Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

April 16, 2025 - Stew Peters Show

01:25:50

Logos Academy Episode 42: European Ethos Project

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Ladies and gentlemen, we are live.
	Welcome to Logos Academy episode 42. We're a tad bit late today.
	We had some audio problems from Rumble Studio, but we got it fixed up.
	So we're joined by Jake today.
	He is the founder of the European Ethos Project.
	He's a prolific writer from what I've seen so far.
	Very interesting individual.
	So we're going to have a nice discussion about, I presume, European culture, European history a little bit.
	We'll talk about his ideals and then his project, which is the main thing that I really want to promote because I think it's a very fantastic idea, quite frankly.
	So, Jake, welcome.
	It's nice to have you on the show.
	Thank you.
	Thank you, Zach.
	Thanks for inviting me.
	Yeah, of course.
	My pleasure.
	So, maybe to give the audience just a broad assessment of kind of who you are, maybe where you're coming from here, if you want to just go into your background a little bit, Yeah,
	so my name is Jake Leone.
	I'm a political science researcher and writer.
	I mostly focus in National Socialism, at least right now.
	How I came to National Socialism is probably not too unique of a story.
	I was always involved in politics and focused mainly on I was mainly in the conservative and liberal type sphere, but over time I developed into probably the only fringe ideology that's allowed in America to step outside of that,
	which is libertarianism.
	Over time, the more I studied it, the more I saw its flaws with its hyper-individualism and some other systematic issues and ideological issues that I had with it.
	I kind of went off on my own for a while.
	And as I was studying history in school, I started finding inconsistencies with World War II.
	And I started finding notes by some different authors saying, essentially, be careful with this information and be careful how you use it.
	It can be twisted.
	And so the more I looked into it, the more I came to realize that there was some guarded information.
	And I just dug into it, and eventually I got to the point where I was reading documents and policies, and I wasn't seeing any of the genocidal or euthanasia-type programs that were always being claimed.
	So I ended up studying more National Socialism.
	Of course, I went to Mein Kampf and found that to be equally interesting, and pretty much everything they said it wasn't.
	And from there, I went into reading the other literature of National Socialism, Goebbels and Federer.
	And yeah, from there, it was pretty much it all overlapped so much with just what I can see is wrong in the world and what I can see is right.
	And I'm happy I found National Socialism in the end.
	Yeah, likewise.
	It's definitely the hot topic of the show.
	It's what we discuss probably the most because, you know, Being in the circumstance that we're in, I think National Socialism serves as this kind of antidote to the poison that's running rampant in society today.
	So coming to National Socialism, maybe to just get a little more into how you got here and why you chose this path, which is very akin to the path that I've chosen.
	You mentioned that you didn't experience any of the things that they said were...
	True of National Socialism when you actually read into it.
	You started to learn that these people weren't advocating just killing everybody that's not them and trying to vie for world domination, which I think is one of the funnier lies because it's so egregious when you actually read what they said.
	There's never even one instance that you can find of them even implying that they should have world power over everybody else or something like that.
	Tell me about...
	Your experience with Mein Kampf.
	This is the foundational text in learning these things and getting to understand the broader picture.
	I think both ideologically and both seeing Hitler as a man and getting this breakdown of this is not an evil person.
	He's asking very logical questions in this work.
	Break down that process for me and the audience.
	What was it like reading Mein Kampf for the first time?
	What are some things that really stood out to you upon reading it?
	So when I started reading it, at first I found it a bit boring.
	At first I was really excited to read it because I was curious to see what would be truth and what would not, because at that point I've already dug into a lot of the primary resources and found a complete lack of resources relating to the things that are claimed.
	And so I was excited, and then I kind of got a little bit bored, if I'm being honest, and I think a lot of people have.
	And I'm happy I finished reading it, obviously.
	But ultimately, I get a lot of flack for this, but Mein Kampf is an autobiography.
	There's a lot of nuggets of wisdom of all kinds, and there's a lot of national socialism in there.
	But ultimately, it's an autobiography, and I think it does a great job of, like you said, showing the man behind a major...
	Ideological advancement of National Socialism.
	And so I thought it was crucial.
	I think it's a crucial read.
	I do normally rank some of the other literature, like some of Fader's work above Mein Kampf for people just starting who want to learn about National Socialism.
	And it's not because Mein Kampf I think is bad or anything like that.
	It's because I just think there's more National Socialism to be had.
	And I think Hitler even specifically had Fader write these books for that reason.
	So I think there's much more to offer in some of these other things, but it was a great, I mean, in the end, it was great, and it was interesting seeing how mild it was, for the most part.
	You know, it was a lot of stuff that you hear pretty average people saying about their surroundings, so.
	Yeah, it kind of, when you first read it, you do get kind of surprised by how common sense it is.
	I mean, it seems like things that really shouldn't be that, You know, arguable or, you know, blown out of proportion as they are.
	And, you know, I do agree that there are definitely for the ideological perspective of things, there are a lot of works that are much better than Mein Kampf in that regard.
	But, you know, I think one of the important things for myself when I first read Mein Kampf was the fact that, you know, you're given this depiction of who Hitler is as an individual.
	And, you know, when you think of him through the modern media lens as this psychopath who just wanted to kill people and whatever, it makes it really hard for the average person to then hear out his ideology because it's like,
	oh, well, national socialism, well, that was the thing that he was the champion of, right?
	So if he was this evil guy, I can't look at this evil ideology.
	Excuse me.
	When you break down...
	And you read this and you realize a madman doesn't ask five questions about one problem and try to come to the most logical conclusion to these questions.
	A madman doesn't try to give people the benefit of the doubt and then study further and further and argue that reason has to overcome sentiment at some point.
	That's just not what a madman does.
	And then it helps you to go, okay, so he wasn't this evil guy.
	He was actually a guy that was truly looking for solutions.
	Now maybe let's see what his solutions were.
	I think it kind of opened that door a little bit and makes people a little more comfortable hearing what this ideal has.
	So now going maybe more into the ideological aspect of National Socialism, what are some of the pinpoints that you find to be crucial or that you think maybe somebody in the audience who isn't really familiar with National Socialism,
	it's just not something that they've researched thoroughly?
	What are some things that you think are very important that they know about National Socialism?
	What drags you to it?
	So I think the first thing to say about National Socialism is breaking down the term National Socialism, because there's a lot on both sides where people hear National and they automatically think of what Hitler and Mein Kampf would describe as dynastic patriotism, a loyalty to the state or a loyalty towards the country.
	But really, it's a loyalty to the nation, and the nation is a racial body.
	So I believe it was Goebbels, I don't remember where, but he said that nationalism is a doctrine of blood.
	Likewise, socialism is also commonly misunderstood, and it's commonly represented, especially by boomers and conservatives, as pretty much Marxism or Marxism-lite.
	And that couldn't be farther from the truth.
	Really, socialism is a doctrine of organization and a doctrine of priorities.
	And so it's about national socialism is the nation coming together to live according to the principles of its blood, to protect its blood, and in doing so needs to place its blood and the protection and its future above all else.
	And so that's the main premise of national socialism.
	It's important to recognize, too, that...
	It's based on the eternal racial laws of the European.
	And that's a really important point to make too, is that this isn't a foreign system.
	This is something we can recognize.
	It's also not something that comes naturally.
	That's another important point, because a lot of times people think they get along the thought of organic, especially when they start confusing some fascism texts.
	With National Socialism and they start thinking along the lines of something completely organic, which National Socialism is not.
	It has to be taught and cultivated.
	So those are the main points of National Socialism that I would present.
	Yeah, I think that's a great description and very much something that I try to present to my audience quite often.
	So it's very in line.
	You mentioned fascism as well, and I think this is an important thing to touch on, too, because I see very often, even in our circles, people conflating national socialism with fascism and equating them as one and the same or kind of painting them in the same stroke.
	How do you differentiate between national socialism and fascism?
	Again, for somebody who's not fully educated on either of these topics, what...
	Maybe separates these two on a fundamental level.
	That's a great question because it really does come up so frequently.
	And I was surprised because you get some backlash from telling some people that fascism is not National Socialism, that they shouldn't be conflated.
	They can be friends, but they're not the same.
	So the primary difference between fascism and National Socialism is the foundational understanding of what we're seeking.
	So national socialism always focuses on the foundation of the nation.
	So we're seeking to protect the nation and to keep the nation going.
	The state is seen as a parallel organization under national socialism, and it functions to protect the nation and acts in the best interest of the nation.
	The second it stops is the second it stops being a lawful state.
	When it comes to fascism, fascism understands the foundation of everything to be the state.
	So it views the people, the country, and the state itself as one entity, as an organic entity, and national socialism does not view that.
	Additionally, it's important to recognize that the difference between nation and country in this context, so national socialism protects the nation, fascism protects the state, and the state is not necessarily a racially...
	And we can see this in Italy, I believe, until 1938.
	There really wasn't any sort of racial laws.
	So there's no inherent racial characteristics of fascism.
	It definitely came in later, but inherently it doesn't exist.
	So that's the primary difference as far as ideologically.
	And then we see differences economically, of course, with the acceptance under fascism of...
	Usury, to a certain extent, unproductive capital or speculative capital, which is essentially where people are making money off of other people's labor, and they're not really adding to the process.
	So they're middlemen not doing anything but collecting money, and national socialism rejects that outright.
	So all forms of unearned income and speculative income is rejected totally, and so capitalism is rejected much more outright under national socialism.
	Where under fascism, it's more so corporatized, and it's twisted to the benefit of the state.
	So those are some pretty big differences, and I think we do well in separating the literature too, because like I said earlier, there's some great books on fascism, and I think people should read them, but I think it should be clear what the ideological differences are,
	because we really need a solid foundation to move forward, and that doesn't happen by blending multiple ideologies.
	Yeah, I agree.
	I think it's extremely important to, you know, really refine and kind of whittle down what exactly it is that we're all agreeing upon because it's kind of an issue with this movement, so to speak, right?
	More of a movement of the conscious rather than a physical movement in that sense.
	But we're very scatterbrained and it's going to get right actually into the point of your project here is that there is no...
	I could be a National Socialist, and Guy B, C, and D can all be National Socialists, but I got there because I read Mein Kampf and 10 other National Socialist works.
	Maybe they got there because they watched Europa and a couple Hitler speeches, and maybe somebody else, their friend told them about it, and they think it's a good idea.
	With that understanding of it, there's no really ideological foundation that's solid, right?
	We might describe ourselves as the same thing, but we actually might not even be ideologically aligned.
	We're just describing ourselves as such.
	And, you know, contrary to, you know, you're a Marxist, right?
	And you go through the universities and you go to like literal Marxist classes where they teach you Marxist doctrine and they put it on a red platter for you.
	And they say, hey, look, this is how it functions.
	This is what it is.
	And now you're a Marxist, right?
	And here's how you do activism as one.
	And here's how you, you know, fight the system as one.
	And for us, it's very scattered.
	It's very individual.
	Like, oh, I'm here for my reasons.
	You're here for yours.
	Which kind of comes to your project and the idea that you've laid forth yourself, which is the European Ethos Project.
	Do you want to maybe give just an explanation of what it is?
	First off, what it is, maybe a summary of the project itself.
	And then maybe we'll go into kind of some of the nitty gritty details of it as well.
	Yeah, for sure.
	So as a National Socialist, I recognize the value of preserving our cultural identity.
	I think it's crucial.
	I think it's something that exists in blood and can be...
	So that's something I want to protect and I want to bring people back to enjoying traditional art and traditional music and also additionally just education in general.
	I think that's a major point of my project right now is focusing on developing these courses and other types of material so that we can develop a more educated community overall.
	One that doesn't rely on paperwork from a university.
	It's a lot of money for essentially nothing now.
	That's the main point of my project right now, is trying to retain this cultural identity.
	That's very key.
	In your project here, what are some of the ways that you aim to do that?
	What's the foundation of it?
	Where are you starting at?
	Because there's so much.
	You can go back to ancient Rome, ancient Greece, and you can dig into those time periods.
	We can look at National Socialist Germany as an example of something that was very culturally in line with us.
	We can look at America and its inception.
	There's just so many different avenues to go into.
	Where do you start?
	And then additionally, where do you aim to go in the future with this project?
	What else do you want to...
	As far as where a person can start, they can start wherever they're interested.
	I've been trying to build up some different book lists on my website too, as far as ancient Greek works, so people can get started reading those.
	I'm going to be expanding it, but I have fiction, I have an NSDAP reading list, I have a couple other reading lists too, a political science reading list.
	Wherever you're interested is a good place to start.
	And really, as far as where I'm moving with the website and where I'm moving with my project, I'm looking towards just expanding it as far as possible.
	And I'm getting other people on board who specialize in different areas of history.
	Or I have a guy who reads a lot of eugenics stuff and is published in eugenics.
	So I'm working with them to develop courses and other stuff like that to offer to our community.
	Great, that's fantastic.
	And where can the audience find this project so they can start to look into it themselves, maybe take some interest in some of their own culture?
	Yeah, ethosproject.site.
	I also have everything linked on my X at ethosrevival.
	So if the link ever changes or anything like that, you can always find that.
	Additionally, I have a library on Telegram, which is the library of Europa.
	And we have a book club on X, the book club of Europa.
	So we'll probably be expanding more.
	And there's some more Telegram groups that are coming up soon.
	I'm working on a NS Writers Guild right now.
	So we're getting some people who have some stuff published already together to try to encourage some people who might want to write more and give them the resources to be able to publish and to be able to add to this.
	This community that way.
	So there's a bunch of ways to find me.
	Great. I want to maybe pull back to National Socialism a little bit, because it's such a heavy topic with so many misconceptions and misunderstandings.
	You obviously are very interested in this ideal, and you wrote this work, National Socialism Explained, right?
	What kind of inspired you to decide to write your own book about National Socialism?
	You know, there's so many works out there.
	What made you want to do your own?
	There's a lot of works out there, but not a lot of contemporary works.
	And as I was reading, like I said, I started with the policy or the party documents and stuff.
	And I branched outwards and I started reading all the primary literature.
	And I felt like, not that I got to an end of it, but I started approaching an end.
	I started looking for more modern works, and there really isn't much.
	There's some.
	A lot of it is heavily opinion-based, and a lot of it isn't really drawing on the spirit of National Socialism as it was originally presented.
	And I think the problem we're seeing is the trade-off where people who are classically trained academics or who otherwise have the skills to be able to publish tend to not because they don't want to ruin their reputation.
	And so we get into this weird cycle of nothing really being produced.
	So I saw that as a problem.
	And like we talked about earlier, a foundation that we can share.
	So that's really the main driving reason why I started writing what I started writing.
	Yeah, it's great.
	And maybe if we can go more into some of these...
	These ideological aspects and maybe some of the misunderstandings.
	One of the big ones, you mentioned eugenics and euthanasia, which these two get conflated as one and the same, right?
	Whenever somebody hears national socialist eugenics, they think that that means they're mass killing people with vaccines or sterilizations or whatever.
	So do you want to maybe explain what a national socialist eugenic policy looks like?
	And then additionally, what the difference is between eugenics and euthanasia?
	Yeah. So this is a really interesting point as far as with racial science, because it's a rather underdeveloped topic.
	And the NSDAP really didn't fully develop it either.
	Walter Gross himself said that, who was the head of the racial policy office, said that...
	He would use the most advanced technology possible to determine eugenically positive traits and whatnot.
	So I think it's important to mention before I answer that, that we have to move away from Nuremberg laws.
	We have to move away from the racial science of the 1930s.
	Not that it's all wrong and the concepts and the ideology behind it nonetheless stand strong.
	But we have to modernize.
	I'm sorry, I got off topic.
	What was your question?
	I asked the question in a very odd manner.
	What's the difference, first off, between eugenics and euthanasia?
	What draws these two apart?
	Eugenics is a greater science of improving the genetics of the community.
	Euthanasia is an aspect that could be implemented in a eugenics policy, in a eugenics program.
	I don't know how a pure national socialist eugenics program would approach euthanasia.
	I know that it wouldn't be...
	It wouldn't be what they claimed.
	I know that what happened didn't happen how they claimed, as far as the euthanasia, because all they have really is T4 and the document, and it really doesn't describe what they say it describes.
	So I don't think there's really anything from the past that indicates that euthanasia needs to be some sort of central focus in the eugenics program, especially because we see such heavy emphasis on preventative medicine and preventative health in the NSDAP, an early national socialist program.
	So euthanasia, as far as the forceful murder, essentially, of people who are deemed genetically unfit, really, it just doesn't have a place in modern national socialism, I don't think, personally.
	Yeah, I concur.
	And this is the conflation that's used quite frequently, right?
	And I think it's so important to break down the fact that these two terms are not one and the same, because when The modern media today, when the whole COVID scheme was going on, and they're coming out with this vaccine, as they called it, they're saying Bill Gates is trying to kill off all of the population.
	He's a eugenicist.
	Well, that's not eugenics.
	That's euthanasia.
	You can't even really call it euthanasia either, because euthanasia is supposed to be mercy killing.
	It's like somebody is sick or they're in a really bad circumstance.
	More merciful to let them go, right?
	It's a morally good thing to do it.
	This is a very big conflation, and this kind of comes from the same camp of people that are in this MAGA-esque, like, national socialism is communism.
	They're the same thing, right?
	They're both left-wing ideologies, and this really brain-dead kind of a take that comes from maybe like an Alex Jones camp or something like that.
	So I think it's really important to break those down.
	To continue, and you kind of answered this, but maybe to go a little more thorough, in National Socialist Germany, what is their take on eugenics, right?
	What is a National Socialist view on eugenics racially?
	I guess racially would be the best way to describe it.
	Yeah, so the ultimate goal of eugenics is to improve the health of the community.
	Can you hear me?
	I think you're freezing up on your end.
	Hello? Yeah, I can hear you.
	Oh, that was really weird.
	You froze for me for a good, like, 30 seconds there.
	Right when you started answering the question, if you want to maybe just start back with the question again, do you know the question or do you want me to re-ask it?
	I don't know if you heard it.
	Yeah, I heard part of it.
	It kind of cut out.
	Halfway, but if you want to, you can.
	Yeah, it seems like Rumble Studios on the fritz today.
	I don't know what the hell it's doing.
	Yeah, so I hope the audience...
	Please do, folks, if you're watching in the audience, let us know if it's lagging for you guys as well, or if this is just our end privately on Rumble Studios.
	Pissing me off the last week or so.
	It's been giving me nothing but problems.
	But if you guys are having problems, please do let me know so I can try to figure it out.
	Anyway, to go back to the question, in case the audience wasn't able to hear it, what is a eugenics policy in National Socialism?
	What is their take on eugenics?
	How do they view this racially as a people?
	Yeah, so the ultimate objective of National Socialism is the protection of the race.
	So that's the ultimate driving force behind any sort of policy.
	And we see that being the entirety of the eugenics policy of national socialism.
	So in the end, it's what needs to be done to protect the nation.
	How that gets implemented is going to depend on the technology available to the people at the time of implementation.
	So like I said earlier, it's going to look different.
	Now versus in 1930.
	So I think now how we're going to see it implemented is through genetic testing and through incentives for healthy relations.
	So the ultimate objective is we want to create healthier and better national socialists in the next generation than we have, than we could ever be really.
	And that's something that gets echoed a lot too in national socialist literature where we see education.
	Being a key point.
	And I think that that education is really, can only be unlocked through physical health.
	And so if we're providing, if we're passing on bad genetics and the next generation is sick and has increasing amounts of different heritable diseases, that education is never really going to take root like it could.
	So it's really important that we stay healthy.
	And I think that the other aspect too is with modern medicine came...
	A reduction in natural circumstances that would have weeded out the population.
	And it sounds harsh to say, but it's just a simple reality of life is that if the weak continue producing, they're going to produce weak more often than not.
	And so that's the main objective is to pass on health.
	Good, good.
	One other concept I want to ask you about, and you very briefly touched on this a little bit earlier, but maybe if we can go a little bit further.
	You talked about this difference between nationalism and patriotism, or dynastic patriotism, as Hitler called it.
	And I think this is another big one today that also comes from the MAGA conservative type camp, where they'll say, you know, you got a guy like...
	Charlie Kirk, as an example, who would say, I'm a nationalist.
	I'm an American nationalist, right?
	And clearly the guy doesn't ever talk about race.
	He doesn't care about the founding stock of this country.
	That's not an interest of his.
	He only cares merely about America as a state, as an institution, as a structure, and simply that, right?
	Just the Constitution and these physical things, which are products of our people.
	But he doesn't view it in that lens.
	Do you maybe want to go a little bit further into this clear distinction and difference between nationalism and patriotism?
	Because I think we have a lot of people today in the United States that would consider themselves a nationalist, but they're not really one in practice or in theory at all.
	Yeah. So nationalism comes from the word natio, Latin, and it essentially refers to a tribe or a small collective.
	And so it really comes from these roots of blood.
	And that's exactly how it's adopted in National Socialism.
	So a lot of these American nationalists or other types of nationalists tend to take that and distort it just like they do with socialism.
	And we end up in a position where we're not really sure who's within the nation at this point.
	Anybody who walks into the borders.
	And so that's the difference is if you are nationalistic, quote unquote, to a country and it's not a consistent nation, then you're patriotic or you're at the least misusing
	the term nationalism.
	National socialism views nationalism as truly loyalty to blood.
	And really that loyalty to the blood goes to such an extent that it becomes socialism at a certain point where a true nationalist man is.
	Because we see so much love for our community and we want to care for our community so much that we recognize that our priority has to be on the well-being of all.
	And that's the foundation of socialism.
	I think that's very well said.
	And people have a hard time understanding the socialism concept, especially on a mass scale, like when you're thinking of a full-blown society.
	But, you know, you think about like a small little village, right?
	Before we had serious civilizations built where you've got the one guy in the village is the fisher.
	The one guy is the blacksmith.
	You know, the woman does the clothing cleaning.
	That is socialism.
	That's being social.
	They're all doing their piece so that everybody gets something, right?
	Not every single person can go out and hunt because then there wouldn't be any time to gather sticks to build fires, right?
	Everybody has to have that.
	That piece that is theirs to take care of.
	And that's social.
	That's pertaining to the society.
	I love to discuss national socialism.
	It's just such an important topic.
	And it's so crucial that people have a thorough understanding.
	And I think it helps people take interest in the project to hear your explanation of national socialism and kind of...
	How you view it through a specific lens?
	Because yet again, like we talked about, there's...
	I know a lot of people that say that they're national socialists or rather they'll just say I'm a Nazi, right?
	When you talk to them, they don't have maybe the correct understanding or maybe not a full understanding of the ideology itself.
	And I think it really helps to show that foundation to somebody that it is existent and they do have it.
	Now, one of the harder parts for a lot of people, and especially those that come from this American conservative-type camp, a lot of people have a hard time viewing how national socialism can be done in the United States, because we have a little bit of a different circumstance in Germany.
	You know, we have all this multiculturalism that's festered itself, and even the people that are collectively white that live in the United States.
	They're not exactly racialist in the broader sense of the word.
	So how do you view national socialism being something that could be implemented in the United States if you think it can be implemented at all?
	Oh, it definitely can be implemented.
	It can be implemented anywhere there's collections of European blood.
	I think the main problem with the implementation in any modern nation, even America, is That National Socialism is an exclusive Weltanschauung.
	It's a worldview that can only exist by itself, and it cannot exist and give and take with another system.
	So it has to be either 100% or nothing.
	Otherwise, it doesn't exist.
	So really, it's a voluntary system.
	You have to willingly submit yourself to the community and to serve the community.
	And so I think that there's plenty of people in America who are now willing to do that.
	And I think in the future, it's going to increase.
	Unfortunately, I don't think that there's some sort of political route to success here where we can run for office and put National Socialists in office.
	National Socialism is a revolutionary system.
	It, like I said, cannot exist with...
	I don't particularly believe that it's possible through political routes,
	but I do think it's possible.
	How I see that coming about could take many paths.
	A lot of them aren't so good.
	Unfortunately, but I think that we will see a collapse before we see a rebirth.
	So that's where I stand on that.
	Yeah, I'm in the same camp here.
	And I think maybe this is probably where you find people that would describe themselves as fascist.
	They have maybe a little bit of a different idea of how these things work.
	And they view this as we can gain institutional power at some point.
	And implement a fascist type of civilization or society.
	Meanwhile, I think National Socialism, as you said, very much does recognize this as a ground-up kind of a thing where you're not going into the Republican Party or into political office and kind of voting your way through that.
	And a testament to this is the Jewish system will never let that happen, which...
	That in itself should tell you that this is probably solution number one, right?
	Without even looking into it or needing to do any kind of research, you should instantly just assume that National Socialism is something very, very sacred if the Jews take it so seriously.
	It's the one thing that they will constantly rail against.
	They do not want to see anybody speaking about it publicly unless it's in this extremely negative light, which is...
	You know, how I kind of seems like maybe you came here the same way and it's kind of how I got here is I was like, look, this is the they hate this so much.
	They lie about everything.
	So why would they not be lying about this?
	And why is this the one thing that they really don't want you to look into?
	You know, it could be that they really are just concerned for their own well-being because these people were genocidal or it could be that they're concerned for their own well-being because they're lying about it.
	They don't want you to know the actual truth behind it, which I think is obviously the case.
	So to go back to your book and what you write out in this book, do you source information from any other works?
	And if so, what kind of works do you pull from?
	Yeah, I absolutely do.
	So my objective with this book was...
	And for anyone who didn't hear it earlier, it's called National Socialism, a Comprehensive Examination.
	And that's exactly what I tried to do.
	I tried to allow the primary sources to speak for themselves.
	So it's more a literary analysis than anything.
	So what I did was around 86 plus sources and 560 plus quotes from them.
	I essentially read through them and pulled out all of the stuff.
	Relating to different subjects.
	And I cobbled them together in a way that is more coherent to somebody first approaching National Socialism or even somebody who wants to get into depth.
	And all the sources are cited in the back.
	So there's a lot.
	And they can jump off and go ahead and read that stuff after if they'd like.
	So yeah, I used a ton of sources, and that was the main objective, was to allow National Socialism to speak for itself and to connect the dots where need be.
	Because unfortunately, I think that ideologically it got stopped short.
	And there were some really big strides happening at first.
	And then you see with the progression of the war, you see less and less ideology, more and more speeches focused on the war.
	And it's really a shame.
	And like I was saying earlier, there's a complete lack of contemporary, especially from National Socialists, contemporary review on these primary sources.
	Or as far as even like your earlier question, how do we adapt that to modern America?
	Any of these questions are not being answered.
	And so I wanted to step in and fill that gap so that people could kind of have a stepping stone into deeper, different territories.
	And they wouldn't have to read 90 books to do it either.
	Yeah, I think that's very good.
	So I know you offer a free copy, which I think is very commendable of you to do that.
	But I know you also sell the copies, and I want to give you a chance to promote the book and encourage the audience.
	If you can't afford it, you can read the free copy.
	But if you do have extra money laying around, I would really appreciate if you would support him and actually physically purchase the book.
	For two reasons.
	One, because he deserves the support since he took the time to do this, and he's very serious about it.
	And additionally, you know me, I'm an advocate of physical books.
	We try to stay away from the e-books over here in my camp.
	I like to take the notes, write down.
	I think it's more personal when you own the book yourself.
	So where can people get this book, both the free and the paid version?
	So the free one, I'll start with that.
	Please, please just read it.
	If you like it, you can buy it.
	If not, it's fine.
	You can find it on my Telegram, on the Library of Europa.
	And it will be up on my website soon.
	But I'm constantly advertising it because I really want people to read it.
	At Ethos Revival on X. So yeah, so that's where that is.
	It's currently being sold in paperback through Barnes& Noble.
	Through Amazon and a couple other international bookstores.
	And I know I'm working with some different distributors to get it out more and some smaller publishers, along with some hardback and some...
	I've had some requests for some leather-bound copies and stuff.
	So there's going to be a lot more in the future available.
	But ultimately, just please read it.
	I put the free PDF out there for a reason.
	It's really important stuff.
	We really need to get on the same page ideologically so we can move forward as a community.
	Yeah, that's great.
	And I agree with you heavily to have this kind of a work where it gives people maybe a broad assessment because I do recognize that not everybody is going to pick up Mein Kampf and read it front to back.
	It's a very long book.
	And as you said, there are pieces that are boring.
	There's pieces of the book where I'm sitting there and I'm like, wow, this is mind-blowing.
	But then you get to parts where he's talking about...
	German statesmanship and German emperors and things that just really aren't relevant to our situation right now.
	It's just not fun to read that.
	It's not super insightful for what we're experiencing at the moment.
	That's a very important piece.
	As he describes in the beginning of the book, the purpose of reading a book is to pick out the good and take away the bad and throw that to the side.
	Not a lot of people want to spend the time to read something that long, and I can't necessarily say I blame them.
	Did you have something?
	I'm sorry.
	No, I agree with you completely.
	It's a shame, but I recognize it takes a long time to read some of these books, and some of these primary books, like, for instance, Germany Speaks by Ribbentrop, von Ribbentrop.
	It's like 500 pages, and it's not necessarily...
	He was a fluent English speaker, but it's not necessarily the best, just coming from 1930s Germany.
	Some of these other books, clear 300, 500.
	So, yeah, I understand why people don't get around to reading 20,000 pages.
	Yeah, I agree.
	I read Myth of the 20th Century in full, and I really like the book.
	It's very insightful, and there's a lot of really, really good analysis in there.
	But that work, it's so long, and it's so in-depth in so many areas.
	You have to be studied on history, theology, philosophy, all these different categories.
	You have to have some kind of understanding of.
	And it's a lot.
	It's a lot to take in at one time if you're not already well-versed in some certain concepts that come behind the book.
	So I do agree when it comes to that.
	Which brings me back to your course online on your site.
	You have video courses.
	You have book recommendations.
	It seems that you kind of go for the whole nine yards on things.
	What can someone expect to see when they watch one of these video courses on the website?
	What can someone expect to see through one of these?
	So right now, I'm using mostly open source stuff.
	So everything provided is free.
	And it'll take you right to my Telegram channel to open up the material, like as far as textbooks and stuff.
	So with every course, there's a textbook and there's a video.
	So far, I've started with the courses where I found reputable full courses from reputable professors.
	And so I've kind of cobbled together a course that would be comparable to what would be offered at an Ivy League college or Ivy League university.
	I took great care in doing that.
	It took me a while.
	And I'm working on more now.
	So far, we have two political science courses.
	And one European history course.
	So that's what you can expect from the courses.
	There's also under the resources tab, there is a language section.
	And so far we only have, I believe it's just French and Italian right now, but soon it'll be Latin, German, Spanish.
	I'm trying to get eventually all the European languages in there.
	And there's books that range from beginner to advanced in there for the two that are presented so far.
	Moving forward, there's going to be PDFs of threads that I've done in the past and other people have done.
	So we'll immortalize them there, along with speeches.
	So there's a bunch of stuff people can dig into.
	The resources are there.
	That's great.
	Another question I have, maybe this is just more of a casual question in your own analysis of things.
	People talk about, we recently were talking about Implementing national socialism into the United States, viewing this as a revolutionary ideology.
	And there's a lot of debate around, well, they call it optics.
	I think optics is a bad term.
	I think strategy is a little more descriptive of what we're talking about.
	So how do you view this question?
	Because this is an argument that comes up very frequently in our circles.
	Do we use the swastika?
	Do we not use the swastika?
	Do we throw the Roman salute?
	Do we not?
	How do you view this problem?
	What is your take on this?
	Because I think there's just so many different underlying concepts and arguments in this.
	What's your approach to something like this?
	So I personally think that conduct is the most important thing.
	I've done activism with guys with runes on their faces, you know, face tattoos and everything.
	But they've conducted themselves like professionals and like national socialists.
	And it made all the difference.
	And same thing with wearing swastikas.
	I wear a swastika pretty much every day.
	Sometimes it's not so obvious.
	So where I fall on it, I think that we should use our symbols.
	I think we should be proud of our history.
	This is a symbol that's been following us for thousands of years.
	And it's ingrained in our people.
	So I think we should use it.
	As far as optics, I think that that kind of...
	It is a kind of a loaded word and a loaded conversation here, but we have on one hand people who are flying a swastika and handing out pamphlets telling people about community engagement.
	And then on the other hand, we have people flying swastikas and yelling slurs at children.
	And so I think that this is where it's kind of like, those are the main differences right there.
	So as far as optics, I think as long as you're behaving like a national socialist, I think that...
	You want to wear a swastika, you want to have tattoos, that's fine.
	Yeah, I think that's very well said.
	It's a matter of decorum.
	It's kind of like if you're to go into a bar and you want to make friends with people and you come stumbling in drunk, cursing at everybody and being an asshole, it's kind of like a given.
	You're not going to exactly make many friends.
	I think it's the same thing when you're pushing an ideology.
	If you're making a brazen ass out of yourself and making yourself look bad, in essence, you're making the ideology that you're representing look bad because people are going to view it in the light that they view you.
	I think that's very well said and very important, too, because behavior is absolutely crucial for us moving forward.
	It's going to take men of serious discipline and character to actually formulate something like this.
	It's not going to be guys that are boyish, I guess we'll say.
	Yeah, yeah.
	And I think that the other thing too is I've noticed personally in my own activism when I speak to people, being well-dressed and well-spoken has made all the difference because I see how other people go about it and they approach people with a mask with a skull on it and a bunch of guys wearing all black and they try to hand somebody a pamphlet or a flyer and they might take it out of You know,
	obligation. But when I go to a train station or wherever I end up going and I speak to people and I'm well-dressed and I talk to them like an adult, they're so receptive.
	So people are ready to hear this type of stuff.
	It's just we have to present it in an appropriate way.
	And that doesn't necessarily mean no swastikas, but it means appropriate.
	It means in an approachable way.
	Yeah, I agree.
	It's not the symbol that's bad.
	It's the behavior.
	And this is like anything.
	It's the same with if you're promoting a business product.
	Let's say you're selling a coffee brand and you want to advertise this coffee to a mass audience and you want people to buy your coffee.
	What's going to do better if your advertisement is like...
	If you come out with an advertisement and you're cursing in the advertisement and it's like really low quality camera and you know the guy's like pouring the cup of coffee and it's kind of spilling on the counter as he's pouring it or are they gonna see a coffee ad where it's like you know super high definition and the coffee's being poured nice and slow and you see the steam coming up and they're gonna go for that coffee even if that coffee tastes worse.
	They're going to go for that coffee because it looks more appealing, right?
	And I think that, not to say that national socialism tastes worse, but in fact, it probably tastes better.
	But the point is that if it doesn't come across as appealing, it's very hard for people to want to try to taste it and see what it's like.
	So I think that's really well said.
	And there is those limits to it, too, where you want to make it presentable, but you don't want to bastardize it in the process.
	And I think that that's where it gets lost somewhere along the way where you say, hey, stop yelling racial slurs at children.
	And then it's, you know, I'm not going to use the word, but there's no in-between.
	And that's what I think we need to recognize is that in-between.
	That's where we live.
	Yeah, I agree.
	It's a matter of being human, really, above anything else.
	But it's a matter of decorum.
	The thing is, this is what Jews have done, and this is how they've gained civilizational power, right?
	These people are inherently repulsive in their behavior, in their demeanor, in their abilities amongst one another, but they came here, they...
	They played the strategy game, right?
	They played optics, and they put on the suits, and they anglicized their names, and they portrayed themselves as very appealing, very taste-worthy.
	And when you scratch the surface and you look underneath to their actions and their views and their thoughts, you realize that's not the case.
	But most people only see it on the surface, and they just see, oh, well...
	Those Jews have a lot of money, and they wear nice suits, and they're on television, and they speak really nice.
	They must be good people.
	Little do they know that these people are plotting your demise on a global scale, but it's a matter of how they portrayed themselves.
	I think they did a good job at doing that.
	I'll at least give the Jews that.
	They've done a good job at deceiving people with their portrayal.
	Yeah, and when you get underneath that surface, all you find is rot, essentially, and greed and mammonism.
	And when you get below the surface of National Socialism, you find love and community and a beauty of a new future where our children are going to be safe and happy and healthy.
	So that's why I think we should present ourselves well, because...
	We want people to look underneath the surface.
	We're not trying to hide who we are or our ideology.
	And that's the other thing, too, with wearing swastikas.
	I've had a lot of interesting conversations from it.
	A lot of people who have been very confused by my behavior and by the things I say after they call me out for wearing a swastika.
	It's really interesting to see their reactions because they're expecting a crass and uneducated person.
	And when I present them with logic...
	They tend to lean my way.
	So I think that we have a lot going for us.
	We just have to present it nicely.
	Yeah, I think that's well said.
	And it's a thing that I've noticed myself in interactions with people.
	Yet again, going back to this concept of appeal and how things look, when these Jews got the power that they got through the appeal that they played, the first thing they did was go...
	Deeply out of such a deep conviction from their own perspective, they went so far as to change.
	What a national socialist is, what it means, how it appeals to people.
	And they did this through all these Hollywood films of some fucking junkie who's beating people up in the street and kicking people around and just looking for somebody Jewish that can vandalize their property or do drugs on the streets or something.
	And they gave an archetype of what a national socialist is to the populace.
	And that's the conception that these people are stuck with.
	And when they think of it through that frame, yet again, it just seems unappealing.
	Even if the ideals themselves are appealing, the average American would be shocked how much they actually agree with the average National Socialist on almost everything.
	Maybe not racefully yet, because they're just probably not there yet.
	They're there subconsciously.
	They do the white flight, and they'll move out of an area, and they come up with all the excuses.
	There's a lot of loud music or a lot of garbage on the streets.
	It's just not a nice area anymore.
	They know why they move.
	They just don't want to consciously recognize it.
	So I think they're close to us, closer than most of them think and most of even us think that they are.
	Yeah, I don't think we're too far off from a mass realization of this either.
	I think it'd be great if we can get more people involved in writing and producing.
	Reducing more stuff of quality that represents National Socialism.
	Because when people make this realization and they realize there is a racial perspective here, and there's aspects of race that need to be recognized and dealt with, they're going to look for somewhere to go.
	And going to some entertainer and watching him yell slurs on Skype or something is not really going to do it.
	We need people ready to receive them.
	Because I think it's coming.
	I think people are recognizing that there is that.
	Because like you said, there's white flight and now it's being publicly named as such too, which is pretty funny.
	Yes. Now, you talked earlier about this is a revolutionary ideology.
	And you view that there has to be a collapse before things get better, which I agree.
	I mean, I think this is like history 101.
	It's pretty common sense.
	Now, I've made this statement many times in the past, and I've had people around me say, oh, that's blackpilling.
	You want society to collapse.
	That's blackpilling.
	This is terrible.
	I disagree.
	I don't think it's blackpilling.
	Actually, I think it's extremely optimistic because it's just...
	This is a cycle.
	It's a cyclical process.
	It's happened in ancient Rome like 100 times, right?
	The civilization starts to collapse.
	It gets really bad.
	They have a big revolution after the low point hits.
	It's not exactly a fun revolution, but once it happens, they live in prosperity for a while again, and then it repeats itself.
	So in your eyes, to help the audience that might hear that and think, oh, well, now I just give up and do nothing until society collapses, because that's how, unfortunately, a lot of people will take a comment like this.
	What do you think that the average person can do right now to be helping in this battle?
	Obviously, like you said, there is a point where society does have to stoop lower before it can really have this full-blown revolution.
	But as people are in this process of watching society around us decay, what can they as individuals do to keep themselves active and stay optimistic in this battle that we're facing?
	I think the most important thing at this stage is education, is pushing yourself and developing skills.
	And that doesn't necessarily mean studying classical philosophy or language.
	It could mean picking up a trade.
	It could mean a lot of things.
	Pursuing your interests and building yourself into something that is going to be of value to a future community.
	Because everyone thinks that there are going to be some...
	Some warlord of some kind, but we need welders, and we need people to build, and we need people to teach.
	I think that's mainly why I focus on that, because that's what I think is the way forward, is through the focus on education.
	Yeah, I agree.
	We're in this...
	This ideological stage right now where everything is an information war where no one even knows.
	Half the people don't know what we stand for.
	Half the people that think they know what we stand for aren't actually fully there in that same sense.
	And it's disorganized on a psychological level.
	Therefore, it's obviously going to be disorganized on a physical one.
	If we ever want this to...
	Organize into something greater.
	We have to do that mentally first and really be on the same page with things.
	So now you mentioned you don't think we're going to have any kind of serious political revolution or getting into office and changing it in that sense.
	I don't agree with the phrasing that there's no political solution.
	I hear that used a lot.
	At the end of the day, the solution is politics.
	When we do take power, national socialism wins over the day, it's still a political movement.
	You still need politics to run a society.
	How do you see this happening in America with the racial demographics that we have, this situation that we're in, America specifically?
	I think, I think Europe has a little bit of a different circumstance with it, but America, how do you view us separating ourselves from these, these other races?
	I know some people talk about balkanization, some people talk about mass removal, and people have very utopian ideals on how this might work.
	How do you view this on maybe a more grounded level?
	Well, I would say that...
	It leads to one of two things.
	It leads to either we live side by side in subcapacity, even if it's segregated communities, or we live totally separate.
	If we live totally separate, well, they have to go somewhere or we have to go somewhere.
	So that's pretty much that.
	On the other side, as far as the balkanization or living side by side, that produces a lot of other problems that I have not heard anyone really deal with, such as a lot of people want to divvy up land.
	And they start writing it up.
	And then I ask them, okay, what about these ports?
	What about this other infrastructure?
	Are they going to run these nuclear power plants?
	Are they going to run these ports?
	Are you going to trust them to not extort us for the goods coming into these ports?
	Are they going to be able to maintain the infrastructure?
	And if not, how is that going to affect our infrastructure?
	And so a lot of these things, they really don't work out.
	We need a closed environment.
	And so we need to be separate.
	So how I see that happening, it's difficult to say.
	I think that unfortunately, I think what it will be, not that what I want it to be, is cascading racial violence.
	I don't want that to be the case.
	And I hope that we can avoid that because war is a eugenic negative.
	It's a negative eugenic trending situation.
	And so I don't want to see that happen.
	I don't want to see our most brave and And loyal white men die in the mud for no reason.
	But on the other hand, a slow demise is none better.
	So we have to act, but it's going to take a demand with a backing of force, really.
	I think that's the best outcome, but it's also kind of idealistic in some ways.
	I think we're going to essentially have to pick up the pieces.
	And that's the other thing, too, is picking up those pieces is not as easy as it sounds.
	You can't just inherit these infrastructural projects that have been underway and have been being managed.
	Even if 30% of the people leave that job, that's a major gap.
	And so we're going to have significant supply line issues, significant logistical issues with the management of the country.
	So it's not something you should look forward to, I don't think.
	I think the light at the end of the tunnel we should look towards, but it's going to be rough regardless, whichever way we go.
	Yeah, I concur with you.
	I think you have a good analysis.
	It's impossible when you're living in a multicultural society to keep racial tensions down.
	They always are flaring up.
	I mean, we just look at this most recent with this young Austin gentleman who was murdered.
	You know, this is a big one that's really showing us in broad daylight how bad racial tensions really are under the surface.
	And you're never going to be able to, you know, this idea of like, we all just live in harmony and hold hands and multiculturalism.
	It's so absurd because people are, it's nature to be tribalistic.
	It's nature to want to look after your own, to want to be around your own, protect your own, even if that comes with bias.
	It'd be absurd to say that it doesn't.
	It does.
	There is a slim amount of credence to this white privilege narrative that runs through the media.
	People want to be around their own.
	They want to look after their own.
	That's not a negative thing.
	And it's a white society.
	So, of course, there should be white privilege.
	That should be a thing that exists.
	We want to look after our own people and make sure that they're benefiting, you know, not some foreigners or tourists or whatever.
	It's not our interest to take care of them and baby them.
	But I do agree with you, you know, this doesn't necessarily mean that we want this racial conflict on a serious scale.
	You know, I see a lot of people in our circles, you know, screaming race war and they're, you know, this is what's going to happen.
	And they kind of edge it on like they would like it to happen.
	And I think this is...
	As you said, this is really misguided because I don't refute it on moral grounds.
	I don't really care about the morality of that, but on logical grounds that we lose the best of our people.
	If we go fight a race war, think about who's fighting.
	Let's really sit and think about this for a second.
	Who's going to be fighting that?
	Not the liberal faggots.
	If anything, they're going to be fighting against us on behalf of blacks, on behalf of all of these minority groups.
	So the greatest of our people, the ones that are racially awake, the ones that are intellectually stimulated, the ones that have genuine views and good morality, those are going to be the ones that go and fight.
	We're going to lose the best of our blood.
	And let's just say you win said war.
	Well, now we have barely any of our people left that are of serious value.
	And these liberal cucks, they're not going to take over the Jewish system anytime soon.
	So we basically, we're talking about...
	Possible extinction on something like this.
	And I think it's not something that we should be cheering on.
	If this is something that might inevitably be in the cards in the future, we talk about that and we look at it on its face.
	But I don't think this is something that we should be cheering on or promoting and hoping happens.
	I think that's very misguided.
	Yeah, I think it's a little bit ignorant, to be honest.
	We are very disconnected.
	Average American is very disconnected.
	Average Westerner in general.
	I mean, we have not had war in our backyards in a very long time.
	And it's not going to be good.
	I never seek to provoke that type of reaction.
	I'd much rather see community come together and make demands.
	Yeah, I concur.
	Well, I have just about exhausted my questions here.
	I think I'm kind of running slim.
	Were there any pieces that you specifically wanted to discuss that you feel like I didn't brush over or something specific that you want to give to the audience from either your perspective or just a National Socialist perspective that you think they should hear?
	Sure, yeah.
	We can talk National Socialism.
	I think...
	A major part that we kind of touched on earlier was how it connects, how national socialism connects to the European spirit in particular.
	So there's a lot of claims, and this kind of touches on the optics thing too, is I see a lot of people, they try to present national socialism to people who aren't European in the hopes that it's going to become more palatable.
	They're offering them a utopia that doesn't exist.
	It's a system that's not built for them.
	It's European in emanation.
	It's modeled after the European, the eternal racial laws of the European.
	And if you believe that the European and non-Europeans are the same, well, then you don't believe in the same biological determinism that is the foundation of National Socialism.
	So I think that's an important thing to mention, is that National Socialism is European, and it is for Europeans.
	And we shouldn't try to bastardize it to sell it to...
	To South Americans or Africans in the hope that they'll run away and create some utopia in their own country.
	Yeah, I think that's very well said.
	I never really looked at it through that lens, but actually, if anything, it's morally wrong to be preaching it to them because you're just duping them into this dream that's not ever going to be possible.
	That's a very good point because I do see...
	I've heard people say that they're a universal national socialist, and they believe that everybody should be able to be one.
	Let's say the Arabic world wanted to adopt national socialism.
	They could try it, but not with our hand or our guiding factor.
	That's their own volition to have their variant of national socialism.
	National socialism in Africa would look a hell of a lot different than national socialism in Europe, for obvious reasons.
	Yeah, and the adoption of European standards would be the adoption of foreign standards, which national socialism stands in complete contrast with.
	It's antithetical to national socialism.
	And Walter Gross said, I believe it was in 1933, it was a speech, I think it was on a radio broadcast, but he said something along the lines of, Like you said, it's immoral to force a foreign nation to live under the standards of the European.
	And what that is, is it's really reinforcing the idea of cultural and national self-determination.
	And as National Socialists, we will not fight for the cultural and national self-determination of Africans or South Americans.
	But we will fight for our own, and we will support from a distance the other nations, at least in theory.
	But ultimately, we come first.
	And I think that people lost that somewhere along the lines when talking about national socialism.
	Yeah, I think that's very well said.
	And, you know, we made this mistake in America, by the way.
	You know, when we did this whole civil war, we let the...
	We freed the slaves, as they say.
	They weren't freed in the sense of if they were really freed, they should have went back home.
	That's what freedom is.
	Rather, they were pushed into our societies and given this impression that they would be able to function the same in this society and we'd all just kind of get along with it.
	Clearly, they're not happy.
	First off, they're not capable of holding the standards that we hold.
	That's why they go, Oh, it's white privilege to dress nice.
	It's white supremacy to articulate your words very well, right?
	Because they just simply can't do these things.
	They can't hold those standards that we hold.
	And it's immoral to try to force them to do so, to dress them up in a suit and try to push them into corporate America.
	And hey, you're going to be just like the European.
	You're going to get along fine.
	You're duping them and you're actually...
	It's like putting a kid in NASA and being like, yeah, kid, you'll do great.
	You're only 12 years old, but you'll do fine with all the rocket scientists.
	You can get along just well.
	They're not built for that.
	It's just not fair.
	It's not right, actually.
	Yeah, and really, who benefits?
	I mean, there's only one party that benefits from this.
	It's not the white Americans or white Europeans.
	We had a fantastic society and civilizations before they came.
	We did not need them.
	And it's not the blacks or the Middle Eastern people that come.
	They don't benefit from this.
	They essentially live as economic slaves, kind of like what we are, to be honest.
	But really the only ones who benefit are the Jews.
	And that's just because of the parasitical nature of them and the way they position themselves in society where they've been able to...
	Absolutely. The only person that could possibly benefit from a circumstance where two are at odds with each other would be the middleman.
	The guy that's the messenger who brings the things back and forth and who moves these things behind the scenes.
	This is what the Jew always has done.
	Since the beginning of time, they're genetically bred to be middlemen.
	They didn't have their own societies.
	They came into our societies and played the game of...
	If you're going to come into a society that you're not a part of as a group or a racial unit...
	And get inside of it.
	The only way you're ever going to take power in that society, if you're recognized as a foreigner, is through being a middleman, through subverting things.
	You can't just take it outright.
	So they have to subvert.
	It's in their nature.
	And it's very clear that they're the ones that benefit.
	I mean, geez, think about all these organizations in the past.
	BLM was founded by a Jew.
	NAACP was founded by rabbis.
	I mean, just everywhere you look, these people are the ones benefiting off of these racial conflicts.
	Yeah, and it gets really interesting from there, too, because you start, you ask the average person about this, and they get to the point, well, it's not all about us personally benefiting.
	Well, what's it about them?
	Who benefits here?
	And not just that, but at some point, we have to ask ourselves, when do our needs come first, no matter what?
	At what point do we need to say it doesn't matter what they want or what they like?
	We're tired of not having any safe cities anymore.
	I mean, you can probably count on one hand how many cities in America are actually safe.
	I don't want to live like this.
	I know a lot of people don't.
	Yeah, I concur.
	Did you have any other points that you wanted to bring up?
	Anything else that you thought was important?
	Nothing in particular, no.
	I think that's the main thing, that national socialism is European and for Europeans.
	That's a major point I need to...
	Drive home.
	Yeah, that's a very good point, too.
	We're coming up.
	We're about an hour and a half in, but we could always close up early.
	I do it quite frequently these days anyway.
	With that said, one more chance, just in case somebody wasn't in here when you did earlier.
	If you just want to promote your socials, where people can find your stuff.
	If you have any concluding statements, anything else that you want to say, feel free to go ahead.
	Yeah. So my X is at Ethos Revival.
	My website is ethosproject.site.
	Also, you could look at europaproud.com.
	That's where we raise money for activism, and it funds things like European Ethos Project.
	So we'll fund different active clubs and get them some PT shirts and stuff like that.
	The Library of Europa on Telegram.
	And you can find that through my ex.
	Everything's connected to my ex.
	So that's pretty much it.
	Okay, fantastic.
	Thank you, brother, for coming on.
	This was a great discussion.
	I always love talking to a fellow national socialist because you don't get to talk to people that are well-read on these things very often.
	So this was a great chat.
	And if you ever want to come on in the future and just have like a very specific discussion about a certain thing in national socialism or something, I'd love to have a chat like that.
	I think that would be really productive.
	Yeah, that'd be awesome.
	Of course, brother.
	My pleasure.
	You have yourself a good day, and I'll be in touch after the show.
	I'll send you a message.
	All right.
	You too.
	Bye. Have a good one, brother.
	All right, folks, that was Jake from the European Ethos Project.
	That was an absolutely fantastic interview.
	Please, folks, I really, really heavily encourage you to give him a follow.
	Make sure that you're sharing his work around.
	Read his book.
	Read his book.
	If you can't afford it, share it to other people, and hopefully they can purchase a copy.
	I really want you guys to actually financially support his work.
	A very interesting individual.
	And of many of the people that I've talked to, as you guys know, on this show, we take national socialism very seriously.
	There's so much to know about national socialism.
	There's so much to understand.
	It's important that we're supporting people that are truly national socialist in the truest sense of the word.
	I'm kind of glad that the show finished up a little early because I want to be able to chat with the audience.
	I feel like I have not been able to interact with my audience as of late because I'm either reading, which is super in-depth, or I'm doing an interview, which basically makes it that I can't address the chat rooms.
	So I do apologize that we've been almost non-interactive with chats.
	On that note, to make up for that...
	Tomorrow, I'm going to be doing a show at 7pm Eastern.
	And we're going to do a call-in show.
	I haven't done a call-in show in quite some time.
	Now, for those that watch on Rumble Studio, do know that I won't be on Rumble Studio.
	I will not be on the Stu Peters Network because I don't have a time slot for then.
	But we'll be live on ftjmedia.com.
	I will be live on my personal Rumble channel.
	And I'll be live on Odyssey as well.
	So you guys can watch the show on any of those.
	I've been having a hard time getting the live streams to work on Twitter for some reason.
	I don't know what the problem is, but I can't seem to get them working.
	So I'll have to continue to try to finagle some kind of technological stuff over there and see if I can get it working.
	But I'm really struggling to get it functioning.
	I see we got Delta Lima with a $5 Super Chat over on Rumble.
	He says, just a small investment because I appreciate the work.
	Thank you very much, brother.
	All of the Super Chats are very much appreciated.
	And please, folks, don't forget that you can support the show down in the description below.
	I hate to be the guy rattling the coffee mug, but the show has not been gaining the revenue that it was at one point.
	It's been very dry the last couple months, so it's been a little harder to keep it up as frequently as I would like to.
	Just being entirely honest, I'm not guilt-tripping or saying anything in that fashion.
	But I do greatly appreciate all of the support as of late.
	Redstone, I will be doing a show with Tanitris probably in the near future.
	there we go.
	I love technology.
	It's so great.
	Didn't end the show.
	I don't know what that was.
	But anyway, I will probably be doing a roundtable soon with Tunitris and a couple other folks.
	Hoping to do that in the very near future.
	I haven't done a roundtable.
	I haven't done any of the typical show ideas that I really like to do.
	You know, roundtables or...
	Casual shows where I'm just chatting with the audience or doing a call-in show.
	I really haven't been able to do these things, so I do apologize for that because it's something that I really like to do.
	With being on the Stu Peters Network now and having a very specific kind of a format that I'm sticking to, it's a lot harder for me to keep up with all that stuff.
	So I won't be...
	I want to hop back on that train a little bit, I guess we'll say.
	That said, so again, we will be live tomorrow, folks, at 7 p.m. Eastern with a call-in show.
	And then we're going to be live Friday.
	We're going to be having Hammer from Blood Tribe on.
	If you guys are familiar with him, if you've watched my show long enough, I'm sure you guys are familiar with him.
	Don't forget to make sure that you're following on all the different platforms.
	We're on Twitter, FTJ, Odyssey, Rumble.
	Those are the big ones.
	I do have a substack.
	I don't write on it super frequently, probably like bi-weekly at most.
	But please do check out the substack as well.
	Sorry, I'm getting like brain fog after the Rumble Studio crash and there's all kinds of weird noises outside of my house right now.
	I see like a million people asking if I have sunburn or if I've been maced or beat up or all kinds of different...
	Odd speculations that people pick up on.
	I have a dermatitis that flares up randomly from time to time.
	Caffeine seems to really elevate it.
	So if I drink a coffee or if I drink soda or something like that, I'll get a weird flare up.
	It'll go away in three or four days.
	My face will look fine again.
	It's a weird thing.
	No, I don't use any lotions or put anything on it.
	I know people always want me to do something.
	I let it run its natural course.
	When it's gone, it's gone.
	It flares up, gets dry and red, and then it goes away.
	So it'll solve itself in time.
	It won't be long.
	Okay. Let me pull this back up.
	Yeah, you know, Substack, it's got a lot of really not-so-great content on it.
	I mean, there are some really good writers on Substack, but...
	Yeah, there's a lot of weird, degenerate, liberal-type stuff that goes on over there.
	No, I do appreciate it, folks.
	I know a lot of people want to help out when they see this stuff and they want to give me advice.
	I will use natural things, but I refuse to use lotions, creams and oils and things like that.
	It's just not a, not something that I typically do.
	Gaelic, I will consider that.
	Yeah, it's some kind of dermatitis.
	I'm not diagnosed.
	I'm not going to a fucking doctor about it.
	It comes and it goes, so I don't over-worry about it.
	Apparently, it seems that people that watch the show worry more than I do about it, so I don't really care.
	It'll go when it goes.
	But thank you, guys.
	I do appreciate the genuine advice.
	I know we see a lot of goofy comments, but I do appreciate the genuine advice.
	With that said, I think we're going to close up in a minute or two here.
	Folks, again, don't forget, if you guys do want to support the show, it is greatly appreciated, all of the Super Chats.
	You can do so down in the description below.
	We are on Entropy.
	You can support through there.
	You can do a Super Chat over on FTJ Media.
	FTJ Media has the lowest processor fees out of any of the other websites.
	So if you guys are going to support, I always recommend that people do it over there.
	You can do a Super Chat over on MyRumble.
	Friendly reminder, you guys can Super Chat on the Stu Peters Network.
	However, I don't physically get anything from those Super Chats.
	So if you want to support my show and me directly, you have to do it on my personal Rumble channel, which is Logos Revealed Eye.
	There are no longer options to Super Chat on Odyssey because Odyssey is having issues constantly.
	So those are the main avenues.
	There's always the crypto wallets as well if you guys want to support that way.
	I know we got some crypto bros that are lurking around.
	So it's always appreciated, folks.
	And with that said, I think I'm going to close up for today's show.
	I'll see you guys tomorrow at 7 p.m. Eastern.
	We're going to do a little bit of a call-in show.
	And then we'll be live on Friday as well with Hammer coming on from Blood Tribe.
	We're going to do an interview with him.
	A lot of interviews are coming up this month, like a lot more to come, so make sure you guys are sticking around.
	It's going to be a very active April for shows.
	I will try to pick back up on the MindConf readings, but I have quite a few things scheduled at the moment, so not sure exactly when that's going to happen.
	That said, thank you folks again for watching.
	Thank you for the advice in the chats on the face stuff.
	I do have a personal PayPal.
	I've had a couple people ask if they can support through PayPal.
	I don't give it out publicly, but if you would like to support via PayPal, you can send me a private email.
	My email is logosrevealed88.
	Shoot me an email and I will get back to you on that, on how you can support through PayPal.
	Because I know a couple people have viewed that as a better option that's a little more private and easier for them to do.
	So, greatly appreciated nonetheless.
	So, thank you folks very much.
	I'll see you guys tomorrow, 7 p.m. Eastern with The Call-In Show.
	Don't forget, it will not be on the Stu Peters Network.
	it's only going to be on my rumble, my odyssey and on FTJ.
	Okay. So if you guys want to watch the call and show tomorrow, or if you want to call in, you can do so through any of those different platforms.
	Make sure that you guys are in,
	Thank you, folks, for watching.
	Thank you, Infinity, Skitten, Peter, Fireglass, AC, Delta.
	We got Interesting, Bill Barr.
	Thank you, folks.
	We got so many different people in here.
	I feel terrible that I have not been able to talk to the chats.
	I haven't been able to be interactive with them.
	That's very important.
	Alright, thank you folks, and I will see you guys tomorrow at 7pm Eastern.

▲