All Episodes
Previous Next
July 13, 2019 - Freedomain Radio - Stefan Molyneux
01:04:46
The Next American Revolution | Nicholas J. Fuentes and Stefan Molyneux
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi everybody, Stefan Molyneux from Freedom Aid Radio.
I hope you're doing well.
I'm going to chat today with the one, the only Nicholas J. Fuentes.
He's the host of America First on Right Side Broadcasting Network.
You can find out his stuff on YouTube at youtube.com forward slash right side radio.
His website is Nicholas J. Fuentes, F-U-E-N-T-E-S dot com and twitter.com forward slash Nick J. Fuentes.
Nick, thanks so much for taking the time today.
Thanks for having me, Stefan.
I gotta say, I'm a long-time fan.
I've been watching you since... I mean, I'm only 18 now, but I've been watching you since I was in high school, so good to be here.
Oh, thanks.
Very, very nice to hear.
Your show is really spectacular, not just for its content alone, but, you know, it's hard to avoid the fresh-faced, apple-cheeked, 18-year-old thing, too, which is really, really impressive.
And the fact is that you're hanging out with us in a suit on a Saturday.
Very, very, on a Friday.
Very, very impressive as well.
So, can you tell the audience a little bit about your backstory, how you developed your principles, and how you got into the show that you're doing?
Sure, yes.
So, I guess I could start with my principles.
That's the earlier story.
I have to tell you, I sort of went through a similar transformation as I know you did as well.
Something that happened to a lot of us, I think.
During this election, I started out in eighth grade.
I think I was brought into the fold by Thomas Sowell, who, I mean, you know, he's a big guy.
Really a titan on the right, and has been for a long time.
I just wanted to mention, Stu, now that he's retired, I really miss the guy.
I mean, you know, hey, he had a great run, 86, you know, let's all keep our fingers crossed.
But great, great rider.
You know, some disagreements, which is natural and healthy, but I certainly miss his voice, and I'm looking forward to see who steps into the fold.
But sorry, go ahead.
Yeah, no, no problem.
Yeah, absolutely.
I know exactly what you mean.
He was one of the most sensible guys and an excellent, excellent writer.
Prolific, too.
But I think it was him who brought me into the fold.
I watched him on Uncommon Knowledge, which was the Hoover Institute which produced that.
And for an hour, you know, he talked about his book, Basic Economics.
And for the first time I heard the idea of economic liberty and free markets and laissez-faire, whereas in school all along you hear about the government, the government should fix everything, the government helped everybody, the government's great, and so Thomas Sowell was really the guy who introduced me to the idea that free people, free markets, that's how you make a society work a little bit better.
Now what drove you to even look for this information to begin with, because as far as I understand it, a lot of teenage boys are looking for videos on the internet, just not necessarily of Dr. Sowell.
Yeah, right, that's what my father tells me, that's what my parents tell me all the time.
They say, you should be watching other things on the internet.
Something with tentacles, I believe, is vogue these days.
Yeah, that's Kurt Eichenwald style, and some other things, right?
But no, so in eighth grade I was looking for that because I was really interested in communism at the time.
I gotta say, I was never a communist, but I was always fascinated by the story of the Soviet Union and just how something like that was possible, how something like that could have happened.
You know, when you're growing up in the 2000s, modern post-Cold War era, it's sort of like this weird end of history time.
I sort of wondered how that could have been achieved, how that worked, you know, or how it didn't work rather.
And so I looked into what is the alternative?
What's the other side?
What was the argument against that?
And so I ended up looking into Milton Friedman.
I read Free to Choose, Capitalism and Freedom, all that.
stayed basically along that path until 2015 when the election rolled around.
I was for Rand Paul, for Ted Cruz.
For a long time, I was a constitutionalist, full-blooded conservative.
For a short time, I was a neocon.
I was always really sort of on the side of the Austrian school, more than the more neoliberal Chicago school in terms of economics.
But right around the time when the primaries started in 2016, I think it was January 31st or February 1st, was the Iowa Caucus in 2016.
And right around that time, that's when I started to see the argument for from the Donald Trump side of conservatism that, you know, maybe we need the institutional change before we could get to this libertarian utopia.
Maybe we need to focus on the demographics, immigration, the culture first.
And really, for the longest time, I think for about a year, a year and a half, I've sort of been along this conversion more to a much different brand of conservatism.
Maybe more in the tradition of Pat Buchanan, Ann Coulter, people like that, where I see that You really can't have that free society if you don't have virtuous people, if you don't have strong families, if you don't have a culture that isn't degenerate, if you don't have a homogenous demographic situation.
And so that's really where I'm at today.
And then you want me to talk about right side and how I got involved there?
No, just a sec for that because I wanted to pause because I think a lot of people have gone through that transition.
And for other people who were not on the left, that transition to being interested in Trump is kind of incomprehensible.
And the way that I've sort of framed it myself, Nick, and tell me what you think, the way I've sort of framed it myself is the non-Trumpers who were on the conservative side were like the single-serve salvation guys, you know, like, we just get Ted Cruz in there, we get Rand Paul in there, and everything's going to be better.
Now, I think, though, what we want is a system wherein it shouldn't matter quite as much who is in power, because otherwise you're just trying to win at Vegas by rolling two sixes every single time.
Sooner or later you're going to come up snake eyes, but enough about Hillary.
And so I think for people With the dismantling of the regulatory state, with the rolling back of taxation, with the control over the borders, I think Donald Trump is smart enough to know he's going to be around for four or eight years, and he wants to leave a system where it shouldn't quite be as much of a, oh my god, whether Hillary gets in or whether Trump gets in is going to be the difference between night and day, because that is a system that's dysfunctional in its essence, in its kind of deep state bedrock, rather than who's on top.
You're exactly right.
Exactly right.
And I think you phrased it perfectly.
That's exactly how I came along to the Trump train as well.
As I said, you know, even at the time when I came over to the Trump train, I was still, at the time, I was still more ideologically in line with Ted Cruz.
I still wanted Ted Cruz's flat tax, Ted Cruz, you know, a lot of his platform.
But I said, you know, we're really counting on one guy.
It's Ted Cruz.
And hopefully he fixes everything.
He's going up against a liberal press.
A central bank, he's going up against how many millions of illegal immigrants, this horrible immigration system, and on and on and on.
The whole of academia?
Hollywood?
Yes.
TV?
Right.
Musicians?
It's the one guy.
It's our lone guy who's going to be treated just as poorly as Donald Trump, but without the balls, frankly, to fight back against it and implement, as you said, a system.
So I agree 100%.
It started, at least for me and I think for a lot of people, We need this, a different kind of reform.
You know, even if you don't agree with Trump on everything, he'll smash the institutions into something where we could get something conservative.
Even if you're still a National Review guy, even if you're still a Ben Shapiro cuckservative, you're still going to have a better shot after Trump than you would with a Marco Rubio or a Ted Cruz, just as the lone tree standing against the wind.
Now, while I certainly understand the appeal behind people like Ted Cruz and so on, I You know, I like my politicians with a side of Canadian bacon, but the one thing that I didn't trust him on was that he was not hated enough by the people I dislike.
And we live in this kind of weird world where the way that you know somebody is going to be effective at controlling the state is just about everybody with a public voice viscerally loathes and hates that person.
And it's kind of like weird because politics is supposed to be about a popularity contest, but politics in this sort of I don't know, post-Soviet creeping socialism kind of world, politics has become an unpopularity contest, you know?
Hey, you've got really, really great stuff to say, but I'm sorry, you're just not hated enough by the people I really, really need to hate you, which means you don't think you're going to be threatening their interest, or at least they don't think they're going to be threatening your interest enough.
So it's become weird to the point where it's like, the more lasers on someone, the more you want them in charge.
That's kind of weird to me.
Yeah, no, I know exactly what you mean.
And one of the reasons why I liked Ted Cruz even initially was because all the senators hated him.
But you're right, because, you know, towards the end of the primary, whether or not all the senators disliked him or whether or not the media disliked him, the Republican establishment rallied around him.
And I don't think you could ever take that away, that that was the reason why I think a lot of people had an issue with that.
And you're exactly right that for the past 25 years about, since the end of the Cold War, You know, when George H.W.
Bush made his New World Order speech, we've basically seen the same globalist monoparty, which controls the Democrats, the Republicans, all the media, you know, every institution of political power.
And so you're exactly right.
It is about, you know, how much a person is hated.
It denotes how much they're really with us and not with them.
It has sort of become the new divide, whereas before you might have had the right versus the left, leftists versus conservatives.
I think now you really do have Globalists, they're either with this elite ruling class establishment or they're a nationalist.
They're with us, the people.
And similarly, I think with the pundit class, there was sort of that same litmus test.
I sort of, once I was firmly on the Trump train, I think right after the Republican National Convention, I was at work and I was working, you know, just a regular high school summer job, menial labor.
I was listening to podcasts and I sort of made the determination that You look at the pundits, at least the online ones, who were for Trump and the ones that were against him, and that very neatly sorted who was with the people and who was with the elite.
If you were for Trump, you know, like the Gavin McInnes, like you, like Bill Whittle, like some of the others, I think you were really with the American people.
You were really with the people and not so much the ideology, not the intelligentsia.
Whereas you listen to like a George Will or a Brett Stevens who voted for Hillary Clinton.
I mean, these are people that sided more with the elite, with the globalist class, right or left, than with us, the people.
So I think that's really what set it apart was, are you with or against Trump?
Right.
And there is this this nationalism has gotten such a bad reputation over the past, you know, I guess a century.
And look, I understand that.
I mean, nationalism had something to do with the First World War, with the Second World War and so on.
Nationalism in terms of just blind allegiance to your local state, marching off to war no matter what they say, not looking at root causes and so on.
Irrational prejudice towards your own in-group makes you a slave to the dominant ideology.
And I, you know, that I push back against and I understand that.
However, the reality that we were sold, or the illusion that we were sold, I should say, the illusion that we were sold was that we're just interchangeable.
It doesn't matter which pawn, you know, one pawn is the same as another pawn, we're all interchangeable.
If people are in the Middle East, if they're here, if they're in Africa, it doesn't matter, we're all interchangeable, and to think otherwise is mere prejudice, but as the Demographics have changed as the data has come in.
Well, guess what?
It turns out we're not all interchangeable.
It turns out that culture and history and all of that, and philosophy, the stuff that gets ground into the bones and the marrow over hundreds or thousands of years of sacrifice and intellectual labor and effort and so on, It turns out that stuff really, really kind of matters.
And this is something that's very confusing to people, because nationalism has been portrayed as, well, if you're a nationalist, you want your country to rule everyone.
Like National Socialism, right?
Like you want your country to expand.
But most of the nationalists that I know of are like, well, you know, we want our country to be our country, but you know, Saudi Arabia can be Saudi Arabia, and Japan can be Japan, and South Korea can be South Korea.
I mean, what's wrong with that?
It's having a preference for a continuity of culture that the demographic change doesn't seem to be able to support at all.
Absolutely, absolutely.
I think one of the biggest changes with the new right, the alt-right or the alt-light, you know, whatever you want to call it, this new sort of faction of conservatism that's grown since Trump got into office, I think nationalism's fitting for all of that, is sort of the ideology of separation.
Whereas the old conservatives, sort of the neoconservatives, neoliberals, I know they both hold their place in the Republican establishment, they sort of saw the whole world as Like you said, interchangeable.
You're all just economic flesh units for the United Nations.
It doesn't matter if you're Mexican or African or whatever.
You come here, you fill out the paperwork, and it's the same as the people that have been here for 200 years building and working on not only, you know, a historical legacy, but an economic legacy, a cultural legacy.
I mean, there's a lot more to it than just you can work that corporate job that the business party wants you to work.
And so, I think people started to come around to the fact that the ruling elite see us, the native population, as replaceable and Western civilization as interchangeable.
It's, you know, I remember that after Maureen Le Pen lost, one of my friends or someone I used to be friends with, Cassie Dillon, she said that, well, Maureen Le Pen lost and that's great because she's a socialist and she's for abortion.
And I said, you know, wait a minute, stop right there.
If you look at the countries that have been under socialism, and you look at the countries that have had demographic change, the countries that have been under socialism are better off, or will be better off, in 100 years than the ones that are being subverted and overtaken by the Third World.
Say what you will about the Soviet Union, but the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Russia, in 100 years they'll still be Christian, probably more Western than France and the United Kingdom.
I think that really clicked in my head that it's not so simple as the libertarian message of, well, we just have to teach them liberty.
We just have to go over to centuries or to countries that haven't had a libertarian tradition for millennium and say, hey, read Adam Smith.
You know, try and have a discussion with someone you disagree with.
Try and, you know, bring Sunnis and Shiites together.
Hasn't happened for 2,000 years, but let's stake the future of our country on it.
You know, so I think people really came around to that idea that culture, history, people matter more than the ideology.
Yeah, I would have to say that I was just reading on Twitter, I think it was yesterday, that in Africa, some place in Africa, five bald guys got killed because there's a myth that there's gold inside of bald guys' heads.
Now, I've got to think that if you're mining through human skulls in search of precious metals, you might not quite be ready for Rothbardian arguments for free markets.
I'm just going to go out way on a limb here.
There may be a slight barrier.
And it's a weird thing too, Nick, when you think about it, that decade after decade after decade of communism appears to be the inoculation against mass migration.
I mean, how bizarre it is.
Because, you know, when I was growing up, I was like, oh man, those communist countries, how terrible, what a horrible place to live.
You know, I went through the usual indoctrination, and then I read A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, and then I read Solzhenitsyn's other works, and you find out, and you're like, wow, this is terrible.
And now part of me is like, Wow.
You know, I'm really sorry about the communism thing, but it may not be the very worst thing that could have happened to you, and that, again, I just feel like life is upside down.
Like, you know, Hitler loved Chamberlain, because Chamberlain's coming over, a piece in our time, and Hitler's like, yeah, stupid old man, fine, I love the guy, yeah, bring him in, let's give him some coffee, be fantastic, you know, let him pet my dogs, love this guy.
And so the British were all like, oh yeah, we love Chamberlain too, because Hitler loves him.
And then, you know, when things went from bad to worse, then it's like, okay, well now, Hitler hates Churchill, but now we love Churchill, and it's just this weird thing where people keep flipping around, ideas keep flipping around, up is down, black is white, and the only thing that's keeping me on any kind of train tracks are principles.
So let's talk about some of those, because when you were talking about socialism and abortion, the two things that spring to my mind are hedonism.
Socialism is, I want free stuff, I mean let's be honest about it, that old Thatcher line, The desire to live on other people's money until the economic sinkhole opens up underneath you.
And of course abortion is I don't want to have any consequences for unprotected sex or sex outside of marriage or I don't want to I want to have the fun of sex without the responsibility of raising a child or anything like that.
There's kind of a hedonism involved in that and the hedonism seems to have really really taken over over the last half century.
Yeah, I think you're exactly right on the money with the abortion argument and that's something that really disturbed me.
I got in an argument with somebody about abortion and I sat down and I really thought about it and these people that say that they're pro-choice, what they really say is People should not be responsible for their actions.
If you have sex on a wedlock, well, you should be able to take a human life, because, you know, why should another human life infringe on your ability to go out and have promiscuous sex and whatever?
And you'll find that the people that argue for the pro-choice, it's not that they say that people shouldn't be responsible, it's to say that human beings don't have agency.
We can't expect them to be able to restrain their sexual urges.
They say, you know, we should have sex ed, we should have this horrible degenerate, hedonistic sex ed in high school because, well, people are basically animals without agency who can't control themselves, and we can't expect families to take responsibility for rearing their own children.
And I took a step back, and I really said, it really says something about the depravity, the perversity of the modern world, that we just can't have any expectations of our own neighbors anymore.
The government or whatever institution you want to call it has to go in and basically tell people how they're supposed to live what they're supposed to do and it came back to culture that we have to Create a population that is worthy of liberty, that can handle liberty.
You know, people take, and especially on the modern right, they take liberty to mean that, well, you can do whatever you want.
You know, wow, isn't this great?
You can smoke pot.
Hey, guess what, guys?
No rules.
We can do whatever you want.
It's not so much about the freedom to do whatever you want, it's the liberty to do whatever you want.
And that involves responsibility, that in order to ensure that you can do and have a wide range of options, You're worthy of those options.
It's sort of like, you know, when you're growing up as a kid and you get to drive the car when you're 16 and then maybe get to have a job when you're 18 or whatever.
As you become more mature and you can handle responsibility, you get more privileges.
But, you know, the modern right and the modern left, I guess, the whole globalist spectrum wants it so that all people are just slaves to their whims, slaves to their desires, and in a way that allows them, I think, to be To be harnessed or enslaved by the corporate globalist establishment in a lot of ways.
It's a very good way of putting it.
And to me, liberty without consequences is just degeneracy.
I mean, I have no problem.
Be as free as you want.
Be as free as you want.
Just don't ask me to subsidize your bad decisions.
Just as I will not ask you or demand or force you to subsidize my bad decisions.
You know, we all need to guide ourselves by positive and negative consequences and by principles.
And it's kind of a mix of those.
And my concern has always been that when negative consequences are diminished, to the point now where, I mean, the people who are pro-abortion, they're not even sort of saying, well, you know, it is troubling, but, you know, it's just like, well, it's all right.
You know, it's like, well, as an old Reagan line says, I can't help but notice that everybody who debates abortion has benefited from it not being inflicted upon them.
But it's not even like, well, it's troubling, and there are health consequences later in life, and it contributes to depression, and you know, and so on.
And generally, it's the people who... Well, so there's all these negative consequences, but they're not discussed.
And now to the point where if you even say to people, well, you should at least pay for your own abortion, you're keeping health care.
Oh, it's like, no, it's not health care.
A fetus is not a disease.
It's not a cancer.
It's going to grow, but it's not going to kill you.
So this idea that taking a human life in your womb is somehow curing you, this to me is very strange, and it's become really to the point where any time you talk about negative consequences accruing to the people who've made bad decisions, the leftists say, well of course somehow it's all environmental, they have no free will, they have no choice, they can't understand the consequences of their actions, so they can't use a condom But they can vote for complex foreign policy initiatives.
Democracy plus no agency is a complete contradiction.
If people have the right to vote, then they are responsible, they're far-seeing, they're thoughtful, in which case they can use a damn condom or something else.
This contradiction never seems to be addressed on the left.
People have no agency, they're just victims, leaves blown around by circumstances, can't think for themselves, can't plan, can't defer gratification.
But they sure can vote on environmental policy now, can't they?
Yeah, well, it's such an ugly world.
It's such an ugly, ugly, disturbing world that these people inhabit that, you know, everything that Western civilization was about, whether it was great art, great achievement, you know, the glorifying of the physical and the mental form, they've degraded it to the lowest possible level.
And just about everything you can look at, whether it's the architecture, you know, I went to Boston University.
And if anybody's ever been to Boston University or been on the campus or seen it, you can Google it for yourself.
The buildings are ugly.
It's the ugliest campus you would ever see in your whole life.
It's the postmodern globalist architecture that stripped away all the culture, stripped away all the heritage and said, look at this brutalistic, crude, you know, we could put this up and put it down anywhere else in the world and it would be the same.
I got a great idea.
We'll take a Kleenex box and we'll marry it to an ice cube tray.
It's going to be beautiful.
Yeah, yeah, right, exactly.
And they think that that's somehow an improvement, right?
And you go down to the McDonald's, this is another, this is sort of a personal analogy, but on this campus you have all the postmodern, ugly architecture.
You have one of the cultural monuments around the campus.
People don't believe this when I tell them, but one of the things that they talk about in the orientation and everything is they have a giant neon Sitco sign that towers above the campus.
And we all sort of live in the shadow of the giant neon Sitco sign.
And I'm sitting in a McDonald's across the street with this postmodern architecture in the shadow of the giant neon Sitco sign.
You have homeless people laundering the campus, people of all different races speaking all different languages.
No one can communicate with each other.
I'm grabbing my Grand Mac by both hands, and I'm thinking to myself, you know, like, is this, is this an improvement?
Is this supposed to be progress?
Is this the future?
They tell us that, you know, we're the progressives.
This is, the way of the future is the free market, the capitalism, the corporations, the multiculturalism, and it's almost like a dystopia.
It looks a lot more like that, uh, that Harrison Ford movie.
What's the one with all the robots?
Oh, Blade Runner.
Yeah, right.
It's like Blade Runner.
It's like this, this, Urban dystopia.
And I'm thinking to myself, you know, you think back to the glories, you look to the the Palace of Versailles, or some of the villages in Europe and what once was of Western civilization.
And it's not so much even the, you know, as I've grown older, I've seen that culturally, Globalism is devastating to just the quality of life.
Forget the fact that maybe people have nicer cars.
They might have more air conditioning, more rooms in their houses.
They have all the cool gadgets to distract them from just the really horrible quality of life that we've created for ourselves.
Like we're in this, I don't even know what you'd call it, like we're pets.
Well, yeah, we're kind of in the mind of a crazy person because one of the things that I miss... I have it in my own life, Nick, but I miss seeing it in the world.
I miss seeing beauty and I miss seeing joy.
And the scrubbing of beauty and joy from the landscape.
You know, everything from modern art to, like, horrible plays.
I remember the first time I watched Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf, I'm like...
Man, if I was at this dinner party, I'd chew my way out through the walls just to get away from these people.
Why would I pay to watch this streetcar named design?
Like, the beauty and the joy.
And it seems to have become now.
That beauty is like, well, privilege.
You can't enjoy beauty because there's ugliness in the world.
You can't enjoy good food because there's hungry people in the world.
You can't enjoy happiness because there are unhappy people in the world.
And every time we try to look up and be ennobled or energized by some higher ideal, it seems like all of the depressed, anxious, negative people scurry up like fire ants up your leg with their little pincers just to take away your happiness.
You only have this because of privilege and because you're white and because of this.
And it's like then you've just, it's like this weird pathological hyper-Calvinism where it's like any possible joy is a sin against the gods of political correctness.
And I really miss, because that was still around when I was a kid.
It was being kind of scrubbed out of England, but the creeping socialism and so on, but it was still around when I was a little kid.
There was joy, there was pride, there was a feeling of community, of solidarity, of nationalism.
And it's so been scrubbed now that any kind of happiness appears to be an affront for the miserable specimens that seem to be in control of public discourse these days.
Yeah, well, it's the triumph of squab and morale, right?
It's slave morality that everything that's great must be dragged back down to the earth and crushed.
And it's so true what you're saying about how beauty and joy have been scrubbed away.
As a young person, speaking as a young person, You know, I look around at my peers.
I look around at the people that we recently graduated from high school, and you look at the epidemic of young people killing themselves and becoming addicted to opioids or abusing alcohol and dying from that.
And people, all the moms in NBC and, you know, on the Today Show, they'll say, well, you know, it's the latest drug trend that's sweeping the nation, and why is it happening?
And, you know, they'll attribute it to whatever cause.
I look into the souls of the people that are taken by this, by this disease.
I think it's really globalism.
My own peers.
And it's really just a loss of meaning in their lives.
They have nothing to live for.
We've taken away God.
We've taken away the nation.
We've taken away the race.
We've taken away the community, the history.
And strip away all of that.
Strip away every Every community larger than yourself to devote your life to and what do you have?
I really started to turn against individualism when I saw that the individual life is not very fulfilling on its own.
You know, I came from this very libertarian position and I still am to an extent.
I do believe in individual liberty, but I think that the human animal is a social animal.
And in our society, You know, what value does one individual have in his 100 years?
You're going to get really wealthy, you're going to buy a really nice beach house, you're going to have sex with a beautiful woman.
Contrasted with, you know, while the nationalism may have been a really horrible thing in the World Wars, giving your life for your country, giving your life for your God, for your children, for posterity.
And the young people that are coming out of high school to be crushed buy college debt, to be crushed in the corporate world, to do marketing for 60 years and then retire and maybe buy a boat.
I mean, why wouldn't you kill yourself if life is suffering and you're just waiting to get a boat to take the edge off?
You know, why wouldn't you expedite that process?
We've stripped away all the meaning, the beauty, the joy out of life.
And the young people say it's not true.
But I mean, you can tell the difference when you actually look at the statistics.
Yeah, I mean, well, there's a great company.
Yeah, yeah.
But community, I mean, this is a very, very powerful concept and idea.
So when I, when I grew up, I grew up on a council estate.
It's pretty, it was poor, but, you know, that old, well, we're poor, but at least we have each other.
You know, it was poor, but I could go out after school.
I could play for hours.
I could go meet up friends.
We could have spontaneous games.
We could go explore the woods.
We, we just roamed everywhere.
And this was from the age of like five or six onwards.
And there's a huge amount of unstructured playtime in my childhood.
And this is one of the reasons why for me negotiating and trying to find win-win situations.
Because when kids are unattended, they have to negotiate with each other.
They have to hammer out their differences.
And there's a lot of social enforcement.
There's no kiddie cops.
You know, there's no like, somebody's cheating at a game.
Well, what do you do?
You ostracize them until they shape up.
Right, so you get this self-regulating, self-contained community of kids where the mean kids, the sucky kids, the cheaty kids, they're ostracized and then they sort it out.
And they usually, I mean 9 times out of 10 or 99 times out of 100, they'll sort things out, you'll figure things out, you know, you have your fights and then you shake hands and you move along.
And you don't need some big giant external authority.
To make that kind of kid society work.
I think kids desperately miss that now.
Unstructured play, in nature in particular, is one of the things significantly associated with growing up believing in sort of freedom and so on.
Because if, you know, if you can self-regulate a society of seven-year-old kids, like 20 of them all playing a game, yes, you can self-regulate a society.
You don't need a big giant state and court systems and all that to mediate every human dispute.
has all gone because community is about two things.
It's about risk and it's about at least ideological homogeneity.
There has to be some commonality of belief in order for you to be able to negotiate your differences and there has to be some risk of non-conformance.
Now the risk has been taken away by the welfare state because in the past if you decided to, you had a kid out of wedlock and so on, well your life was terrible.
You know, no guy would marry you, you'd be shunned from polite society.
The same thing used to happen, interestingly, if people got divorced for virtually no reason.
Like if there was some god-awful thing, you know, oh he got a brain injury and he turned into a psychopath, it's like okay, well, that's bad, but you know, we understand the railway spike might have overridden your gold ring.
But, for the most part, if people just had an affair or just, you know, well, I'm bored, I'm, you know, I'm unsatisfied, I'm going to take off with this Spanish sculptor from down the road, then people would use, like, you couldn't do that because you would no longer be part of society, your kids wouldn't get invitations anywhere.
There used to be this amazing...
Self-regulation of society.
Now the risk has all been taken away.
You can have a child out of wedlock, you can get divorced, you're probably going to end up better off financially.
And so society can't sustain ostracism when ostracism is outlawed.
And ostracism is outlawed when you're forced to subsidize other people's bad decisions.
And so, you know, with this massive redistribution of income, the welfare state, it has fundamentally unraveled everything that took I guess now we're talking 300,000 years.
They just found another older human being.
And we're talking like 300,000 years of intense social pressure and development to develop these mechanisms of enforcement without centralized authority.
And it's taken like 50 years to fundamentally unravel that basic thing.
And you've got no community and no homogeneity that you can be comfortable with.
And what do you have left?
Well it's true, we've taken away all the mechanisms by which a community, which is like a living organism, would remove the waste.
And that's sort of something that...
The globalists, the neoliberals, they want to strip away all the pain, all the ills, all the negative, but you need that.
I mean, could you imagine if, as a human person, you know, it's not the most pleasant thing in the world to go to the bathroom.
Could you imagine if you just taped everything up down there and you didn't let the waste go?
I mean, that's sort of what we've done with people in a society.
It's the people that are born out of wedlock.
Well, it's fine.
They just made a mistake and it's okay.
Look, it's great.
And you create sort of a moral hazard.
I think that's a big part of globalism, too, is the moral hazard that, you're right, when you strip away the disincentives, when you strip away the consequences for actions, you know, there's no reason for anybody to have any agency.
Why would you?
You know, if you want to be a video game designer, or you want to write comic books for a living, or, you know, you want to have a kid on a wedlock, or you want to be a sex worker or something, you know, what's the negative consequence?
Is there anybody that's going to judge you?
Well, no, I mean, judgment is wrong, right?
We're all just We're all just these flesh units that are supposed to toil endlessly to pay our debts and pay for our cars and watch television.
We've really stripped away the essence, the soul of society.
And someone that really turned me on to that idea was Jordan Peterson.
And he turned me on to the book, Modern Man in Search of a Soul, by Carl Jung.
And I read that and he said that, you know, we've really gotten away from the idea that man is anything more than just this this automaton that we're just supposed to work and work and work and for nothing though.
We have this life, we're here on this earth, but for no reason though.
And we're just supposed to get over that.
We're just supposed to get over the death of God, the death of nation, and find something to keep us occupied like collecting stamps or doing a marketing job.
It doesn't work.
And one of the biggest problems is not so much just the little things in our society that are wronged, The Republicans will say, we have a big debt.
Or, well, you know, we just have to fix the health care system.
We have a society which is fundamentally dysfunctional and will collapse and break if we don't fix it in the areas where government can't just put a bandage on it, can't just tape it up.
It's something that really, and one of your quotes, one of your quotes, which I loved, I forget, I saw it on a meme once.
But honestly, I'm not just blowing smoke.
It was one of the most intuitive things I heard.
But you said trying to change society without changing the family is trying to move a shadow without moving the statue.
And that spoke to me because it's so true.
What is a society or a country without its composite elements, which are good people and good families?
And so, you know, if we don't fix the people inside the machine, you can't fix the society.
Yeah, I was just reading about how I think the number one cause of death for people in America under 50 is drug overdose.
That is so astonishing to me.
I mean, in a way, yes, you look in hindsight, it's kind of inevitable.
But even though I predicted some of these things, you know, when the facts manifest, it's like, oh, you know, it's like, I think there's a ghost over there.
Oh, no, there is a ghost, you know, and it's kind of weird because, and I think, and I know, I know, particularly for white people, I mean, the life expectancy is just cratering.
And addictions are rampant.
And I think, I don't know if it's just a white thing or, you know, I don't know what, but I think when you live in a society that is fundamentally unsustainable, it's really, really tough to plan for the long term.
Like I talked about this with Bill Whittle a while back ago, just growing up in the shadow of the Cold War.
It's like, hey, is that a bird whistling or is that a bomb landing to end civilization as we know it?
And it was really tough to sort of say, OK, well, I'm going to defer gratification.
I'm going to knuckle down.
I'm going to work hard and so on.
And I think there's something now that the end is in sight.
I mean, the end of whatever ride we're on.
I think it's in my sight.
For sure it's in Europe, sorry about that, but you know, we're working what we can to fix it.
Good luck with all that.
But the end is in sight.
I mean, the unfunded liability is north of $150 trillion.
I mean, the end is in sight.
And there's going to have to be, it's either a soft landing or it's a hard landing.
Like it's either a negotiated landing or it's a wheels up, nose 90 degrees down kind of landing.
And I think people are waiting for the end times, so to speak.
You know, I mean, some of the more extremist Religious ideology is like, the end is imminent, the end times are imminent, so I'm not sure I'm going to go to the dentist this month because, you know, someone's going to come and fix my teeth supernaturally.
But I think that feeling of mathematical inevitability of an unsustainable system has got a whole lot of people, in a sense, circling the drain.
Like, why bother?
Why get involved?
And particularly the smarter people who see the challenge coming up ahead are saying, kids, well, you know, that just could be, in a sense, hostages to fortune for my future.
That, to me, is a very, very tragic place for society to be in.
Well, yeah, there is this sense of doom.
There's a sense of dread, and particularly for people that know what's going on, you know, for people that have seen the charts and the graphics and all the things that the normies don't really concern themselves with, for people that see the picture in a mathematical way, just how you're just not going to be able to make it work, there is this sense of Harold, that we're in in our lives and in our society.
People ask me all the time, you know, the complete degenerates that I graduated with from high school ask me all the time, you know, Nick, why are you angry sometimes?
Why are you reading books?
Why don't you come out and hang out with us?
Why are you reading books all night?
For people that don't understand, it's like, even if we did everything in our power to reverse and we did everything right and everything to reverse the course in the exact right direction, Still would probably come up short.
And you still have the majority of the population that are going to watch the female Ghostbusters and the majority of the population that are tweeting, you know, hey, that that London terror attack was really bad.
But how about all the Islamophobia that the Muslim invaders are going to experience?
And you realize that when the majority of the population is just so committed, the momentum, the inertia is just so in the wrong direction.
It is sort of a hopelessness.
You know, I have to get my wisdom teeth out probably.
I don't think I'm going to do it because, you know, either in 40 years, I'll be, my consciousness will be uploaded to some hive mind, like Alex Jones says, or there's going to be some horrible interstate war going on here.
So, you know, I do it, but it's true.
There is a sense of dread for people that know what's going on.
I, I take faith in the idea that We've stared at the brink before.
You know, we stared at the brink.
Could you imagine after the Great War?
And then, oh my god, ten years later, there's another Great War.
And then, oh wait a minute, there's an empire that has a thousand nuclear warheads pointed at us.
But those crises were of a fundamentally different nature.
Whereas those were existential, those were outside.
This threat is inside.
It's a cancer of the body.
You know, and so I think that's why It's very tough for people that understand what's going on to really have the same energy to have that sense of urgency when, you're exactly right, they're looking in the face of impending death.
They're looking at, essentially, the light of God and saying, you know, what difference does it really make if I go out and exert myself like Sisyphus rolling the stone up the mountain just to have it roll back down again and, you know, some Jim Comey testimony blows it up and we don't even have Trump anymore.
I mean, what's that going to look like in ten years, bud?
I'm keeping the faith, I'm trying my best, but you're right, it's difficult for us who know what's going on.
Yeah, I think the West has never faced us, and it's an overused phrase, an existential danger, but the West has never faced such an existential danger I think as it faces now, which is the downside.
The upside is we've never had this kind of technology before to spread information.
This is, in a sense, the great glory and the great bummer of the Internet.
Because with no Internet, it'd be like, well, you know, I can stuff my little hand-typed manifesto into people's mailboxes, but, you know, there's no hope, right?
Because the Internet gives us this enormous power and hope and potential, which is great, And sucks a little too because, you know, you can't give up.
That's the problem.
You just can't give up.
There is will and there's means and there's methodologies to fight the good fight.
And so I'm very glad that there's the internet, even though every now and then it'd be like, Oh yeah, good.
Twitter.
Huh.
Good news.
Good news.
You know?
So, I mean, it is something that is so fundamentally transformational that you can't step aside because there is hope.
And if there is hope, it is in the data packets.
Yeah, well it's true.
And someone like me who was... I mean, you wouldn't have believed it.
I know a lot of people wouldn't have believed it who knew me well.
In high school I was the Milton Friedman guy, you know.
If anyone had an argument about, you know, why there should be social welfare or whatever, you know, there I'd be with the free-to-choose lecture series, chopped and pasted, ready to go.
You know, if there's hope for someone like me who is so ideologically convinced that this was a direction that could have sustained itself, you know, if only we passed a couple of bills and maybe had a constitutional convention.
I think there is hope that we can convert people.
And I saw on Twitter, there were some articles somebody posted where you only need 10%.
You only need to convince 10%.
of the population of an idea and have them really convinced to change the whole zeitgeist.
And, you know, you look at the American founding, it was only about a third of the people that were really patriots fighting for independence.
And, you know, hopefully with the tools that we have, with the will that we have, we'll do it.
But the more that I've gotten older, and I'm not very old, but the more that I have gotten older, I've sort of seen that it is up to people succeeding.
It It's not like it's this destiny, it's this fate where, well, you know, everything's gonna work itself out.
Even if, well, you hit the snooze on the alarm clock and, well, you don't really write that book so well, everything will still work itself out.
When you see the pictures and the videos of the migrants pouring into Europe and the riots in Paris and you see You know, just how huge the amount of money is that we owe in debt and all these different catastrophes.
You quickly realize that it is up to every one of us who know to pull as much as we can and hopefully that will be sufficient.
But I think that's what I've learned growing up is It's on every person, and that's why people ask, you know, why do we do this?
To regular people, we seem like we're crazy.
You know, why are you yelling at the camera, Stefan, for an hour about philosophy?
Nick, why are you filming a show in your basement, telling people about, you know, Muslim terror attacks, and only a thousand people watch your show?
Well, it's because if everybody's doing as much as they can, you know, maybe we could right this shit, but hopefully it'll be worth it.
Hopefully we'll write everything, and people will thank us for it.
Maybe, maybe not.
The good news is that if it wasn't so tough, I'd probably be doing something else that was tougher, because I enjoy the biggest challenges around, and yeah, it doesn't take a lot of people.
And this is the funny thing too, when people communicate over the internet, sometimes it feels like you're flying over fields, throwing seeds out the window, right?
But here's the thing, you never know Who the great person is that you're just gonna light up.
And they may be person, they may be somebody with me, right?
Maybe you're gonna end up being a billion times more successful than me.
You have like all the charisma in the known universe.
And in which case, you know, the work that I've done has some influence on you.
Fantastic.
It may be somebody after you.
You don't know.
Somebody who's got a lot of resources.
Somebody who's just incredibly charismatic, incredibly well-spoken, maybe really hands.
I don't know.
But you don't know exactly what's going to happen.
And that's why you do That's why we have to do the work that we do, because we do have an airplane, we do have a whole load of seeds, and the fertile soil can really change things.
The analogy of the farming is, you know, corn is only so much.
But the Pareto principle we know, that somebody who's really brilliant, look back at the history of philosophy, we're talking like 20 people.
Maybe.
Certainly Western philosophy.
20 people, you could argue down to 15, mostly men.
So if those 15 people had said, I don't really feel like doing it, we'd live in an entirely different planet.
And you have to do the very best with what you have.
And that's something that is new.
And I know I was thinking about this, because I want to ask you about your experience.
Nick, of your own generation, because I was thinking back, I'm in this half century mark where I'm like a salmon going back upstream to all of my early memories.
It's either going to have to write a memoir or something like that.
But I was thinking about all of my friends in junior high school and high school, and I was running through them.
It's like, okay, well, that person, they kind of did their own thing.
That person, I never got married.
That person, no, never had kids.
They're all very smart people and all have done very well professionally.
But I would say less than 25%, maybe 30% of them got married and had kids.
And that is something that's very, very unprecedented throughout most of human history.
I mean, the birth rate was higher during the Second World War than it is in the West at the moment, at least among whites.
And that level of hedonism is funny because hedonism provokes degeneracy, which provokes debt, which provokes more hedonism.
It's this kind of vicious cycle.
So what is your experience of your generation?
I don't have, obviously, a big view into it.
My daughter's a lot younger than you, and I'm a lot older.
I don't have a good horizontal view of that, but I've heard that there's a conservative streak or a more traditionalist streak among the younger people.
It's tough to gauge, you know, because I am really just on the cusp, but I definitely think there is something to that.
You know, people do say that Generation Z is more conservative and is more traditional, and I think that part of the Maybe the benefit, I don't know if it's a benefit, but part of the perk of maybe all the degeneracy that it saturates the culture, just how much of it there is, is I think Generation Z, when they grow up with Miley Cyrus on television, whereas with previous generations, they see that at the age of 10 or 13 and they say, you know, wow, that's something that's really novel.
I think one of the benefits may be of having it be so saturated, maybe it will break the cycle because you see a lot of the younger people growing up with that as a norm and they say, yeah, okay, You have your Miley Cyrus, but maybe let's pursue something a little bit more meaningful.
And I think that you see, especially with the internet and, you know, just sort of how empty and how vapid what the degenerate globalist culture has to offer, I think that's pushing people back into more traditional lifestyle and they're sort of rediscovering it for themselves and so I will say there is something to that.
I could definitely see that happening and you know obviously time will tell how they'll grow up but I see that starting with a lot of my peers in high school where there is a little bit more monogamy, there is a little bit more of an eye towards the future, towards saving, towards posterity.
You know they say that the hard times create the strong men, the easy times create the weak men.
I think we're in a hard time right now whether it be the recession, whether it be demographically, culturally.
Hopefully that's creating a new generation of strong men.
I think we are seeing the roots of that.
Hopefully the establishment doesn't do anything to thwart that, because we know that if the establishment is good at anything, it's thwarting that sort of beautiful development, that sort of progress in the right direction.
So hopefully we'll see that.
And we do see that in places like in Russia, in Poland, in some of the more traditional societies, where you see sort of a new beginning, where Christianity is having a rebirth even in Asia and in South Korea and Russia.
Hopefully we'll see that in America.
And I think that the more that people see less meaning, In the wealth, in the material world, I think they'll start to turn towards posterity and towards The number of lies, I think, that are being exposed, you know, to water wears away the stone and time wears away the government lies.
And when there is this first flush of enthusiasm with government solutions, like, oh, you know, we're gonna borrow all this money and we're gonna throw it at poor people and everyone's gonna become wealthy.
Now, of course, when people see poor people getting more stuff, and the taxes don't go up, either the big 60s thing, right?
It drove off the debt.
You wanted a welfare warfare state at the same time.
Nobody has to make any sacrifices.
So it seems like magic.
God, we should have done this before, you know?
It's like the guy who's like, wow, I have a credit card?
Why did I bother going to work?
I could just put things on the... I should have thought of this.
This little card is way better than going to mowing lawns for a living.
And so I think people had this magic fantasy land of Poverty is going to be solved by the welfare state or racial tensions are going to be solved by affirmative action or, you know, all of this racial preference in quotas.
I think it was Eric Holder a couple of years ago was talking about affirmative action and because it was originally never going to be a quota system, you know, just like the 1965 Immigration Act was never going to change American demographics.
So it's never going to be a quota system because it immediately becomes a quota system.
And somebody was asking Eric Holder, this is 50 years into affirmative action, Saying, you know, any chance this could wind down at any point?
Affirmative action.
Man, we barely even started.
We barely even scratched the surface.
And it was just like, A, that's not how it was sold, and B, are you kidding me?
I mean, how many trillions of dollars?
Anyway, so I think this idea that Sexual liberation is going to make everyone happy in society.
Well, STDs, unwanted pregnancies, broken families, you know, a massive welfare state, single mom households.
Single moms are noble heroes, just out to do the very best for their children.
Well, no, massive dysfunction in the kids of single mother households and so on, drug addiction, crime, criminality, promiscuity.
Addictions of various kind and so on.
And so all of these... diversity is a strength!
Well, of course, it's a strength if all you do is import people who vote left, then yes, it's a strength for the left.
So I think the number of lies that have come down It's astonishing.
You know, like, my daughter likes these domino videos on YouTube.
I don't know if you've ever seen them, like, you know, dominoes.
It's like, that's as fast as you... the lies are just coming crashing down.
And the great danger of that, of course, Nick, is nihilism.
The great danger of that is, well, everything I've been told is a lie.
There's no such thing as truth.
I'm just going to stimulate my nerve endings like a monkey with an electrode until I die.
And I think our great challenge is to say, yes, everything that you've been told is a lie, and the last thing that you see, the last domino that stands, is the truth.
Because if everything you've been told is a lie, you know now a lot of lies, which means you have some direction where the truth is.
And holding up to people the idea of objective truth, of moral truth, of things to sacrifice for, of things to grow towards, of nobility and beauty and honor.
Honor is a word you don't hear outside the military anymore, but there can't be any military for long in the honor if there's no military as a whole in the general population.
Affirmative action and chicks with guns, anyway, it's a whole other topic.
But I think that is our great challenge and this is one of the things that I really like about your show is there is a passion and there is a criticism but you're also holding something up to say the last domino falls and you think that there's no hope.
It's like Pandora's chest like you take out all these demons there is something after the lies fall that we need to look at and absorb and start building towards.
Yeah absolutely and that's the reason my show is that way is because that's that's been my life as someone that's lived through the sludge and You know, that's been my life, is the television, is the broken education system, the recession, the government lies, you know.
I grew up and it was Bill Clinton and then Bush and then Obama and then finally we have Trump.
But, you know, I look at some of the older people that have at least had a Jack Kennedy.
They at least had that something to look forward to, something to even look back to as something that was truthful.
And that has been the story of my life is looking for what is the truth because there have been so many lies.
And so it has been, in a lot of ways, a personal odyssey for me and why it is sort of a personal struggle to help fellow.
And I'm not going to pretend like I'm this great evangelist or anything like that, like I'm this great philanthropist.
But just to tell my story that this has been my truth that I've been searching for, rather the objective truth I've been searching for, as you're right, as everything has come crumbling down around.
because The majority of people that I talk to that believe the same things that I do, that have gone through the same journey, they are nihilistic.
They're nihilistic with Trump.
And I see this on Twitter a lot with people that are so quick to throw in the towel.
I remember on the day of the Syria strike, they said, you know what?
That's it.
It's over.
Forget about it.
There's nothing to live for.
Everybody, you know, Trump's a globalist, whatever.
I'm done.
I said, no, wait, just like, wait just a sec.
There's still something there.
Let he who was without sin cast the first stone.
You tell me you've never made a mistake in your life.
And then you get to criticize someone who I genuinely think made a mistake in that moment.
Stop listening to your daughter.
Why are you so concerned with the moat in your neighbor's eye when you're a beam in your own eye?
I mean, that's something that people need to have some patience with, I think, with themselves and with others.
Oh, definitely.
Definitely.
Especially with the president and with the movement that's going on is And I think there is there's a reason for that.
You know, it's not by accident that people are so quick to say, oh, well, it's all over.
Because realistically, for someone, you know, that's 19 or 20 or 21 and all they've seen their whole life is just lie after lie, betrayal after betrayal.
You know, George W. Bush let in eight million immigrants.
This is a Republican.
This is supposedly a conservative.
You know, it makes sense.
Sort of like, uh, I don't even know.
They've been burned so many times, just down to a psychological level, it's almost like an abused dog, sort of, you know, that they just sort of flinch whenever something happens, but you're right, it is our task, it is our job to to offer something else, to offer the alternative, the replacement, because You're right, if we don't offer a substitute and we just tear down everything, you know, what is there left?
And that's essentially what happened in the beginning of the 20th century, which started all this madness, was we took down God, we took down all the superstitions, and we said, wow, look at how smart we are, look at how enlightened we are, without fully realizing the implications of what would happen In the absence of meaning, in the absence of a God to devote ourselves to, and we just have to offer up those virtues that you talked about.
I think that's primarily why paganism has an appeal to a lot of people in the alt-right is, you know, because even the church has been subverted in a lot of ways by the globalists.
But we do have to offer something as an alternative to all the vapid lies, the sludge, the goop that we've been fed, you know, outside of television.
Well, and I think one of the great challenges is that We men are genetic-slash-socialized to sacrifice.
Male disposability, right?
You've heard this a million times.
It's all over the place, right?
12,000 men have been mown down by Wonder Woman, but she split a nail and everyone's like, right?
So men, when you ask a man to make a sacrifice, he's like, yep, how big, how much, how far?
One arm, two arms, head, whatever you need.
You know, just dial it up.
It's a buffet of male disposability.
The big challenge now, though, which is I think one of the greatest challenges that we're going to face as a civilization is, you know, sorry, ladies, it's kind of your turn now.
Sorry, you know, I mean, you know, men have been doing it 300,000 years, not that women have never sacrificed and all of that.
But sorry, ladies, I know you love that welfare state.
I know you love it.
I know you feel like it's your second backup beta husbanding just in case the first one doesn't quite work out.
But you gotta let it go.
Because unfortunately, it's a giant sticky trap for migrants.
You have to let the welfare state go.
I know you really love that job security in the government.
I mean, you know, federal employees, significant numbers of women.
I know you love having these big pink ghettos of an HR department because of all the regulations and all the law.
But I'm sorry, we're going to have to shrink government, which means that more women than men, statistically, are going to have to be fired.
Like, there's a lot of things where the sacrifice that is so used to being shouldered by men, and frankly, I would actually rather just not have the welfare state that we sent off to die in World War II or something like that.
So it's not a huge sacrifice.
But I don't know that women are as a whole that ready for something like that.
I don't think it's something that men can particularly solve.
We can talk about it and so on.
But if the welfare state is drawing, you know, the 700 million people on the move, In the world.
700 million people on the move in the world and every single one of them, I have no doubt, would love to get into a western-style welfare state situation where they can make 10 times or more without working what they would have been able to make scratching somewhere away in the desert.
So this is the giant, you know, it's the pot of honey that's bringing the people to disturb the picnic.
And so I think that the great challenge is saying to the women, Sorry, you know, I mean, it's been 300,000 years of men getting their, you know, nads shot off and now I'm afraid you guys are going to have to take one for the team because it's going to be tough for you.
I don't know that there's a lot of preparation or people are kind of ready for that.
Yeah, no, you're absolutely right.
And that's, I think that's sort of why you've heard so much feminist propaganda for how many years is sort of as an inoculation against that.
And it's funny you mentioned that.
I talk about this a lot on my show about how, you know, the women The gender roles for both men and women are biological.
The basic conservative argument about how, oh well, you know, there's two sexes, have I triggered you leftists?
You know, this is very easy to say, there's only two biological sexes.
The next leap that the basic conservatives have to make is, there are also biological gender roles.
And you look at the anatomy, you look at the bone structure, you look at everything else, and you're exactly right, the women do have to They have to cut it off a little bit and they have to return to where they were when we had a functional society because there just isn't one.
And I got in a big fight in a Starbucks at Boston University with like five different women about this.
You'd be surprised.
I'm not so much of a catch in Boston.
But I got into a big fight with about, you know, like five different women in a Starbucks because they're telling me, hey, I want to grow up childless and not get married.
And what's wrong with that?
And I said, well, look, number one, you're going to be miserable.
Number two, this is not a functional country.
You know, Everybody can complain about all the, you know, the sexism and everything else, but if we don't get the fertility rates back up, if we don't, like you said, cut off the welfare state, if we don't have strong families, you know, there goes the country.
And with the primary one I was talking to, I said, you know, look, you may say, rah, rah, rah, girl power, you know, you go see Wonder Woman, you wear your pink clothes.
Okay, that's great.
That propaganda that you're being fed, that message that you're regurgitating, it's not made by women.
It's not made by people that care about women or like women.
The feminist message was crafted by people who, if you look at the results of feminism, must hate women because it makes them miserable, it makes them poor, it makes them sad, and all the rest.
And so I think We just sort of have to convince them that it is ultimately to their benefit.
They're being used like pawns in the same way that a lot of men are in the grand game.
I mean, the feminist message somehow appeals to women that we're going to push you into the workforce, we're going to push you into the battlefield, we're going to push you into the fire first.
There goes ladies and children first.
I remember one time some girl, she like lost a bet she had to pay for dinner for me.
And I was like, wow, this is great.
Why do women want to give this up?
I'm just sitting here eating dinner.
I can order whatever I want.
I don't have to worry about finishing it or paying for it.
And they're getting pushed into the battlefield, into the cubicle, and they think that's pro-woman.
We have to get the women on the same page as us, it's true.
Well, and to me, it's all just about not using force to prop up ideologies regarding this.
The more extreme elements of feminism desperately need the welfare state, they desperately need abortion and so on, to cover up and to mask some of the differences that naturally accrue.
You know, if you get married, your wife gets pregnant, let's say you want three kids, if she wants to be a good mom, wants to stay home, wants to breastfeed and all that, recommended 12 to 18 months or whatever, like, I'm sorry, that takes her out of the workforce for at least seven, eight years.
And then after that, as a stay-at-home dad, I mean, it's time-consuming.
It's like it's your big number one job.
You don't get to have it all.
You don't get to have it all.
Now, if you borrow, if you print money, then you can have the illusion of having it all.
And that, to me, is the great lie.
Without massive subsidized wealth transfers, this ideology of, you know, absolute perfect, no matter what, consequentialist egalitarianism between the genders, and it all comes down to child Yeah, if you don't want to have children, then you can do most of what a man can do.
There'll be some physical strength limitations.
But the other thing too, if you don't want to have children, don't expect or don't advocate for big old age pensions.
Because that's another thing that's frustrating.
You know, I don't want to have kids, but I damn well better get my pension.
It's like...
But you're not creating economic agents to pay for your pension when you get older.
All the people who want big giant social programs that need future taxpayers to fund them and don't have kids?
I don't even know what to say.
I mean, how do you even explain 2 and 2 make 4 to people like that?
Yeah, well yeah, I mean, that's what Bastiat said, right?
Government's the great fiction by which everyone endeavors to live at the expense of everyone else.
And it's totally true.
And how do you explain to people that are on the government dole, that are having it all, or as you say, having the illusion of having it all, how do you explain to them, hey, you need to vote to not have, you know, the money.
You need to vote for the money to go away and all that.
I don't know.
I mean, that's a question I can't answer at my ripe old age of 18.
It's a little bit difficult, but we're going to have to.
You're absolutely right.
Nobody said to men, well, how does society function if you all get drafted and go to war?
How do your families continue to function?
How do the fields get planted and harvested?
You know, stuff happens and everybody works it out.
Stuff happens, community emerges.
When risk increases, community will magically emerge like Atlantis out of the sea.
When risk increases, people look and say, well, how am I going to possibly make things work without the welfare state?
It's like, do you know that people made things work in wartime, in plague?
They got together, they worked things out.
You can get together with your neighbors, you can all watch each other as kids while you go get a job, or you can find some great guy to take care of you.
You will find a way.
This idea that we've become so fragile and such a hibiscus that we can only operate in a tiny narrow band of status subsidies is like, come on!
We rule the planet, we're top of the food chain, and we didn't get there by being dependent on stolen money, for God's sakes.
I mean, we've become so fragile, like, ooh, glass, you know?
It's like, no, you'll be fine.
You'll be fine.
It'll be tough, and you'll be better for it.
Oh, but Stefan, that's not easy, though.
I can't figure it out by clicking a button on Facebook, so I don't want to hear about it.
And that's how we've raised people to become.
I mean, that's right.
That's what the public school system teaches or doesn't teach is the dependency.
And that's even what the parents teach when you have the helicopter moms and dads that don't teach children.
It goes back to when you're saying about how when children have their own independent play, they figure these things out.
You know, people don't have the ingenuity or the creativity or anything else anymore because they were taught Put the square peg in the square hole.
Put the circle peg in the circle hole.
People are poor.
Government gives them money.
This is how this works.
Every problem has a government solution.
Everybody gets a trophy.
Right.
Yes, exactly.
And that's, you know, from cradle to grave.
That's how we're taught to solve the problem.
So I think, you know, until we get back control of the education, I think it really starts with community, with the elders in the community taking back responsibility in terms of educating the kids and having that sort of thing, teaching those values.
And they still have it, by the way, in a lot of the country.
And a lot of the country go down to some parts of the South or in the West.
You know, they still have that independence.
It's really once we get drawn into the cities, once we get drawn into the suburbia, the urban districts where you have no community, where you're just this multicultural slime, you know, then you get away from those values.
You know, because I don't think man was ever intended to live in a city.
You look at every city throughout history in the metropolis.
I mean, the human zoo.
Right, right.
What was the one that they destroyed in the Bible?
Gomorrah?
Yes, Sodom and Gomorrah to Rome, to every city.
It always doesn't end up so great.
So I think once we return to The fields, where we were intended, you know, maybe then it could become a possibility.
I just wanted to mention, for those who may have misheard you, he said, return to the fields, not return to the feels.
Returning to the feels is something that we'd be doing entirely too much of.
Nick, I really want to thank you for your time today.
I want to remind people, check out your show.
It is a great show.
You can get on Right Side Broadcasting Network.
That's youtube.com forward slash right side radio.
The website, we can put all the links to this below, but just for those of you who are listening alone, Nicholas J. Fuentes, F-U-E-N-T-E-S dot com and twitter.com forward slash Nick J. Fuentes.
A great chat.
I hope we can do it again soon and very, very best of luck with your broadcasting career.
I see bright things ahead of you and not just the hope of universal morality, but a good career as well.
I appreciate it.
Thank you so much for having me.
▲
Export Selection