Oct. 24, 2009 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
43:35
20091024_Hour_1
|
Time
Text
Welcome to the Political Cesspool, known across the South and worldwide as the South's foremost populous conservative radio program.
Here to guide you through the murky waters of the Political Cesspool is your host for tonight, James Edwards.
Welcome, my friends, to a very celebratory edition of the Political Cesspool Radio Program.
I am your host, James Edwards, and tonight, for the final two hours of our program, we will be looking back on the five-year run of our radio program.
That's right, the Political Cesspool Radio Program does, in fact, turn five years old this week.
Five years in this business.
My God.
On October 26th, 2004, that was our first night on the air.
Obviously, now we're a weekly program and syndicated nationally, so we don't do it five nights a week anymore like we did in the old days.
But this is as close as we're going to get to having an anniversary on air, being at the 24th of October 2009.
And it is a great night to be with you.
Throughout the latter part of the show this evening, you will be hearing from the entire cast and crew of the Political Cesspool, Eddie Miller, Bill Rowland, Winston Smith, and then some people that work behind the scenes to bring you this show each and every week.
And we will be sharing with you some of our most memorable moments, behind-the-scenes stories.
We'll be dishing on our favorite guests and much, much more.
So you're really going to enjoy what we have in store for you.
A very fun and festive program tonight during the course of the last two hours.
But first, work must intrude.
And if it must, then I am glad to be able to go into the trenches with our first guest of the evening, a man who is an intellectual, heavyweight, a man who I've had the opportunity to meet.
And I'm proud to say that he is Richard Spencer, the managing editor of Takis Magazine at talkiemag.com.
And he's making his inaugural debut appearance on the Political Cesspool.
Richard, how are you tonight?
Yes, I'm doing great.
And congratulations on your anniversary, James.
Well, thank you very much.
I think five years in this movement certainly surpasses the average shelf life.
So we're happy to be able to.
Well, yeah, no, I can't believe you lasted as long as you have.
And I mean that in the best possible sense.
And in the sense that I'm surprised your enemies haven't been able to get you yet.
Well, it's not for lack of trying to get all this dangerous stuff off the air.
It's not for lack of trying, as you well know.
But in addition to that, and of course, we'll talk more about this during the second and third hour.
I'm not going to bore you with the history of the program, but to have started out in the way we did.
And certainly we've been lucky to have caught on in the way that we have and have received so much media attention.
But this was a show that started out with no sponsors and was 100% listener supported.
And we've, well, we've been able to stand the test of time.
And that has come with no shortage of support from people like yourself, Richard.
And we're very grateful to have your support tonight as you make this appearance.
We're going to be talking about some very important things.
A little later on in the hour, we're going to be talking to you about a meeting that's going to be taking place in Maryland that I want everyone to mark on their calendars.
They're going to be really interested to hear about that.
But first of all, as I said, it's a celebratory program tonight, but it's also a reflective program.
We're going to be looking back on the last five years, analyzing some triumphs and plotting a course on where we go from here.
And with that being the theme, Richard, as you and I were talking about earlier in the week, it just made sense to have a man of your intellectual prowess on the program during this first hour to help me reflect upon the issues that animate us to take action.
And these are the issues that comprise, for lack of a better term, the paleo-conservative cause.
And you thought it would be interesting to take a look at, to borrow the title from the Buchanan book, Where the Right Went Wrong.
Richard, it's a broad subject.
We're painting with a broad brush right here, but what happened?
What happened?
Well, I don't really know where to begin to describe the disaster and failure that is the American conservative movement.
I mean, there's so many aspects.
And, you know, one is certainly William Buckley himself, the fact that he thought having influence was getting invited to Barbara Streisand's birthday party and how he allowed all these neoconservatives into the movement and would kick out or write whole books denouncing people like Pat Buchanan and all this kind of stuff.
He thought this was having influence.
Well, this was becoming weak and defanged and declawed and basically this just big marshmallow cloud of limp moderation that is the conservative movement right now.
So that is one failure.
But I think another thing that I think I've been trying to do, because I think we could look at the conservative movement as it stands today and talk about how it's a kind of a warmongering party.
They seem to define themselves on wanting to bomb people and all this kind of stuff.
But then while at home, the basically left-wing values triumph.
They triumph in the government.
They triumph, I'm sad to say, in many of the churches.
They triumph in the academia.
They triumph everywhere.
And yet, the conservative movement thinks that we're standing tall and we're triumphant as a nation because we're going to go bomb some other Middle Eastern country or something like this.
So I think it is a disaster and we need to start building alternative institutions.
I don't think the conservative movement can be reformed or salvaged.
I think it is hopelessly lost.
And we need to start building alternative institutions.
And one of those is certainly something like the political cesspool.
And the other thing, all these alternative institutions, we don't have to agree with each other on everything.
It's just about finding another way outside the movement.
And I think something like the cesspool, what I'm trying to do with Talkie's Magazine, which is, you know, probably a different audience at some level, that's part of it.
There are lots of other things that we're going to have to build something totally new.
And I think in some ways, when we talk about, when you mentioned that word paleoconservative, and that word was kind of, well, I don't know if Paul Gottfried actually coined it, but he certainly had a lot to do with it gaining currency.
And that was kind of a lot of people who were rejecting the neocons.
When I mean neocon, I of course mean people like William Crystal, his father Irving, who passed away recently, Krauthammer Pottertz, all these people who are obsessed with Israel and want to bomb every Middle Eastern country and all this kind of stuff.
They kind of specifically define themselves against them.
And I think there for the 90s, they had a big run where they had the Buchanan campaigns.
He was kind of a paleo candidate.
And there's some famous, intellectually speaking, I mean, this didn't always, you know, this wasn't always known in the mainstream, but intellectually speaking, the paleos have worked with a lot of the libertarians, like the great economist Murray Rothbard or Lou Rockwell, a couple of these people, and they were all unified behind Buchanan for a couple presidential runs and things like that.
So I think the paleoconservatism really had its run in its day.
I think sadly it is kind of a failed dead movement, and I think we need to move beyond that.
I mean, I just, I think, and this is something, I think Paul is unfortunately away at the moment, but hopefully we're going to get him on.
I think we've all really got to work together to find a kind of a new tactic that isn't just about kicking the neocons out of the conservative movement.
I don't think that's possible or desirable.
We've got to find a kind of new right wing.
And that's what I've been kind of labeling it with a label that's a little bit vague.
I call it the alternative right.
And it's a collection of different groups and individuals who are basically not falling into that lesser of two evil type logic of, oh, well, you know, Obama's so bad, I'm just going to support McCain or something like that.
Or, you know, the Democrats suck, and so the Republicans are good.
Go, go.
You know, none of that cheerleading nonsense.
It gets you nowhere and things get worse.
Richard.
I'm sorry.
I maybe should interject here.
No, no, I really appreciate your answer.
And I mean that in all sincerity.
You certainly have a depth of vision on this subject and an idea of where we should go.
And I appreciate your candor and your enthusiasm.
One of the things that you said that really speaks to me, because we've mentioned it so often on this program, is the fact that we ought not have to agree on everything.
I mean, obviously, there's some basic fundamental principles that you can't compromise on, but I've never been involved in a left-wing movement or organization, but I can certainly testify that the right has a terrible time of coming together and working as a cohesive unit.
We will splinter and factionalize over the smallest of disagreements.
And that's something we are going to absolutely have to work through.
Our very survival depends on it.
And rather than this being an hour in which we remain down in the mouth about all of the things that we have to be down in the mouth about, we are going to offer solutions to those listening out there a little later on before Richard leaves us tonight.
But, you know, Richard, you're right.
I think the mentality that a lot of people who would claim to be, for lack of a better word, conservatives have is that they go out once every four years, pull the lever for the Republicans, and think that George Washington had nothing on them when it comes to their patriotism.
They think that going out there and doing that is the end-all-be-all of political activism.
And in doing that, that they have safeguarded the realm.
They have completely done their duty to preserve and protect the American experiment.
And let's face it, they're sorely mistaken.
The GOP is the evil party.
Sam Francis would always joke, the Democrats are the evil party, but the conservatives are the stupid party.
Hey, Richard, hold that thumb.
Don't mean to interrupt.
We've got five seconds to break.
This is commercial radio.
It's, well, those commercial breaks come up like a brick wall.
We're going to take a break.
We're going to pick it up on that train of thought when the political cesspool resumes this evening, October 24th, 2009.
I'm James Edwards.
My guest is Richard Spencer, and we'll be back right after this.
after these messages jump in the political says pull with James and the game
Call us tonight at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the Political Cess Pool, James Edwards.
I was so excited to dive into this program at the top of the hour at the beginning of the last segment that I failed to give you my standard introduction.
Welcome, of course, to the Political Cess Pool broadcasting here from our flagship studio, AM 1380 WLRM Radio in Memphis, Tennessee.
Of course, we are going out to our affiliate stations from coast to coast on the Liberty News Radio Network, but that's not all.
We're going out over the internet as well, simulcasted at libertynewsradio.com and thepoliticalcesspool.org.
You can catch us there live or an archived forum.
We're going out over the satellite as well.
So many ways to listen.
You could be even tuned in to the Liberty News Wire, which means you can dial us up on any telephone and listen to us.
So whether you're driving around in the car or listening in front of your computer, thank you for tuning in tonight to a very special edition of the Political Assess Pool Radio Program, where during the second and third hour of tonight's live broadcast, we will be celebrating five full years on the air, sharing stories, behind-the-scenes scoops, dishing on our favorite guests, and where we go from here.
But first, we are continuing on with Richard Spencer, the very well-spoken managing editor of Takis Magazine at Takimag.com.
And during the break, we were joined by our second featured guest of this first hour, the very venerable Dr. Paul Gottfried.
He is the professor of humanities at Elizabethtown College and a Guggenheim recipient.
He's an adjunct scholar of the Mises Institute and is a distinguished historian and interpreter of the American conservative movement.
He is the author of numerous books, including Conservatism in America, Making Sense of the American Right, which is obviously what we're trying to do this hour, Multiculturalism and the Politics of Guilt Towards a Secular Theocracy and After Liberalism, Mass Democracy in the Managerial State.
Paul Gottfried has made numerous appearances on this program, but we just can't get enough of him.
Paul, welcome back to the show.
Well, thank you for having me on once again.
Well, it's always my honor, and thank you for accepting the invitation.
And now we've come to full strength here.
Paul Gottfried, Richard Spencer, and I'm James Edwards.
And Paul, as we were talking about during the first hour, we're trying to figure out what happened to the, again, you know, I hate to define it as anything because definitions have become so skewed, but the conservative cause, the conservative movement, and Richard and I were talking about just the apathetic nature of the Republican Party.
I don't even know if apathetic is the right word.
They're just plain evil and immoral and certainly not the lesser of two evils in any way, shape, or form.
But I'll let you pick up here, Paul, as we continue.
I was going to say that the cause that we share, I believe, I truly believe that our message is righteous, yet we can't seem to stop the bleeding.
I wouldn't dare make a guess at how many millions of Americans fundamentally agree and subscribe to the message that the three of us share.
But when you're talking about issues like, and these are the basic issues that I would say most conservatives would agree with, securing the border, an America First Foreign Policy, fair trade, a reindustrialization of the American manufacturing base, Second Amendment rights, the freedom of speech and association, so on and so forth.
These are our issues.
And I've got to believe that a great percentage of the American population is with us on these issues, yet we never seem to gain any ground on them.
Now, it seems as though we consider it a victory merely not to lose any additional ground in a battle, but we never take anything back.
So, Paul, my question to you, and then I'll let Richard come in on it.
What constitutes this?
Is it a genetic predisposition that our people have to play fair and turn the other cheek?
I'm looking for a logical answer here.
How have we continued to lose so much when so many are with us?
Yeah, I'm not sure it's that people want to play fair.
I think there's two factors at work here.
Number one, they identify in the United States conservatism, or at least one might say, respectable conservatism with the Republican Party.
Now, the same, there's a similar phenomenon in Europe where there are parallels.
I mean, in England, a respectable conservatism identified with the Conservative Party.
In France, with the South Coasi Coalition, in Germany, with the Christian Democratic, Christian Social Union.
And if one wishes to be respectable and be conservative, then one supports them.
As a matter of fact, just voting for these parties and putting up the banner of their standard-bearer in a presidential race or a race for premier or whatever is considered a mark of conservatism.
The other problem as I see it is that the Republican Party, and particularly with the neoconservatives running it, is really not going to move to the right on the issues that matter to us.
They will do favors for big business.
That is to say, for the elements in big things that support them.
They will carry out a neoconservative, neo-Wilsonian foreign policy.
And in addition to that, they will make desperate, frantic attempts to reach out to the left by signaling that they're not against affirmative action, that they favor more immigration of Hispanics to the United States.
Now, the only way they would be able to pay, or they'd be made to pay for doing those things, is if you had Republicans who were willing to turn their backs on their party for doing this.
The same thing in Germany, because I know a lot about modern Germany.
The Christian Democrats just move leftward.
They give money to the so-called struggle against the right, which is an excuse for shutting down the right, putting people who are conservative in jail and so forth.
But the conservatives in the country, self-democratic conservatives, will vote for the Christian Democrats, which is a centrist party moving left, because that is the mark of being respectable and conservative.
Richard, I don't mean to interrupt, Paul, but you're onto a great thread here.
And this was something that goes back, Richard, to what you were saying in the first segment, that Buckley thought it was the ⁇ he had arrived because he could go and rub elbows with Barbara Streisand.
And then you, of course, you've got Rush Limbaugh, who has an immeasurable army of listeners out there, but he, too, seems too willing to play the game where if he just wanted to be a little less respectable and a little more influential, he could really turn the rudder of this country with his own listening audience.
I absolutely agree.
If that's what Richard said, I agree.
I think he has made a very bad choice by sticking with the Republican Party.
He doesn't have to do this.
He has an independent following.
And they would listen to him rather than their local Republican talking heads.
I truly believe that.
Well, I think that's absolutely true.
I mean, I think there was probably a turning point in 1992 where Rush Limbaugh was invited to the Republican National Convention and sat next to George Bush and things like that, where he was kind of irrevocably lost.
But let me kind of throw this out there, because this is something that I really think about every day.
And that is, you know, I agree that there is a great deal of the American public.
They're right with us.
They want to reorient the country on a national basis.
They want to rescue the historic people of the American nation.
They want to do all the stuff that we want to do, except they keep voting Republican because they want to be respectable and they think the Democrats are worse.
And how do we do this?
Do we have a third party?
And I was thinking about this.
I mean, obviously, third parties are notoriously awful.
Indeed, some people actually create them in order to get the other party elected.
I mean, it's a stupid game.
It doesn't work.
Ross Perot was an interesting counter example to that trend.
But it was a one shot and off.
And he has not created a movement.
Buchanan did not create a movement or a party in 2000, period.
And I think, I mean, I've just come to the conclusion that we need to just abandon the two-party system.
I think we need to start creating alternative institutions that are really outside both parties, that are outside the state, that are just about what we want.
And the political parties are going to have to come to us to actually get our vote.
We're not going to come and try to form a coalition with something like that.
I just think we need to just kind of morally reject what is going on in Washington and mainstream politics and start to find something very, very different.
Well, Richard.
Total alternative.
Richard and Dr. Gottfried, when we continue after this next commercial break, we will pick your brains to see if there is a way that we could possibly put that plan into action.
Let's see what solutions we can come up with over the course of the next few minutes.
When the political cesspool continues here on the Liberty News Radio Network, don't go anywhere, ladies and gentlemen.
We'll be right back.
The political cesspool, guys.
We'll be back right after these messages.
On the show and express your opinion in the political cesspool, call us toll-free at 1-866-986-6397.
Welcome back to the program, everyone.
James Edwards here with you in the Political Cess Pool that is Saturday evening, October 24th.
Coming up in just a little bit, we will be going into the birthday party mode, celebrating our five-year anniversary, and we will be doing it with the entire cast and crew, the hosting staff, and production folk that work behind the scenes.
They'll all going to be coming to you a little bit later on in the program tonight.
But first, we continue on with two very esteemed, very distinguished guests, Richard Spencer, the managing editor of Takis Magazine, and Dr. Paul Godfrey.
Gentlemen, right before the last break, we were talking about things that we might need to do, or not might, the things that must be done in order for us to stave off elimination.
We know that there is no difference between the two parties, at least on nothing of substance.
Even in their own rhetoric now, they disagree very little, if none at all.
I mean, they don't even feign opposition with one another on the most important issues, on the most important issues.
But here's the question.
This is the million-dollar question.
I guess if any of us had a real answer, we would have already implemented it.
But why are we, and I guess when I say we, I'm talking about white conservative Americans.
Why are we unable to organize and coalesce as a cohesive group as the minorities and other factions of the left have been able to do so successfully?
Well, I think an even more interesting question is why are people, what we might call it the alternative right, not able to organize as effectively as the neoconservatives who have taken over the conservative movement.
And I think the answer is that corporate interest, the media, the press empires in the United States absolutely oppose us.
They hate what we stand for, whereas they're willing to negotiate or to come to terms with a kind of center right that continues to compromise on social issues, immigration, things like that.
Well, you know, we're just too far to the right toward the establishment.
But, Paul, what you say is absolutely true in terms of the kind of tactics that have been used in order to push the paleos out or something like that.
But I think what James is getting at is a broader question.
And why is it, because it's not just an American problem.
I mean, there is no, I mean, well, maybe Russia or something like that.
There is no Western European country that isn't going down the same nihilistic, liberal whirlpool that we are.
You know, I mean, all of the West is dying.
And I think James is getting it.
Why is this?
Like, why can't we even take our own side in an argument?
Why can't we stick up for ourselves?
That's it.
That's the question, Richard, because I'm looking at it and I get more emails than we can read.
And I know this little program in and of itself has a legion of supporters that, if working as one, could go out there and accomplish something.
We don't accomplish hardly anything.
Do they have a few billion dollars?
See, use it effectively.
Well, see, money is one thing.
We're certainly outgunned exponentially.
But I'm wondering if everyone wants to be comfortable.
I understand that.
I wonder if it's something more.
Is it something that's rooted in our evolutionary behavioral psychology that we want to be respectable?
We have to have the mainstream, whatever the mainstream is deemed to be, their approval.
Is that something that only afflicts our people?
I know in most places, in most times, you know, have looked to authority figures.
This is simply human nature.
And the authority figures in our time are utterly despicable, but just almost omnipotent.
And, you know, I think that the television media, the newspapers, the pundits that we see and so forth, these people are taken seriously as sources of respectable opinion.
And they have worked diligently to isolate us.
They consider us to be extremists, fringe, racist, anti-Semites, homophobes, whatever.
So, I mean, we have been stuck in the right corner.
The same thing, of course, has happened in Europe.
Now, I know that there are larger cultural and social reasons for this.
That traditional bourgeois Christian values, social structures have been largely eradicated thanks to the modern managerial therapeutic state on which I write books.
I understand this fully.
But one of the facilitators of this process, an important facilitator, have been the modern media.
And the modern media have, I mean, they would declare war on us, except that they have reduced us to such humble status that we're not even important to them anymore.
Well, Paul, you are on to something once again, and you're talking about the institutions.
And with that, I'm going to toss it over to Richard.
And this goes back to something Kevin McDonald has said on this program, and you were talking about the terms that they used to mischaracterize us and mislabel us.
They've made us so radioactive that people, in their ever-lasting need to be part of the in-crowd, they wouldn't want to associate with us.
But that is, of course, not what we are, but that's what perception is the ultimate reality.
Here's the thing, though.
Regardless of what it is that makes us so weak right now, we were talking about Sam Dixon during the commercial break.
Sam has said before and has used the line several times.
He's quoting a scene from Going With the Wind while the Confederates are retreating from Atlanta.
A character says at some point they will turn to fight, and when they do, I'll fight with them.
Richard, here's the question for you.
What chain of events would have to occur, in your opinion, for the founding stock of this nation to begin to, I say this not in an illegal way, retaliate and retake our own institutions.
And by our institutions, I mean the media, academia, business, even the church.
What would have to happen for our people to shake off their misgivings and shake off their need for respectability and fight for their own survival?
I think a massive economic collapse.
And I think we're going to get that as well.
But I would go even, you know, before that, I think the problem is deeper.
I do not think the problem is simply one of funds or media attention or things like that.
I think, and Paul has written about this wonderfully in his book, Multiculturalism and the Policies of Guilt.
I think for, and this is something, this is only for white people, and maybe it also works for Asians at some level as well, very assimilated Asian.
But basically, we believe in multiculturalism as a religion, as a kind of Christian heresy.
We've integrated Christianity into it.
It's absorbed Christianity.
I mean, that is the civic religion.
That is what people believe in.
I think a lot of, you know, even lower class people in the church, in the megachurch, higher class people who go to grad school, other people who become in the law firm.
I mean, they all believe in this kind of diversity religion is the only way to describe it, as something that is deeply meaningful and it gives meaning to their nation and their lives.
So I think the problem is much deeper.
It's not just simply that they've got Murdoch and Fox News and we don't.
Well, I think certainly I would rather have the numbers than the money.
It wouldn't hurt to have both, but if I have all the money in the world and I'm the last paleoconservative breathing, then it's not going to do me much good.
I think we have the numbers.
We just need to find a way to animate our people.
But continue on, Richard.
Yeah, no, but I do think, I mean, like a lot of other religions, it can go away.
I mean, I don't think, I do think that this idea that we are just disembodied, derachinated individuals and diversity is our greatest strength and all this kind of nonsense that people believe in, this is not a religion that can last as long as, say, Christianity or Islam or paganism has.
I mean, this is a religion that is totally unsustainable.
But I mean, quite frankly, I think basically in terms of a lot of the just normal Americans, the kind of white Americans, things like that, that for them to really start fighting back and sticking up for their neighborhood and not just playing, watching the little political reality show on Fox News or whatever, for them to really fight back, I think it's going to take an economic collapse and a hyperinflation of the currency.
I think it's going to have to be a matter of survival.
Because right now, after World War II, they have enjoyed, even if they're losing their jobs and the manufacturing base is going away, they have enjoyed a kind of standard of living that has been unprecedented in the history of the world.
And that has, they've kind of been bought off by being able to have the service sector job and being able to buy something at Walmart and so on and so forth.
When it ultimately becomes a matter of survival, I think they will give up this nonsensical religion of multi-liberalism and multiculturalism and all this stuff, and that they will look to us.
But the thing is, are we going to be a bunch of crankish intellectuals who have never accomplished anything and are just blogging at each other all day long?
Or are we going to have a kind of an institution that they can turn to as something that they're going to be able to do?
They're going to have to have to have some sort of an infrastructure.
I mean, there has to be some sort of a shell of an organization or a movement for these people to come to if and when the time comes.
But I'll tell you, these people that we're talking about are going to have to understand that they're going to have to get their hands dirty on this.
They might have to, God forbid, suffer an attack from the Southern Poverty Law Center.
We cannot allow, as Tom Sunick says, Dr. Sunik says, we cannot allow our enemies to control our discourse.
It means nothing to me that the, in fact, it's a badge of honor that the SVLC would attack us and attack you and attack our associates.
And this is something people are just going to have to get past that.
It's not the end of the world.
You know, much more important things are at stake than what our enemies think of us.
And we'll be back with more right after this.
We got to get out of this place.
If it's the last thing we ever do, we got to get out of this place.
Welcome back to get on the political cesspool.
Call us on James's Dime, toll-free, at 1-866-986-6397.
And here's the host of the Political Cesspool, James Edwards.
Ladies and gentlemen, please keep in mind, and we made mention of this on the program last week, and we sent an email out to this effect as well, in commemoration of our five-year anniversary, which we are celebrating tonight.
The Political Cesspool hosting staff has manufactured a little booklet entitled Liberalism and Its Effects on American Society.
And we are offering that as our gift, our party favor, to anyone who donates $25 or more to this program before the end of tonight's broadcast.
So if you're interested in helping support this listener-supported show, go to thepolitical cesspool.org or donation of $25 or more.
We'll get you a personalized, hand-signed copy of this booklet that we have put together, Liberalism and Its Effects on American Society.
This booklet contains a lot of the thoughts that we share with you each week on the issues that make this show possible.
And I guess that's one difference, gentlemen, in the left and the right.
We ask for $25 and feel blessed when we receive it, whereas some of our opposition wouldn't cash a check for less than $25,000.
But we're continuing on now with just two outstanding gentlemen, Richard Spencer, the managing editor of Takis Magazine, and Dr. Paul Godfried, the accomplished author and scholar.
Guys, we're talking about where the right went wrong and what we can do to put it all back together again.
Paul, I'd like to ask this question of you and then toss it over to Richard before we make mention of the outstanding conference that's going to be taking place in Maryland before the time runs out.
Gentlemen, your ability to articulate such well-reasoned commentaries has made this hour go by far too quickly.
We're beginning to run short on time.
But Paul, at this point and where we stand now, where can we draw our hope?
You look over at Europe.
You were talking about contemporary Germany.
Certainly the nations of Europe are much more oppressed right now, but yet they seem to be making more strides.
Where can we draw our hope?
And what leaders do you think we have right now that are out there that are worthy of our support, who can be counted on not to capitulate when they're attacked?
Yeah, I don't know exactly what leaders we can turn to unless we can change the cultural situation a bit.
I don't think the Europeans are better off than we are.
I think what Richard spoke about is the kind of multicultural acids have penetrated European consciousness much more, at least Western European, much more than they have here.
And I would rather be in the United States than in England or Germany or any number of European countries in order to resist the further inroads of the multicultural left.
I don't think our situation is as bad.
I would be very happy if we can get Americans to vote for a third party as an alternative to the Republicans and Democrats.
And it would have to be a party that would combine social conservatism with some kind of economic libertarianism and an attack on the managerial state and its destruction of traditional social institutions.
I think it is possible to do this if we can break the habits of American conservatives who insist on voting for the Conservative Party.
They have in the past voted for other parts.
I mean, they did vote for Perot.
As late as 1968, you had 15, 16% of Americans, I think it was 16% voting for George Wallace.
And those who voted for Nixon to won the election generally assumed, albeit incorrectly, that he was a conservative.
So I still think there is a receptive, a public that is receptive to our message if we can only organize them as a political party.
Another thing that I've mentioned before, which I think is important, if only somebody like Rush Limbaugh, who has 20 million Americans listening to him every day, would take the initiative in attacking the Republican Party and calling for a true conservative alternative to the two parties, it would make a difference.
So far, he has not been willing to get very far off the wrench.
Somebody like Mike Savage, whom I cannot get where I'm living here, but who also reaches millions of people, seems to be equally fed up with both parties.
He attacks them regularly on his radio program.
I think we have to get our more conservatives who are willing to attack the two parties and who are willing to look for alternatives.
And then perhaps from that, solutions perhaps could present themselves.
But Richard, what say you?
I mean, it's always good to hold out hope that one of these heavyweights like Limbaugh will see the light, so to speak, and begin to do the right thing.
But let's not wait for that to happen.
Do you think we need to manufacture our own leaders?
And same question I asked Paul.
Where can we draw our hope right now?
Yeah, I'm as equally pessimistic about a lot of things.
I don't really see anything great happening in Europe or something like that.
I think, you know, someone like Vladimir Putin is an interesting guy, and he'll defend his country.
Whether he has any kind of real vision for the West, I think, is doubtful.
I can.
I think I agree with Paul.
I think the problem is more cultural.
We've got to change the culture before we can just hope that one of these figures can turn.
I mean, I'm not sure I actually believe that Rush Limbaugh agrees with everything we're saying and is just kind of afraid to go all the way or something like online.
Or on the air.
I think that we really haven't articulated ourselves and we haven't really created a kind of a movement, an intellectual movement, a populist movement, a movement of culture, both high and low, that can help someone like Limbaugh or anyone who happens to be in a high position to articulate the kind of vision that we want.
So I don't think Rush Limbaugh has anywhere to go.
So yeah, I mean, I think we've got to work on creating these alternative institutions that are outside the conservative movement and the mainstream where we are really being honest and we're really articulating something new.
And that's, you know, hopefully I can use this as a segue into the plug.
But, you know, back in 2008, Paul and I were involved in an organization, which we won't mention, where we were trying to kind of transform it in this direction.
You know, I remember we had a members meeting, and I was suggesting we need like Steve Saylor to come out here and talk about, you know, everyone should check out Steve's blog, ic the blogspot.com, or check him out at TalkiesMagazine, talking.com.
You have tons of hilarious call him.
And, you know, we need Steve Saylor over here.
We want Pat, you know, Buchanan to come.
We want Darbisher to come and do something on genes and culture and all this kind of stuff.
And they were like, oh, no, that's too radical and, you know, oppressive or awful or whatever.
And we were eventually kicked out of the group for our extremism.
You know, I think they assumed Paul Gottfried was a raving Nazi or something like this.
But, you know, so I think that was a great blessing because we started a group and we named it the Mincon Club after the great, you know, one of the great American, perhaps the greatest American journalists, H.L. Minken.
You know, a no-holds bar, take no prisoners style of journalism.
We wanted to name it after him.
And he was a fiercely independent man.
He was a libertarian in many ways.
He believed certainly in individual liberty and speaking the truth no matter how worts and all.
But he was also a right-winger.
He was a great admirer of Prussia and German culture, for instance.
He perfectly embodies what we want.
And we have this group that we started.
I remember in May of 2008 when Paul and I started it.
And we now are the largest alternative right-wing group in the country in less than two years.
And, you know, what was going on next weekend in Baltimore, it's actually the Holiday Inn Hotel.
It's near the Baltimore Washington International Airport.
It's very convenient.
If you live in Washington, New York City, Baltimore, the whole eastern seaboard, really, it's drivable.
And it's at the Holiday Inn there.
And we're basically having John Brimelow, Peter's twin brother, speaking, Patrick Buchanan, John Darbisher of National Review, Paul Gottfried, Kevin Gutzman, who's a constitutional scholar, Steve Saylor, one of the most talented journalists in the country.
Thomas E. Woods from the Muses Institute.
He's written a best-selling book on the financial collapse.
I will go allow me to say a few words as well.
So, you know, this is the kind of hard-hitting, free-thinking, honest, you know, forms of discourse that I can imagine.
And there is a demand for it.
There are people who are not satisfied with the conservative movement who want this kind of stuff.
They want to talk about these issues that we've been talking about.
They want to, you know, let's talk about the impact of race and what that had on this Great Depression that we're living through.
Hey, Richard.
Richard, pardon the interruption.
We have only a minute left.
We probably should have gotten to this before now, but I want you to be sure to be able to get out the contact information for this.
Kevin Gootsman, Steve Saylor, Pat Buchanan, John Darbisher, Peter Brimelow, Paul Gottfried, Richard Spencer, they're all going to be together at one location.
When's the date, and how can folks get more information on how they can be there to meet all of you?
Yeah, the best way to get information is just to Google H.L. Mincin Club.
But you can also go to MincinClub.blogspot.com, and you can basically see the website, and you can actually register and pay for it on the website.
You could also see, you could also find, go to talkievag.com, T-A-K-I-MAG, M-A-G.com.
It's named after Talky Theodore Akopoulos.
And there's an advertisement on every page, so you can go to it that way.
And basically, it is next weekend, October 30th.
It's Halloween weekend.
The conference is titled We Are Doomed, Exclamation Point.
And it's at the Holiday Inn at the Baltimore, Washington International.
An hour down.
Next weekend, guys.
Next weekend, I'm going to talk over art here during this bump.
But next weekend, be there.
We are flat out of time.
Richard Spencer and Paul Godfrey, thank you, gentlemen, so much for being with me.
Thank you for having me on again.
God bless you all.
And listen, we've got to do it again.
It was a great hour.
We're going to take a break.
We're going to have a birthday party when we come back.
But please make plans to be there next weekend for that conference.
If you can, you're going to meet some of the greatest thinkers in the world.
We'll be back right after this.
Well, Harv hit the aisles dancing and screaming.
Some thought he had religion, others thought he had a demon, and Harv thought he had a weed eater loose in his crew of the balloons.
He fell to his knees to plead and beg, and the squirrel ran out of his britch's leg unobserved to the other side of the room.