March 29, 2025 - The Political Cesspool - James Edwards
54:43
20250329_Hour_3
|
Time
Text
You're listening to the Liberty News Radio Network, and this is the Political Cesspool.
The Political Cesspool, known across the South and worldwide as the South's foremost populist conservative radio program.
And here to guide you through the murky waters of the Political Cesspool is your host, James Edwards.
I want to thank our friend and listener and supporter in East Tennessee, John in East Tennessee, who wrote in this week that your show last week, that was the show with Charles Bosman live from Russia, Simon Roche live from South Africa.
Your show last week was incredibly informative and stimulating.
PPC is radio for grown-ups.
Well, John, I appreciate the compliment and I appreciate your friendship and I appreciate the fact that we are able to strike a balance that comes across in that way, where we are taking these very difficult issues and trying to offer a balanced treatment on it.
Now we need some grown-up contributions.
Well, not balanced in so much yet.
Thank you, Keith.
Not balanced in so much as we're trying to split the middle, but balanced in so much as we're trying to be real and reasonable and do what it takes to advance our people.
And I think if you enjoyed last week's show, I will hope at least that you're enjoying this week's show as well as we wrap up March Around the World.
In fact, we did wrap that up in the first hour tonight.
What a wonderful sampling of international thought leaders this month.
And we're looking forward to next month as well.
But first, let's go and welcome an old friend, but inexplicably a first-time guest here on TPC and a gentleman who I haven't had the honor of speaking with in some years now until right now.
Psychologist Josh Neal is with us to talk about his brand new book, Intolerant Interpretations, which is at once both an essential analysis of the current cultural climate and a bold offensive against ideas which, if not identified and suppressed, threaten to prove fatal to individuals and societies alike.
It is Josh Neal.
It is Intolerant Interpretations.
It is available at antelopehillpublishing.com.
Josh, hello, and how are you tonight?
I'm doing really well.
I appreciate you having me on.
It's a pleasure to speak with you again.
I think the last time we talked was back in 2018, and that was when I first started out on YouTube.
And you were very generous with your time.
You were willing to talk to me.
And as always, you're generous again to have me back.
So thanks.
Happy to be here.
Well, it's our honor, Josh, and I do remember that.
It's seven years ago, and I remember that you were doing a show and it was going and we had a great conversation.
And of course, I remembered you popping up in other places as well.
And every time I saw you or heard anything from you, I was like, this guy's got a great head on his shoulders.
And we're going to let Keith say hello to you as well.
Yeah, hello.
Let me ask you this.
Tell us all about your new book and the theory or the raisin d'etre of it.
What is the message that you're trying to get through to the American public?
Well, it's a pleasure to meet and speak to you, Keith.
Well, the title, Intolerant Interpretations, it's really exactly what it sounds like.
It's I hesitate to say 100%, but maybe damn close to it.
Most of the problems we have today are the premises are kind of on their face outrageous and shocking and senseless.
And a lot of how we've gotten this far down this path is basically Basically, treating these ideas and the people who put them forth as worth consideration.
In other words, what you're saying is that we're too tolerant.
Well, yeah, in effect, exactly.
The book is basically, among other things, it's an encouragement to the reader to, at face value, reject destructive, toxic, I hate to use that word toxic, but dangerous ideas, dangerous concepts, dangerous beliefs.
I thought, Josh, you were a great pairing tonight with Gurmar Rudolph.
I'm not going to give your entire background.
You can share with people that which you think or feel comfortable in sharing.
You've paid a great price as well.
Perhaps not as great as Gurmar.
I mean, who of us have been in prison for four years for our beliefs, but we've all paid a price, and you've paid one too.
Now, we're going to dive in.
This whole hour is going to be spent on this book and its tenets, and we're going to do a deep dive and get to the absolute flesh and marrow of this book.
But before we do that, I wanted to circle back very briefly in terms of introductions, because again, that you are making a debut here on TPC far too late, but nevertheless, better late than never.
Give people a little bit, before we go back into the book, give people a little bit more of what you're willing to share, of course, about your background and what led you to this interview tonight.
Yeah, so while I was just trucking along in my early 30s when Trump came along, I had a graduate degree.
I was pursuing a PhD in psychology.
I grew up in New York City.
I was living in New York City.
I would say, you know, I had sort of a conservative temperament in a lot of ways, but I was living in one of the biggest metropolitan cities in the world, and that definitely takes a toll on you.
You had to hide your line under a bushel.
Yes.
So when the Trump thing happened, I kind of knew that I was a libertarian for about half a decade by that point.
I kind of knew that the libertarian thing was done.
I never really saw myself as a standard conservative or Republican.
I mean, I'm under 40, but I came of age under Bush II at 9-11 and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And I had a real strong revulsion towards that era of conservative politics.
So when Trump came along, it was kind of like, well, here's something.
This is like the real deal.
Like he was, he was, we all remember, he was threatening to arrest and lock up Hillary Clinton.
I was like, fine, let's do this.
I was activated.
And I got online and I started a YouTube channel and I started podcasting with a friend of mine.
And very quickly in the Trump administration, the first time around, he did a lot of things I didn't like.
Basically, from the very beginning, I realized, like, oh, this is not what I thought.
And it was radicalizing.
It was radicalizing.
I joined what, you know, what was then known as the alt-right.
And as a result of putting my face and my name out there, I got canceled.
You know, when you do that kind of thing, when you put your face in your name and you leak all of your personal details online, surprise, surprise, people find out they put the pieces together.
That was back in 2019.
And it was a substantial, it was a substantial detriment to your life at that time.
Yeah, you need to learn to lie.
That's what we're doing.
Well, I mean, what have we ever lied about?
But I mean, no, but seriously, I mean, it was something that caused you a degree of discontent.
To say the least, discomfort.
Yeah.
I had a private practice.
I had to close it because Antifa were posting flyers all around every major block in downtown Brooklyn.
This guy knows David Duke.
This guy knows Richard Spencer.
He's a white supremacist Nazi.
So I had to close my business.
It wasn't doing all that well at the time, so maybe it wasn't a major loss.
But nonetheless, it was a business I was trying to grow.
I was teaching.
I lost all my teaching positions.
I had a girlfriend, lost my girlfriend, was playing in a band, lost the band, had friends that didn't talk to me after that.
And while my family supported me and ultimately really didn't disagree with me, it caused tension there too.
I mean, you could probably, you guys can probably imagine, maybe you don't have to imagine.
My parents were like, wow, is our little kid ever going to have a job again?
Is he ever going to have a normal life again?
Is he going to be able to get married?
Well, not in New York.
No.
Well, I don't live in New York anymore.
Thank God.
Well, so again, this is how you came to be involved with these issues.
Yep.
And some of the price you paid, which was a substantial price, which is certainly a price that almost all Americans couldn't even fathom.
And even most of our audience, which has suffered along with us for the last 21 years.
But as you mentioned, Josh, the last time we spoke was in 2018, and then you blink, and it's seven years later, but here you are now.
So how do you connect the dots from 2018 and all that you went through during that time to Antelope Hill publishing a book by you?
Yeah, so, well, I did a lot of self-reflection after getting canceled.
And it would have been easy to just say, wow, these awful liberals and these awful journalists, you know, they ruined my life, which they did.
But the flip side of that is also, I didn't really put my best foot forward.
I probably could have been more mature, more serious, thought a little bit more about what I was doing.
If I had done those things, maybe I wouldn't have gotten canceled.
It wouldn't have helped.
You're right.
But nonetheless, like, you know, my modus operandi has always been after any major catastrophe in my life to look to look inward and see what I can take responsibility for.
And when that happened, I was like, well, I still care about these things.
It still means something to me.
This is still a problem in the world, and I still want to do something about it.
So how do I really do that the best way I can?
And I decided I had to write.
So starting in 2021, I published a book, American Extremist, The Psychology of Political Extremism, which, you know, on one hand, was good.
Josh, pardon the interruption.
Hold on right there.
We got to take a break.
Sure.
We're going to continue this conversation with the author of Intolerant Interpretations, Josh Neal, AnalopeNet Publishing.com.
Stay tuned.
God tells us in Hebrews 10, 25 that we should gather together to worship him.
This isn't a request.
It is a command.
Going to church isn't an option.
It is your Christian duty.
With the hellish apostasy of mainstream churches, attending church these days can be difficult.
That is why you're King James Only, traditional services in the ancient church of St. Mary Magdalene alive online.
And I invite you to gather with our congregation to study God's Holy Word.
Join us every Sunday at thetemplarchurch.com and especially on the first Sunday of the month for Holy Communion.
This do in remembrance of me is also a command that all Christians must obey.
I'm Reverend Jim Darson, ordained Puritan minister, nationalist, and a veteran pro-life campaigner.
Tune in to my weekly sermons at thetemplarchurch.com.
Based on Ireland, this old-tame religion is the faith of adult America.
God bless you.
You know where the solution can be found, Mr. President?
In churches, in wedding chapels, in maternity wards across the country and around the world.
More babies will mean forward-looking adults, the sort we need to tackle long-term, large-scale problems.
American babies in particular are likely going to be wealthier, better educated, and more conservation-minded than children raised in still industrializing countries.
As economist Tyler Cowan recently wrote, quote, by having more children, you're making your nation more populous, thus boosting its capacity to solve climate change.
The planet does not need for us to think globally and act locally so much as it needs us to think family and act personally.
The solution to so many of our problems at all times and in all places is to fall in love, get married, and have some kids.
The book is Intolerant Interpretations.
The author is Josh Neal, and he is our guest for this third and final hour tonight.
Let me read the back page cover of this book available at AntelopehillPublishing.com, one of their newest releases.
Despite emerging from different fields and originating from different parts of the Western world, social theorists of the last century all share one thing in common, a desire to instill doubt and mistrust in the minds of their readers.
This result is the endeavor of a widespread culture of suspicion, and it has led to a rampant conspiracism, not just in politics, but also in everyday life.
Psychologist Josh Neal, our guest live right now, an expert on the concept of extremism within American life and the psychological and intellectual origins of conspiracy theories, applies his innovative analysis to this culture of suspicion.
Starting by disclosing for the first time a detailed, cohesive picture of the roots of this phenomenon and the intentionality behind it, Neal advances the thesis that intolerance, a natural defense mechanism that is activated when in proximity to something dangerous, can consciously be used to protect oneself against the individual and social assaults of suspicion culture.
Antelope Hill Publishing, our friends, are proud to present Josh Neal's Intolerant Interpretations, which is, as I mentioned before, both an essential analysis of the cultural climate that we currently endure and at once a bold offensive against ideas which, if not identified and suppressed, threaten to be fatal to individuals and society alike.
So we're going to get into the meat of this, Josh, after I let you or ask you to continue to connect the dots.
From 2018 to 2025, 2018, you're active, you suffer a lot of personal blows, and then here we are tonight with this brand new book.
Yeah, so as I was saying, I turned away from broadcasting and commentary to writing because I thought, you know, what's the best thing I can do for this?
And at the time, there was, you know, with the alt-right, there was a lot of people doing YouTube, a lot of people doing video commentary, things like that.
And I was like, well, there's a lot going on here, and the salsa is not really my forte.
And, you know, since I was a child, I always wanted to write.
And I was like, well, here it is.
Here's my God-given opportunity.
I had this crazy experience.
I have these passionate beliefs.
Let's try to put them together.
And so, Imperium Press, who are over in Australia, reached out to me about publishing my first book, which American Extremist, the psychology of political extremism.
It sold very well.
It was a very well-reviewed book.
And the premise was basically, not an original premise, but that at the time, during Trump's first administration, there were all kinds of terrorist attacks, domestic terrorism, shootings, the Christ Church thing over in New Zealand.
It seemed like every couple of months, somebody was going crazy and committing, you know, terrible racist violence, etc.
And it seemed like people wanted an answer to the question: why are people acting like this?
My answer was: it's not that there's something specifically wrong with these people, it's that the whole liberal establishment is itself dysfunctional, pathological, and extreme.
And so, I just basically made my case over the course of that book.
And when it was done, I got back to writing my second book, Understanding Conspiracy Theories, which I had actually been working on for some time.
And I set it aside because it was just really difficult to do.
I'll be honest with you.
I think I might have been off more than that.
I could chew.
But the basic idea, again, was: okay, we're also in this climate of rampant conspiracy theorism.
I'm a little bit younger than you folks, but back in the 90s, popular culture was very much interested and excited and titillated by conspiracies.
The X-Files was a popular show.
Oliver Stone was releasing his JFK movie.
Fox 5 was published, was doing alien autopsies on broadcast television.
Obviously, there was Waco and Ruby Ridge and the World Trade Center bombing.
And a few years later, the Twin Towers went down.
And so there's really, in my view, over the last 30 years, been this kind of crescendo of conspiratorial ideation.
And the liberal answer basically is: again, like with American extremists, the liberal answer is, well, it's you people who are wrong.
You're crazy.
You need to be re-educated.
You need to be canceled.
You need to be ostracized.
And I took a step back and I said, well, that doesn't make any sense.
And very similar to the first book, I was like, well, this culture, I came up with this term suspicion culture.
This culture of suspicion really is the result of ongoing, active and factual conspiracies about the world.
So that was kind of the point of that last book was simply to demonstrate, you know, to give conspiracy theorists a sort of framework to present their case, right?
And it wasn't like Bigfoot conspiracy theories or Paul McCartney was secretly dead and they replaced him with conspiracy theories, but the really important ones, like The Great Replacement.
So then that brings me to this new book, which is a continuation of my last book.
And really, as I was saying at the start of the interview, the whole purpose of this book is to give people a framework to simply reject destructive, harmful ideas and to identify the people who are putting those ideas out there so you can really aggressively get at them.
Well, I think the conspiracy theories have proliferated because people have finally realized the extent to which the government has lied to them in the mainstream media and things like this.
For example, on JFK, RFK, MLK, 9-11.
You know, unfortunately, the idea of a lone nut gunman being responsible for just about everything just isn't flying anymore.
People realize that they've been lied to.
Didn't stop them again in Pennsylvania last summer.
No, no, it didn't.
I mean, they just, you know, they always come back with the same old rasmataz.
And I was going to ask you this.
Do you think that the rise of feminism has anything to do with the elevation of, you know, the lionization of ideas and values like tolerance and whatnot?
They seem to basically try to force on everybody the feminization of America, which would be like, you know, you've got to be tolerant.
You've got to be kind.
You've got to be understanding.
You've got to bite your tongue and let other people speak their mind.
I guess certainly I would.
Feminism itself is like an interesting subject matter to approach from a conspiracy theory point of view because obviously the CIA started the Miss Magazine.
I was going to say, almost say Gloria Epstein.
Gloria Steinem, the CIA partnered with her.
So, I mean, she might as well have been Gloria Epstein, I guess.
But the CIA was very heavily involved in that.
But yeah, to your point, and I don't want to get all sexist misogynist here.
I don't actually believe this 100%.
That's okay.
There's a certain truism about women that they are more suggestible, more conformist.
While I think that's overplayed, I think in general, men and women are conformist because we're social animals and we're suggestible because we live in a technological society and we're bombarded with all of these messages 24-7.
I think women have a unique role as moral enforcers, and that's pretty much how they enforce cohesion.
It's how they enforce conformity.
Women are status-sensitive in a way that's particular to their sex compared to men.
And also women, obviously, this is not an original idea, as maternal beings tend to lean on, this is something I take out of my book, Jonathan Heights' famous moral foundations theory.
Women tend to deploy more of the care and fairness moral intuitions, whereas men don't.
Men are more combative.
Men are more disagreeable.
That is true, Josh.
And in terms of your degree of study, I'm sure you have a more informed opinion than I do on this.
But I mean, just basic common sense tells you that everyone wants to be led.
Everyone is attracted to a strong leader.
I mean, you know, not necessarily in a sexual way.
That would be more so women than men.
But men want to be led too.
Most men want to be led by a strong man.
And there is a desire for that on a national level by a lot of people.
And so, but this is a very interesting topic, but we don't want to digress too much.
But going back to your book, we're going to really, really, really get into some of the topics, some of the chapters in the next segment.
But with just seconds remaining this segment, you know, Antelope Hill has been a partner of ours for the last couple of years.
They help us.
They give us great content every month.
The last hour of every show, every month is theirs, and they fill it wonderfully.
And this interview tonight with you, Josh, is no exception.
How did you become linked up with Antelope Hill for this particular book?
And again, the book is The Tolerant Interpretations by Josh Neal, antelopehillpublishing.com.
How did that happen?
Yeah, so I attended the last V-DARE, rest in peace to the Brimlow Project, which was a really great V-DARE.
It was a really great event.
And they had a couple people there, and we chatted.
And I mentioned that I had a manuscript lying around, and they jumped on it.
And I just can't say enough how warm they were, easy to work with.
It's actually been like a completely painless process.
They're great.
They weren't from New York.
They're great, but from Pennsylvania.
They're great.
And also, they pushed me to deliver a really good product.
They kept sending material back, like, can you tweak this?
Can you tweak that?
So it's been a great partnership.
They are wonderful.
I can't say enough about Taylor Young and all of the crew there.
For us here at TPC, it's been a wonderful partnership as well.
They are top of the line, tip of the spear organization that is leading the way.
Analogillpublishing.com, the book is a tolerant interpretation.
Josh Neal, we're going to talk more about it in the next segment, so don't go anywhere.
How would you like to help this program reach more people and earn silver at the same time?
Call or text 801-669-2211 for complete details.
News this hour from townhall.com.
I'm Jason Walker.
Just incredible destruction in Southeast Asia.
Come on.
Dozens of patients lined up in beds or seated on the ground outside a damaged hospital in Myanmar's capital following Friday's devastating 7.7 magnitude earthquake.
The country's ruling military says on state TV, the confirmed death toll is now past 1,600, but rescue workers are pulling more bodies out of the rubble.
In neighboring Thailand, authorities in Bangkok say the number of confirmed dead is at least 10, but dozens of people are still unaccounted for.
I'm Donna Warder.
Also at Townhall.com, President Trump has withdrawn the nomination of New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik to be the next ambassador to the United Nations.
The reason for that move?
Well, to help maintain the GOP majority in the House of Representatives.
On Salem News program this week on Capitol Hill with Tony Perkins, House Speaker Mike Johnson praised the New York lawmaker.
She would have been an extraordinary ambassador to the U.N.
She would have done a great job there.
But she's deeply devoted to her country and she's fully committed to seeing the president's agenda succeed in Congress.
And after much deliberation and discussion, the president talked with her about withdrawing the nomination so she could stay and help us lead in the House.
And I'm telling you, to great credit to her, she agreed to do that.
Crowds protesting against Elon Musk, massing outside of Tesla dealerships all throughout the United States and parts of Europe as well.
Protesters trying to escalate a movement targeting Tesla dealerships and vehicles that in opposition to the role that Musk has been playing as the head of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency.
More on these stories at townhall.com.
Which varies by plan.
You heard me talk about Relief Factor and how so many people enjoy a better, more pain-free life because of it.
If you're dealing with everyday pain, it makes sense you'd want to try it first.
Well, Relief Factor makes that pretty pain-free, too, with their three-week quickstart kit for only $19.95.
An easy, affordable way to see how it could literally change your life, like it has mine.
Relief Factor is a daily supplement that fights pain naturally.
Developed by doctors, Relief Factor doesn't just mask pain temporarily.
It helps reduce or eliminate pain.
In fact, the longer you take it, the more effective it is.
Trying it couldn't be easier with their three-week quick start for only $19.95, less than a dollar a day.
And it just takes a phone call to 1-800 for relief.
That's 1-800, the number 4, relief.
1-800, the number 4, relief.
Wherever you're having pain, every day you feel better is a day you live better.
Try Relief Factor's three-week quick start.
Visit relieffactor.com.
That's relieffactor.com or call 1-800, the number 4, RELIEF-800-4 Relief for Relief Factor.
Hey, y'all!
Do you enjoy great tasting coffee but are tired of supporting companies that hate you?
If so, let me tell you about Above Time Coffee.
Above Time Coffee is a privately owned and operated small business.
They hand roast coffee and ship it to customers throughout the United States and abroad.
Above Time Coffee was launched because they saw a need for more pro-white businesses serving our people.
The time has come to take our own side.
And did I mention their coffee tastes great?
It's the best coffee I've ever tasted.
When James brought home a sample from a conference, I was hooked and threw out all the other brands.
I think you will too after you make an order at abovetimecoffee.com.
Living a healthy and active lifestyle is important to us.
And I appreciate the effort Above Time Coffee invests in keeping its products organic.
And there are so many flavors to choose from.
Check it out for yourself by visiting abovetimecoffee.com.
It's the only coffee we drink at the Edwards Home.
Delicious Coffee, a company that serves the interests of our people.
Check out their selection today at abovetimecoffee.com.
It is common for politicians, major media outlets, and nonprofits to hype white on black murders aggressively, or even claim that blacks are living in fear of white people.
Lynch for simply being black.
Hard to believe, but that's what was done.
And some people still want to do that.
This is why National Conservative launched the Interracial Homicide Tracking Project.
We have now documented well over 2,000 confirmed interracial homicides since January 2023 and created the most comprehensive overview of these killings anyone has ever made.
We plugged the gaping holes in data left by other homicide trackers and government crime stats.
Rather than engaging in hyperbole and vitriolic rhetoric like everyone else, we are simply creating a massive sample size of empirical evidence so people can form rational and informed opinions about a sensitive and politically charged issue.
Visit natcon.life.
N-A-T-C-O-N dot L-I-F-E.
It has been great to be back in touch with Josh Neal tonight, talking about his new book, Intolerant Interpretations.
And now, without further ado, we are going to really get into the meat and potatoes of this book.
The description of it, Josh, which we read earlier, is interesting.
It describes you at once as an expert on the concept of extremism within American life and the psychological and intellectual origins of conspiracy theories, which would maybe have the reader believe, what is this guy?
You know, an SBLC agent or an ABL employee.
But then it goes on to mention that you tackle ideas with a bold offense of that if some things are not identified and suppressed, they threaten to prove fatal to individuals and societies alike.
So what is this book all about?
So basically, there's two parts to the book.
One is a continuation of my last book.
It focuses in, in particular, on Karl Popper, a famous 20th century philosopher, and Richard Hofstadter, a famous American historian of the last 20th century.
And I narrow down on those two as really architects of both the kind of anti-conspiracy culture that we're in, but also the open society and the prejudice for liberal democracy.
And actually, Karl Popper also wrote a great essay about conspiracy theories.
It was called the Conspiracy Theory of Society.
So, I mean, I chose these two because, one, they were both communists in their youth, and then they became reformed liberal centrists.
And they basically spent, at least their politically informed careers, writing in ways that basically gave an intellectual justification to progressive liberal politicians, the progressive liberal hegemony that was starting to emerge at that time.
And I completely dissect them.
It's full of quotations, like direct primary source material, basically showing in the case of Richard Hofstadter.
I don't know if you guys are familiar with Richard Hanania.
Is that a name that's come across your table lately?
I've heard it.
Yeah, and not to any degree of satisfaction.
No, no, but he's coined this phrase, elite human capital, and he's used it as a way to bludgeon populists, nativists, nationalists, conservatives, Christians, really anyone who's on the right and who's...
A way to be dismissive of people.
Well, if people don't know who we're talking about, I mean, this is a guy who sometimes says things we agree with.
He formerly was a writer for counterculture, excuse me, countercurrents, Greg Johnson's webzine.
And he basically sort of mocks people who would actually read countercurrents.
That's pretty much it.
Yeah, that's the long and short of it.
I mentioned him just to say that, you know, a lot of these people who are on the front line of doing apologetics for liberal democracy, who are supporting mass migration, who are supporting the great replacement, who are supporting the technocracy, all of these people today who are popular and at the forefront of that are directly traceable to this lineage, mid-20th century lineage of people like Richard Hofstadter, people like Karl Popper, who basically pioneered this type of argument that says,
if you think that there's something your government is doing that's kind of suspicious, well, then you're poor, you're stupid, you're lazy.
And in the case of Karl Popper, you know, if you resent being demographically replaced, if you resent having, you know, your authorities like the church or your, you know, your democratically elected representatives, if you resent having all of that taken away from you, then you're just like a prejudicial bigot.
And you're pathological and you believe in crazy things like men behind closed doors, smoking cigars, making things happen.
You're not on the right side of history.
Exactly.
Exactly.
So the first half of the book really looks at those two researchers or those two social scientists and draws a straight line between their work and the world that we live in today.
Richard Hofstadter, some of his most important works were going after the McCarthyites, going after the John Birchers, going after the kinds of people who supported Barry Goldwater in the 1964 election.
All the good guys.
Yeah, exactly.
He called these people pseudo-conservatives because they're not real conservatives because they're just pathological, parochial, paranoid losers.
You know, the kinds of people who In today's world, you know, would have supported the Tea Party, would have supported Donald Trump, would have supported Pat Buchanan, would have supported closing the borders.
Those people are not on the right side of history.
The second half of the book pivots to contemporary psychology.
And I'm trying to build out this idea of suspicion culture.
So in the first book, I basically demonstrate, you know, here's the intellectual foundation for creating this kind of paranoid culture that we're in.
And then in the second half of the book, it's about identifying important psychologists, important social scientists in the last few decades who have continued on this program of basically making everyone a paranoid, crazy person.
So I focus on Jonathan Haidt.
Maybe your audience is familiar with The Righteous Mind.
It was a very well-received book about 10 years ago.
The Righteous Mind was basically about psychological differences between liberals and conservatives, which the punchline of his book was basically that liberals have a diminished moral psychology compared to conservatives.
So in Jonathan Haidt's research, there are these six moral intuitions: caring, fairness, sanctity, authority, hierarchy, liberty.
And conservatives, according to his research, have no problem accessing all six.
But liberals seem to really only focus on things like care, harm reduction, fairness, equality, and values.
Effectively, yes.
Then there's Daniel Kahneman, who's a Nobel Prize-winning behavioral economist, also published a massively well-received book in the 2010s.
It was called Thinking Fast and Slow, which if your audience is not familiar, Daniel Kahneman is one of the most famous and most highly regarded economists and social scientists.
Going back to the 1960s, he started this program called the Heuristics and Biases Program, which was sort of this meeting between cognitive psychology and what now is called behavioral economics, but also the statistical sciences.
And the basic premise of Daniel Kahneman's program was that the human brain has evolved to make decisions, but it's evolved to do it in an inefficient way, in an irrational way.
And that most of our decision-making, thinking, categorizing, relies on these inefficient heuristics, sort of like a rule of thumb.
There's these rules of thumb that we use to think, but then there are also these biases.
And so this has kind of popularized this idea in psychology where people are just kind of like prejudicial morons who don't know how to think clearly.
And so his book is basically like demonstrating that everybody is dumb.
Everybody can't think clearly.
We need to have elites like him make our decisions.
Well, exactly.
And it's more pernicious because he's a sort of paternalistic libertarian, which you might think, hey, that's a good thing.
He's about liberty.
He's about freedom, personal freedom, and he's paternalist.
What does that mean?
He's like a real man's man?
Actually, no.
what he's about is putting his friends like Cass Sunstein, who wrote an important paper on conspiracy theories in 2008, saying basically that we need cognitive infiltration.
He was saying that the problems of conspiracy theories were so pronounced that the government needs to send people into chat rooms, into really any online social space, and deliberately confuse and distort the messaging that people are coming out with.
So we're living in this world now where disinformation is this critical problem the government is trying to address.
And people like Cass Sunstein, people like Daniel Kahneman are saying, actually, disinformation is exactly what we need.
Otherwise, people are going to look into things like 9-11 or the JFK assassination.
And they might point their fingers at the wrong people.
They might draw the wrong conclusions.
So Daniel Kahneman's book was massively widely well received.
Like I said, he won a Nobel Prize.
And the upshot of it is that everyone you know is a total moron and they need a elite class of technocrats who are going to do the thinking for you.
So that's the manifesto of the SPLC or something.
Yeah, I mean, well, look, put it this way.
Let's put it this way.
I'll put it very delicately.
People like Daniel Kahneman are related very closely to the kinds of people at the SPLC.
Very, very closely related.
Yeah, I don't know, you guess.
And the EDL.
But then the last one I choose in this book is a guy by the name of Paul Bloom, Canadian psychologist.
There's another one.
Yes.
Yes.
And so I kind of have a curious relationship with Paul Bloom's work because when I was teaching, like I said, I grew up in New York.
I taught university-level psychology.
And, you know, New York City, obviously, very diverse.
So no matter where I taught.
You escaped from the Gulag.
I escaped from New York.
Yeah, like Snake Pliskin.
I just got the heck out of that.
Kurt Russell, the great Kurt Russell.
But so whether I taught in Long Island or the Bronx or Manhattan or the Burroughs, every classroom looked kind of the same.
Young people, old people, black people, white people, atheists, Christian, poor, you know, middle class, lower middle class, whatever.
And I had to teach developmental psychology, you know, cradle to grave development of the mind.
And so I would always show this clip.
It was a clip of Paul Bloom on 60 Minutes because he pioneered this type of research that basically demonstrated that children under the age of one year are actually capable of moral thinking.
They're actually capable of moral reasoning.
They can tell right from wrong.
They can tell good from bad.
And his research showed that as early as three months old, infants can do this sort of, if you want to borrow a Carl Schmidt phrase, they can do this sort of friend-enemy distinction.
And the research did it a few ways.
One of the key methodologies they used was a sort of like a little drama.
They would have hand puppets.
They would either help each other or fight.
And based on the way the hand puppets interacted, the children would determine, you know, they'd be able to see who was being the aggressor, who was being the helper, who was being neutral.
And they would show a preference for the people who are helpful over the people who are combative.
They would show more of a preference for the neutral character over the one who is belligerent.
And so Paul...
Kamenai's values again.
Well, in a sense, I mean, we all do a sort of friend-enemy distinction because we just need to know, like, who we can trust to navigate the world.
But to your point, Paul Bloom's research was very much about this kind of womanly like, no, we need to identify the bad people so we can re-educate them.
And I showed that video to my students, and they thought it was amazing because on one hand, they're like, I never thought a three-month-old could do that kind of thinking.
But on the other hand, they were horrified because they also realized, wow, this is really creepy.
Academics and social scientists are studying these things in children and sort of making these moral judgments about them and sort of responsibilizing them and kind of inappropriately projecting into a child's mind the basically like the kinds of paranoid.
Yes effectively, that's exactly what it is and this is what Paul Bloom's whole mission was.
He's like well okay, if children can tell right from wrong before one year old they can tell, they can do friend enemy distinctions, which leads them to then make kinship preference.
This was another part of his research showing that okay, kids can tell right from wrong.
They also have prejudices.
Infants white infants show a preference for other white people, black infants show a preference for other black people, so on and so forth.
And Paul Bloom, obviously being a good, you know, diversity loving, multiculturalism loving, cosmopolitan academic, said, well, there's a big problem with this, because if people want to stay with their own, how are we ever going to have a multicultural hellscape, right?
So the whole last chapter segregation for me, but not for thee right, the whole last chapter is basically and this is really key to the title of the book intolerant interpretations.
The whole book is demonstrating, or that whole chapter is demonstrating, if something stinks, then you're right to avoid it.
If something seems fishy, if something kind of seems like there's a rug pull moment going to happen to you, then you probably should put your guard up.
It's actually not a bad thing to do.
It doesn't make you a, you know, a bad person from mid 20th century Germany.
It doesn't make you any of these naughty uh things.
It actually means you're a functional person uh, with a sense of self-preservation.
So that's what the two natural instincts.
Yeah exactly, the book is intolerant interpretations.
I've been sold folks, i'm sold.
Uh, Josh Neal, the author, has sold me Antelope.
He'll never disappoint when they, when they uh provide the content for the last hour of the last uh show of each month.
They never miss the mark and uh, tonight is no exception.
Josh Neal's intolerant interpretations.
Josh, I want to get to something fundamental with you before we run out of time.
But before we do that, you've done such a good job of breaking down the book and its contents.
But just give me a 60 second answer on why people listening tonight need this.
People need to learn to identify their enemies, and people need to learn to identify the strategies of their enemies, and they need to learn how to intellectually defend themselves.
We've gotten exactly where we are by being, as your co-host, I think you said Keith, said earlier, too tolerant.
We're too interested in being good faith and fair and thoughtful.
It's two minutes to midnight as far as our people are concerned, and we need to be really, really like sticking our finger in the chest of our enemies.
So that's what this book does.
Well, let me ask you this.
It sounds like if that's what they teach in New York, that's the best argument for secession that I've heard in a while.
You know, we've got to, you know, I consider Red State America the repository of common sense, and I think that Blue State America is the exact opposite.
What do you say?
Well, I've retreated from a blue state to a red state, so I'm inclined absolutely to agree with you.
The first chapter of the book sort of gives a little bit of fairness to liberals, but I think we're absolutely in a time where we just can't live with these enemies.
They're the enemy.
We need to recognize.
All right, well, this brings me full circle then.
I will mention, of course, once more, antelopehillpublishing.com.
They're at the top left.
You can't miss it.
It is the featured item.
The featured title, Intolerant Interpretations by Josh Neal, our guest this entire hour, and it has been another hour that has gone by in the blink of an eye.
But, Josh, I thought you were an interesting pairing tonight with Gurmar Rudolph for, well, a couple of reasons, but I want to just hit on this very quickly.
You know, Gurmar is a guy who has spent years in prison for his beliefs, and he is a man's man because he never recanted it.
He never recanted it.
He never apologized for it.
He never backtracked.
He never said he was wrong, and he's oh, so sorry.
You have paid a price as well.
You have not gone to prison, but you've still paid a heavy price.
And that brings us to the topic of free speech.
And I'm very interested by what you say here, or rather what the description of your book reads here, in that this is a book that analyzes the current cultural climate, and it is a bold offensive against ideas which, if not identified and suppressed, threaten to prove fatal to individuals and societies alike.
It sounds like me in college.
When I was in college, they were just selling that damn outlook.
You know, that was the primary coin of the realm.
Well, but that was for entirely different reasons.
Now, with Gurmar, hey, listen, a guy who's been four years in prison, I'm interested in his opinion, but as I was talking with Gurmar about in the first hour, Germar, you should not have gone to prison, but there are people who have ideas that deserve to be banished.
Their ideas do not deserve a so-called freedom of speech.
And a society has to live among us.
A society has to agree on what that limit is.
But feel free to disagree with me as well, Josh, or agree, or whatever your mind is.
But this whole thing with regards to what you mentioned it here, there are ideas out there and certainly actions that are animated by these ideas that prove fatal to our people and to our nations.
Where do you draw a line on the freedom of speech?
And are you opposed to if people like you and I and Keith and others who appear regularly on this program could ever have their hands on the lever of power?
Should we afford our enemies the courtesies that they've never afforded us, as Germar believes, and I respect him.
But I say no.
Germar is German, too, and I think they have tolerance to a fatal degree.
Basically, if anything is good for the founding stock of Germany, it's a bad idea.
I mean, I'm not saying that's him.
That is not him.
But there are far too many white people.
I answered the question.
Josh Dean.
Well, they put it to you this way.
I mean, if somebody comes up to you and they say you need to not start families because the carbon levels are too high, if they say things like, you need to give up your inheritance because other people that we're bringing in by the plane load into your country deserve your inheritance.
No, no quarter, no quarter whatsoever to these people.
And I don't think it's a moral quandary to say, hey, if you're deliberately trying to screw up my backyard, you're not allowed here.
So, look, I am a believer in the sense of free speech as a general principle, but I'm also not a believer in people deliberately manipulating the rules and the principles of a society to get ahead.
I don't think that there's anything else.
They're crazy.
I got to say this.
Four people on the program tonight.
Only one's going to prison.
He disagrees with the other three.
But I agree with you, Josh, and I think Keith, you probably lead the.
Oh, I do too, man.
Look, it's not just that they're wrong.
They need to be under lock and key if they believe things like that.
You know, somehow they have been brainwashed to the point that they hate themselves.
And that is one of the big problems with Blue State America.
Whether they hate themselves or they hate us, they cannot be in our society.
Well, they look in the mirror and they don't see a white person.
Well, I mean, it doesn't have to necessarily be self-hating whites.
It can be people of other races, too.
It could be Muslims.
It could be Jews.
It could be blacks.
It could be anybody.
The most dangerous one is the enemy within, which is, you know, they bring these other people in, but they're the gatekeepers.
They're the fifth column within our ranks.
And I know some of this is mentioned in the book, but you'll have to read it to know Intolerant Interpretations, antelopehillpublishing.com.
But Josh, the 60 seconds that remain are yours, and you can expound upon the topic we're talking about.
Yes, I don't believe in absolute free speech.
If it's something that is negative to our people, I have no tolerance for it.
They should not be allowed.
And we'll determine where that line is, and we can determine it together.
But I am not for all ideas are equal, all speech is equal.
We have taken that position because we've always been the ones on the outside in.
I said that in the first hour.
But no, these people have to go.
Final word to you, Josh.
Let me just say thank you so much for having me on.
It was a pleasure.
It's great to talk to you again, James.
Keith, it was great to meet you virtually.
If your audience likes what they hear, go to Imperium Press to pick up some of my older books.
Go to Antelope Hill Publishing to pick up my newest book.
I'm on Twitter, stillj Neal.
I'm on Substack, jneal.substack.com.
And we're going to win.
God bless you guys.
Thank you.
Hey, God bless you.
Yes, that's right.
We are going to win.
I know not everybody believes it.
And some people who have suffered dramatically can't believe it.
I believe it.
You believe it.
We believe it.
We are going to win.
And when we do win, it will be because of the work of our collective.
There's no I-EN team is the cliche.
But, you know, we have to move past seeing ourselves, if the music's going to play here as individuals.
We are a collective.
We are a team.
Josh Neal, thank you for being an important part of the team.
Good to have you on.
Intolerant interpretations.
It's our pleasure, Josh, and it's our honor.
AntelopehillPublishing.com.
That wraps up March Around the World.
Confederate History Month starts next week with Michael Hill and Gene Andrews.
Don't miss it.
Hey, still two days if you've not yet contributed to PPC's fourth quarter.
Wait a minute, that was last time.
First quarter, first quarter, first quarter fundraising drive.
We need to pick up the slack a little bit.
We got some great incentive offers.
No contribution too small.
Yeah, that's right.
That's right.
We've never had a big one.
Thank you, folks.
We'll be back next week as we move into April with the Federal History Month.