In this News Roundup episode, we take a look at the 'debate' between Professor Richard Wolff (public face of Marxism these days, sadly) and 'Destiny' (AKA Steven Bonnell II), a liberal YouTube livestreamer, and Bonnell's total lack of real and honest curiosity about socialism. We then take a look at Nick Fuentes' extremely not mad reaction to YouTuber Thought Slime's video about him, and discover various things about Nick, including why he doesn't believe in dinosaurs. Or, y'know, the Holocaust. We also check in on Bret (Weinstein) and Heather (Heying) (of the Dark Horse podcast) to correct some of their pernicious bullshit and see what they think the cops should be allowed to do to protestors who are DESTROYING CIVILISATION. Daniel draws the various threads together and, in a stunning third act twist, reveals what all these things have in common. Content Warnings Apply. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent. Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1 Episode Notes: Destiny, "You Are Just WRONG! -- Richard Wolff Debate Gets Heated" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcA5szcnESY Matthew Gault, "Twitch Streamer Destiny and an Economist Debate Capitalism, Achieve Nothing." https://www.vice.com/en/article/jg8x77/twitch-streamer-destiny-and-an-economist-debate-capitalism-achieve-nothing "Twitch streamer and philosophical gadfly Steven “Destiny” Bonnell II spent 90 minutes of his day on Wednesday debating the merits of capitalism and socialism with noted economist Richard Wolff. Thirty-five minutes into the “debate” and the pair were arguing over the basic definitions of capitalism and socialism—economic systems whose relative merits and performance they were supposed to compare. It was not how either party had said they wanted the conversation to go. It was also a clear picture of the state of online-led political conversation—one side stalls the conversation to demand strict definitions and gaming personalities soak up too much time and attention. [...] "The pair went back and forth, both often heated. Wolff is old school and a college professor. His style was collegiate, sometimes condescending, and often sounded like a lecture. Destiny is used to debating on the internet where talking fast and fussing about specifics throws off an opponent. It was a weird pairing." Rad Shiba's video on Richard Wollf, 'A Wolff in Marxist Clothing' https://youtu.be/JG7FhC2LeGE ThoughtSlime, "Nick Fuentes is the hate nerd" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eRoYhTQDuo Nick Fuentes response on AF: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngzBo3NcurE Nicholas J. Fuentes | Responding to Th*ught Sl*me's Hitpiece https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oX4QO8nPKFQ Avi vs Nick Fuentes On the Holocaust and Trans Issues: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30qlCoYLfSc Dark Horse Podcast Q&A 76th DarkHorse Podcast Livestream, "Should Police Be Allowed to Kill Rioters" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7wWmzmBw6I&t=3414s Starts at 56:54
I'm Jack Graham, he him, and in this podcast I talk to my friend Daniel he him, and in this podcast I talk to my friend Daniel Harper, also he him, about what he learned from years of listening to today's Nazis, white nationalists, white supremacists, and what they say to each white nationalists, white supremacists, and
Be warned, this is difficult subject matter.
Content warnings always apply.
Hello, and I Don't Speak German podcast has been 86 years.
It's episode 86, that's all I mean.
Yeah, so welcome back.
Not a prime, as you should know, but yeah.
Thanks there, Daniel, for that nice bit of math.
Always nice.
Yeah, so here we are.
Another good old ep of the good old show.
And it's the 86th one, if you can fucking believe that.
And it's a News Roundup episode.
News Roundup episode!
So Daniel, what news are we going to be rounding up this week?
I think we're starting by going straight back to our increasingly frequent topic of Heather Hying and Brett Weinstein, Stein, at Dark Horse, aren't we?
Yeah, we kind of have three basic topics to cover here.
First of all, we're going to respond to some of the stuff that kind of came up from our Brett and Heather turf two-parter, which we did earlier in April.
Then we're going to discuss this Destiny Richard Wolfe debate, which I think has some Interesting bits in it.
We'll see how much time.
I kind of think of this as a little bit like the Jimmy Dore episode, in which, you know, you were really enthusiastic about doing that, and I was less so, but the audience loved it, and I think this will be kind of that, but opposite, where I'm kind of excited to force you to listen to some of these clips, and you're going to hate it, but I think the audience will appreciate, and will appreciate this.
And then in kind of the third part, we're going to talk a little bit about the Nick Fuentes Thought Slime thing, where the YouTuber Thought Slime made a video about Nick Fuentes.
A pretty good video.
I think there are some things that I would criticize, but very good.
And then Nick Fuentes, in very I'm not mad mode, did a three hour live stream at two in the morning, whining about it.
And I'm just going to say now, I've intended for that to be the core of this episode and I got really into doing the Richard Wolff clips and doing some of the other stuff and I pulled a bunch of, I have like two pages of notes about this Thought Slime video issue and we're gonna just barely touch on it today because there will be a full episode dealing with this.
Some of the issues in here.
We could go through this minute by minute.
We could spend a year going through all of the bullshit that's in this Nick Fuentes whining for three hours bit.
But we're not going to do that today.
We will slot that in at some point in the future.
I owe you more Nick Fuentes material, is what I'm saying.
We're going to talk about the Holocaust a little bit today, and what Nicky Boy has to say about the Holocaust.
And maybe if we get to it, we'll do a little bit of audio from Bette and Heather Talking about what should be done with rioters in Portland.
So yeah, that's our plan.
That's our plan.
Great.
Well, I don't think we have any prelim material, so let's just get stuck in.
Sure.
The first thing I want to do is say thank you.
I mean, this is kind of preliminary.
So we do have preliminary material.
You see, I checked before we started recording this, and as I did, I checked and he said no.
So this is the shit I have to deal with with this guy.
This is what happens when Jack is the producer and I'm the talent.
I am a diva.
I am not.
I bring you stuff and change my mind three times in a minute.
It's like dealing with David Gerrard, honestly.
There's only one reason that David Gerrard is not going to take over for me in this podcast, and that's because he has better things to do with his life.
Anyway.
Thank you.
Love you, David.
Always.
It's great.
So anyway.
So anyway, we should start off here.
We normally do kind of, at the beginning of these episodes, we talk a bit about kind of errata or corrections or things that kind of came up regarding previous episodes of the podcast.
That's sort of how we, that's sort of our beginning.
That's kind of how we open things.
And I got so much feedback after the two-part Brent and Heather bit, the Heather Hine goes full turf episodes.
We could do a full episode about that.
Also, I said I'm going to do an episode or two, or maybe more, bringing in trans voices and other marginalized voices, talking about their experience of these things.
I have gotten a lot of response from people who are eager to be a part of that.
We're just trying to figure out how to make that happen.
I owe some people some emails, etc, etc.
I'm not punting on that.
I think that's important to do, but I didn't want to kind of come back to it that quickly immediately.
So what I want to do right now is just kind of cover really just kind of one message that I got from a listener.
And this is a person who, for I think obvious reasons, wanted to remain anonymous.
And so I have to adjust this.
But in episode 84, we discussed the way that Brett and Heather covered a particular issue, a trans woman named Colleen who had I don't want to, I don't know exactly what verb I'd use here, but had some issues with using a sauna at the Evergreen State College while Brett and Heather were there.
And so we're not going to cover that story again.
Please go back and listen to episodes 83 and 84, and in particular, kind of the end of 84 to kind of get the coverage of that story.
But in that, I was kind of unclear about what the actual kind of factual nature of the claims, because the news stories are really incomplete and it kind of became a thing that Went out on the right wing noise machine and Brett and Heather covered it very badly because they were manipulating certain details.
And so immediately after that episode dropped, I actually got a message from someone who I did not validate this.
It was an anonymous person who claimed to have been working for the pool at the time of this incident.
Yeah.
And again, I did not kind of dig into details.
I did not kind of do like full journalistic asking questions and emailing people or calling people or whatever.
So this is an anonymous person.
I have no reason to disbelieve this because from whatever else I know about this situation, this stuff kind of lines up.
And so I'm just going to Paraphrase a bit, kind of massage some details here because I don't, this person did come anonymously and I don't want to kind of reveal any details about it.
But the details here are that a trans woman was using a sauna.
The way it was kind of portrayed was that some small girls had gone in, were disgusted by the trans woman's body.
And, you know, called the authorities and then it kind of got in the news, etc, etc.
And Brett and Heather were very much on the, well, of course, this person is just going to be threatening to young girls because this is obviously a man with a penis.
This is not what I'm saying.
This is what they pretty much literally said on that episode that they did and which we played clips from last time.
So here's kind of the more Complete story.
And that is, um, this person emails me and says, it was a club swim team, which has a group H218.
Swim team members were not and never have been allowed to use the sauna because it's a small sauna and both numbers of an age of kids who end up there unsupervised are an issue.
Um, and then there's a little bit more there, but it was a swim team mom who brought her young kids into the sauna, which she knew she wasn't allowed to do, and then complained about it.
Parenthetically from this person, it was so dumb.
So this was not a girl swim team goes into a sauna and is terrified by the terrible person sitting there.
This was a swim team mom who brought her kids where they were not supposed to be.
And then the mom complained about this.
The rec director was very firm about calling his rights to be there.
The swim team board of directors decided to take it to court.
They lost.
From the rec center policy, anyone who was uncomfortable sharing locker rooms with trans people was given the option to use the single occupancy shower bathrooms right by the pool deck.
As far as I was aware, only two or three swimmers chose to do so.
The high school girls on the team.
These are the girls who Heather Hying explicitly said should have been defended from this terrible trans person, if you remember 84.
She was deeply passionate about the rights of these girls to be protected.
The high school girls on the team vocally supported Khalid.
So, you know, as always, you dig into it.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah, this was this was a nothing burger from the point of view of certainly the swim team like the swim team was very aware of this.
There were two young girls who were there where they shouldn't have been by the rules of the sauna.
That had nothing to do with trans people or trans rights or anything like that.
A swim mom, a Karen, walks in, brings her kids in, and then she decides to make a fuss about it for her own reasons, which, you know, et cetera, et cetera.
Anyway, I find it interesting is that whenever we do a Brent and Heather segment, I get people from Evergreen or from the surrounding Evergreen areas sending me messages of support.
Like, you know, even people who broadly like Brett and Heather are often on the like, I don't know what the fuck bullshit there are these days, you know, it's a very much that thing, but particularly like people in the community are people who were there at the time or who are there now have been like overwhelmingly supportive of the coverage that we've done of this issue because Brett and Heather have done terrible, terrible things to the Evergreen State College and to the community that supported them for 15 years.
And I think it's important to just highlight that in this way.
This is very, very indicative of the kinds of emails I get from whenever we cover Brett and Heather.
It's like, oh yeah, they were into some bullshit.
They're just fucking... It's nothing.
Anyway.
Okay, so that's the preliminary material that we didn't have dealt with.
Right, that we didn't have.
Hopefully everybody appreciates that.
And if you are a trans person who was in one of Brett and Heather's classes, I would love to hear from you and I will protect your identity and not even read anything.
I got permission from this person to read portions of that DM before I read it.
So if you want to come to me anonymously and you don't want your information shared, I will absolutely respect that.
And I have done for many, many, many people, particularly around these two individuals.
Okay, so what's our next piece?
So the next thing we're going to do is we're going to talk about Destiny and Richard Wolff.
Oh, good.
Perhaps I should make it clear at the start that I haven't watched this.
Awesome.
I'm not going to watch it.
I'm not interested.
I'm not a big fan of Professor Wolf.
He calls himself a Marxist.
I don't think he is, personally.
And I don't like internet debates.
And as for Destiny, I basically neither know nor care who this fucko is.
That's my position on this entire thing.
Sure, that's fair.
I know, I mean, I kind of shared a little bit with you, you know, in kind of privately when it happened.
It's like, oh yeah, this is a big heaping pile of bullshit.
And for those who don't know, Richard Wolff is an economist.
Again, as Jack says, he calls himself a Marxist.
I have deep and fundamental problems with Richard Wolff and the things that he says in this debate.
And if Jack were to watch the full debate, he would throw heavy objects at a wall, I suspect.
And he might do it while listening to some of these clips.
But for all of the problems that Jack and I would have with Richard Wolff, Pale in comparison to the issues of neoliberal fuckhead Destiny.
And Destiny has been on my list of people to possibly do an episode about at some point.
He produces a ton of material.
He is not a fascist, but he does a lot of the Nazi debates, and he does a lot of really questionable things.
And we would absolutely get a big upswing in listeners if we started covering these kind of YouTube live streamers more, but life is too short to care too much about YouTube live streamer drama.
So yeah, you might, you might not be able to tell from the way we talk listeners, but we're too serious minded.
Yes.
Also, also like this, this is a subculture where, you know, they will do multi-hour, you know, six, seven hour live streams and just play video games and answer questions from chat.
Another, These people are impervious to normal human boredom.
Another one that the people want me to... Half of our audience seems to want me to befriend Vos and bring him on the show, and the other half want me to do a cutting takedown of Vos and make him a subject of our ire.
And my very strongly held opinion is I have very little care about Vos, one way or the other.
I think he's kind of a dipshit.
He definitely Has said very many bigoted things out there.
I would rather he not have the audience he has.
He actually got his start in the Destiny Discord channel.
He was part of the Destiny fan club.
And then he kind of got elevated into being a live streamer of his own.
Which, great.
That's apparently how you get to be professional at this these days is just hang on to Destiny for a while.
I'll try that maybe.
We'll see if that works out for us.
But, yeah, people really want us to do more of this kind of content.
And I think this segment is going to demonstrate why we do not.
So there's a really nice write-up here in Vice.
And I've got some quotes here.
This is from Matthew Galt.
The title of the piece is Twitch Streamer Destiny and Economist Debate Capitalism Achieve Nothing.
Very apt title.
Oh, what a surprise!
Who could have seen that eventuality coming?
I've got a link to this in the show notes.
And just to kind of highlight this, it's, you know, Internet debate achieves nothing.
In other news, bare shit in the woods, etc.
Academic and video game live streamer have different modes of communication and do not communicate well.
I think Wolf understood Destiny very well, you know, for all the issues that I would have with Wolf, I think he at least was understanding what destiny was going for.
Destiny was more interested in scoring points than he was in trying to have a real conversation.
And that will be we are going to put some clips.
Again, a completely unforeseeable.
Because it turns out that doing Internet live stream debates with people is not really about coming to truth or having real conversations. - Mm-hmm.
Turns out.
Yeah, turns out.
OK, sorry.
Yes, you were going to read from Matthew Galtz.
So here's the here's here's just a little bit just to kind of wet your whistle before we play some clips here.
Twitch streamer and philosophical gadfly Stephen Destiny Bonnell II spent 90 minutes of his day on Wednesday debating the merits of capitalism and socialism with noted economist Richard Wolff.
35 minutes into the debate, in quotes, and the pair were arguing over the basic definitions of capitalism and socialism, economic systems... Oh, you don't say.
You don't say.
You don't fucking say.
...whose relative merits and performance they were supposed to compare.
It was not how either party had said they wanted the conversation to go.
It was also a clear picture of the state of online-led political conversation.
One side stalls the conversation to demand strict definitions of gaming personalities, soak up too much time and attention.
I'm skipping ahead just a little bit.
The pair went back and forth, both often heated.
Wolf was old school and a college professor.
His style was collegiate, sometimes condescending, actually often condescending and fairly so, and often sounded like a lecturer.
Destiny is used to debating on the internet.
We're talking fast and fussing about specifics.
Throws off an opponent.
It was a weird pairing.
So I want to give you just a little taste of this.
To my detriment, I'm sure.
There's a lot here.
Jack would not.
Put up with this and I don't really want to spend any more time on it than I have already but this is a 54 second clip and just to give you a sense of Destiny's understanding of the left of these of these socialists and these anarchists that he debates.
These are his five challenges for socialists that he claims he can never get anyone to I really hope there's a point to this beyond pissing me off.
I really do.
There is.
Don't worry.
Okay.
All right.
This one is largely, this one is mostly For the audience to understand just how terrible this man is at understanding the basic concepts that he's debating here, okay?
It's likely in the course of this debate that my opponent will suggest we take after Nordic or Western European countries, citing that things like socialized healthcare or subsidized education are powerful programs that address many of the underserved needs of Americans today.
While this is true, I would like to remind everyone that we've spent the last decade reminding conservatives that the government simply providing welfare has absolutely nothing to do with socialism.
My opponent believes that strong social safety nets and welfare programs are important parts of the government.
Most liberals would welcome him with open arms, me included.
Consequentially, there are five major hurdles that no socialist I have ever spoken to has adequately addressed, and they are as follows.
Number one, what level of violence is acceptable for you to reach our socialist state?
Number two, how do we decide which businesses are allowed to exist in a socialist society without allowing private capital investment?
Three, is any form of investment whatsoever allowed in a socialist society for an expansion of business?
Four, how are labor markets determined in a socialist society?
And five, how do we calculate which goods and services a nation needs if we do away with the commodity form?
I love that number one is, what is the level of violence that you are willing to submit the world to in order to create your glorious revolution?
Unstated, of course, is how much violence already exists in the world due to capitalism, etc, etc.
These are literally like talking points from like Hayek.
They're not even Hayek level, like understanding of this.
Destiny, people say, is one of the vanguards of the online left.
I would say not so much.
Yeah, by the sounds of that, probably not so much, no.
Given your antipathy towards this material already, I think we might skip one of these clips that I had planned. - I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm literally getting a headache.
Fair enough, fair enough.
But it gives you a sense of the general theme of this.
So we're going to skip one in which Destiny proves that he is He thinks like a capitalist.
He thinks like an investor.
That's sort of the way he thinks.
But we will also cover a bit of Destiny's opinions of history.
He thinks that analyzing history is irrelevant.
There are two clips here that I'm going to play, just kind of back to back.
Yeah.
I just want to say, listeners, I'm aware that I'm not answering the questions.
I'm not responding.
I'm aware of that.
I'm just going to sigh and roll my eyes.
And that's all you're going to get from me, very likely.
But, you know, Jesus Christ.
I do apologize.
I did not realize that this would be quite this unpleasant for you.
It's okay, it's fine.
There are answers to these questions.
What I'm really trying to get at here, and I think our audience... The last one is literally just the calculation debate.
Yeah, it's just the calculation problem.
There is a very interesting and in-depth history of people... I've literally written an entire fucking article about it on my blog.
There's a long debate among socialists about the calculation problem, which Destiny seems to be completely unaware of.
And I think that this clip here is going to demonstrate exactly why.
Your argument is so difficult that you have to make up the information to support it.
My argument is so concrete that I don't think I've had to bring up feudalism a single time to make any of my points or ask you any questions related to any of your points.
That analysis is a little richer than it is.
Something I'm curious about.
Why wouldn't you consider, just going by the incredibly generous definition you gave me on point one of socialism, why wouldn't you consider the Democratic Party in the United States a socialist party?
As a party that wants to see more stuff returned to Americans, wants to see people with a greater control of the workplace, had members that were pushing for 20% ownership in the share of companies, Bernie Sanders and AOC, why wouldn't you consider the Democratic Party in the United States a socialist party?
Because it opposes almost everything you just mentioned.
It has a small wing now that is in favor of it, who, by the way, call themselves socialists.
But the establishment of the Democratic Party, its history over the last hundred years since Franklin Roosevelt... Wait, that's not fair.
Why would you talk about the history of it?
That's not relevant.
Because history is always present with us.
It's absolutely not relevant.
You've said yourself that the way that we look at socialism today is different than it was a hundred years ago.
Joseph Biden is a product of that history, as he himself says.
That party has been unable to make a government.
They couldn't even preserve the level of government intervention that was achieved in the 1930s.
The last 70 years have been a rollback of the New Deal, an undoing of it, and that was done as much by the Democratic Party as the Republicans.
He literally just Sam Harris'd the history of the Democratic Party and its relationship to socialists.
The history of it doesn't matter.
The history is irrelevant.
The thing that he's really kind of talking about there is that Wolf goes through the history of kind of three different threads of people talking about socialism who call themselves socialists, who again, we would have, you know, Wolf doesn't even agree with all of the things that Were said there because he agrees with one of those threads instead of the other two.
But one of them is, you know, like, we're going to have private enterprise, it's going to have a have heavy government regulation, etc, etc.
And Destiny is like, well, isn't that what we have now in the United States?
Isn't that just, aren't the Democrats just socialists by that definition?
And Wolf is like, well, no, because A, they're not by my definition regardless, but even Wolf is saying, well, no, because what they're doing is they're embracing a capitalist system as opposed to anything like that.
They are cutting back on regulations through inaction, if not by, you know, outright malice.
And to think that the Democrats are anything like a socialist program, even the furthest left, even the Bernie's, AOC's, Ilhan Omar's, are not really full-on socialists by our definition, but even if you were going to kind of grant them like provisional status, a handful of members on kind of the extreme left wing of the party who have very little influence relative to the much larger, more centrist wing, it's just complete nonsense, right?
It's just complete nonsense from Destiny's point of view.
He is trying to win the battles on the internet as opposed to come to any kind of The history of the Democratic Party is incredibly relevant, because if you go back to its most left-wing phase, FDR, New Deal, 1930s, it's explicitly about preserving capitalism.
It was done to preserve capitalism, because socialism is not just when the government does stuff within capitalism.
And the Democratic Party and FDR knew that perfectly well, which is why they used government action in the New Deal era, precisely to preserve capitalism.
And of course, the other thing is that socialism has to be internationalist and completely across colour boundaries and race boundaries and stuff like that.
And it's most left-wing, the Democratic Party, basically just said, yeah, fuck black people.
So yeah, of course the history matters.
The structure of the party is its accreted history.
Absolutely.
And, you know, the New Deal was built on, you know, for all of the kind of positive qualities that, you know, have improved the lives of Americans, of many Americans, over the last 90 years or so, did the New Deal.
It was absolutely built on the backs of Fucking over the African-Americans and other racial minorities in the country.
And the way that they got so the Democrats to get on board with it was to implicitly and explicitly exclude African-Americans from that.
And also on arms spending from capitalist arms firms to build up the power of the capitalist imperialist state.
So that's at its most left wing.
So the.
Right.
So, yes, the Democratic Party might as well might as well be Chairman Mao.
Right.
Yeah.
Same thing.
Yeah, again, and Destiny there, he thinks it's unfair that you get to criticize the current Democrats for the history of the Democratic Party when you don't get to criticize a current socialist for Pol Pot, for instance, or the crimes of the Soviet Union.
It seems like it's kind of a double standard there, don't you think?
Well, I mean, firstly, uh, we're talking about a, a global political tradition with incredibly different facets spread out across different areas and different countries versus the history of one specific institution in one specific country.
So, uh, the comparison is completely inapt, but, but secondly, we don't criticize, you know, AOC or Bernie Sanders for what they say based on.
The politics of the New Deal.
We criticize them based on what they say now.
It's informed by what we know about the history of the Democratic Party going back to the New Deal, etc, etc.
In exactly the same way as I personally would criticize anybody now calling themselves a socialist in terms of Pol Pot or whoever you like if I thought that was relevant.
Absolutely.
History isn't gone.
History is like physics.
It's the way that we understand these things is by understanding their history and by understanding the material realities that built them and the incentives and the structures that are built that way.
Absolutely.
After the end of the debate, Destiny stays on stream for a while and bitches and moans.
Bitching and moaning is a theme of this episode, by the way.
He spends a lot of time answering chats and complaining about the things that Richard Wolff, this terrible Richard Wolff, did in this debate and the unfairness of it all.
You could tell just from that clip that he was, as I say, I haven't listened to the debate.
So I don't know, but I could tell just from that clip you just played that Destiny was... I feel really stupid calling him Destiny, honestly.
You can call him Stephen.
Stephen Bonnell, that's his real name.
Mr. Bonnell, good.
Because, you know, calling a grown man Destiny, that just makes me feel very foolish.
Mr. Bonnell is clearly outraged by the fact that Professor Wolf has been talking about feudalism.
You know, he's ridiculing the fact that Professor Wolf even brought it up.
Whereas, you know, I can Having heard Richard Wolff speak a few times and read some of the things he's written, I can very easily imagine how feudalism came up.
You know, it's to do with context and comparison between and the origins of the capitalist system and its comparison to previous economic... Yeah, but Mr. Bonnell is clearly just... That's such a silly thing to even bring that up!
Man, I just want to talk about capital gains taxes and talk about, you know, capital allocations and systems.
And you've got to bring up feudalism, almost as if, you know, the way that capital gains and flow have some impact on or are impacted in some way by the history of feudalism.
Or even as if, you know, you're trying to lay out basic definitions so that you have a common ground on what the words you're using mean with the person you're debating.
I mean, what a foolish...
I mean, those five questions just reveal the complete lack of intellectual curiosity, right?
Like, I mean, it's just, you know, that's why I included them.
It's just like, this is, again, this is Baby's first anti-socialist argument.
Like, this is not someone who deserves respect.
Like, I would respect, you know, a neoliberal centrist who had kind of a deep understanding of some of this stuff and who could bring kind of an honest critique of those furthest to the left.
I would disagree with him, of course, but I could, you know, if that was what was happening here, you could at least respect it on some level.
Bunnell brings nothing, he brings nothing.
Or if it was like You were talking to a kid on Twitter or something.
A kid self-identifying as a Marxist-Lemnist or something on Twitter.
They're obviously 17 or whatever and they're just venturing into politics and they're excited about these new ideas.
Yeah, if your aim was to try to sound them out and find out how much they actually knew and how much they'd read and how far they really were into it.
Yeah, those sort of five basic questions.
What's your idea of revolution?
How do you respond to, you know, how does a socialist society allocate primary resources?
You know, what would actually be the state of private investment in a socialist society?
Very basic stuff.
Yeah, okay.
If you're trying to sound out a beginner, yeah.
From somebody that's actually a little bit further into it.
And I'm not mocking beginners, because everybody's a beginner at some point, but you know, some people will race ahead beyond what they've actually done the research.
Yeah, that's the sort of stuff you would ask one of these kids on Twitter, you know, to find out where they are.
Yeah, well, and Destiny obviously isn't doing that.
He thinks he's a knock-down drag-out, you know.
Yeah, he's coming at Richard Wolff with that, and I said, you know, I'm not a Richard Wolff fan, very much not, but Jesus Christ, man.
Big shades of Jordan Peterson, like, skimming the Communist Manifesto to debate Slavoj Zizek.
I can never pronounce his fucking name.
Slavoj Zizek, I believe is how, yes, usually.
He skimmed the Communist Manifesto and, you know, that was his preparation.
Oh, I opened it this morning and it's very interesting.
It starts by talking about a specter.
Now, as everybody knows, ghosts don't exist.
So there you go, right from the start.
We might have to do a Jordan Peterson episode just to get you to do that accent more.
All right.
I did want to play one more clip.
And this isn't from the debate.
This is from the post-debate.
While Bonnell is whining.
And he brings up this irrelevant history thing again.
And yeah, this is pretty good, I think.
Why did you say history isn't relevant?
Because I didn't like the fact that when he was condemning the actions of the Democratic Party, he wanted to reach back over a hundred years and talk about their failures.
But when I was trying to get him to tell me what he believed a socialist country was or what socialism was, he was like, well, hold on.
I'm not going by Marx's definition.
Things are different now.
Well, hold on.
If things are going to be different now for how you define socialism, which, by the way, that's fair.
If you want to use a different definition now, that's fine.
But you can't hold the Democratic Party to account for things that another Democratic Party did a hundred years ago.
I don't think that's That's fair.
I don't think you can do that.
You have to be consistent in this.
If you want to talk about how things are as they are now, that's fine.
But if your definition of social is going to be so wide to include private... This is another thing that bothered me, but I feel like he never actually gave me a definition of capitalism either.
My definition of capitalism, or what I understand capitalism to be, capitalism is when you have private enterprise, meaning you've got people that can own companies that don't necessarily work them, and then they interact with some free market or open market system.
That's what capitalism is.
It means that I can go out and buy a business, hire other people to work it, and then I can buy and sell goods on an open market.
Like, that's it.
That's what capitalism is.
But it feels like...
That's Destiny.
That's Destiny.
Yeah.
like load things, so much more like, capitalism is when the slave and the master, when you have the employee and the ployer and the ownership and the extraction of women.
It's like, damn, let's just like, let's just go by basic things so that we know what the fuck we're talking about.
That's destiny.
That's destiny.
Yeah.
For whatever criticism we have of Wolf, and I have many from that debate, believe me.
Here I'm focusing on, like, again, destiny is like kind of complete lack of curiosity, which is something that we've seen over and over again in these, and this is what interests me about this and what, you know, kind of like logic I was trying to follow here is that we've talked a lot about like Brett and Heather and various other members of the kind of like logic I was trying to follow here is that we've talked a lot about like Brett and Heather and various other members of the IDW who speak at some length about topics without having even the basic understanding of
There is a large, gigantic, I mean, Amount of writing of technical academic literature over 150 years talking about these issues from a variety of socialist positions.
And Bonnell, you know, his answer is like, well, I can't even get like a basic definition of capitalism out of this guy.
He was trying to give you a definition.
You weren't listening, you know.
And the definition that Wolf kind of gives is about the relation between employer and employee.
That's his distinction there, is that that's the thing that's unique to capitalism, as opposed to other systems like feudalism or slavery, etc., etc.
That's the argument that Wolf is making.
But you see, they've jumped to debates too soon because, as you say, Destiny is... Destiny?
Bonnell is... I'm sorry, I just feel so foolish referring to a grown man as Destiny.
I can't get past it.
I don't know if it's fair to call him a grown man, to be fair, but, you know, moving on.
But they've proceeded to the debate stage too soon because he doesn't understand the complexities of the subject he's supposed to be debating.
So if you want to talk to Richard Wolff, Yeah, interview the guy and ask him questions, and then you find out.
And then, you know, talk to another person that calls himself a socialist and ask questions and find out.
And then if you find yourself completely unconvinced by any of the answers that you get, then you proceed to the debate stage.
But of course, he's posing as if he's already done all that with his five questions, which actually, to us, look incredibly basic.
Exactly.
That is the last I'm going to ask you to listen to Destiny today.
Or Bon-El.
That's good.
And probably, we'll probably have to eventually talk about Destiny again.
He pops up on some of these online forums often enough that, believe me, I've got some knives to sharpen into this band.
But I wanted to cover that because it kind of speaks to the state of sort of the online left, quote unquote, and this sort of like, you know, I've come to understand that I Must Speak German is as much about how the far-right manipulates internet culture and about how the far-right influences internet culture as about, you know, kind of like full-on fascist guys.
And the fact that this is sort of the level of conversation that's happening on the internet among these like giant live streamers and that you don't even get Any even kind of reasonable understanding of socialism from what you and I would understand.
The debate was actually hosted by one of the guys from the Serfs.
I think Lance is his name.
I'm not a big follower of the Serfs, who make some, I mean, reasonable content, but, you know, even they are not They don't feel to have a great level of theoretical understanding of some of these issues because they're live streamers and ultimately, you know, your job is to be entertaining and not to be knowledgeable about any particular thing.
Yeah, yeah.
And that's just kind of the nature of it.
I might put together some links for the notes, you know, links to like pieces or YouTube videos.
There is a good YouTube video by my friend Rad Shiba, the YouTuber Rad Shiba, did about Richard Wolff, which I will definitely link to, which expresses, I'm not in complete agreement with it, but it expresses a lot of my disagreements with Professor Wolff.
So yeah, if you're interested in following that thread.
The thing is, you know, again, Jack and I cover like very different, we have very different interests.
I think that's part of what makes this podcast works is that we come at this from kind of two different angles.
Like Jack has a very deep theoretical understanding of these issues and I am a stamp collecting, but the stamp collecting is more entertaining.
And so therefore people think I'm the real key to this podcast.
Daniel, Daniel knows the useful stuff.
That's what, that's what all that means.
Daniel has a bunch of fascists stamped between pages of wax paper pages and just kind of opens it up and goes like, and look at that one.
It has like a very interesting coloration.
You should learn to recognize this in the wild.
And Jack is like, I understand the evolutionary history of every organism going back to the original microbes of all of this stuff.
And ultimately, my job here is to clean up the messes that Daniel makes when he doesn't understand how bad Richard Wolff is.
That's what this podcast really is.
Moving on from Destiny, I think you'd be okay with not listening to his voice any longer.
That'll be fine, yeah.
I've got some more YouTube stuff to talk about, and that is Nick Fuentes and Thought Slime.
What do you think about Thought Slime?
Just curiosity.
I really like Thought Slime.
Again, I think he's an anarchist, so he and I would have some disagreements, but I like him as a presence.
I like him as a presenter and I really like his videos.
I think he's very good.
Yeah.
I think, you know, when he when he gets one wrong, he gets one way wrong, but he gets a lot more right than wrong.
And I quite like his content.
And he's been doing an occasional series called Know Your Fash.
Which is quite good.
He did one on the Proud Boys, which I really liked.
And then he did one recently on Nicky Boy.
Little Nicky.
I'm assuming you actually watched that video?
I did, yeah.
Yeah, I usually watch ThoughtSlam videos.
Just, you know, when there's a new one, I just watch it.
Yeah, I'm subscribed.
So, I mean, he just kind of shows up in my feed and then like some of my old favorites, I'll just go back and rewatch because I just, I don't know.
I like him.
He's an entertaining guy and he makes the kind of content that I like to consume on YouTube.
So, you know, I actually, he followed me after I did a little thread about this issue that we're about to discuss.
I sent him a DM saying, like, hey, if you ever need help doing more Know Your Fash episodes, I'd be happy to give you whatever resources you need.
He didn't respond to me, but I don't respond to all my DMs either, so I'm not going to blame him.
I'm sure he gets a ton of messages.
So we will see.
We will see.
But hey, Matt, Thought Slime.
Good work.
I do have some issues with the Nick Fuentes video.
I think there is, you know, so the story is that Thought Slime made a video about Nick Fuentes, and then Nick Fuentes responded to that video.
As I said before, a nearly three hour, starting at two in the morning, live stream.
Very, very not mad.
He was very not mad about this video.
And what I realized going through this, because I spent like three hours this afternoon going through with notes and trying to figure out what clips to bring up, and I realized we could do multiple episodes just going through this.
There is so much in here.
Because this isn't like a standard like America First episode.
This isn't like I'm wearing my shirt and tie and I'm talking I'm doing like my kind of like professional thing.
This is on one of his like live stream channels.
This is on his like America First slash live or something.
His own late night where he's mostly like he spends like six hours gaming and talking to his audience or whatever doing the same kind of thing that destiny does by the way just to just to make that connection which is part of the reason that i included all this in one episode but uh this was we'll have to call this the youtube bullshit news roundup episode YouTube, I don't think you can put bullshit for the major platforms.
You might have to use some other work, but we can figure that out.
So, what I have done here is, this is a very limited selection of clips from this episode, from this livestream.
He talks about the Holocaust.
We're going to talk a little bit about the Holocaust.
He talks about the Capitol riots.
He talks about all these sorts of things, and his major contention is that Thought Slimes' video says that Nick Fuentes is kind of talking out of both sides of his mouth.
He is saying one thing and kind of saying, I'm a college Republican, I'm a mainstream Republican, you know, kind of person, while at the same time expressing like, White nationalist and arguably violent talking points, which anyone who spends any time with.
The thing is that people who are experts on Nick Fuentes, people who spent a lot of time looking at Nick Fuentes, or even a moderate amount of time looking at Nick Fuentes, know exactly what Nick Fuentes is.
But mainstream journalists and mainstream people who look at Nick Fuentes do not see through the layers of irony that are not, they're tissue thin, but they exist to provide a kind of plausible nihilism, right?
This is the incredibly frustrating thing, isn't it?
Because Nick Fuentes is still kind of doing the 2016-2017 alt-right thing.
He's kind of the last holdout of that technique, you know, that kind of chuckling nihilism wrapped in 17 layers of irony thing.
And the mainstream media are still being bamboozled by it.
They're still foxed by it now.
Exactly.
And so when Thought Slime says that, I think his name is Matt, when Matt says, this is the thing that Nick Fuentes is doing, he is building this kind of layer of plausible deniability Uh, around the things that he says and the terrible things that he believes.
Also, the other thing is he produces so many hours of content that virtually no one has time to look through it all.
Um, this is common to all of the figures that we cover on this podcast.
Yeah.
Um, Nick Fuentes kind of comes out and says, well, look, anybody who's actually followed my stuff knows that I say what I believe.
I have said many, many things I have said, you know, he talks about, you know, I've said, you know, we shouldn't have race mixing.
I've talked about the Jewish question.
I've talked about Jewish power, I think.
is the actual word that he says.
I've talked about all these kinds of things.
I am very open about what I believe.
And you can go back early up, way back to 2017, and I've been saying the same things the entire time.
And I'm not hiding what I believe.
Well, you are and you aren't, right?
He is not because he is right.
He does arguably say the things that he believes to his core And if you kind of follow those channels and you believe it.
But when he is interviewed in the mainstream media, when he is interviewed in kind of other places, and he puts on this kind of act of being something that is much more kind of moderate.
And so that's the key to understanding Nick Fuentes.
Again, we have done lots of material on Nick Fuentes in the past, the Groifer movement, et cetera, et cetera.
I think we're going to have to do kind of a big, like, new episode on Nick Fuentes because my biggest mistake, well, arguably my biggest mistake in the entire time we've been doing this podcast was when we did the original Nick Fuentes episode, I thought he was going to crash and burn and disappear.
And instead he got much, much, much larger and much more important.
Because I thought the kind of 2017 era stuff that you mentioned earlier was no longer going to be viable.
And it turns out, It kind of is, but only if you're as challenged as Nick Funtas.
So all that being said, I have cut together a few clips here that are indicative of the tone of this response, right?
And I think it will be fun to go through them.
If you're ready, we should get started.
Using the very particular definition of fun that really only applies.
I don't speak German fun, Jack.
Do you understand what our fans?
Our fans expect us to go to the darkest place imaginable and laugh about it.
That's what they think is fun.
This is our life now, Jack.
I hope you understand this is what you signed up for.
You didn't realize it, but this is what you signed up for.
When you're like, hey, you want to do a little podcast to help you get some notes together about White Nationalists?
And I was like, yeah, that sounds fun.
And now two and a half years later, it's like, we're here.
This is where we are.
And I would not want to be, I'm so happy to be doing this.
This is, you know, I feel like I've been training my whole life to do this fucking podcast.
Anyway, we should actually play some of these clips now.
Yeah, do it.
I know we're kind of resisting it.
Let's just kind of dig into this.
Honestly, I prepped so many clips for this.
I've got so much more.
I'm not even quite sure exactly what's in this clip, but there is an order here.
So we're going to go through it.
All right.
So the way this works is you're going to hear first a bit of the Thought Slime video because Nick plays the Thought Slime video and then responds to bits of it.
And sometimes he plays like a second or two and then comes in.
And then at some points you're going to hear old Nick Fuentes clips.
that Thought Slime quoted and then Nick responding to the bit from Thought Slime.
So hopefully this is going to be clear, but like the first voice here, this is Matt Thought Slime.
And then Nick Fuentes is going to respond to it.
And he's going to have a very particular and interesting response if you know anything about Nick Fuentes.
Yeah, it will help listeners get the context.
I think if they if they listen or watch Thought Slimes Fuentes video first.
But yeah, and I threw it in the show notes.
I also threw because Nick responded on his main show on the America First Show.
He did do a kind of brief response and I linked to clip to that and I linked to clip to his response to the full three hour one.
No telling how long those are going to last because they come from clip channels which get deleted very quickly.
Fascism is authoritarian and xenophobic paleo-ultranationalism.
and how that happens.
But, so go check those out quickly.
But I did include links just to prove that they're there. - Fascism is authoritarian and xenophobic paleo-ultranationalism.
That's a lot of $5 words.
So to explain, a fascist believes the following.
Their national, ethnic, or religious group is is superior to all others.
At one point, their national, ethnic, or religious group was at the height of its power, and now is in decline due to the corrupt-- - Notice, by the way, about this in particular, this is just true, right?
You're a fascist if you think things were better and now it's worse.
How can you not think that?
How can you not think that things are better at one point in time than they are at another point in time?
Is that just... right?
Are we supposed to believe that things are always getting better each passing day?
And what, if last year was better than this year, does that make you a fascist?
At one point in their history, is what they're saying, their national ethnic or religious group is at the height of its power and are now in decline due to corrupting influences.
Yeah, well, the natural tendency of a society is to degenerate.
The natural tendency of anything is to degenerate.
It says, corrupting degenerative influences, which is a gratuitous way to say it, Another way to say it is entropy.
And entropy is a force in nature just like it's a force In society, right?
You can't define fascism as talking about how, you know, lost greatness that needs to be regained because entropy increases because of the second law of thermodynamics.
Brilliant.
Well done, Nick.
This might be my favorite like minute and 35 seconds of Nick Fuentes ever because there's the whole video is like this because he just self-contradicts continuously.
So first of all, and again, another reason to connect is back to Destiny.
Nick is not responding to the actual argument that Matt is making here, right?
No.
Matt is essentially doing, he does like kind of a four, kind of four defining characteristics of fascism.
They're oversimplified versions of Eco's essay, or fascism.
That's essentially kind of the portrait that he's giving for fascism.
I have my issues with the eco essay.
Maybe we can do that at some point.
And just sort of that very model of how to understand fascism.
Like, yeah, I just kind of have issues.
Like the essay is fine.
I think it's very worthwhile reading.
I think it's a it's a worthwhile document.
I don't think it accurately describes some of the kind of historical processes and etc, etc, that go into The Rise of Fascism.
You might argue I am not qualified to comment on that, and I would agree with you, but... No, I agree with you very much.
The eco essay is good, but it's a good description, not a good explanation.
Right.
That's the difference.
There's also echoes in what Thought Slime says of, I think, Paxton.
I think he talks about palingenetic ultranationalism, which is a term I think comes directly from Robert Paxton.
It's not.
It's not wrong again, but there's some other stuff needs to be said.
There's nothing wrong with Thought Slime's definition there.
No, there's nothing wrong with it.
I mean, for.
But it's obviously wrong because apples rot.
So.
No, no, no.
Well, here's where we're going to go with this.
Thought Slime is doing fine for the 18 minute entertaining comedy video that he's making, you know, for the thing he's doing.
It's fine.
Like there's, you know, you and I would have differences with it, but that's because we're speaking to a more technical audience.
We're speaking to a different kind of audience, right?
No question about that.
Fuentes, over and over again in his response, listens to these points of view about what fascism is and just goes, but isn't that just basically true?
Well, duh!
Of course societies degenerate.
We used to have a great past and now we don't and we must revisit that past.
We must use the imagery of that past In order to build to a brighter future.
That's just true.
Democracy and anarchism and socialism, these are obviously new kids on the block who are obviously wrong.
Throughout all of history, there's always been an authoritarian figure.
Come on, this is just the nature of reality.
And so I do find it amusing that his response is like, well, yeah, but that's just because fascism is right.
Yeah, like, you know, what he's what he's what he's doing, basically, is I'm not a fascist because X, Y and Z, where X, Y and Z basically is fascism.
And in other places, he essentially says, you know, like he does argue, you know, I'm not I'm not a fascist or I don't call myself a white nationalist because, you know, it has a bad connotation.
It doesn't have a clearly defined definition that we can go by.
And therefore, yada, yada, yada, I don't I don't call myself that because I get associated with the wrong crowd, essentially.
And again, Thought Slime is very much right.
He has a very accurate description of the acquaintance.
The things that I really argue with is I think one of the clips that he uses in the thing is taken slightly out of context.
And I think that there are just some minor factual errors that don't affect the quality of the finished product, but which if you had given me the script, I would have Again, no complaints to Matt there.
It's just like, you know, there are little things and Nick Fuentes chops on every single one of them and uses them as a way to discredit the entire video.
Of course, because any factual error that anyone makes in any criticism of fascists just means that you don't know what you're talking about, fundamentally.
So, the other thing that I think is interesting, and you kind of called it out there, is that Fuentes, Nicky Boy, uses entropy as an example.
Well, things just decay.
And this is not a man who's a big fan of science, shall we say.
I have a bachelor's degree in chemistry.
I took the two-semester course in physical chemistry.
Not a pleasant experience, but I did a whole semester, most of a semester, on thermodynamics.
I I know, I know, like, entropy with calculus, you know?
This is a highly technical scientific term, and the second law of thermodynamics is something that, I mean, you know, you can get the kind of, like, basic description of, but, like, it's not accurately described with words, right?
But Nicky Boy here, using highly A highly technical scientific thing to describe the process that he's talking about when it benefits him.
And so now, just to make fun of Nick Fuentes a bit, and I hope you'll, I wanted to, I made you listen to a lot of Bonnell.
Let's, let's mock Fuentes for a while.
I'm going to go off this, this particular live stream and talk about another live stream.
We're going to talk about Nick Fuentes and dinosaurs.
I just want to say, before we get on to the charming concept of Nick Fuentes and dinosaurs, I'm fine with using scientific concepts figuratively when you're talking about politics.
Again, I've done it.
I've literally written an essay about how capitalism is entropic, using the concept of entropy figuratively, right?
Rather than as a scientific concept.
I've literally done that.
That's a fine thing to do.
And I think you and I are going to do an episode about James Lindsay, which is going to obviously take in the SoCal Square.
That's the next episode, by the way.
That's the next one, which is probably going to involve at least a little bit of talk about the original SoCal hoax.
And again, there's some complexity there because I suspect I'm actually a tiny bit more sympathetic to the original SoCal hoax than you are.
But at the same time, I think it's fine sometimes to use scientific concepts figuratively when you're talking about, you know, things in the humanities, etc.
The thing about this is that he's not even using it figuratively in any way that makes sense.
If you're using entropy, then... I mean, literally, time's arrow.
It only goes one way.
That's the whole point.
You can't resurrect anything.
You can't bring anything back.
You can't change anything.
So if you're bringing in entropy figuratively to talk about social decay or degeneration, basically, without knowing it, he's just discounted his entire political project.
Right.
I mean, I wasn't even going on that level.
I was, I was merely just saying, like, again, Nick Fuentes has a deeply, has a deep antipathy for everything scientific, as, as we will see very shortly.
I mean, he... Well, he's a Trump-cath, isn't he?
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
He's like a very extreme tradcast.
I mean, I don't even think he's I mean, he he's kind of the king of the online tradcast in a way, but like he is that that's mostly opposed, frankly.
I mean, well, yeah, because it's all but it's all opposed with this guy.
But yeah, no, I don't have a problem with people using scientific terms metaphorically or literary to use them as a metaphor for some kind of sociological concept.
I do it myself.
I think I've done it on the show.
I've described Trump as a catalyst for the rise of white nationalism in 2015 and 2016.
I'm fine with the metaphor.
Certainly, I'm not trying to say you can't use the scientific metaphor.
I just find it interesting that he reaches for this thing, entropy, in this context.
uses it badly but in any other context would reject like he rejects the very idea of like how scientific knowledge is gathered right he's going to start talking about creationism here and so yeah dinosaurs dinosaurs so and Dinosaurs!
So this clip is a little bit muddy in terms of its audio, and the reason is that this was a livestream.
This was a kind of multi-hour livestream that he did about a year and a half ago, I believe.
Actually, probably about the end of 2019.
Pre-COVID for sure.
An Australian Nazi who used to go by Lolli Socks and then changed his name to Catboy Cammy because Lolli Socks is literally child porn related.
So he went by Catboy Cammy.
And he did a like a hangout for a day with this Nazi who wears cat ears and is Australian and who did a bunch of live streaming and this is the thing that like a lot of basically the entire Nazi community had a big laugh at Nick's expense for hanging out with this guy because in their turn the fact that Catboy Cammy will you know
Drink from something shaped like a dildo, and we'll get on screen in various bondage gear as a way of being this grotesque figure to attract an audience, which he can then fill with his Nazi bullshit.
The fact that you would do that is, by itself, discrediting.
Believe me, the Nick Fuentes Catboy Cammy thing is It is its own separate story.
And Cowboy Cammy and like kind of the community that kind of grew up around him.
There's a reason I haven't covered it.
And that's because it's like it's deeply, deeply disturbed.
There's some really fucked up shit in there.
And some people went to jail recently.
And so we're going to that's something that's been on my plate to cover at some point.
But the IDW was just easier for a while.
So the IDW was easier.
There you go.
The IDW was easier than talking about Cowboy Cammy.
Anyway, so this was filmed from the front seat of a car, and so you get some background noise.
But this is an edited piece from that kind of longer clip that's available online, and it's Nicky Boy talking about where on a previous episode of his show he had said, I don't think dinosaurs existed.
I am very skeptical of it because it just seems really implausible that there would be these giant bones in the ground.
How could that happen?
He did his research quote in heavy quotes and uh this is this is where he this is where he landed.
I watched um a lot of videos about dinosaurs people have been giving me shit about I said I don't believe in dinosaurs I was doing some research about that watching like some and then I just kind of got then I just got sucked in and then I was watching videos about the end times and uh about Noah's Ark and then I was watching a video about Star Wars and so So you've looked at the data, what do you think about the dinosaurs now then?
Um, so I guess they're real, but they lived with people.
That was the takeaway.
Okay.
Yeah, because I did my research, because I said on the show in a very tongue-in-cheek way, I'm like, yeah, I find it hard to believe that dinosaurs are real.
And I even, all these fucking people get on my case, they're like, oh, Oh, well, you don't believe in dinosaurs, huh?
Oh, he doesn't even, oh wait, you don't believe in dinosaurs?
And it's so, it's so funny to me because that's exactly the intended reaction.
Like, I don't care, I don't care about dinosaurs.
I don't, I'm going to put the, you know, it's getting fogged up a little bit.
I don't care about dinosaurs.
I don't know anything about dinosaurs.
And I said, even on the show, I said, yeah, they probably were real.
I said, but, I said, when I think about it, it just seems like outlandish to me.
I said, I just find it hard to believe.
Are we not allowed to say that?
You know what I mean?
Like, I didn't say they're not real.
I didn't say, well, my opinions are not real.
I said, well, it seems kind of like crazy when you think about it.
And they're like, no, you don't even... So then I did all this research and...
I texted a good friend of mine, because he's very woke on the DQ on the dinosaur question.
I was like, do you have any resources on the dinosaur question?
In the Bible, it talks about dinosaurs.
They talk about, in the book of Job, they talk about Behemoth, which is a sauropod.
They broke down all the different descriptions of the Behemoth, and it was a sauropod, and they showed how They uncovered a lot of dinosaur bones and in the dinosaur bones they found like red blood cells, which organic material like that couldn't survive 65 million years, which is what they said was how long ago the dinosaurs died.
Also, the fossil stuff was consistent with drowning in perhaps a great biblical flood as opposed to a meteor.
So that was my red pill on the DQ today.
I see, I see.
But, I think they lived with people and they were created by God.
Right.
And they died in the flood.
When it comes to shit like dinosaurs, I think it's just not very important.
Like, who gives a shit?
Yeah, well yeah, that's exactly my point.
That's why I'm willing to joke about it and be silly.
So I know that was a long clip, but I think anyone who... I was on the internet in the early 2000s talking to a particular group of people.
I think it's very obvious where he's getting his research from in that case.
This is literally a list of, like, Young Earth Creationist talking points that he got from Answers in Genesis.
I could not find the moment in which he said it, but in my kind of cursory research for this episode, but at one point he actually quotes Kent Hovind, Dr. Dino himself, approvingly.
I thought it was part of that clip, which is why I kind of went through it so much.
But again, this is how Nick Fuentes treats evidence and sources.
So there's an official narrative, right?
And this is beyond Nick Fuentes himself.
There's an official narrative, which is dinosaurs existed Millions of years ago, we were killed by an asteroid.
Evolution is real.
This is the standard narrative because it is very largely correct.
That is why it's the standard narrative.
Yeah.
Because in the scientific community, it is withheld many, many, there are millions of pieces of evidence that support this.
This is not, you know, something that someone made up somewhere, right?
That is to be rejected, because I googled and found answers in Genesis, and they say that the Bible says, yada yada, and the, you know, the red blood cells found in fossils, completely not correct.
That's a spurious claim.
You know, the dinosaurs... Oh, really?
You amaze me.
I never would have... I don't really have to go through this, right?
Like, you know... I don't think so, really.
We could go through this step by step, but I'd be surprised if there was a large contingent of IDSG listeners who were kind of, you know, doubtful about dinosaurs.
Well, I did.
I did get an email.
I did get an email from someone who said, you know, I love your show, but at one point you kind of dismissively rejected.
The 9-11 truthers is some baseless conspiracy theory, so you know, it happens sometimes.
You never know.
If there's any listeners who are fans of IDSG and also doubt the existence of dinosaurs, pick one, because you can't be both, okay?
You have to choose.
Exactly, exactly.
Nicky Boy talks a lot about the Holocaust and his response to Thought Slime, because Thought Slime accurately describes Nick Fuentes as a Holocaust denier.
Although, you know, I go back and forth now, kind of watching his response and some of the nature of this.
So I wanted to be fair to Nick and share a little bit of that and how he talks about the way that Thought Slime describes his Holocaust denial.
So we're gonna we're gonna play another little clip here and then just spoiler alert I have another clip in which Nick Fuentes talks about the Holocaust in a place when he is not responding directly to his critics.
But you knowing the particulars of what he believes is irrelevant to Fuentes' goals, which are pretty simple, to mainstream discussions of taboo topics such as white nationalism, holocaust denial, queerphobia, and of course, fascism.
Hang on, hang on.
What was it?
White nationalism, holocaust denial, queer phobia, and fascism?
Is that it?
That's not the goal.
The goal is not to mainstream any of those things.
topics such as white nationalism, Holocaust denial, queer phobia, and of course fascism.
That's not the goal.
The goal is not to mainstream any of those things.
The goal is to achieve our stated policy objectives.
And by the way, you know, people always say like Holocaust denial, Holocaust denial.
I make a joke about the Holocaust, like, a few times, and then they say, well, he's a Holocaust denier.
As though, you know, you do 2,000 hours of content, you make, like, a few Holocaust jokes, and, oh, you're a Holocaust denier.
Really?
2,000 hours of content, four years, five days a week, every single night.
Yes, Nick.
If you deny the Holocaust, even once, you're a Holocaust denier.
Yeah, that's what it means.
A Holocaust denier is somebody who denies the Holocaust.
Yeah.
It's a bit like the old joke, you know, if you have chicken one time, do they call you, you know, Daniel the chicken eater?
If you go to the pub, they call you Daniel the pub goer, but you fuck one goat.
Yeah.
Yeah, it turns out that when you do the cookie meme, the famous Nick Fuentes cookie meme, that's the thing that people throw at him.
People call him a Holocaust denier, and when he denies it, they unfairly cite that time he denied the Holocaust.
Isn't that just fucking outrageous?
They cite that time that he joked about the Holocaust in a way that he is very knowledgeable about Holocaust denial memes and the way that that interacts with sort of the far-right online culture.
Um, as opposed to kind of pointing to kind of like other specific places, because that's what happens when you're someone like Nick Fuentes is you gain a certain level of notoriety.
And because you've produced so much content, then certain clips get kind of brought to the surface over and over again, as like, this is the very clear and obvious evidence that this person is a terrible person.
That's kind of what we do here to a certain degree, right?
But then they start to respond and say, look, all you have is like a handful of clips where I made a joke a few times.
TRS does it.
These guys, they all do it.
It's like, look, I was joking around.
I was saying one thing, it's taken out of context, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.
And so I have a clip here.
That, in which he very explicitly denies the Holocaust, although doesn't quite deny the Holocaust, but it's a two-minute clip.
You can listen for yourself.
I mean, he is a Holocaust denier, just not quite as far as the TRS guys are, but not as bad as a Holocaust denier as the overtly anti-Semitic neo-Nazis who make the daily showa.
That's not really a place you want to be.
But when he was just kind of being questioned and doing a debate for a small audience, which is not his regular audience, this is from a clip from a debate with someone named Avi.
It looks like a Discord debate that he did back in like 2019 or something.
I'm not sure exactly the provenance of this, but it's very clearly him and it's very clearly him talking.
I have put a link to this in the show notes so you can listen to the whole thing.
The full clip is actually Nick Fuentes talking about the Holocaust and trans issues.
Almost just said let's wrap and let's just talk about Nick Fuentes and trans issues in the way that the more mainstream quote-unquote gender critical people talk about trans issues because It's the same fucking thing.
It's not completely identical.
Functionally identical.
Functionally identical, yeah.
Pretty, pretty functionally identical.
Although, they come from different places.
We will be doing a lot more about anti-trans bigotry in the future.
I've been listening to the Savage Minds podcast.
Do you remember?
And aside here, do you remember, do you know Mark Christopher Miller, or the book, The Bush Dyslexicon?
Yeah.
I was a big fan of that book back in the day.
It turns out he is a raging conspiracy theorist transphobe, like, who doesn't believe in COVID.
And like, it was, it was a real like, It was a real moment of like, yeah, I really liked your book in 2001, 2002.
Yeah, too bad.
Or whenever that book was published, Bush's first term.
Anyway.
Yeah, no, I get this a lot now.
People I used to like who, you know, just they won't hit a word said against Julian Assange and just completely deny the the Chinese state's persecution of the Uyghurs, you know?
Oh, God, really?
Did you really have to?
You wrote a book I liked in 2003.
I've had a very positive impression of you without really following you since then.
And then it turned out that you became a giant bigot when I wasn't looking.
Yeah.
Anyway.
Oh, really?
You're talking about wokeness now?
Right.
Wonderful.
Anyways, yes, sorry, go on.
We need to actually finish this episode.
But so here's the here's the clip.
Avi versus Nick Fuentes on Holocaust Denial.
And stop me when you've heard this before.
So like that book is still taught today and and it's based on lies.
OK, just some context here.
What book do you would you have a guess about which book he's talking about?
It's not the one with the holo coaster in it, is it?
No, no, no, no, no, no.
It's a more mainstream book.
It's Knights by Elie Wiesel.
Oh, right.
Factual inaccuracies in a memoir.
I mean, there's a big conversation about that book and about how He used a memoir as a way, you know, and the factual inaccuracies and how seriously we should take that.
I think there's an interesting conversation to have there.
It's obviously, it's obviously a powerful book, but it's also filled with things that are not factually true.
Yeah.
And there's a lot to be said about Elie Wiesel.
I'm not a fan.
He's a big apologist for the Israeli state, etc.
You know, but yeah.
Many people who've done really great work on Holocaust denial and on the Holocaust end up kind of fitting into that camp.
People whom I otherwise have enormous respect for, including Deborah Lipstadt, unfortunately.
Yeah.
Anyway, so he's talking about, so he's using, like, that book is full of lies.
It's been incredibly discredited.
I didn't want to do the two minutes of him, like, whining about that in the podcast, but that's the context of where this clip, what, that's what he's talking about right there.
Another thing too is there's all these other historical accounts about roller coasters.
Oh, there's the holocauster.
Which no one ever thought was real.
Roller coasters and electrical floors and masturbation machines and lampshades and all of this, which has all been totally debunked.
It's also true that...
Many of the historical recollections of the Holocaust by survivors, a high, high, high percentage of them claim that they were experimented on by the Nazi scientist Mengele.
And it's like so many that it's not even possible.
Not even possible, right?
So it's like, do I believe that it happened?
Yes.
But then you've also got a whole industry which has been created of, you know, Where people are gonna, they're creating basically fantasy, they're creating this kind of like, you know, propaganda in order to prop up a liberal internationalist agenda.
So while I believe it happened, I think that it's taken, it's distorted, it's twisted, and like I said, a whole industry has been propped up in order to basically shame white people, shame nationalists, shame Christians, and everybody knows that anytime You try to talk about white identity.
You try to talk about dual loyalty to Israel.
You try to talk about nationalism.
And what crops up?
You know, Jewish organizations talking about the Holocaust.
And it's used to shame people in the 21st century and used to bludgeon people in 21st century out of a very particular political ideology.
And so I'm against it in that form.
You know, it happened and other things have happened too.
You know, the Kurds were genocided, the Armenians were genocided, the Christians were genocided in Ukraine.
The 20th century is full.
It's a graveyard of mass graves.
And anyway, so the existence of evil and the existence of mass murder in the 20th century, I don't know why that cast such a long, well, I know exactly why, but it's a rhetorical question.
I don't know why that casts such a long shadow over American politics in the 21st century.
That's my long answer on that.
Just straight up defend the, uh, making the dual loyalty charge.
Like, this isn't, this isn't even, like, this is, and again, it fits right in with what he was just doing with dinosaurs, right?
He found a website, he found some post on CODO or whatever, on the C-O-D-O-H.
He found some Twitter, some Telegram or something, which had a bunch of, you know, easily, like, just full-on bullshit Holocaust denial shit.
And that is acceptable because of the basis, you know, kind of, and build political beliefs.
And then he goes on to say, you know, you can't even be a fascist anymore.
And then people just throw the Holocaust at you.
Again, very standard.
I don't want to actually deny that 6 million Jews were killed in ovens, et cetera, et cetera.
But, you know, it's not as bad as what the communists did.
It's not as bad as the other Western powers.
You know, whatever happened, you know, look, people can debate that, but, you know, it's not relevant to, you know, we're just trying to restrict immigration and trying to deport people in trying to build on ethnic homogeneity within North America.
And that should be a thing we're just allowed to do without having people go like, you just want to exterminate people because that's not what we want.
And it's like, that is very clearly what you want.
And I just, you know, I think that clip kind of speaks for itself.
I could go on for a long time about all the stuff that's in that clip, but I just want to highlight at the very end is like, well, I know exactly why.
I know exactly why you're not allowed to talk about it.
It's because the Jews run Hollywood.
It's because the Jews run the media, right, Nick?
That's why.
Yeah, that's why.
And he's smart enough not to say so, but that's an incredibly damning clip, right?
He's just saying it.
He's just repeating mainstream Holocaust denial.
Not mainstream, but you know what I'm trying to say?
This is not coded.
This is not a nuanced opinion.
This is not Norman Finkelstein talking about the crimes of the State of Israel.
This isn't that.
Well, this isn't even Norman Finkelstein talking a little bit more, even more controversially about, you know, how the Holocaust is used politically and how it's remembered culturally.
There is a conversation to be had about this.
It's difficult.
It's tricky.
It has to be done sensitively.
There is a conversation that needs to be had about how we remember the Holocaust, how it's used politically to justify this, that and the other, how it sometimes obscures other things in history and how that's used very ideologically.
There is a conversation.
We're not going to have it now because I think you and I are going to do an episode about, it's an episode I want to do about what's called camp lit, like this explosion of paperback pot boilers, you know, about the camp and stuff.
We're going to talk about this in the future, so I'm not going to get into it here.
There is a conversation to be had about this.
Norman Finkelstein has talked about it.
Obviously, he wrote a book called The Holocaust Industry.
It was very controversial at the time.
I have my disagreements with him.
I think he makes some points somewhere.
I think he gets some things pretty badly wrong, but that's not even this.
I am deeply uncomfortable with a lot of what Finkelstein has said while agreeing with Some of the kind of larger points, and I think we will discuss this in some nuance in another place when we have like full notes in front of us and no other pitfalls, but yes.
You know, I'm more in tune politically with Finkelstein's opinion re-Israel-Palestine than I am with Lippstadt's, but when I went to read Lippstadt's book Denying the Holocaust from a position much more sympathetic toward Finkelstein, I found myself agreeing with her more than I agreed with him about a lot of this stuff.
Not all of it, but there is a conversation.
But this stuff from Fuentes here, especially given the context of who he is and what he does, it's not even at the Finkelstein level.
This is very, very crude apologetics.
Right.
I mean, you know, sorry, I didn't mean to necessarily kind of get into the Finkelstein conversation.
But, you know, Finkelstein is trying to, like, as a Jewish person whose family was murdered in the Holocaust, He's trying to bring the kind of like the, you know, like you're not allowed to use that crime to enact genocidal against the Palestinians, right?
Nick Fuentes is doing that.
He's saying, well, gee, every time I spew a Nazi talking point, you call me a Nazi and say I'm leading to the Holocaust when I'm just trying to deport all the illegal, all the brown people from this country.
You know, I'm just trying to work on white identity.
And he says this very explicitly in a number of places in this kind of longer Clip here.
Again, you know, why is the Holocaust such a big deal anyway?
You know, we we know why it's because, you know, powerful interests inside three parentheses want to keep talking about it, including loads of stuff about Holocausters.
And yeah, it's it's stealth Holocaust denial.
Yeah.
I mean, it's not even that stealthy, to be honest.
I mean, you know, some of those talking points are that doesn't that doesn't come from a place of, you know, I'm trying to kind of hide what I'm doing.
You know what his beliefs are based on where he's obviously getting his talking points from.
So even if he's distancing himself from full-on Holocaust denial, he's right there with it.
He's very conversant with it and very willing to make the points as if they're real.
And again, it's still that 2016-2017 alt-right mode, where everything's a nudge and a wink.
Uh, at one point in another, uh, live stream debate that he did, and I could not find the exact moment, unfortunately, because I was going to play it here.
In a, in a break, they did like a five minute, like, bathroom break or whatever.
And, uh, one of the other, one of the other, uh, people on the call goes, uh, uh, Nick, do you, do you, uh, do you believe in the Holocaust?
Do you believe the Holocaust happened?
And his response was, you know, well, why would I not believe the Holocaust happened?
It's like, Jesus Christ, you fucking guy.
That's the way he treats it.
Anyway, we may do a full Nick Fuentes and the Holocaust episode at some point, but definitely there's a big Nick Fuentes episode coming because there's just so much that I want to kind of collect all the stuff that's happened since we started doing this podcast.
Kind of put it out there as kind of one episode because I think he is an important figure that we've been slightly neglecting because it's all this like internet drama shit that he does, right?
Yeah.
It's just, you gotta, you gotta spend a lot of time with him to really feel like you're really kind of getting at the core of it because he's just fighting with people all the time.
He's constantly sniping it.
He actually sniped at TRS at a certain point in this podcast and this live stream.
And I almost wanted to do like the dueling TRS, sniping at Nick Fuentes and Nick Fuentes sniping at TRS.
We could do an episode that's just all Sip and Fuentes arguing back and forth on their various podcasts, which would be amusing, but probably less than enlightening.
Former partners, now enemies.
Yeah.
So I've got one more clip to play, and this is not a Nick Fuentes clip.
Again, we will talk a lot more about Nick Fuentes in the future.
I wanted to put it in this episode because we started off talking about Brett and Heather's lies, by omission or commission, you know, whatever, about an event that happened in 2012 around them, around a trans woman.
Things that were easy to check.
When you look at the sources, you know that there's a bunch of bullshit there, right?
Then we moved into Destiny.
I'm not having any real understanding of the things that were being said to him by a professor of economics who, however much you and I would disagree with Wolf, I wasn't even able to grasp the basic understanding of this stuff, and supports the existence of the neoliberal state, because the rise of communism or socialism will cause so much mass death, and so it's worth putting people down.
I could play the clip of during the summer of 2020 when the The protests and the riots were happening around George Floyd.
There's a clip of him saying, you know, these things need to be put down by whatever force necessary.
You know, so Destiny Bonnell is a believer in the use of state force to to put down to put down a leftist.
And then we move into Nick Fuentes, who in other places in that conversation and that three hour angry live stream, he talks about how he doesn't support mass shooters because we need to have legal And that's what we, that's what I focus on in my work.
That's where I think it's important.
Like, it's not that I don't care about mass shooters or that I don't think it's important to talk about terrorism.
That's not my, my focus is on people trying to enact political power against the weak.
Right.
And that's the core of fascism for me.
And previously on this podcast, and in other places, I have talked about Brett and Heather and their response to some of the things that happened in Portland over the last year and a half or so, and about what they believe should be happening.
And they got a question in episode 76 of their Dark Horse Q&A, should police be allowed to kill rioters?
It starts at 54 minutes and 36 seconds into the show, and there's a link to that particular thing.
There's not a clip.
There's not a clipped version, but there's a link to the full show, and the link that I gave you should lead you right to this clip.
So we're going to play it, and maybe we'll stop it halfway through if You know, Jack interrupts me and we decide to have a little bit of commentary, but I just want to end on this because I think it's, I think it highlights the sort of liberal fascist connection as much as anything here.
It's like, what needs to be done in order to maintain quote-unquote order?
What needs to be done to maintain this system in which we benefit?
What has to happen to make that happen?
Who has to be put down for that?
And so let's just start this now.
I don't see a way out of this that does not include giving law enforcement permission to kill rioters.
Please tell me why I'm wrong.
Florida made it okay to run over protesters blocking roads.
What are your thoughts?
We can't do this, but the fact is there are tactical things you could do.
It is impossible to do what is necessary in the case of an anarchist force that is trying to precipitate violence against them in order to justify more of this.
So we can't Well, I'm reminded of a conversation you had early in the protests and riots with someone who was, I can't remember, police or military.
Who'd been called in, who was saying they're taking all of our non-lethal methods of enforcement away from us.
Yeah, he was federal police.
That's right.
And, you know, first, before you even start to think about going there, give the police back all of their non-lethal tools.
Yeah, not non-lethal.
They're less lethal.
And that does mean, you know... Well, tear gas isn't lethal.
So I just, I'm pausing here.
I just want to highlight that.
They made a big show of saying, like, you're not allowed to have these toys anymore, and then the cops continued to use exactly those methods, as anyone who has followed anything that actually happened on the streets of Portland over the last few months knows intimately.
I know people who are on the ground who are like, yeah, they announced that, and then like, you know, 10 minutes later, they started firing tear gas.
Fuck you, Brett and Heather, right? - Yes, also some-- - It's not especially lethal.
Let's just say I don't like the idea that we are held to non-lethal.
You've got people who are destroying civilization.
And the fact is, it makes sense to use tools that allow the law to be enforced and do not do more harm than necessary.
But you can't let the fact that they're going to do some harm stop you.
And the fact is, I would be shocked if Tear gas had never killed anybody.
You know, just the simple fact that it's stressful on the body is dangerous to some people.
That's fine.
The fact is, if they were calling for defunding the police, and they effectively did, and they managed to, at least in Portland, get rid of most of the lesser kinds of control Tools that the police normally would be using.
And no one said you also need to disarm the police, because frankly, even the assholes who were leading this thing knew what would happen then if it was understood that the police had literally no arms.
And so what they're left with is their arms.
What they're left with is their most lethal tools.
And yes, they need those, but wouldn't it be much better if they also had their entire panoply So, you know, fine, yes, all of these tools can be lethal under the wrong circumstances, but we don't start now having taken all of these tools off the table by saying, OK, well, you can kill them.
No, you give them back all the tools and you actually start, you know, arresting and booking and sentencing some of these fools.
Yes.
Like that's what you have to do.
You have to.
Yep.
I totally agree with that.
Yeah.
And I mean, I frankly, if it were me, I would give a speech and I would say, the law has to be enforced.
Here's why.
It'd be lovely if we could do it without damaging anyone.
We'll do our best, but don't expect nobody to be damaged because this is the nature of the thing that we're up against.
Here are the tools that we intend to use.
They're not perfectly safe.
You know, the wise thing to do would be to obey the law and not destroy property or attack people.
And that speech having been made, stop being so damn nice to the people who are destroying life for everyone else.
Stop being so damn nice to the people.
Stop being so nice to them.
Stop being so nice.
100 days of tear gassing, and more, and beating with clubs.
You know, we talked about this last year.
I mean, you know, we don't have to dig into this, right?
You know, like people understand the enormous violence the state enacted upon people who were doing no more than like touching a piece of wood that was deemed forbidden to touch.
Yeah.
Enormous state violence was done against these people.
And people protested and rioted bravely in response to that state violence, to force the state to do the thing that Brett and Heather are antsy for them to do.
And there were people who were fired upon, who were given headshots with, you know, less than lethal munitions, who, you know, had serious, serious injuries.
And it is kind of a miracle that no one died in Portland.
Uh, last year, but you see, this is what, this is the good liberal response, right?
Like this is, this is, you know?
Oh yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
This is absolutely fucking classic.
Yeah.
And of course, I'm not saying that Brett and Heather are equal to the Holocaust denying Nick Fuentes, right?
I'm not saying that Bunnell is equal to Nick Fuentes or TRS or whatever, but you can see there's a spectrum here.
Who is the enemy of these people?
It is the people agitating from below for material change to their living conditions.
It's Black Lives Matter, it's anti-fascist, et cetera.
And it is because people like Destiny Bonnell and people like Bretton Heather will ultimately push comes to shove.
If Nick Fuentes is in a position of authority in 10 years and pushing the cops against rioters and whatever, or someone like Nick Fuentes or another griper Or whatever.
Who are they going to side with?
A question that answers itself.
They told us.
They told us.
Yeah.
This is what we're up against.
And this is what this podcast is about, ultimately.
Right.
So I understand I gave you some disparate topics here.
I understand it's slightly disconnected, but it's all part of the same story.
It's all part of the same phenomenon that's happening right now.
And I share that clip, that last clip, because I've seen a whole lot of that.
All over the place.
In disparate places.
It's like, you know, we can't have the kind of violence that we saw.
The violence that we saw in summer 2020.
We have to have a monitor.
We have to have, you know, we can't have this thing again.
Look forward to that.
Look forward to the very nice, now that Biden's in charge.
Look forward to the very nice MSNBC liberals.
Starting to sound a lot more like Brent and Heather there.
Now that they don't have Trump to blame on it.
The line is very clear.
From, what level of violence are you prepared to countenance to bring about your socialist dystopia?
To, well, isn't it just true that things were better before and they've degenerated?
To, well, these people who are trying to destroy civilization, apparently, and destroy life for everybody else.
That's literally their characterization of the protest.
Lighting fast food wrappers on fire in front of a brick building is tearing civilization down.
Yeah.
Well, it's the line between those three things is very clear, and that's where it ends up.
It ends up with the police being given back their nonlethal, i.e.
being rearmed to the extent, you know, that they were ever disarmed, which they weren't, as you say, so that they can crush these people.
Yeah.
The line is exceedingly clear.
I mean, you know, I knew about that line anyway, but yeah, you've drawn it very clearly for us, I think.
As you and I know, and as I think a lot of our audience knows, but it's worth Now that we have this, just for the audience, we're wrapping up here, but like, I have spent a lot of time, and Jack knows this very well, like, building a setup to let We've come a long way from me explaining on one of the episodes that we don't do clips because the whole thing is predicated on it being low effort for me.
like basically banging tin cans together to get these clips into the show.
We've come a long way from me explaining on one of the episodes that we don't do clips because the whole thing is predicated on it being low effort for me.
That was literally something I said on one of these.
Yeah, at the very early days.
But hopefully this makes it a little bit easier.
Anyway, hopefully the system is working for both of us.
But being able to do this means we can kind of do these episodes and kind of talk about this stuff.
And I think it's important to actually kind of listen to some of this stuff and understand what's actually being said.
Because again, you can hear it in Destiny is frustrated, Bonnell is frustrated with Wolf, because he isn't able to understand what Wolf is talking about.
And, you know, But Brett and Heather, they sound very nice and reasonable people, right?
They're just so reasonable.
So reasonable about this.
Look, they're trying to burn civilization down and what needs to be done needs to be done.
And ultimately, down that path lies fascism.
Period.
Yeah.
Yeah, that is always what they say.
The hordes are here.
They're at the gate.
The barbarians are at the gate.
They're destroying civilization.
They're burning it to the ground.
They're making it impossible for the rest of us to live.
And we need to restore order for everybody's sake, for the community's sake.
These malcontents, this minority that want to ruin it for everybody, they need to be... Yeah, that's always what they say.
And it always works like this.
Every fascist regime that's ever come to power has done it with the connivance, active or passive, of people like Brett and Heather.
And, uh, destiny.
James Lindsay next time, and if you think this one... So, I've said this on the podcast before, I've got at least three James Lindsay episodes to cover, because the work that he's doing currently in New Discourses is worth a full episode.
It just is.
He recently tipped right the way over, basically, didn't he, on Twitter?
He basically just voiced the cultural Marxism... I mean, I know he's been edging for a long time, but he basically just spurted the cultural Marxism conspiracy theory all over his monitor on Twitter.
Well, he's been kind of moving that way for a while, and he's working with what's effectively a Christian nationalist organization in New Discourses and Sovereign Nations.
And so there's a very, that's kind of its own thing.
In terms of understanding James Lindsay, we will spend an episode diving into that work.
We will also spend an episode doing the grievance studies, hoax papers, and going through those in fairly minute details and sort of the details around that, because it's fascinating.
We will cover a little bit of it in the next episode.
But in the next one, what we're going to do is just kind of do the big picture on who James Lindsay is and his path to where he is now.
I mean, so hold your horses.
We will do a lot more James Lindsay content.
I've been working on this for a long time now.
You would not believe the amount of notes that I have for James Lindsay and the amount of material that I have highlighted.
I'm like, I need to go back and re-listen to that.
I need to go back and re-watch that.
I've got a bunch of stuff already prepped that I will spend the next week in some stress trying to get this ready for the next recording date.
But yeah, that's what we're doing for 87 next week, or next episode, whenever we get that out.
Okay, well, that was a long episode.
Thanks for sticking with us through that, listeners.
I hope you found it instructive.
And yeah, tune in next time for James Lindsay.
Okay, good night, everybody.
cheers that was I don't speak German Thanks for listening.
If you enjoyed the show or found it useful, please spread the word.
If you want to contact me, I'm at underscore Jack underscore Graham underscore, Daniel is at Daniel E Harper, and the show's Twitter is at IDSGpod.
If you want to help us make the show and stay 100% editorially independent, we both have Patreons.
I Don't Speak German is hosted at idonspeakgerman.libsyn.com, and we're also on Apple Podcasts, Soundcloud, Spotify, Stitcher, and we show up in all podcast apps.
This show is associated with Eruditorum Press, where you can find more details about it.
