind of stuff is already done.
It's just not something I'm interested in.
It's not something I think is particularly worthwhile, etc.
So, no.
I mean, we'll still...
And we do it mostly just for the entertainment of you guys because...
We know that people like news shows, essentially, on the DR. So there is some entertainment value or people will take an interest in listening.
Oh, no doubt.
I'm not saying we're not going to talk about it and kind of influence things in that way.
It is ultimately less interesting to us, but we know that it's interesting to our audience.
It's interesting to me.
Yeah. I mean, what I'm saying, yeah, I'm glad you put this in there, because what I'm saying is not that we aren't going to talk about politics in a very serious way and think about it.
What I am saying is that, you know, would I ever want to raise money for a lobbying effort or something like that?
I don't know, maybe in the future, but before we put a million dollars towards lobbying, we should have already dedicated $10 million towards developing.
A intellectual school of thought.
Because the other thing, it's just, you're playing a game that is going to be difficult to win, and there are already good people there, and what would we do anyway?
I don't know, lower taxes?
You know?
I think it's, yeah, that's my opinion on that kind of stuff, of getting pragmatic and real is often not very pragmatic at all.
Yeah, I guess I would back up what Richard's saying.
Anyone who's not a paying subscriber, I think he should become a paying subscriber, honestly.
Well, everyone here is a paying subscriber.
Oh, okay.
Is that true?
Yes. People are going to hear this that are not paying subscribers, though, right?
Perhaps. I think probably so, if we're doing a pitch, right?
Right. Well, no, no.
I'm pitching even more.
I'm not pitching $9 for people.
Don't worry about that.
I pitched $9 for some people who have been longtime free subscribers to try to knock them off the fence, and I certainly hope they will.
I mean, again, the recurring income just allows you to think forward in a way that...
Yes, in a way that's just incomparable.
I mean, it's really a great thing.
And again, every month we get more subscribers.
It's about, I would say on average, it's about one subscriber per day since we began.
And sometimes it blows up for reasons I don't have any understanding of.
And sometimes, well, and there's churn, you know, you'll lose people.
They don't like it.
Whatever. That's also fine.
It never goes down.
I would say that.
It always goes up.
And that is very good.
And if we keep at it and we keep working and we keep doing good work, it's going to continue to go up and compound, etc.
So that's all very good stuff.
We lose about 100 every time Rad Femme Hitler is on the podcast.
We don't, actually, because they all secretly are in love with our fantasy.
Yeah, exactly.
So, there.
Yeah. But anyway, I will put in the chat.
I've created some just recurring donations that are above and beyond what you guys do with $9.
And so it's very simple.
It's $25 a month, $100 a month, $250 a month, $750 a month.
And so it's the gentleman, the scholar, the patron, and the hyperborean.
$9 a month.
Extremely affordable.
It's basically, I forgot what I said, two and a half cappuccinos or a glass of wine, the price of an appetizer at a restaurant.
It's really not that much to ask.
And again, in numbers, it adds up.
These things that I've just put forward, it adds up even more.
$25 a month, I spend that already.
If you can do more than that, then good on you.
If you're comfortable at nine, Also good on you.
We totally get it.
But if you do want to do more and you are able to do more, then I really want you to.
I'll just put it like that.
So what is...
I talked a little bit about Bigger Dreams.
I mean, what's coming up?
So we're already putting out the book for subscribers.
They get to read it early and also do help us with just basic copy editing.
That's been excellent.
That's going to just go forward in the new year.
So that's the main thing that we need to do is finally get it out.
And this has been...
Four years of a lot of hard work.
I mean, a lot of hard work that Mark did before that.
It's been just a long-term thing.
I think the first article you ever published at Radix was 12 years ago.
So it's been a really substantial effort.
Gone through a ton of rearranging and rewriting, etc.
And we need to stop at some point, but we also want to get it right.
And we know that it's going to be attacked.
So we need to have all our armies in place and so on.
The other thing is building off that.
The next three volumes that we have outlined.
Also, additional books that are supporting the theory in terms of a lot of the stuff we've already talked about with Alex Yu.
And so those are also kind of medium-term goals, you could say.
That is goals that are going to be accomplished.
We need some help to get there, but it's all happening.
But I think it's important to think about these bigger picture things.
So one benefit...
If you want to call it that, of giving it a higher rate, is that we're going to start having a twice-monthly call.
And this is not going to be like these calls where we talk about politics and all that kind of stuff.
It's going to be just down to business.
What are we doing?
And where do we need help?
Where are we making mistakes?
Et cetera.
So we've had some of these in an informal way.
Kurt just said yes.
We've had some of these in an informal way with Kurt and other people.
We're going to have them in a more scheduled way.
Because if you don't have a schedule, you're never going to do it, as we all know.
The other thing is that I, you know, in the past, it's been, oh, like...
Six years at this point, but I mean, I've hosted these big events and there have been formal conferences.
People host conferences and it is what it is.
I think one of my favorite conferences that I've hosted was just here in Whitefish over August where so many of us got together and we had fun.
We've also had fun in Vegas a few times and there are just a lot of good things that are happening.
What I think the way forward is to do things that are more laid back and casual on the one hand, but also more pragmatic on the other.
And also don't have registration fees, which is always good.
So basically, we're going to start doing these events coming up.
If you're in, you're in.
So, if you're already...
Look, I understand how much it is to pay even $250 or $275 per year, even if it is kind of stretched out or whatever.
I understand how much it is to pay $109 a year.
It's something.
And so, it's real.
So we're going to start doing these events, no registration.
They're going to be fun, and we're going to plan them at our business meetings and get everyone on the same page and then do them at a regular pace.
Again, it's about friendship, bonding, and it's also about thinking about the future and talking about what we're doing.
And there'll certainly be a lot of intellectual activities, talks.
Fun and things like that.
And this will just give you more input into them.
And it's a little bit special.
You're really part of it doing this.
And we won't need to vet anyone at some point.
If you're a new person doing this, we'll definitely talk to you and do the usual vetting.
But I kind of want to get away from that.
Everyone's committed.
Everyone's on board.
We know everyone.
That, I think, is just a better way forward, and I think a lot of good things will come out of that.
So there's that.
But I guess the bigger issue is something we talked a little bit about in Whitefish, and we've talked a little bit about here and there, but I do think that we have a school of thought.
I think that having an actual school is my goal.
And it's not the goal of politics or saving the country.
It's not the goal of activism.
It's not the goal of...
Taking over the world or something like that.
So that is some unreachable dream that is cloudy, to say the least.
It's a real thing that we can do.
And I think the Alex U is a very achievable and very casual thing in many ways.
You can show up for two hours, listen to me, you know.
Go off on My Love of Hamlet or Mark on Stanley Kubrick or whatever.
And we're going to do some interesting stuff coming up this year.
And that's great.
And that benefits you.
But I do think that ultimately moving to something that is in person and brick and mortar just has to be the direction that we go into.
It would offer a certain kind of...
Prestige, for lack of a better word, substantial quality to what we're doing.
And other people are doing things like this.
There's the Austin University, which is kind of like neocon you with Niall Ferguson and his wife and Barry Weiss teaching you about liberal tolerance, etc.
That's... I probably wouldn't attend to those things.
Maybe I would.
Nile Ferguson might be fascinating on the right subject.
And I have my criticisms of it, but I think it's ultimately a good thing.
And I think it's something that we're not exactly copying them.
We had the same idea.
But I think it's an idea whose time has come.
The current university system is a disaster.
And it's a disaster in all ways that I don't need to It's expensive.
It's radically politically correct.
It's wasted on the young.
You go when you're 18 to 20, like the precise time when you don't appreciate these things.
It's wasted on pragmatism in the sense of going to get a business degree so you can go work on Wall Street.
That's great, but that's not really what a university would be about.
And it's also wasted in terms of the big football school universities.
You're in a room of 300 people listening to someone's lecture.
You might as well be on Zoom.
You're not getting any kind of dialectic in the Greek sense of that word, which means discussion.
So I do think that that is a big dream.
I cannot...
Come anywhere close to affording it right now.
I don't think I could reasonably get enough people to pick up and go for a summer or something to do something right now.
We could probably get a few, to be honest.
But you understand, it's not pragmatic, practical right now.
But it is something that is practical in the future.
And it does take time.
And other people have done this.
Other people are doing this right now.
So it is real.
And so I do think that it's good to sketch out, you know, what are we doing next Tuesday?
Well, we're doing a member's call and we're going to post it.
What are we doing in the next few months?
Ah, we're finally releasing the book.
We need to clean up the copy edits.
Boom, it's going to be there.
What are we doing in the next 10 years?
I think it's important to think about that.
What I'm laying out is very radical in many ways, but is also very achievable.
I think it would be only good.
It doesn't put a target on our backs.
I mean, it does to some degree, of course, but it's something that is part of a...
Western American tradition of founding schools and instilling values and ways of thinking into people, young people in particular.
And I think it's also something that as we get substantial funds, we can start thinking about and taking input on.
How are we going to implement this?
What's the best way to accomplish this goal?
What is a timeline?
I think at this point, I think we just simply need to name the goal because we don't have money to put it into practice, so it's all theoretical.
But as we start having money, we can start thinking about how that can be used and how we can achieve this.
So that is my pitch.
There you go for why you should support what we're doing.
But do you guys want to discuss this, or do you have any questions?
Yeah, yeah, please, Mark, please go.
Yeah, no, so, I mean, REM theory is definitely going to be a thing.
So it's, in a lot of ways, it's very, you know, the more that Richard and I study it, and I think Richard would agree with this, the more...
It becomes evident that the theory is evidently true or is evidently the case, right?
So we've cracked something that for whatever reason hasn't been solved in the past, which is remarkable, of course, when you think about it.
Yeah. And to the extent that we're overturning.
Schools of thought.
So a guy like Jung, whatever value he does, value he has and his work has, and he does have value and his work does have value.
He does say some things that are essentially true.
But I think that our thesis fundamentally kind of overturns a lot of his thinking.
And so that's a remarkable thing.
So if you're part of this, you're part of history.
I mean, that's...
Maybe that's important to you.
The truth is, it's going to succeed.
If I'm being honest with you, it's going to succeed if I die penniless and Richard dies penniless.
It's going to succeed regardless.
We'd rather not die penniless and we're not going to die penniless because our school is already a success and will become more of a success in the future.
The point I'm making is that what we're saying is true.
It's novel.
So you can be there sort of at the beginning helping us with this.
And, you know, of course, you know, it's so as much as it's a labor of love for us, you could also consider it also a bit of a labor of love for yourselves.
And that you are like putting something good into the world, something that is true.
You're clarifying.
This mystery that we call art, this mystery that we call religion.
You're lending clarity to it.
Not only that, you're allowing it to sort of come back into our hands and allow us to use it as the kind of formidable cultural weapon that it is, essentially, that religion and art represents.
And it's ultimately the kind of, it's ultimately the sort of nuclear bomb of weapons.
That you can have in your arsenal in the sense that, you know, nothing forms opinions and ideas and attitudes more than parable does.
And this is really, you know, what we're focused on, essentially, is figuring out this sort of the what parables and religion and art represent, what their significance is culturally.
And also, you know, how.
How an artist can use these sort of symbols that have been used so effectively against us, in a lot of cases, through parable and so forth, that they can use it in the other direction.
Now, I mean, that's just one very kind of important application that I can mention.
I mean, at some point, Richard would probably agree with this.
Uh, development of the school eventually, and I don't think this happens now.
I think right now mostly we're involved in an analysis, but that, um, it would be some part of it would be an art school.
It'd be kind of an art conservatory because when you go to art school, what you learn is you learn the kind of technical aspects of your craft in, in sort of the best case scenario.
You learn the technical aspects of your craft and you network, right?
But what you don't learn is the intelligent use of symbol and the intelligent development of parable.
And also, what we can do is we can also give artists the message to impart.
So we can give them the message to impart, and we can also give them the sort of means or the ways of imparting it symbolically.
And you could never learn that at a film school.
You could never learn that at a creative writing school.
And to the extent that, I mean, maybe you could in some cases, if, you know, you had a, for example, a Jewish master that was a Jewish esotericist in a film school, and he was willing to kind of divulge some of these things.
But they are, of course, unwilling to divulge it, because that's sort of the nature of Jem.
It's esoteric, right?
So, but...
We divulge it and will divulge it to, you know, people on our side, so to speak.
And I don't think that that can be underestimated in terms of the potential cultural impact that it could have.
I mean, there have been art movements in history that have had an important effect on the culture.
There's no question about it.
But this could have a kind of seismic effect, I would argue.
Because it would allow people to kind of look at art and religion for what it really is, to understand its kind of true and fundamental nature, and its esoteric nature, and to understand the symbols, to become conversant with the symbols,
and to use those symbols in parable in an effective way in a kind of cultural religious warfare, effectively.
And I think it's going to be a game changer.
Now, again, and I'm not in this for personal financial or economic reasons.
Obviously not.
I've been working on this theory for free for several years.
You know what I mean?
Just because it's fascinating.
And just the fact that it's true is by itself something remarkable.
You know, and I've been thinking about these things my whole adult life, the use of symbol and so forth.
So I've been invested in this project as a kind of intellectual exercise and a labor of love, and ultimately something that I see as good for humanity, you know, and good for, again, our side, so to speak,
that it's kind of necessary work.
The whole time I haven't really asked for anything, to be honest with you.
I wanted to really make sure that I wasn't seeing things.
I wanted to verify it through many cases and many instances and to have a very strong and solid case to bring forward.
I think that that's done.
I think that that work is completed.
I think that a kind of unbiased person who reads this book will say, hey, holy shit, these guys are really onto something.
This is a real phenomenon.
And I think it will be to art and religion what Darwin is to essentially biology.
I mean, I guess it's a kind of very bold thing to say, but I think it is actually the case.
You know, I mean, Richard has talked about this before.
A lot of times with GEM or the study of REM, we're tracing a kind of genealogy of myth, you know, in the way an etymologist might trace a genealogy of linguistics and so forth.
We're doing something similar in that regard.
But we're also seeing that this myth is developed intelligently.
It's not developed arbitrarily.
It's not born of mystic experience or some fantasy that ancient man is having.
It's developed intelligently by intelligent, sophisticated people that are symbol-wise.
And this process continues to this day.
We can see a kind of perfect continuum from Sumer to Hollywood.
Once you start looking at this shit, you realize that that's the case.
You know, and it's it's the most ingenious form of cultural warfare that can be practiced.
Like we're seeing right now, Hollywood is kind of retreating into this anti-woke thing.
But that doesn't mean that they're going to stop making gem.
No, it just means they have to become more clever and more sophisticated, sort of like the thief hiding in the shadows now.
Right. He has to be more dexterous to kind of to escape detection.
But that is.
You know, I mean, this is this is something that we solve this problem.
We can solve the religion and culture problem.
I argue that we can solve this problem.
If we solve that problem, we've solved a lot of our problems effectively.
You know, and of course, we can't.
I don't think that we're going to be able to do it in our day and age with our sort of fucked up, stupid politics and the Magatars and so forth.
But we can we can bring that work into the future.
So, you know, when the right people assume power, for example, and I think this will help them assume power, because myth can be created en route to political power and assist and aid the development of political power.
We see that with Jews, for example.
So these things can happen simultaneously.
But then once, you know, once we have a kind of elite that knows the score, essentially, They could be dominant for a long period of time in history.
I mean, that's the honest to God truth.
And I think it's harder to just erase knowledge now than it was in the past.
And maybe that will change, right?
Maybe all the digital systems will go down and so forth.
And that's something that we should be mindful of.
But I think that it will be harder to erase this knowledge in the future.
And we've effectively, we've kind of...
You know, castrated an important avenue of attack.
If this theory takes hold and people in a kind of widespread understanding of it gains hold in society, you know, or just like, you know, again, it doesn't, not everyone has to be a kind of REM priest and understand how the symbols are used in a kind of closer,
accurate way, but just be aware of the phenomena, that it's just a kind of game changer, ultimately, you know, that art is not benign.
It can be sort of poisonous, or it can be very salubrious and helpful, you know?
But it has significance.
What your children are looking at, even the Sunday, you know, comic or cartoons or whatever, it has an effect.
It has a formative effect on your children and on young women and young men, and maybe less so as you're getting older, but it has an effect.
During that formative period on your psyche.
And it rules the whole civilization ultimately.
End of rant.
Yeah. Oh, I totally co-sign everything that has just been said.
Yeah, I mean, Darwinism is an interesting...
I mean, I mentioned Marxism, Freudianism, and maybe people have negative feelings towards those, but Darwinism is definitely some.
I mean, this is what it is.
I think there needs to be that level of discourse, that level of uncovering reality for an institution to really have a raison d'etre.
So yeah, these are the big things.
Anyway, do you guys have any questions or comments or affirmations that you want to add to this?
In terms of actually supporting, I'll be sending out something just for subscribers only probably later on tonight.
I just need to finish cleaning everything up.
But you can see the link that I put in the chat.
It definitely would work for just that base level of support.
But anyway, anyone have any comments on this or anything like that?
Bert, you turned on your...
Screen. Yeah.
Sorry, just to check how horrible my hair was.
No, I was going to just be, you know, as an addendum, say, foreshadow that myself and a few of the other people on these calls have been working towards something which has taken up all of my professional life,
actually, for the past 12 months and a couple of other people's on here also.
So I think we're going to get there.
To be guilty of the words of affirmation, which I think is a good way.
Maybe, I don't want to go on a Tony Robbins rant, but I often think in these types of things, like when you're trying to do something huge, you've almost got to think how you would like to fail in a way and why, as much as that might be batting up against some people's sort of positive thinking,
which I think we're going to have some measure of success, but...
In a way, I see sort of like a quote-unquote Aryan victory being something of having some type of financial power, similar to the sort of cliches that basic bitch white nationalists point at and just sort of...
They don't realise that when they're actually doing that, they just hate power the same way.
Idiotic Christian does, and they don't quite realise that you need that in life.
You know, even if you want to open a Lego factory, you need that type of financial power to get you done, let alone if you're trying to do something political.
So I was going to say, anyway, I'm looking forward to the sort of more commercial-orientated and goal-orientated stuff that we'll do in the new year.
But also that I think as a horrible runner-up prize for the future, If it means that we all just are incredibly powerful and live in a little diaspora somewhere, I'm willing to take that, although I think that's a very unlikely scenario.
But I think doing something like this is the only way forward.
And I just want to say thank you so much to you, Mike, and Richard also, because, you know, I can see that this has taken a horrible, well, not a horrible, but a huge personal toll to be able to do the stuff you want and you believe in it.
And it's definitely inspired me because, as I mentioned, it's been quite difficult to do what I'm trying to do to get done.
And I realized that I've done it for one year.
You guys have done it for probably 10 years plus.
So thank you so much to both of you, even if you don't quite want to be thought of as an inspiration.
And thank you, everyone, for coming here.
Yes. Yeah, I know.
I appreciate that quite a bit.
Yeah, I know, Kurt.
Definitely appreciate that.
Thank you, man.
But, you know, part of it is just my autism.
Let's be honest.
I'm just kind of, I'm a little bit crazy to even undertake this thing, as is Richard.
And I dragged him into it.
And he knows how crazy you become once you find that little red thread.
And you're like, oh, wait, this is what this is.
And it becomes, it can become a rabbit hole.
And so, you know, publishing the book is kind of a...
It's part of the process of publishing the book is letting go of how kind of fun it is, actually, on some level, solving these problems.
Because they're riddles, basically, in these parables.
And when you're solving them, you're like, wow, you're kind of proud of yourself.
But really, what we have to do is just kind of solve kind of some main ones that represent sort of examples and show the way.
To solving these parables more generally and show the way of looking at these parables more generally might be a clearer way of saying it.
But I think the book does that.
I mean, I think the book will be very definitive in terms of establishing the credibility of the theory.
You know, of course, we'll have our critics.
And of course, some people will claim that we're as crazy as Alex Jones, right?
You just have to assume that.
Because, you know, that's what they would claim of a guy like Kevin MacDonald, for example, whose thesis is, in a lot of ways, a lot less ambitious, I could say.
And that's not to, you know, diminish his work at all.
I think he's had an incredible impact in terms of his work.
And it is this kind of yeoman work.
But I think that what we've done, though, is...
See something that hasn't been seen before, right?
Or at least it hasn't been seen since Rome might be a better way of saying it.
And maybe a lot of that has to do with Christianity, I think, which to some extent I think has had a kind of lobotomizing effect as far as being able to read a symbol and so forth.
The literalist mentality of Christianity that Christianity induces, where everything is just kind of face value, essentially.
That's sort of the attitude you're supposed to adopt vis-a-vis Christianity.
And if you're able to look at Christianity in that sort of gullible way, where you're looking at everything as kind of face value and looking at it through a literalist's lens, then where does that put you vis-a-vis ostensibly more credible things?
You know, more credible myths appearing in the society and so forth.
And you can you can you can apply you can even apply this to like the news media, for example.
Right. Where does that put you vis-a-vis these other things?
So I think that.
I think that this is going to be very, you know, and we stand on the shoulders, obviously, of people that are doing important work as well and kind of related fields.
And I think probably most saliently.
Most importantly, on some level, I mean, obviously, we owe a huge debt to Nietzsche, but we also owe a huge debt, I think, to mythicists, right?
The Christ mythicists, which is, you know, there are many people that are in that field, and, you know, guys like Richard Carrier, I think, are kind of some of the more important ones, you know, Price as well.
So, and Scribina.
Certainly as well.
But those are some examples.
And so we owe a debt to them.
But I think that we're going the next step, right?
Because what they're saying is, yeah, look, this is obviously a myth.
It's obviously bullshit.
But we know that.
But they're also saying, in some cases, this is a derivative.
It's a derivative myth, right?
Makes sense, right?
Because all the other myths that we see in the ancient world are derivative myths.
So it would seem to follow that this is also a derivative myth.
But I think it's...
REM theory really, especially on the mythicism question, I think that we add a special kind of insight to the mythicism question because we see...
Essentially, Jews, and Richard will back me up on this, we see essentially Jews kind of endorsing Christianity through the esotericism of contemporary films, right?
Why would they be doing that?
So it becomes the proof.
I mean, it sort of verifies Nietzsche's suspicion that it is, Christianity is an op, right, to use the parlance of the day.
But it also...
Yeah, and so it would verify a guy like Scribina, for example.
But, you know, of course, there are other reasons why we would think it's an op that are more kind of literalist and explicit, such as the creed, the sort of egalitarian creed that Christianity represents and so forth.
End of rant.
does anyone want to talk about this or should we start talking about some other things?
Okay. So does anyone want to talk about this?
Any questions?
We could do...
I did grab some clips of, like, predictions that people...
I don't know.
I didn't know if we watched clips.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
We can do predictions.
I mean, this is 2024.
I mean, it's the year.
Yeah, so I figured that we might just do some predictions, right?
But... Did you put the clips in the scratch pad?
No, I'll grab them right now.
If you wanted to start with your predictions.
I guess let's start with the most obvious one.
You think Trump is going to be our next president.
Why don't you describe to us your reasons for believing that?
Well, I did a little jokey tweet when I got home today, but on how Alvin Bragg is the man of the year, not Taylor Swift, because Alvin Bragg, he definitively did the act that rallied everyone around Trump and made Trump inevitable,
effect. So Alvin Bragg, of course, the district attorney in Manhattan, he is in the process of prosecuting
Prosecuting Donald Trump for paying, I forgot how much it was, you know, 200 grand or something to Stormy Daniels after he had sex with her and then decided that he wanted her to shut up or so on and so forth.
And it is a bullshit charge.
I mean, look, if you went into the books of any New York firm and you dug Just a few inches down.
I mean, how many prostitute payoffs and dead bodies would you find?
I mean, it's just ridiculous.
Now, I guess that's not an argument against actually prosecuting on him if he broke the law.
But what I'm basically saying is, who cares?
And from that very point, Ron DeSantis' support collapsed.
Everyone rallied around Trump.
I think it made it inevitable, and it definitely did taint further prosecutions.
I think the documents thing is a real deal.
Now, it might be just boomer hoarding, or it might be something really bad in terms of Trump's dealing with other countries.
J6 was a buffoonish coup d'etat, of course.
Those things are more substantial.
But Alvin Bragg got it off to the right start.
And I think it just expresses these liberals thinking that they can get Trump on a technicality and just erase his movement.
And they're going to be very disappointed.
So, yeah, that's my call right now.
Trump will be the winner of our last election.
I don't know if that's dark or kick-ass, celebratory.
Well, or maybe it just needs to happen.
Yeah. Yeah.
No, I guess I don't really.
I mean, it does seem like he's most likely going to be the next president.
Yeah. But I don't know.
I mean, it was kind of remarkable that Biden became president, right, if we're being honest.
I mean, it does seem like...
I mean, sure, he was the establishment Democrat candidate.
And it was during COVID, and there was dissatisfaction with Trump.
And the COVID thing was just to kind of...
I don't even think that Trump...
Maybe you disagree with this.
I don't even think that Trump necessarily mishandled it.
I mean, I think he did in hindsight, right?
But in hindsight, it's 2020, as they say.
Yeah, I don't think he was radically bad on COVID.
I mean, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, so he just kind of like...
It was just a kind of misfortune.
There were conspiracy theories around COVID.
Was it hatched in a lab?
Possibly it was.
If it was hatched in a lab, were they thinking about the election in the United States?
That's another thing to consider.
But what I would say is that if you could look at Trump, and again, this didn't occur to me at the time.
It only occurred to me later.
To give Trump his fair due, he said he should have immediately said, okay, let's lock down.
Maybe it did occur to me at the time, actually.
But let's just lock down all the borders, right?
And he should have just called their bluff.
He should have called the left's bluff.
To the extent that we understand the kind of pro-vaccine crowd and the restrictionist crowd to be leftist, he should have called their bluff and just said, hey, listen, all right.
We're going to lock down.
We can have no immigration into the country.
We're going to seal the borders.
We're going to accelerate building the wall.
We've got a COVID, big COVID problem, right?
Now, if he had done that, it would be interesting to see how the left would have reacted.
I mean, I think that if I had to guess, the left would have been- I mean, immigration did go down quite a bit in the last year of history, but yeah.
Yeah. I think the left, anytime a leftist is agreeing with Trump, they get a little leery and say, maybe I should be not agreeing.
But again, hindsight is 20-20.
And I think, like everyone else, I was kind of, I think everyone else, like everyone else, we're kind of deers in the headlight, as it were.
I think I was pro-vaccine for about three months, and then I was like, you know what?
Fuck this.
I just, I herd immunity.
Right. Yeah, that's kind of how I got at the end of the day.
I mean, I do think the vaccines were ultimately a good thing, but, and we haven't had full herd immunity in the sense that we keep...
I mean, I got it again this past fall.
So it's a weird thing.
It's like the perfect virus.
But yeah, that's pretty much where I was at some point.
Let's not go into the COVID discussion because I don't want to revisit those years.
But let's...
Yeah, Aristocrat is pointing out something from Visigrad24.
That's very interesting.
US and UK are preparing to declare total war on the Houthis and Yemen.
So this is another, in terms of predictions, and you guys feel free to chime in.
People have been very silent this episode, but in terms of war, is the Gaza thing going to wrap up fairly soon and there's just going to be an Israeli occupation?
Is it going to lead to a broader regional war in 2024 or shortly after?
What do you guys think about this?
I think at minimum, drone warfare is a serious option because that's the one that requires the least amount of commitment.
But I think that what's happening with the Shia groups is...
So America gets a lot of its legitimacy in the role that it plays in ensuring the maritime security of the world.
And I think that what they're doing here is they're undermining that.
And this is interesting because I think that the Anglo-Saxon world is a very specialist world.
It's a world with a very high carrying capacity with a lot of Emphasis on both specialization and economies of scale.
And what happens is that in the face of instability, things like that collapse.
And I think if you look at the past 100 years or more even, so much effort has been spent on ensuring global security, global stability and peace on Earth and all this stuff.
All of that is being undermined, and it's being undermined by undermining the effectiveness of America in delivering on its promise, basically.
Yeah, I also agree that global systems can collapse pretty quickly.
It's remarkable.
I don't know.
I don't see any real...
Pushback in terms of Israel's actions and the consequences that could result from them.
I just think we're going to go keep going in this direction.
Yeah. Honor said Netanyahu wants to undermine Biden.
The war is hurting Biden.
Yeah. So keep going.
Do the war and get Trump in office and he'll let you do even more.
I think that public relations considerations, public image considerations are really going to be a big factor in how America moves forward.
Because there's been so much that America has been benefiting from, from its role in the world.
And when that's undermined, you know, it's more than just petty saving face.
It's about being able to lead by example.
Which is something that America has done for a while.
The example I like to give is, imagine two people are hanging from a thread, and even if the two guys hate each other, you're not going to cut that wire.
You both have an interest in making sure that the wire is kept safe.
But what happens when one of you is suicidal?
To continue this analogy, the Shia groups are the suicidal people.
They're literally kamikazes, right, effectively?
Okay, let's watch this just for a little bit, see if there's any interest in this.
I get to predict the future.
What do you expect in 2024?
Look, there's been a lot of talk about micro-targeting and the ways that candidates are going to try to reach the voters.
I predict, however...
One of the tried and true pieces of presidential campaigns will endure and that there will be at least one televised debate.
Between the Democrat and Republican presidential nominees.
I think there'll be no debate.
Which would be standard fare.
It would be.
But it's very much uncertain.
But it's very much uncertain right now, given concerns about the nonpartisan commission on presidential debates.
And the willingness of the potential nominees as we currently imagine them.
But if it's Biden and Trump, they can't help themselves.
And they'll want at least one go at it.
Anything's possible this year.
Nicole? What about you?
Well, if former President Trump ends up being the Republican nominee, I predict that he will pick a female running mate.
And there are a number of females that are being talked about, female lawmakers, whether that's Elise Stefanik, whether that's Nancy Mace, for instance.
You have Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders.
It makes sense, potentially.
Christy Noem, possibly.
Christy Noem, another one, Governor of South Dakota.
So there are a lot of options, remains to be seen, but I think there potentially will be a woman on the ticket.
We talked about this on Thursday.
I am barely convinced by the argument for Nikki Haley.
Just to go back to all of those other women, Kristi Noem doesn't bring you anything that you already have.
And yes, she's a woman, but yeah.
Huckabee Sanders, wow.
Nancy Mace is quite a piece of work.
She seems...
I don't know.
If I were Trump, I would be worried about putting someone like that in there.
I don't know if she's terribly popular, and most people thought her opposition to McCarthy was pointless.
Stefanik is interesting in the sense that she's very pro-Israel, as was revealed recently.
And has also done just all Tucker Carlson, you know, great replacement stuff is real and all that kind of thing.
So I don't know.
What do you guys think?
I kind of...
It passed as precedent.
So what did Trump do in the past?
Will he be likely to do something like that in the future?
It was not...
Mike Pence did not run for president in 2016.
So he was a bit...
He was kind of a, you know, someone who wasn't on the playing field that he brought in.
So is he going to do that again with Noam, Stefanik, etc.?
The Vicky argument, I think, is just very compelling.
Or Nicky argument, excuse me.
But it's just, would he actually be willing to do something like that?
What do you guys think?
Essentially. I'm not so sure.
I mean, Haley does kind of have a representation of the neocon establishment.
So, I mean, if Trump did pick her, it would be kind of a, it could be a mending of the GOP in a way.
But I don't know.
I'm just, I'm not sure he'd be inclined to do that, honestly.
Yeah, I think it depends.
I mean, we talked about this a little bit last time.
I think the Pence experience might...
You know, and actually, Richard, you talked about this a little as well on a former or an earlier podcast where you were talking about, you know, I mean, MAGA can provide its own talent to some extent right now.
So it doesn't have to, like, rely on these Washington insiders and these sort of career policies and so forth, you know, or these networked lawyers and, you know, whatever, you know.
I think that he, you know, once bitten, twice shy.
We'll see, right?
Because the problem is he didn't learn quick enough on the job last time, in my opinion.
So is he going to go in with the same sort of naive perspective?
And is he going to, you know, fumble around with the art of the deal?
Let's make a deal and we can get everyone on the same team.
Or is he going to go in as he should have early on in 2016 and just cleared the deck and just said, hey, listen, it's my way or the highway, and I'm going to get off.
One thing that I should say, this is like a cliche of mine of it's a feature, it's not a bug, but all of these people were desperate for Trump to simply admit defeat.
It's no...
It's no sin in a way.
You know, people lose elections.
It happens.
It was a tough one.
It was a COVID year, blah, blah, blah.
And he just can't.
I mean, he still hasn't admitted defeat.
But this is the question that I would ask, is if he had admitted defeat and then shook Joe Biden's hand and gone to the inauguration and so on, Would he be in the position that he is in now?
I would say no.
Yeah, I would agree with you.
It's like everyone, the things that are just so totally insane about Trump are the ways that he, not even wins, but survives.
Yeah, well look at the success of Alex Jones.
Yeah. Why is he successful?
Because he's completely nutty.
I think that, you know, not to throw Fuentes under the bus.
Again, we think he's funny and we like him.
But, you know, some of his nutty shit is really what gives the guy a higher profile.
Yeah. And draws a lot of views and augments his audience, right?
So I think he, whether consciously or unconsciously, I think he panders to that wildness as well, right?
You know, so it's better if Trump's like, oh, yeah, it's actually it's actually just a big conspiracy.
Right. You guys are right.
It's actually just a big like reptile.
Yeah. And of course they fix the elections.
Then, you know, the reptile part is subtext, of course.
But you understand what I'm saying.
They're going to be more like, yeah, he's right.
The whole thing's rigged.
It's bullshit.
Yeah. So, you know, we've discussed this before, but then it's like.
Well, if that's your narrative, and I think that they still will manage to get the vote out.
I mean, thinking about it now.
But yeah, is that blackpilling if the election's fixed?
Yeah, it has been in the past.
I mean, I remember that Georgia in 2020 was a disaster because of this.
But remember, Trump cares about Trump.
Trump doesn't care about these other politicians losing.
And also, I think only Trump can do it in the sense that Carrie Lake, I haven't really heard from her in a while, and the court cases in Arizona have not been successful,
and she's kind of disappeared.
So only Trump can do it.
But when he does it, it's ultimately to his benefit.
If he had conceded, I think DeSantis would be the leading candidate.
It's just kind of crazy when you think about it.
And again, I think he actually did lose the election, although I do also believe that the election was rigged in the sense that these new rules, massive mail-in voting...
Leeway on late stuff.
I mean, I do think that it was a different election than it had been in a while, and obviously more votes were counted than ever before.
And big tech censorship, okay, I'll grant something there.
But it wasn't rigged in the way that people think it was rigged of just outright fraud and changing of votes and all that kind of stuff.
You have to just look at Trump, and yeah, his whole life is a disaster now, and he's facing jail time and all this kind of stuff, but can you really fault him for any decision he's made?
Nothing succeeds like success.
There's no other criterion for success as a politician outside of remaining relevant and being on the verge of victory.
Yeah, the conspiracy...
It's crazy just to say it out loud.
Because it's like every smart person is like, he's just got to drop this stolen election stuff.
Well, the conspiracy stuff, and again, I think we've touched on some of these things, but the conspiracy stuff, I think it's appealing because it appeals to a sort of childlike mentality where...
It's a form of entertainment.
We've talked about this with Alex Jones.
Why is Alex Jones so salient?
Why do people cut him so much slack?
It's because at the end of the day, they're kind of entertained by the guy.
It's funny.
What if there are UFOs and they're controlling the government or whatever?
That's cool.
It's like you're in a movie.
Watching a movie, you're like, oh, holy shit, there's UFOs controlling the White House.
And that is more entertaining.
It's entertaining.
So it's entertainment.
And so he has an entertainment factor to him.
And because he's entertaining, he's more likely to get elected.
That's how he got elected the first time around.
I mean, whatever you can say about Trump, however you can criticize him, you can't say that he's not a showman or he's not entertaining.
He's extremely entertaining and funny, and he is a showman, you know?
So he's definitely brilliant in that regard.
I think this year, just to do a little bit of a brief retrospective, though, 2023 will be remembered as the year that Israel jumped the shark, right?
I totally agree.
Yeah, and jump the shark is, I don't know if everyone's familiar with that expression.
You're obviously familiar with it, so maybe there's a kind of widespread understanding of the meaning of that expression.
But it derives from the Happy Days, the old Happy Days show where they had Fonzie, right?
And Fonzie was...
The shows were getting increasingly sort of like worn out, all the tropes were getting worn out, and they didn't really have anything new to do with the show.
So the show...
Got increasingly, like, ridiculous and just kind of, like, you know, odd or whatever, just going in these random directions.
And in one show, Fonzie is water skiing, I guess showing off for the girls, we would have to assume.
And he jumps over a shark, right?
Like on a lake as well.
Yeah, yeah.
There's a shark in the lake.
Is that what it was?
I think it was that bad.
Yeah, it was just, yeah.
Yeah, yeah.
So, I don't know how they, you know, through whatever contrivances of the plot, they got to fondly like jumping over a shark.
But it became a kind of, it became a cliche or aphorism.
I don't know what the, there's a better, that episode became a kind of byword.
Oh, do you guys hear that?
What was that?
Good lord.
I hope that was a firework.
Oh. I don't know what was going on.
Just a huge...
I guess it wasn't picked up by the mic.
Just this...
Good God, these crazies are doing...
I hope that's a firework.
Otherwise, it was just a big bang, collapse.
Anyway, keep talking.
I'm just going to go look out the window real quick.
Yeah, but anyways, so it became...
That episode became a kind of byword for just when a sitcom had run its course or when a TV show had...
Run its course and was no longer viable and ratings were dropping and the thing was starting to suck.
You know, not that happy days was ever Shakespeare or anything, but so jump the shark.
That's where that expression originates.
Probably everyone on the call knows that, though.
I just have a...
Yeah, I know.
It's interesting.
I think probably people have heard the term but don't know what it derives from.
But they've derived its meaning from truth.
Israel will never be legitimate again.
I think this is actually profoundly important.
What has happened.
And I don't think I'm engaging in any sort of wishful thinking.
Israel became the bad guy definitively.
It's been the bad guy for Marxists and leftists and critics and paleoconservatives and white nationalists, etc.
But it's now the bad guy for a great deal of the population and a great deal of the world.
And I don't think you can recover from that.
And there's no way to recover from it because people are overlooking the atrocities of October 7th at this point.
And they were atrocities, but it's just Israel is so much worse.
It's amazing, and it can't recover, so we need to start thinking about where it's going, like what happens after wars.
Yeah, I mean, one thing that I think is worth remarking on is just how rapidly people turned on Israel.
Like, the anti-Israel...
I mean, granted, they're doing some very terrible, insane stuff, but usually the media would find ways of covering it up or just not reporting it or whatever the case may be.
But sort of the rapidity at which people turned on them.
And I think that there is something to that where...
You know, I mean, on a micro level, I think you experienced something similar to it yourself, where how Israel is kind of the scapegoat.
I mean, that's too kind of a word, obviously, because they're killing thousands of Palestinian children or whatever, right?
But people smell blood in the water is what I'm trying to say.
So suddenly all this kind of like pent up resentment of like, you know, why did the Jews get away with thinking they're so special?
All this shit that's been simmering under the surface.
Now is the moment to be like, all right, fuck you, and throw them under the bus.
So everyone takes the opportunity to throw them under the bus.
And it just happens, it just turns very rapidly.
And so I think that that's remarkable.
You know, and I'm sure in a lot of cases, Jews, Israelis, certainly, but Jews in America, for example, feel like suddenly they feel betrayed.
Right. And.
Yeah.
But this resentment and this anti-Semitism, you could call it, but certainly anti-Israelism, has been there the whole time.
It's just people have been waiting for the moment to just say, okay, that's it.
This is the straw that broke the camel's back, and fuck you.
But it's shocking.
It's surprising.
And I think that it's...
It is a kind of tragedy, I think, of Gentile and Jewish relations generally, in the sense that I do think that, and this is something like, you know, Woody Allen might comment on or whatever, is that there's this idea of the repressed wasp, right?
And, well, what does that mean?
Well, they're talking about sexuality, I guess, to some extent, but they're also talking about, like, you know, civility or being gentility, right?
They're talking about Being polite and sort of suffering offenses and being like, oh, but taking the high road, right?
But it ends up being a kind of pressure cooker, right?
So, I mean, I guess the Kipling poem.
It just tends to sum it up of the, what's it called, the Awakened Saxon.
I've actually done a reading of this poem, though I think that that's a modified form of the original poem.
I don't think it was originally Saxon, if I'm remembering correctly.
I think it might have been like Englishman or something.
It's something more, you know, less kind of universal or less, you know, applicable to Americans, for example.
But in any case, I think you understand my point, that I think this is part of a dynamic between Jews and Gentiles, where the Jew, you could argue, is more the extrovert, right?
On the other hand, there is a kind of, and we see this with Jem, for example, there's a kind of subtle, but I would say relatively rapid and aggressive, subtle, but rapidly Aggressive kind of invasiveness that Jews represent,
essentially. Whereas the Gentile is slow to be offended, ultimately, right?
So similar to the Saxon poem, right?
So he's, on some level, he's kind of, he at least ostensibly is insensitive to these kind of gradually accruing offenses.
And then finally, he...
Opens a can of whoop-ass.
Or suddenly the turn is surprising and sudden.
So I think part of that figures into what we're seeing now.
Now, of course, a lot of the reaction that's going on now is coming from the left, including in some portion of it is from non-whites, for example.
So it's a little different than that, but I think that that is in the mix, and it's a kind of important part of the mix, right?
Because that represents a relatively potent opposing force to Jews.
So in any case, I think you understand the dynamic, though.
It's almost like if you look at it, if you could imagine two archetypes, the archetypical Jew and the archetypical Gentile, And you can see how problems would develop, right?
Because one is pushing, but maybe at first subtly and gently and testing.
Can I go here?
Can I go here?
And pushing in a kind of invasive way, ultimately.
And the other one is saying, that's not enough of an offense for me to react.
That's not enough of an offense for me to react.
I'm just going to let it go.
I'm going to be the bigger guy.
But then at some point, he's just like, you know what?
I've had it.
And it's sort of like we're seeing two personalities contrasted against one another throughout history.
Two personalities where...
They just at some point, you know, one gets sick of the other, essentially, right?
You know, it's sort of like college roommates, that one of them is kind of annoying the other roommate.
And at some point, he's just like, you know what, fuck it, fuck you.
And it's just been bottling.
He's been bottling it.
That's what the word is, bottling, right?
And I don't know.
I mean, we could argue that it's a kind of deficiency on our part, is that we are bottlers, essentially, on some level.
I mean, that might be part of the diagnosis here.
And, you know, I argue, like, there are two types of, like, and I think part of it, too, is that, like, well, we don't want to be overly sensitive because, you know, women are overly sensitive, essentially, right?
You should be able to, like, razz a guy.
There should be some jocular way, the bants or whatever.
The interaction between men is not necessarily a kind of, you know, sissy, gentle interaction.
So you should be able to kind of, you know, take a little...
A bit of abuse.
I think that this is part of the mentality.
But I think that there's another kind of sensitivity that's not feminine.
I've said this before.
It's a kind of poetic or maybe a little ridiculous, but a dramatic way of illustrating this type of sensitivity.
There's also the sensitivity of the lion, of the animal that's hunting, that can smell when he's being threatened or endangered.
You know, is sensitive in that way.
And kind of puts up his boundaries more effectively to avoid being in a situation where, you know, all the boundaries are gone.
And so he can only react by lashing out, essentially.
You know what I mean?
And I think that, to some extent, culture can solve a lot of these problems.
To a greater extent, religion and culture can solve a lot of these problems.
Now, of course, part of that is also the kind of...
Execution of religion and culture and so forth.
And it's given to human hands, so there's something imperfect about that, obviously.
But I think you understand my point.
We're looking at two different personalities.
And, you know, therein lies the conflict.
You know, it's a kind of oversimplification, obviously, and it's looking at one dimension of it.
But I think it's a part of it, and it's worth considering.
You know what I mean?
If we look at...
Yeah. In any case, go.
Well, I would say that Israel has jumped the shark.
Israel will never have legitimacy in the eyes of the general public.
And also, anti-Semitism...
fairly or unfairly, has been released as a result of this.
It's not the ultimate, it's not caused by the actions on Gaza, but it is never going away.
And all of the actions that are being taken by Jewish organizations are going to increase anti-Semitism going forward.
I think we're in a point where anti-Semitism is going to be mainstream.
For better and for worse, it's not necessarily how we would...
Like to offer a criticism of Israel or the Jews in general or Judaism, etc.
But it's just going to be uncontrollable.
Yeah, I would tend to agree with that.
Yeah, and I think that there's going to be a lot to sort of criticize about that manifestation that will manifest itself.
Definitely. You know, in many forms of it, we cannot be in favor of, ultimately.
You know what I mean?
Because ultimately, they're not solutions to this challenge between these two groups, the Gentile and the Jew.
They're not solutions.
They're ultimately ways of, you know, delaying the solution and just entering back into this destructive cycle, essentially.
Yeah. That, you know, sort of the more ignorant people with DR get excited about.
They're like...
Yeah, 109 times, 110's coming up, buddy.
You better get ready.
It's just like, holy shit, dude.
Don't you realize this is failure?
Yeah. It's failure, you know?
And so, I mean, because, look, ultimately, all minds, again, I think that ultimately, I think that Judaism will go out of style.
We've talked about this a bunch of times, so there will probably develop what are called post-Jews.
But Judaism proper itself, I think, will go out of fashion because it ultimately attends a bad reputation.
And because of the decline of Christianity as well.
Christianity is declining simultaneously.
And if Judaism starts to decline as well, then there's even less reason.
Then Christianity has even less coherence, right?
Yeah. So I think that the general trend, it seems, is that these things are going out of style.
And, you know, it would be better if all minds of whatever race were directed toward more constructive civilizational projects than, you know, having to fucking...
Be in these conflicts, these prodigal conflicts that have resulted in even world wars.
I mean, it's just, you know what I mean?
Like, we have to at least aspire and dream of a better world, even while being realistic.
I mean, it's, you know, the ancients say no man has seen the end of war.
No, but maybe there will be no end of war, but I think that we can greatly sort of mitigate the sort of prodigal Yeah,
I will have to get going pretty soon, although...
You guys can stay on if you want.
But does anyone else want to jump in with predictions about something we're missing?
Well, one thing I would add is that the idea of Israel being scapegoated, I think that looking at that and saying that that's an example of a loss of Jewish power is actually incorrect.
I think that it's an exercise of Jewish power, rather.
It's slapping your prison bitch, effectively.
But yeah, not to say that they had a loss of power.
I do think they have.
But I think that the Israel situation, that's not in itself a loss of Jewish power, an indication of it, rather.
Well, I mean, I sort of agree with you in the sense that Israel can be scapegoated and that...
Doesn't mean the loss of Jewish power, and Jews are in a way more powerful when they're not Zionist, or they're a little bit critical of Zion.
I mean, I could go on with that, but I don't agree with you fundamentally.
I think Israel getting overrun, Israel engaging in greater atrocities, etc., etc., whatever outcome it is, I think is bad for the Jews.
I mean, it's just a bad look.
It makes people question other things.
And so, no, I would say it's a bad thing.
Yeah. And maybe I think, Aristocrat can correct me if I'm wrong, maybe what he's saying, though, is to the extent that they ultimately become hated and despised or persecuted, then it ultimately sort of benefits them in another turn or another cycle,
as it were.
Right. But really, the way that they're looking now is they're looking like Nazis.
So it's the worst case scenario.
All their propaganda that they've toiled to create about how bad Nazis are and how bad, you know, killing minorities, like non-white minorities is.
Yeah. Like, they're doing all that shit, right?
So their whole, like, billion-dollar propaganda industry is now working against them, you know?
So all these things that we're supposed to be concerned about and sad about, they're doing that now.
So it's a massive loss of credibility on terms that they have set, you know?
Now, ultimately, if Jews are, you know, to Aristocrat's point, if Jews become a despised, persecuted people and so forth, I mean, you know, ultimately that can become a narrative in another turn of history,
as it were, right?
As we saw with World War II, of course, right, where they became persecuted in Nazi Germany.
And then, you know, they used that persecution, essentially, and the propaganda of that persecution, essentially, to, you know, to their effect, to their benefit, rather.
Norman Finkelstein describes so eloquently and says what we can't say.
It's a big guilt trip, essentially, is what he says.
It's moral capital.
They gain all this moral capital through the Holocaust.
They have more moral capital than Gentiles.
Through this moral capital, they become beyond reproach.
That's a huge amount of...
Power and cultural power that they're given in society as a consequence of that.
You know what I mean?
So, in any case, you know, one thing I was going to mention about the work that Richard and I are doing is that the other thing, too, is that, and it's one of the reasons.
Well, I mean, there are many reasons, of course.
I mean, if I was just doing something that was kind of a straight-up DR approach at myth or whatever, it would be difficult to find funding for that as well.
But I think that the analysis of REM is neither right-wing or left-wing, right?
So it's neither appealing to sort of the vanity of the Norse bros or the kind of standard Aryanists that look at myth.
It's not appeasing to them because we're really interested in knowing what these myths say and understanding the symbol language and so forth.
So it's not something that they're going to be like, get on the bandwagon and say, yeah, support this work.
He's telling us how we used to be like Thor and shit.
It's not like that.
Not that it doesn't have elements of that.
We have Jupiter and all this stuff and Apollo.
But I haven't pandered, and neither has Richard on this count.
But on the other hand, it's also not necessarily going to be appealing to the left either.
So we're kind of in this little area where You know, sometimes to tell the truth is, I guess it's a cliche or whatever, but it is kind of lonely telling the truth, where you're not creating propaganda for either side,
or you're not creating propaganda, at least for a side that yet exists.
Now, I think that on some level, you know, what we're doing can be turned into propaganda, you know, from our perspective, definitely.
That's part of the goal.
You know what I mean?
That's definitely part of the goal.
It's a completely new thing, is what I would say.
I would stress the sort of novelty of what we're doing.
And because of that novelty, though, and Richard will attest to this, in the DR, I'm fucking universally hated.
I mean, that's just the facts.
And you guys hear me talk on these shows.
It's not like I'm a real asshole.
I'm kind of a nice guy, I think.
But this is the reason I'm disliked, is because I'm telling the truth, essentially.
And if they could just easily discount me and just be like, this guy's a moron, then they would try to debate me.
Tom would try to debate me.
All these guys would try to debate me on myth, which is my strong suit, symbol and myth.
No one will touch that.
You know what I'm saying?
And a lot of it is just because they don't have The knowledge.
And also because they probably sense on some level that I'm actually correct.
Or that there's a lot that sort of correct my thesis.
And, you know, and they don't want someone competing who has a more sophisticated thesis that's revealing and interesting with what their sort of basic stuff, essentially.
So they don't like that because they don't know it and they have to learn it now.
You know what I mean?
And they've already kind of taken positions on North Smith and so forth.
So they just want to censor it, essentially, or, you know, kind of de facto de-platform it by not, you know, acknowledging it and, you know, whispering in their little chat rooms like, oh, fuck it, but not daring ever talk to me about it because they'd get their teeth kicked in,
basically. In any case, this work is necessary and important.
The conclusions I reach, I reach because I believe them to be true.
They seem to be true.
And I provide the evidence to why I've come to these conclusions.
And it's not to piss people off or fuck with anyone or anything like that.
But rather, it's quite the opposite.
It's to...
Uh, give us sort of the, the understanding, this sort of esoteric, uh, symbol knowledge and understanding so that we can go forth and be dominant in this field.
Um, you know, and, uh, any, any case.
So I just thought I would add that.
Yeah. Um, you, uh, I saw the comments on the, uh, my millennial, uh, discussion, pretty remarkable.
The haters are still out there.
They have nothing else to do.
Well, anyway.
Okay, guys.
Last chance to do predictions because I've got to actually run to dinner.
Does anyone want to speak up?
Nuggets are going to win the championship again.
Do they have an overall good team?
I just don't know enough about baseball.
I know.
Are there any other...
I probably know basketball.
Actually, I see one basketball fan.
Yeah. I think the Niners are going to put it together and win the Super Bowl.
I have a UFC prediction.
I say Chandler beats Conor 55-45.
So it blows him out, basically.
Don't you think that Conor will get knocked out?
I mean, it seems like he might get knocked out because he's slowed down, and he doesn't really run from a fight, does he?
I don't know.
I mean, he's an amazing counterpuncher, and that's going to play very much into his hands when Chandler does his usual thing of standing and banging.
But then again, my issue is Conor's fitness.
He's basically a pothead now.
He's probably a crackhead as well.
You know, he's just not really taking things seriously, whereas Chandler is training his ass off.
And, you know, people criticize Chandler's conditioning, but, like, if you look at the way he fights, I mean, he goes balls to the wall from second zero until he can't anymore.
So it's not a conditioning issue.
It's an energy efficiency issue.
And I don't know.
We'll see how it goes.
You know, maybe Chandler decides, you know what, I want to win more than I want to be entertaining.
He might change his mind about that.
But, yeah, I mean, Conor, of course, has a chance.
I think he's the more skilled opponent, but against someone who's really hungry and who's really trying and taking it seriously, you know, I think it tips it in favor of Chandler by just a bit.
I would, yeah, I don't see...
Assuming Conor comes back, right?
It seems like that's still a question mark.
Oh, no, no.
He just confirmed it tonight.
Oh, is that right?
Yeah, he was at a restaurant, I guess, or a club, and he was filming a selfie video where he's congratulating everyone, and he made his big announcement that I think in May, maybe, or June, something like that, the fight's going down.
Did he actually make it to the fight?
Do you think he actually makes it to the fight?
I don't know, man.
That's a good question.
Yeah, I mean, you know, and honestly...
I would root for the guy, even though he doesn't really deserve people's support at this point.
He turned into kind of a shitty guy.
But he's so entertaining, and I still like him from the old days.
But, yeah, I don't see him beating Chandler.
I think Chandler would just beat him.
And Chandler, I think, is kind of a flawed fighter, too.
But he's fun, he's exciting, and he's fun to watch.
The fight that I'm really looking forward to, even more than that, is the one with Dreykus Duplessis and the other guy.
The guy who's retarded.
What's his name?
Oh, Strickland.
Strickland, thank you.
Yeah. You know, I like Dreykus.
I think he's a homosexual, though.
I mean, not that it...
I just found that surprising.
Is he a homosexual?
Do you know?
That's the first I hear of this.
Yeah, I think there's images of him kissing his...
Coach on the lips.
Okay, guys, listen.
Oh, goodness.
I've got to go, and we can't get into this.
Okay. Okay.
It was just getting hot.
It was just getting hot.
Yeah. Okay.
So anyway, yeah, best of luck for everyone.
And yeah, you know, what is it, next year in Jerusalem, next year in Rome?
Maybe we should start saying that over and over.
A tradition of that.
But it's going to be our year, and that's going to be a good thing.
Yeah, definitely.
Guys, thank you so much for your support.
For your current support, we're overwhelmed by it.
