Mark Collett: Hello everybody, and welcome to tonight’s Book Review. We are here tonight with Student X to review his book, Equal Training. And we are live tonight on Odysee, DLive and Rumble. The usual platforms. We’re also live on Entropy. If you can share this stream, that will be very, very much appreciated.

Obviously, I’m expecting there to be a bit of a hit in numbers tonight. I’m not expecting this to be the usual book review because sadly, the football is on, so unfortunately, what can you say? It’s gone into extra time. The very multicultural England team are taking on the very homogenous Slovakia. And I’m sure that many people are tuning into that.

But if you can help us get a few viewers in, as I say, we’re not expecting the usual numbers, but we shall soldier on regardless and hopefully a few people will pick it up on replay. So England are now winning two one as well.

Anyway, let’s get straight into things. Oh, by the way, we’re going to do the new usual format.

So if you like the book review, if you like what we do, please do send a Superchat. You can Superchat via Odysee or Entropy.

So let’s get into this and we’ll start by introducing our special guest, Student X.

Now, he’s written a book, it’s a different book to the sort of books we usually review. It’s more in line, I would say, with a textbook, sort of a self help textbook, which is aimed at students.

But I’m not going to say anything more than that. Let’s let him speak for himself. Student X, this is the first time we’ve worked with you. Do you want to tell us a bit about yourself, your personal journey, then describe the book and why you wrote it, before we get into things.

Student X: Yeah.

First of all, thanks for having me on. It’s a pleasure to be here with all of you. So, for me personally, background, I was born and raised in southern California, also called North Mexico, jokingly. And this journey kind of started out before I ever had a social media account or any online footprint. And I didn’t know that there was a broader, White positive community out there.

So a lot of this was done just from my own personal point of view, thinking, what’s the best impact I can have just as one person and what can I do? Right?

So basically, I graduated high school. My main focus was working. You know, I started working as soon as I could. And after I secured a pretty good job that would pay the rent and I had enough free time, I then said:

“Hey maybe I should go back and finish my degree.”

So I would try to attend evening or weekend classes at the local community college. And I was quite shocked by the type of material that I was encountering in there.

So at the time, I was pretty good at navigating bureaucracy and stuff. I had been working for large companies for a while now, and I thought:

“I’m going to file a formal complaint, and I’m going to go through their process and kind of see what comes of it.”

So I did that.

I would say off and on while attending classes, this probably ranged from about 2012 through 2015. Around that timeframe. I spoke with all top officials at the school location that I was going to. I escalated things to the state level Chancellor’s office. I spoke with the AA UP, which is the American Association of University Professors, and I wound up back at the school speaking with their attorney, trying to make sense of, you know what are the rules that you operate by, basically.

So what I encountered through this journey was a lot of gate-keeping. All these different levels of bureaucracy, they’re selective about who they enforce the laws on behalf of and who they don’t. A lot of times they operate by unpublished criteria or resort to using undefined terms. So after I go through this whole exercise, and it became apparent to me that they’re clearly stonewalling me and they’re using this giant barrier and this bureaucracy to avoid being held accountable.

So I’m going through this thinking:

“Okay, so this is clearly intentional. They’ve got some kind of agreement going on.”

So I thought:

“How can I bypass this gate-keeping? Like, how can I work around all this?”

And I was also thinking from the point of, I’m just one person. I have no network. You know, my demographic maybe was around 5% of the total school demographic, and those include people going during the day, which I don’t even see or interact with. So I truly felt really alone!

And I thought:

“Okay, what are my options? What can I do to kind of disrupt all this stuff? How do I work around the gate-keeping and the people who deflect and all that stuff?”

So I thought, if they use the literature and the academic material as a means of putting our population on trial publicly, then my strategy was going to be to draught the criteria and the terminology that can be used to put their literature on trial publicly along with its author. You know, the thought process is I don’t control that narrative. I’m not really giving a say, which stories or collection of narratives that get picked.

So that’s already in place. But what I can do is expose the tactics that are being used and try to cause them to backfire, and incriminate the people who use them. Right?

Around this time personal and work life got really, really hectic. I actually had to stop going to classes and pivot and focus on work.

[06:40]

And I remember coming across a story of a young boy who is about nine years old, and I think his name was Aaron Dugmore, and it says that:

“He was bullied for being White at school and he wound up taking his own life.”

And that’s something that stuck with me and really haunted me. So that stayed with me. And regardless of how busy life got or when I did or did not have time, I made a personal commitment, …

Mark Collett: Just to interject. That’s a UK case, isn’t it?

Student X: That is, yeah, I believe it was out of Birmingham, …

But that really solidified the commitment inside of me, Mark, that said:

“I have to do this or else it’s going to haunt me all the way to the grave!”

So this is something that’s for all of us world-wide. This is not just for me to say:

“Hey, I’m an author or whatever.”

Right? This is to begin the process of actually busting up that media cache and surgically taking it apart.

And that’s how my work is designed to operate.

Natty: And just a quick question. This was one institution, or did this start in one institution or., ….

And then you kind of played it out in local government or the local education body?

Student X: Yeah, good question.

So I was working full-time during the day. And at the time, the only option for me to attend college courses was at my local community college, and it was on nights or evenings and weekends. So I was going through classes in the evening and weekend and I was encountering this kind of stuff, and I just thought:

“Hey, this is something that should be confronted!”

So I took it upon myself to draught a formal complaint that I sent to Academic Affairs. I copied the Dean on there as well. So in addition to taking night and weekend classes while working full-time during the day, periodically I would have in person meetings with that Dean or members of Academic Affairs or whatnot. And it’s kind of sprinkled in wherever they could fit on the schedule.

So that’s what happened at that specific location.

And then when I was not getting what I wanted, when they were not being cooperative with me, I looked to higher levels that I could escalate. So that went to the state level Chancellor’s office. In California, they have a state level office for Chancellors. I then went to outside institutions like the AA UP, which is An Association of University Professors. And they pride themselves on “academic freedom” and “freedom of speech” and things like that. So it actually started local, but I went to, I basically exhausted the whole bureaucracy to say:

“Okay, I’ll go through this whole process!”

Because it felt like they were trying to exhaust me, so I quit.

And I’m not that kind of person. I’m like:

“Okay, you want to take the long way? We’re going to go the long way!”

So I kept notes, I kept all my emails. I kept all my communications, to this day. It’s all there. I have all the receipts for it, just so I can go back in the end and say:

“Hey, you gave me wrong information six months ago! You sent me down the wrong path six months ago. You said X, Y and Z.”

So that was the purpose of me co-operating and going through all that so I could really remove all of their excuses.

Natty: And to be clear, when you started this process, you weren’t ideological. You’d just seen some of this stuff and it was starting to weigh on your mind. And did you have any expectation that the process would actually work, or did you go into it knowing, kind of having some expectation that you were going to be stonewalled and you were going to get sent around the houses?

Student X: Well, I mean, I was already somewhat aware simply because of the location I grew up. Right.

So when I went to high school and stuff like that, there was like a lot of gangsters there from each population. I already knew that just from personal experience. The piece that got to me is, why are the teachers chiming in? Why are the teachers going on with this and doing it? Why is the administration and the faculty entertaining this? My thought process was:

“Hey, if you’re an employee, if you’re on payroll at this school, you have behaviour requirements that you have to meet as an employee. This piece shouldn’t be optional for you to go along with.”

Like, I expect it from the student body, but not from the people who are supposed to be the working professionals.

So that’s the piece that caught me by surprise. And that’s the piece that said:

“Hey, I’m going to bypass arguing with students and everyone else.”

I’m just going to go directly to the administration and say:

“Hey, what are the rules that you’re supposed to be operating by? Let me see those. I want to review those.”

And that was really the path I took.

Natty: And just one more question before we get into the kind of, the content of the book. You, in the first few chapters, you outlined that you didn’t have a lot of money growing up. Your family didn’t have a lot of money growing up, so you were kind of working class.

I mean, I know we’re in the UK, it’s a little bit different, but there are ways, if families have enough money, but they can avoid kind of racial schools and go to homogenous schools, whether, you know, White schools where the kids are well behaved. You didn’t have that option, presumably.

Student X: No.

Natty: And it’s very, it’s all very well to say:

“Oh, well, you shouldn’t have gone to that school!”

[12:12]

Student X: And, well, to clarify on that, though. My grandparents raised me. I was taken, … They took me into their custody. I think I was around one or two years old. I was very young. Simply because my parents were not fit for it, right? And in the area I grew up in, the only other White families were that generation of grandparents that was left. Everything else that had moved in was from different populations. So there may be like four or five other sets of grandparents in that whole community.

And this kind of just grew up around them. You know, they bought that house 40 or 50 years prior, and then it got socially engineered into a pretty ghetto atmosphere. But you also have generational differences too, because my grandparents generation were big on manners. They were big on like:

“Hey, if you mouth off, you deserve a fat lip!”

You know, they just handled things differently. And they wouldn’t understand if they were to encounter somebody behaving all nasty like these anti-Whites do, they would think:

“Oh, that’s just one person. Maybe they’ll work out of their system. Maybe it’ll stop one day.”

They don’t know that this is actually receiving government funding and academic support, and people are making careers out of this, and it’s not gonna go away!

So that’s not really something, … It’s hard to communicate something like that to someone in their generation. Because they don’t understand the reason why people want to engineer conflict like that, you know?

But going back to what you said, it was working class, they were older, they were fixed income. I didn’t want to request money or anything like that from them. I didn’t want to, like, burden them. I was kind of born into this. I grew up with it from grade school to high school. Started working on my own, and really just became independent and kind of just left without saying anything, you know, as far as the reasons why. And I just kind of operated independently. But it would not have been an option to relocate and go to different schools because any of the surrounding cities around mine, they’re all pretty similar in demographics, so, …

Natty: Sure. And before I hand it back to Mark, I will say this. What you’ve just said hearkens back to something that we talked about a few years ago, where it’s all very well running away and trying to find schools that are well behaved and homogenous and are White, but eventually the barrier to that gets more and more expensive.

So you have to be more and more wealthy to be able to afford that. And even if you can there are some people who don’t even know that’s an option, and working class kids who go to comprehensives. And this is true from what you’re saying. This is true in the United States. It’s certainly true in this country cwhere there are certain schools that are totally just non-White, 90% ethnic minority. And you can say that:

“Well, the schools enforce behavioural codes.”

And all the rest of it.

Now, this book exposes that that isn’t the case! But it’s also the case that kids are ruthless and will pick on differences.

When I was a kid growing up, it would be the slightly tubby kid or the kid with ginger hair or whatever.

But you can imagine a few White kids in a school full of blacks or Asians [Pakistanis, etc.] or anything like that, they’re going to have a really tough time of it. And the Aaron Dugmore case just exemplifies that.

So I think this book is very important.

But let’s get into it. I’ll hand it back to Mark on that one.

Student X: One thing I would add, though, is where I was at, they had what’s called “Busing”. So they would literally bus kids in from other cities to that specific school to meet quotas.

I don’t know if you guys have ever heard of those, you know, nineties rappers, like gangster rappers who talk about the city of Compton. People were bused from that specific city to the high school I went to!

Natty: That’s, uh. That’s pretty crazy!

Student X: Yeah.

Natty: And it’s like the schools require a certain amount of minority students in order to claim funding.

So they’re more, …

Student X: Federal funding. Yeah, yeah. And they create all sorts of false excuses like:

“Oh, the schools in their area are overwhelmed, so we need to offload to a different school or whatever.”

So it truly, even if I were to try to evade this and go to a different location, it’s impossible with busing and all the other quotas that are put in place.

Mark Collett: So obviously, this isn’t necessarily about the book, but I’m really interested in what you’re saying.

So when you go into one of these multiracial American schools, I’m obviously aware of busing and that this was a treacherous policy put in place by the American government to, basically integrate via the gun, because people were forced at bayonet point to go to these schools! I’ve seen the pictures of the National Guard literally forcing White children or White teens to go to these multiracial schools. It’s quite sickening! It’s absolutely horrendous!

Now here’s the interesting thing, or the thing that I’d like to get to here, or the topic that I want to sort of discuss. When these blacks, because you’re talking about ones like, gangster rapper types and they’re obviously black the ones from Compton, you know, that you mentioned earlier, they’re obviously being bussed into these schools, but what are they actually like? Do they stick together when they get to your schools? Are they basically acting as one homogeneous group or is there any attempt whatsoever for any form of integration? Or is that just doesn’t happen?

[18:21]

Student X: Well, I mean, if you’re asking like, hey, during lunch, does everybody group up and sit in their own space? I would say yes, for the most part.

Mark Collett: When you say “group up”? So when they meet blacks, …

Student X: Yeah, totally. Same way you see it go down in the jails, that’s kind of the same way it goes down [chuckling] in these high schools. And then as far, …

Mark Collett: Then there is racial segregation still then? But the racial segregation, rather than being segregated by school, you’re all in the same sort of, you’re all thrown in the same area, but they segregate in a different way, if you like.

So there is the segregation. There are the battle lines drawn. But rather than the segregation being in different buildings in different cities, the segregation takes place in one building in the same city. And I guess that leads to tension, does it not?

Student X: Well, I mean, everyone’s got their own lunch table in the cafeteria, so to speak. Right.

And a lot of times people they try to avoid conflict for the most part. In California, it’s well known people just don’t even make eye contact, and they don’t even say anything when they walk by each other. That’s just the norm. That’s kind of how I grew up. If you don’t know them, don’t, … You have nothing to gain by interacting with a complete stranger because it can just go to so many different directions. And then sometimes you would see the normal beefs between guys over girls or whatever, and sometimes it would cross certain lines. It would be one guy from this group and one guy from another group.

And then you have the few strays that go outside of their group and talk and mingle with others or whatnot. So.

But for the most part, if they don’t have us under forced interaction policies, we all tend to keep to our own. It’s just the best way to avoid conflict.

Natty: You know, funnily enough, there was a story that emerged recently, in the past month or so about Britain’s strictest head headmaster. And it’s an Indian or Pakistani lady. And she runs a school called Makayla Community School, and she’s been lauded as this new pioneer of education. This school has all different students, all different ethnicities. It has Muslims, it has Christians, it has, you know, Africans, Middle Easterners, all of these kids.

And on the surface, and they have lots of visitors who visit this school to see this model, exemplary school that really works. And the kids are well behaved and they get on with their work. But they have to treat them like prisoners. And they have some of the craziest rules where they not allowed to hold anything in their hands. They’re not allowed to look around. The parents who send their kids to these schools agree that there’s the detentions that they can be put under and they can be kept behind the school and all this stuff.

So for this multiracial, multicultural, [chuckling] utopian school idea to work, they basically have to treat these kids like they’re in some sort of forced labour camp! And it just puts a lie to all of this idea that it can work and it can be successful.

Student X: Yeah. You know, I remember being excited about graduating from grade school and going to high school. I was like:

“Wow! You know, you’re growing up!”

You’re like, you think:

“I get to have a locker now? I get to have stuff like that?”

Nope! They took the lockers out. My 7th grade year was the only year I had one. After that, they removed them over the summer. They put in just random checkpoints. There was a constant., … We used to call them “narcs”. They were just security, you know, that would be riding bikes around or walking the campus at all times. There was anywhere from, like six to ten of those. And they would have a wand on them if they wanted to search you, or they could just take you to the main office and say:

“Hey, we’re going to go through your backpack or whatever, because we heard X, Y and Z.”

So in reality, you are operating kind of like a captured population. And they have to put all those controls in there to kind of to force these interactions against free people, basically.

Natty: Yeah. One of the things that came out of this documentary about Britain’s strictest head headmaster was the kids would constantly have their things searched. And when [chuckling] they’re asked by this, the documentary maker, the kids are saying:

“Oh, they’re making sure we don’t have chewing gum and sweet wrappers and stuff.”

And it’s like:

“No, no! They’re making sure there’s not knives and switch blades in them.”

Student X: Yeah:

“Which one of you is selling drugs?”

That’s what they’re looking for.

Natty: Yeah, yeah. Exactly!

Mark Collett: Sally has now rejoined us. Sally, can you hear us?

Aunt Sally: Yes, I can. Yes, I can hear you. And can you hear me?

Mark Collett: Yeah, you’re clear and fluid. Would you like to give your., … I don’t know if you’ve heard anything of what we’ve been saying or if you’d like to join in, but it’s good to have you here and it’s good to have you on a proper connection. My blood pressure is now falling.

Aunt Sally: He said his blood pressure is falling. It’s great! Yeah, no, I have heard, because I’ve been listening on my old laptop, but this wouldn’t work tonight.

But, yeah, I have heard. No, and I like what you’re saying, so, yeah, I’ll say what I think of the book at the end. It’s great! It’s great! I just need to check my notes now and see what questions I had for him. So you just carry on, please.

[23:45]

Mark Collett: Yeah. Okay.

One thing I will say about the American school system is when you see it from the outside looking in, you see it in movies and TV shows, they do touch on this sort of segregation. Were the schools you’re in, …. And this is the last question I ask. Were there metal detectors when you went in? And how regularly are there serious outbreaks of violence that either end with stabbings, shootings? Did those things happen? Were those regular occurrences? And how does being involved in that kind of very tense standoff, almost like a war zone, if you like, on a day to day basis, how does that affect White children? I mean, that’s a number one sort of priority here, isn’t it? How does this affect our people? What would you say? What would the long term mental stresses be on young White people in these institutions?

Student X: Oh, that’s a big question!

As far as metal detectors. You know, back when I was going to high school there, they didn’t have the doorway style ones that you had to walk through, but they did carry the wands on them. The narcs or security guards, they had those, and they could use you know, randomly or spontaneously if they wanted to. So it was really up to their discretion.

And as far as education, you know, education comes secondary to survival in that type of environment.

So really you’re not absorbing a lot of the subjects and stuff that you’re supposed to be. What you’re mainly looking out for is avoiding conflict, things like that.

I would say as far as fights, breaking out, physical fights. Yeah, you’d probably get one like every, you know, three, four weeks somewhere randomly on the campus, and the narcs would come and break it up like that. Don’t remember any shootings or anything like that when I was attending there, although it’s quite possible it’s just nobody did.

But I do remember that one time there was a pretty nasty attack where people, you know, resorted to using baseball bats out towards the sports field, which is just not good. But, yeah, that’s kind of the environment.

Education becomes secondary to the social engineering that they’re forcing on you, basically.

Mark Collett: Okay, so, … Go on Natty.

Natty: So I’ll just cap that off by saying that’s interesting, because secondary school, for a lot of people, I think, is where they become socialised and learn how to deal with groups and how to interact with other people properly without the kind of oversight that you get in primary education. I’m not sure how that breaks down on the American level. But like you said, group dynamics the social side of things, totally take over for a lot of people and become, like you said, become secondary to, like, academic studies.

So that’s very interesting that you’ve come to that conclusion as well.

Student X: Yeah, I mean, ideally, you’re just hoping not to get jumped when you’re walking home. And you’re hoping not to have your bike stolen from the bike rack or stuff like that.

Mark Collett: Can I just ask one last. This is another tangential question before we get really into the book, and I know we’ve been half an hour just discussing the sort of school system, but this is really interesting.

So how come more, I might be missing something here, but how come more White Americans obviously aren’t racially, ….

So one of the arguments that’s made in the UK, and this is, I think, you know, Natty, if I’m saying something wrong here, Natty, just let me know whether you agree with this.

One of the problems in the UK that we always hear is that things aren’t bad enough yet, that basically, here in the UK, things haven’t got to that awful point yet. Where people are fighting for their life, begging for scraps of food, and as such, unfortunately, people don’t accept there are problems because life is just too good.

But it seems to me that these young White Americans are growing up in pretty much a living hell in sort of this racially charged almost war zone in what should be a educational institution. How come more young Whites, or how come so many young Whites are still drinking the Kool Aid*, so to speak?

[* “Drinking the Kool-Aid” is most strongly believing in and accepting a deadly, deranged, or foolish ideology or concept based only upon the overpowering coaxing of another; the expression is also used to refer to a person who wrongly has faith in a possibly doomed or dangerous idea because of perceived potential high rewards. The phrase typically carries a negative connotation. It can also be used ironically or humourously to refer to accepting an idea or changing a preference due to popularity, peer pressure, or persuasion. In recent years, it has evolved further to mean extreme dedication to a cause or purpose, so extreme that one would “drink the Kool-Aid” and die for the cause.
While use of the phrase dates back to 1968 with the nonfiction book The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, [citation needed] it is strongly associated with the events in Jonestown, Guyana, on November 18, 1978, in which over 900 members of the Peoples Temple movement died. The movement’s leader, Jim Jones, called a mass meeting at the Jonestown pavilion after the murder of U.S. Congressman Leo Ryan and others in nearby Port Kaituma. Jones proposed “revolutionary suicide” by way of ingesting a powdered drink mix made from Flavor Aid (later misidentified as Kool-Aid) that was lethally laced with cyanide and other drugs.]

Student X: Well, regarding the argument of its just not bad enough yet, I remember hearing that years back and I kind of view that like a dismissive argument. Somebody who’s just being dismissive and not actually confronting things, because once they admit to things being bad enough, there’s not going to be much of a White population left to fight back. Right?

So to me, it’s kind of like:

“Oh, you know, eventually everyone will rise up and we’ll get someone to save the day.”

I don’t see that happening.

As far as networking on this particular subject. You know, Whites have been conditioned to pretty much accept what’s dictated to them and not speak up for their own interests and not organised based on their own interests. In addition to that, and I’m seeing this in the UK from afar as well now, because I know the tactics, I’m familiar with them at the institutional level. You know, the institutions are told:

“You only enforce the laws on behalf of minorities!”

That’s it!

“If Whites want to enforce the laws, it’s up to them to do on their own. Right? And stay quiet about this. Do not admit that you’re operating this way. Keep it a secret!”

So that’s where we’ve run into the gate-keeping and the stuff like that. So even if Whites want, let’s say, parents wanted to speak up to, who can they tell? You know, the institution won’t do anything. The police are ordered to stand down. The media, the mainstream media is controlled, and they won’t report it.

So, I mean, they can maybe tell the person standing next to them who already knows. Right? But there has been, somebody has disrupted our abilities to communicate. Kind of like they do at the military level when they’re going against other countries. They cut out their communications. They do certain things. Those are the tactics that have been used on our population.

And if you do ever get up to a media platform or anything like that, you’re going to have one of these radicals that are there to sabotage you and smear you and just call you all kinds of dirty names and stuff, and really derail your true purpose.

[30:19]

Following Transcript Quality = 3.5 Stars

1 Star — Poor quality with many errors, contains nonsense text 2 Stars — Low quality with many errors, some nonsense text. 3 Stars — Medium quality with some errors. 4 Stars — Good quality with only a few errors. 5 Stars — High quality with few to no errors.

NOTE: Users can help improve the quality of this transcript by putting corrections in the Comment section. Thanks.

Mark Collett: So all of this, then, was a inspiration for you writing your book. And your book, as I said, it’s quite different from things that we’ve had in the past because I would say that I don’t want to put people off buying it. That’s the thing. But this book has got more of a specific purpose than probably any other book that we’ve reviewed. It’s almost, if you like, if you’re reading a book on gardening the book has very little use if you’re living in a one bedroom flat, you know, four stories up, and you’re in the concrete jungle. And this book has a very specific use for a specific group of people. This is pretty much a textbook, if you like, but a self help textbook to help White students within these institutions. I would say not just to fight back, but both to understand what’s going on and to help orientate these students in some way so that there could be some fight back. Would you agree with that?

Student X: Yes. Think of this like a training manual. I already know that White students are being sent into an environment that’s hostile to them. I’m trying to give them the information and the language they need, not only to bob and weave as they go through it, but to actively de-weaponise that public school curriculum and defend themselves and be able to stand their ground on site in front of the teachers, in front of anybody else who starts using these hostile terms and things like that.

Mark Collett: Now, my first question is about the book in that thing, then I’ll let everyone go around the group. And this is really a major question. What would you say? Because it’s more of a potential criticism, but what would you say to people who, because a lot of this is, and I noticed its how to argue back, it’s how to use language, it’s how to frame things in a way that should be able to help people who are disenfranchised and angry with the system to get their point over. What would you say to the argument of, it’s better just to keep your head down, acknowledge the problem, get your diploma degree, whatever, get the hell out of there, and make sure you move to a White area before you have kids so your kids don’t have to go through this. What would be your answer to people who said:

“You know, fighting it in a university, or a college is fruitless.”

Student X: There’s nowhere to run this specific agenda. Once I’ve mapped out the tactics the way that I have, and I took a long time to map these out, just so you know, there’s a lot of strategy that went into it.

I started working backwards on the timeline saying, have I seen this used in other countries? And the answer is 100% yes. And it ran me back to a country that was called Rhodesia, something that was never taught to us here in American public schools.

But when I start pulling a lot of the scripting and the verbiage that was used on public platforms to kind of whip the populations up into a frenzy and get them to annihilate the White population there, that same canned language is here in America. It made its way here, and now I see it being used in the UK and even in Ireland, the laws are being changed the same way so that the government institutions only have a legal obligation to enforce the law on behalf of non-White populations, both that are here and that will be installed in the future, there is nowhere for you to go. I’ve already seen the articles, the random articles of, oh, the countryside is too White here in England, or just random stuff like that, when you say:

“Oh, well, I’ll just get my degree and move to a White area.”

Well, within your lifetime, long before you’re even going to retire, this will be brought to your doorstep courtesy of the people behind it. So that said, that’s not an option, in my view. I understand people want to avoid conflict, and that’s one of the elements I built into this book is dissent. The power of dissent. That is something that we can use immediately and we can use without getting in trouble. That’s the best and most effective way you can avoid conflict in this situation. But you are going to have to stand your ground. Your own institutions are being turned against you, the same way they have in America, same way they did in South Africa and what they originally did in Rhodesia.

Mark Collett: Okay, well, let’s let Natty and Aunt Sally bring up some stuff and make their points. You go first, Natty, and then we’ll go over to Aunt Sally.

Natty: So, getting into the meat of the book, I don’t think we’re going to have time to go through all of the all of the chapters and the sub chapters.

However, the first bit you get into is group blame, using colour. And you talk about the way that the word White is used versus the way that brown or yellow or, I can’t remember, black is not used, and how media reports and celebrities and politicians will use the word White.

Now, I guess I’d like you just to talk about that briefly, but I also wanted to ask you a question in that. Do you think that us as White identitarians, White nationalists, nationalists, whatever, however you want to term Us dissidents, have made a mistake in owning the term White when we refer to ourselves?

Student X: Yeah, good question. First off, the term White does have its proper uses among us. I believe all of us are. That is an umbrella term. Right. And within that umbrella, there are multiple different subgroups. Later on in that book I talk about, I prefer to use the term White ethnics. I like that because it both acknowledges our shared heritage, but also does not diminish or erase our different cultures and things that we have branched off to become. Right.

So in that respect, I like that.

Natty: Talk about that. Talk about that for a second, because when I heard that, I was a bit sceptical, because using a term like that, we’re trying to force a sea change or changing people’s opinion. You’re going up against a lot of pre-established ideas and ideology to.

Student X: I understand it’s very controversial.

Mark Collett: Yeah.

Natty: Add the word ethnic to a term that we use for ourselves, which is White, and ethnics is a term used to describe the other, especially in Western countries undergoing this change.

Student X: Yeah.

So let me first preface this by saying the first chapter took me the longest to write out of everything, out of any other chapter by far, because trying to convey that in a way that’s not confusing or to getting off into the weeds, so to speak, it took a while for me to really just be content with the way I wanted to write that out and convey to the reader, understand it this way.

Okay, so the first chapter even. Well, let me say this. White is one word. Yes.

However, there can be multiple different uses and meanings for this one word. So one way is to refer to people’s colour or their visual appearance. Right. You’re a White person, you’re a brown person, so on. That’s when you refer to people by what colour they are the second and the different way to use it is in the context of race. Right. So in America, our official census has a racial category of White, and that defines anyone from North Africa, the Middle East, the semitic populations, the original peoples of Europe, Hispanic and Latino, all fit into that White category. Right.

Natty: And this is the reason why the term Caucasian has very, very rapidly just completely disappeared from the lexicon. Right.

Student X: It’s possible. I didn’t really focus on that term, to be honest with you. I’m focusing on the way that they weaponise the word White and they vandalise it, and they maximize the amount of times they can use it in a negative way. So all within one piece of literature, you can see the word White used by its author, but they might be using it in the context of colour or flipping over to use it in the context of race. So they can maximize the amount of times they get to use the word White in a derogatory way and really install that into the mind of the general population or the kids in the schools. Right. And which leads into chapter three. So chapter one is colour.

Chapter two is race. It explains the difference between the way the word White can be used in these two contexts. And chapter three says, okay, now that you understand these differences, let’s analyze what you see in your school literature. Let’s analyze what you see in the media reporting. So, as an example, in America, when somebody is Hispanic or Latino, North African, semitic, or any of the other subgroups in there, when they commit a crime, since crimes are recorded by race, the blame gets shifted to White. That’s the official descriptor. These people are considered White when they commit crimes. There’s this giant criminal record that’s been exaggerated, and blame has been shifted over to our demographic for things that were actually not done by our demographic. These were done by other subgroups or members of special treatment groups or the special treatment class.

But this is needed, this understanding is needed for the readers to go this far in depth and understand the reason why certain materials I view as anti-White. Was this intentional? Was this their strategy? You know, so back to the term White ethnics. Like I said, in the racial category of Whites in America, anyone who is not classified as Asian or black is classified as White, basically.

And all of those different subgroups have an additional unique identifier except for us, the original peoples of Europe.

So the position that leaves us us in is we have no way to measure our level of access to our own institutions. We have no way to measure if we are proportionately represented at all levels of our own society. We have no way to document discrimination against our subgroup by other subgroups, which, by extension, locks us out of accessing our own justice system. We have no identifier we can use to gather the evidence that’s needed to access our justice system and present this in front of a judge. Right?

So it was a total lockout, basically. So without going that far into. I mean, it just goes deeper and deeper and deeper, right. But to try to keep it at a level where I don’t want people going too far off into the weeds, I say, hey, here’s some important reasons why I propose a unique identifier for our subgroup. Those of us who are not members of special protection or special treatment classes, those of us who are the original peoples of Europe.

I like the term “White ethnics” because, a, it shows a shared heritage, but be, it acknowledges our different cultures and things along the way. And there’s no active erasure that happens. You know, Italians can still be Italians. Same for Germans, same for Irish, same for French. You know, we’re under the umbrella of White ethnics and then under the larger racial umbrella of White.

Natty: Now, just two quick points to come back on that one.

So this is where British readers, British listeners, are going to struggle with this, because for us, the umbrella term White doesn’t cover anyone else apart from the White British at the moment.

Now, judging by what’s happening in America.

Mark Collett: Well, it does. I’ll be wrong there. I think you’re wrong there. I’ve got to counter signal you immediately on this, because if you look at our census, our census does have White British, White other, and then a series of sort of like European ethnic categories as well. And I would argue, and this is just to throw this out there.

I mean, look, I’m not bashing Americans per se, but the term White is generally more of an Americanised term than something that’s less used or was less used in Europe or wasn’t used in Europe until it was imported from America, because America is a White or was founded essentially as a White multicultural nation. You know, there were Germans, there were Brits, there were.

Student X: America was founded by White ethnic, right?

Natty: Yeah.

Student X: By different White fighting amongst each other. They said:

“Okay, we’re going to have this homogenised identity of Whites. We’re putting all of you different White ethnics in this category. Stop the infighting.” That’s my story.

 

Natty: So hold on a second.

Mark Collett: But wait, I just got to say one thing. Like, in Europe. So in our census, myself, Natty, and Aunt Sally would all be classed as White British, which is the ethnic group we would be.

But in Europe, it is far more common. And sorry for cutting in May, but in Europe, it’s far more common to hear people talk of themselves in terms of things such as, like here, I’d say, I’m English, I’m English, I’m English.

And then there’d be Scots who say:

“Well, I’m Scots, I’m Irish, I’m Welsh.” We are only termed as White in the sense that we are White British.

 

Student X: On the census, that’s changing, though, because now you have the other installed populations that are coming. And take Ireland, for example. You have people installed from Zimbabwe. You have people like what’s her name, chu, who have taken it upon themselves to deconstruct Irish identity. And now they’re saying, all of us are going to be called Irish, and we’re going to hyphenate wide in front of that. When we refer to you. To indicate that you are no longer one in the same Irish does not mean only this. There is White Irish, and this is the creeping agenda that you’re seeing. They’re first separating your population from its own identity and allowing foreigners to claim it.

Natty: Yeah, that’s absolutely true! And just coming. Coming back to the question I was going to ask, and I may have been missing something from when I read the book, but why use the term White ethnics when White Europeans has become fairly synonymous both in Europe and America? To refer to ourselves or we’re dealing with revision.

Mark Collett: Before you answer that, Dr David Duke is somebody that everyone knows, I work with with regularly. And Dr David Duke coined the term European American. And if you’re friends with him on Skype, that’s his name, on Skype, Dr David Duke, European American. And he uses that term to differentiate and say that you could be a White American, but he is a European American, so he’s American of European descent. So an African-American, quite obviously, is a is a American of Elon Musk. Yeah. And he would. Elon Musk. Well, you know what I mean?

Student X: Mark, did you, did you see, a couple years back, there was a black woman who took to a stage. It was like a performative, but it was very dramatic. And she said:

“Europe does not mean a Whiteman. Anyone can be European. I’m here.”

Natty: This is.

Student X: But here’s the problem. You can dismiss it as nonsense, but this shows you the formula and the steps they use to actually make the change permanent in the permanent record. Right?

So if I were to use the term European American here in America, and I have all of these migrants who have recently been sold in Europe who are told, oh, we get to identify as European now. You know, they go identity shopping or whatever you want to call it. A. If I were to use the term European American here in America, that could include anyone who’s been installed into Europe, whether they have a heritage based connection.

Mark Collett: Oh, that’s fine. Look, by the way, this wasn’t. This wasn’t.

Student X: No, I know, I know.

Mark Collett: It was just genuine, a genuine kind of like, query. Just because I know, I do find these things quite interesting, although here’s what I’m getting at by what I said earlier about Americans being the ones that introduced the term White.

Student X: I know. No, no, no, I know. Here’s what I’m getting at, though. Why do I like the term White ethnics? Well, a the properties I said before, it acknowledges a shared heritage. It does not result in acts of erasure amongst the different subgroups within it.

But also, Mark, there’s now reclaiming properties. If I get White ethnics coded into law and an official identifier that can be used, I can now refer to you as a White ethnic English, or I can refer to someone in Ireland as White ethnic Irish or White ethnic Swedish or White ethnic German. It reclaims the identity that their population made with the intention for their heritage and it reattaches it to them by wording it that way. Sothere’s a lot. Think of language, kind of like you would mathematics. Right. There’s a certain end I’m trying to get to, and there’s certain things I’m going to do along the way to get there without even announcing it, because I don’t want to give anybody a heads up. But that’s the long answer to your question.

Natty: Lessons and the experiments are not experiments, but when you ask people to go away and do something is like a judo move where you’re using their terminology against them and holding us under the same umbrella to basically turn us from the victim into.

Student X: Because we use these as a heritage based identifier. We always knew them to be that. Well. Silently, someone else came along saying:

“Hey, I want to start revising the category this is and make sure the whole world gets to claim this identity.”

I even saw a while back, like a year or two ago, there’s a black politician there in the UK. He said:

“I want the census English to be defined to where other groups can claim to be English because we are English.”

So he’s trying to take it away as an ethnic identifier and open it up for the west of the world to use, thereby leaving your group without a unique identity, thereby leaving your group vulnerable to being dissolved off into a giant tidal wave of global traffic. You know, that’s how this works.

So when I look at what way do I need to phrase this? What kind of a language lock do I need to put in the terms so that can’t happen again? I like the term White ethnics. It had all the properties I was looking for but now I didn’t even go into this depth of an explanation in the book because the point was:

“Hey, simply pointing out that we have no unique identifier we can use to document discrimination, access our own justice system, or measure, you know, our current levels of access should have been sufficient.”

I’m not going to tell everybody the real agenda behind all this stuff and how it’s going to perform.

Natty: Well, that’s a really good point, because it highlights the one of the differences between me, Mark, and Sally, and hopefully the intended audience of this book is that we are. We’re not. We’re not hatchlings. We’re not. We’re not young students.

I mean, I suspect that me, Mark, and Sally are all probably a little bit older than.

So this is. It’s been a while since any of us have been through the education system, and we’re slightly more well versed on the rhetoric and the propaganda and the marketing machine that’s kind of demonised us.

Student X: Good.

I mean, there’s those of us who have seen. Who have been in this a lot longer and thought our way through these things and see a little bit further ahead, and we’re just trying to bring on a larger part of the population and warn them, like, hey, you need to know these things. So I’m really glad to be in your guys’s company.

And like I said, I understand this is a very controversial topic as far as the use of the word White, but my aim is to show through explanation and through examples. Hey, this one word White is being used in all these multiple different ways. So when a radical who uses it as part of their strategy to continuously flip and I. People confused and refuse to define the terms that they use and whatever, this is one of those tactics and you have to know to watch for it, you know?

Natty: Yeah, sure. I wasn’t being condescending or anything like that, but it’s really interesting the way this, the way the ideas in this book are laid out. It’s like from all the, from the, from the years I’ve been aware of, like an anti-White machine that’s kind of set against us. This book does quite a good job of like, if you imagine those ideas being a mat laid out on the floor, this book kind of pulls in each individual Strand out and lays them out so you can follow each of them and look where they come from. So it’s not, I’m not saying it’s not for us. It very much is. And it’s very good at laying out the individual thought processes and the individual reasons why certain words are used and certain terminology is used.

Student X: Yeah, I appreciate that. And that really was my goal.

Let me tell you guys. Most of my work hasn’t even been shown to the public.

So what I did was I said:

“Okay, this obviously goes way deeper than I expected it, right?”

So I said, what are the, what are the concepts I can use in relay in a logical manner? What can I give terms to that are not derogatory, that allow people to talk about them without getting in trouble? You know, what kind of communication tools can I create and cultivate and disseminate for everybody else?

So these were the top concepts I pulled. These are the ones I said, this is what should be in this book and how they all tie in together at the end. After you’ve learnt each of these concepts, at the end, you’re going to have basically the playbook that these evil teachers are using against the student body. And you might just know these tactics a little better than they do and be able to wield them a little better than they do because they’re, a lot of them are operating under a lower level narrative just to get them to do what the administration wants them to do. They’re not fully clued in on a lot of this stuff. Right. I actually reverse engineer stuff. I own a giant dry erase board with the multicolor pin packs. I will literally sketch things out like you see on a movie, like where there’s a writing all over the wall. I will leave it up. I will go back, I’ll make adjustments. I’ll retest it. I’ll test my responses to certain verbiage and stuff like that. And all that is what went into this.

And a lot of the explanations as to why it’s designed the way it is, they’re not relevant. I just need to make it target the Right audience with it and say:

“Hey, here’s some instructions. I’m going to show you a roadmap. When they say this to you, ask these direct questions to kind of bust up their language manipulation tactics and stuff like that.”

So one other thing on that concept of colour is there’s a different chapter called denial of identity. Right? And in that chapter, I asked you, hey, would it seem strange to you guys if I personally were just to fly to Africa and flood their school system with literature that trains everyone to refer to everything as African except for black people? Would that seem like a strange way for me to train that population to talk? I think yes. And then I ask, is it equally strange that somebody has flooded America school system with material that trains everyone to call everything American except for White people? They’re referred to by their colour. I argue, yes, it’s strange. That tactic, denial of identity, is now in Ireland. I’ve seen it pop up and stuff from the UK when I’m, when I’m researching over there. So.

So they are actively detaching you from your I own heritage based identity and allowing the insurgent populations to claim that identity. And they’re all being trained to refer to you by your colour instead, visual observation. And this goes back to that first chapter. You know, when you refer to people by their colour, you’re impacting that entire colour category in a lot of ways without even fully realizing it. You’re engaging in-group defamation. You are incriminating all people on the planet at the same time who’s in that colour category. Right?

So we have been kind of desensitized to having national conversations about White people, right?

But we don’t have the same national conversations about yellow, brown, and black people, even though we’ve been desensitized to it and it’s been normalised to point it at us. No one else wants that exact same language structure pointed back in their direction. Right? So all this stuff intertwines, guys.

Mark Collett: Well, I was going to say this is a good point to throw over to Sally, because Sally hasn’t had a chance to say much, and she was sorting out her stuff. Sally, have you got anything to say on this or any questions that you’ve specifically got to ask up to this point or anything that you. You’d like to raise?

Aunt Sally: Oh, I want to raise this, but this is. Goes towards what you were all just saying. It’s something I noted on page 74. It says, the goal in destroying a recognised population of people and slowly revising them out of existence is first to destroy their group identity and ensure it’s no longer officially recognised, socially validated, or reinforced by the general population. This is because any population which does not have an officially recognised identity will no longer exist as a group and will be mixed away into a sea of global traffic, which sort of sums up what we, very powerful words there. But I ended up making so many notes about this book, I was basically rewriting the book in my own words. It’s just such a brilliant book.

And I actually strongly disagree with what you said earlier, Mark, that it’s a book more for the young. It isn’t at all, because it’s helped me tremendously. It’s opened my eyes to a lot of what’s going on now, but also what happened to my generation, how this crap creeped in. And my three children. I had a child in every decade. So I had one in the seventies, one in the eighties, one in the nineties, and actually could have gone on had one in the two thousands, because I was 14 in 2000, still fertile, but I didn’t. So I’ve seen it happen incrementally over the years in our country.

And I think the big thing that they did, and I noticed this, was to destroy the English identity in particular, while still letting the Irish and the Scottish. I’m not sure about the Welsh. I think they were on at them as well. But they’ve been destroying the English identity to the point now where we don’t exist, even on paperwork on a form you can fill in an online form, but English doesn’t exist, but Welsh and Scottish and Irish does. And I’ve actually typed in English, and it’s been deleted by the auto thing, so we don’t exist as a group.

And I think part of that was voluntary, where they portrayed the English as a bunch of football hooligans and their dwarf. Well, so that middle class English people didn’t want to identify with them. I don’t know if the Whiteman van thing with the England flag on it. That was all directed at anti-English. And literally the middle class population moved away from the label. And now no one really, no one says it anymore, that they’re English. And maybe they’ll do that with the Irish and the Scottish. I don’t know the Scottish. They have such a strong identity. I can’t seem ever getting away with it there. I’m not so sure about the Welsh.

Natty: Well, sal, you make a really good point. You just jogged my memory about something because I was going to mention earlier that the people who have put these narratives in place and have had a very long game plan with this stuff have used wedge issues and the grey area to push this stuff through. So in the United States, the history of slavery was used to create this divide and to drive a wedge in that all of this stuff could flow in, behind. And in the UK, I’m pretty sure, and this is just an idea and I may be wrong about this, but that divide was the class divide and that’s how they’ve done it, to make the middle class really find the working class, like you said, the White van man with an England flag hanging out his window as like, something utterly repulsive and say, we don’t want. We want to disassociate with that kind of person so much that we’re willing to welcome in the kind of middle class Nigerian dentist or doctor or whatever else is so these wedge issues that exist in societies have been used to create a gap wide enough to start forcing this stuff through until it just becomes like a tidal flood that you can’t stop.

Student X: Yeah, let me propose this to you guys, too, because there’s a lot of booby traps, so to say, that have been put in place before this agenda was targeting us. So back to, let’s say that an Irish person sitting in school and a Nigerian was recently installed. The teacher goes, okay, this is what Irish means, and points to the Nigerian kid. If the Irish kid said:

“Hey, you know, Africans or whatever group are not Irish, yada yada!”

They will then get slapped with a policy that school has on racism, discrimination and whatever, right? So a different approach is for the Irish kid to be trained to say:

“Hey, this is what we know to be denial of identity. When you’re using my population’s identity in an inside out way or in a way that distorts it and separates my population from it. So we want material that reinforces our Irish identity instead of material that revises it and takes it away.”

Phrasing it that way, giving them that term, denial of identity bypasses all of those little landmines and stuff like that, and they can say that directly to the administration. They can avoid naming any other groups. All of the policies on discrimination or whatever don’t even come into play. It’s a valid claim on the Irish kids part. They just need to be trained, like I said, to bob and weave. You know, you think of those spy movies when people drop down on that really thin little line and kind of blow cigarette smoke to see where the lasers are. This is what this book is aimed to train people to do.

And their parents, anybody outside who’s helping them and providing support to them, anyone who’s emailing the administrations, asking the correct questions and doing the data gathering, even people in the legal field who can draw on this verbiage and these frameworks to strengthen their arguments and increase their chances at winning when they challenge this stuff, this is all built in here, and this is what this is to do.

I’m basically showing you, hey, this is the enemy’s playbook. These are the main dirty tricks they’re going to use on you. Here’s how you respond, here’s how you move without getting in trouble. So.

Mark Collett: I don’t know if you want to follow up there, Sally. I didn’t want to jump in because you’ve not really had as much chance to talk as everyone else tonight. I was hoping that you would.

Aunt Sally: No, no, because I was just busy scanning my notes now, because I’ve got so many, and I’m just looking for the next question. A lot of the things that I actually did write down, you’ve already covered.

So I’ve just been. I’ve just been listening.

Mark Collett: I was feel guilty you sat here, though, because you don’t. Sometimes you don’t get as much time as everyone else. I was hoping to throw something more your way rather than. Because I think tonight. Tonight we’ve actually focused less on the book, and we seem to have. We seem to have focused more on probably other things about the themes of the book, rather than doing sort of a chapter by chapter breakdown, etcetera. But I have found it really interesting. But if there’s nothing else you want to add, I’ll throw it back over to Natty.

Aunt Sally: Yeah, I’m just looking at my notes, so I have got a few questions, so I’ll come back in a sec.

Mark Collett: Are you sure you don’t go now?

Aunt Sally: I’m sure. I’m sure. Like, you just carry on flowing. Sorry, Natty.

Mark Collett: Go for it, mate.

Student X: Natty, you mentioned slavery earlier. Yeah, yeah. Can I add to that?

Natty: I was going to ask you next about this idea of cropped narratives, because you talk about crop narratives, and one of the biggest topics in there is this idea of slavery. There’s a really good picture, actually, that describes it. And there’s pictures throughout the book, and they’re very. Not childish, but, like, they’re very simple. They’re very easy on the eye cartoons. Right? And this picture explains it perfectly. I wish I could bring it up on screen. If I’d had time, if I’d had the sense to do this, I would have sent it to Mark so he could show you.

But it’s basically the idea of slavery. There’s like a picture of Africa with Europe above it and the lines of where slaves came from and where they went to. So there’s obviously European slaves who got taken from the shores of Spain, France, and even England. Cornwall. The Cornishmen were taking slaves as well and sent to the Middle East.

And there’s also lines emanating from Africa coming up to Europe, which is where they were sent. But you have this, like, cropped on your iPhone, if you crop a photo, you get this little square that comes around it, and you can move it around, you can Zoom in, zoom out, crop it. And the part of Europe where the arrows are leading out of Europe, which is where slaves were taken from, too, is completely cropped out, so that all you see is Africa with the lines going out of it.

So maybe we could talk about cropped narratives a little bit.

Student X: Definitely! And this goes back to my strategy of, it’s more effective to name the actual tactic and confront the teacher for using that manipulation tactic than it is to speak about the subject at hand. Right, right.

Natty: So rather than, like, whining about, oh, yeah, but White people were taken slaves, too.

Student X: Right, right.

Natty: We were victims as well, rather than being on the back foot with that.

Student X: Say, right, because then they’ll try to hit you with their other policies, racism, discrimination, whatever. And I just. I, Bob. And we’ve all through that. I say, hey, you know, an example? In America, Washington, non-White slave owners and non-black slaves were cropped out of all school lesson plans nationwide for decades. And that level of precision does not happen naturally on its own. That requires coordination, that requires planning, that requires people at higher levels who disseminate to all of the different schools below them.

So that in itself is enough, gives us enough information to confirm it was then intended intentionally. Right.

And then we have these guilt monuments that are built in real life, like these museums about slavery, or these little, you know, monuments to pass slaves or whatever, to provide support to those crop narratives that were disseminated in school. Right? And slavery is not the only one, though.

Now, one thing I do touch on is there’s been this really big ruckus for we want reparations. You know, and my response is, you can’t. I don’t support reparations if they’re all based on cropped narratives. You know, if you’ve cropped out the fact that White people fought to end a slave trade that was started by elite black Africans, you don’t really deserve a penalty to be signed to our population. It’s misdirected. You have to focus it at the source. You have to send that to the people who arranged all this and who made it possible, which is to elite black Africans. You know, that’s where. That’s the proper way to direct it, you know?

But I think that when radicals try to activate different groups and try to engineer conflict and destabilise things, this is a very effective tool at turning different groups against one another. Right? Because when I was growing up in school, that left me under the impression that only White people owned slaves and only black people were slaves.

And then all of the social retaliation, the negative remarks, the if beatings ever came into play for other people, whatever, all of that was justified by citing these crop narratives, which were given lots of air time and lots of circulation, both in the schools and in the media platforms. Right? So, bypassing the most effective way.

And I thought:

“Okay, what strategy can I use to give your average person, or even a younger person, who is now challenging some older PhD who’s skilled in manipulation? What term can I give them to incriminate that teacher for trying it to show that all they’re doing is using a manipulation tactic and really to speak down to them.”

And I say, let’s name the tactic. Let’s call it a cropped narrative. Slavery is not the only subject. We see crop narratives used in other countries, like Germany. We see monuments put there. We see them all over, and they’re very tightly controlled. A lot of times, people recite these crop narratives or point to one of these guilt monuments, and then it’s always followed up with concession demands or extortion demands, transfer money to me, you know, things like that, and they’re really used as a money making scheme over generations to continuously milk the host population of that country and to freeload off of it, basically.

So to create a communication tool that’s simple, that stays out of the weeds, that people can use without getting hit by the discrimination policies or accusations of whatever ism, I said, let’s just call it a crop narrative and let’s teach people about this concept. And you’re absolutely right, Natty. I took that icon. I was inspired by the phone. Your ability to crop an image and determine what you want to be publicly visible and what you want to be cropped out before you present it to the public. And this is literally one of the communication tools.

Natty: I’m just thinking of your board with all the circles with things written on and lines going this way and that way, and the crop, like, you could crop out just one connection and focus on it and say this is the whole issue, whereas in reality, there’s all of these spider lines going everywhere and different ideas and different actions taken throughout history that feed into it. And before I pass it on, I just want to hammer on this again just one last time. Instead of being defensive, just ask why, when someone is talking this way, why they are ignoring it rather than saying, no, no, we. You know, I don’t think this is right, or I think this is no. Why you ignoring so much of this topic? Why have you only decided to focus on this one specific thing? I think that’s a really, really strong, strong rhetorical corner.

Student X: Them, Natty. Students should be trained to ask the teachers, hey, why are you using crop narratives instead of complete ones? What is your real intention in this class? Because this doesn’t seem like it’s education. Is that, like, a false cover argument? Are you really here to instigate trouble or incite violence? You can really push that teacher up against the wall or that activist and say, you need to explain your actions, and this is a way for you to word it and to do it that a, that teacher hasn’t seen before. It’s new material. And be, puts the power in the hands of the kid at the student level or the parent or the attorney, if they’re involved, or so on, know.

Natty: Yeah, absolutely! Fantastic! I really. I really like that. And I really like that chapter for that. For that very reason. I’ll let someone else talk.

Aunt Sally: Yeah. Can I just say with those, the cartoon through the book, they’re brilliant! They’re really, really brilliant! I just wondered, did you design them yourself or. Because whoever drew them knew exactly what you meant, so I just thought.

I’m just curious for that.

Student X: Thank you.

Aunt Sally: And another thing want to ask, I want to say is I love these little phrases like crop narratives. I’ve sort of started making notes of them. Guilt monuments. Brilliant! And there’s a few more I can see. Part time Whites. That’s a brilliant one. The minority privilege. Love that. Yeah. But, yeah. Please answer my question. Who designed them and how?

Student X: Thank you, Sally. I appreciate it. So, as far as finding people to work on this book, a lot of people were scared, so I had to search online, and I had to locate other folks that happened to be out of the country, but I think it was kind of fate. So I located a gentleman who was in Hungary, and I was able to supply him some good income streams and whatnot.

And what I would do is I would actually make the memes on my phone. They were kind of crude or whatnot, but he was the artist, and then it would give him a better idea of where I wanted him to take the picture and whatnot. The idea I was trying to convey and we worked together for a few months and all the pictures and everything the way I wanted them or were good enough and then I put them in the book. What was most important to me was that wording, this using simple language that I wanted to reach the lowest level readers out there that I could. Not just the intellectuals, right. But this, I want to be to reach as many people as possible.

But also, I’ve noticed that there have been deliberate attempts to make our population illiterate. Right. And to sidestep that illiteracy. Memes and illustrations have the ability to do that.

So I wanted to marry both of them in there. And depending on what type of reader dealing with, increase the chances of do you understand this concept? Do you understand what’s being directed at you? And do you understand how to defend yourself and stand your ground?

Aunt Sally: So I think that’s one of I really, really love this book. And that’s one of the things I like, is its a positive book in that it tells you what you can do in them in the most lawful way or the most agreeable way without causing conflict. I really love it. I can’t recommend it highly enough, I’ll say that at the end.

But, yeah, I love the way you give people the verbal tools and the backup, really, the wording to back it up with, to argue their corner. I just love it!

Student X: Thank you. I appreciate it. High praise.

One thing I think a lot of people need to realise is a lot of the mainstream terms that are marketed like discrimination or racism or whatever through various means. The definitions of those have been revised through academia or in the legal system, through case precedent. They’re revised so that they really exclude anything that’s directed at White people. And they’re therefore, by extension, do not offer equal protection to us. Right.

And I think this is where, this is one of the things that are exploited when we Whites engage in these conversations and say:

“Well, this is racist, or that is racist!”

Well, then the radical reply is:

“No, it’s not, because X, Y and Z.”

And these conversations just go on for forever, like semantics. So I do encourage the use of the term anti-White as a way of working around that and sidestepping the debate and actually moving forward and making progress.

And then I’ve tried to establish some kind of criteria or guidelines to say:

“Hey, these are the properties you can look for. And if you find these, you can say, yes, this piece of material or this remark is anti-White.”

You know, you’re levying charges or incriminating White people for things that are not even unique to White people. You know, and you could go the direction of, so did the other colour groups, so did the other racial categories, so did this sort of that none of that’s unique to us. You’re just really bringing about a public shaming session or trying to make extortion demands from our population. You know, it’s, it’s. We have to take the longer way and work around it because they’ve, they’ve got all these language locks in place, you know, so.

Natty: Yeah, it’s a good point. Just to. Just to cap that, we, the people who are teaching this stuff in schools have been trained to use. To use language as a weapon, whereas we’ve been trained to, or taught not to use language as a weapon. And the inherent politeness of White people is being used against us.

And I think to understand that words, words can be like a game of chess, or a judo match or something, is quite important. And this book does a good job of explaining that and giving you the tools to use it in that way.

Aunt Sally: Something I wanted to, something I didn’t quite get, the only thing I didn’t quite get is, and it might be because it doesn’t apply to us so much here in the UK, but the four colour categories are White, black, yellow and brown, where they’re all sort of being moulded into every ethnic group that’s yellow.

So the Chinese and the Japanese and the Koreans and whatever, they’re all yellow and they’re taking away, are they taking away their individual identities as well as they’re doing to the White population or European population? Or is it. They’re just doing it for other purposes so that because they’re doing it to Whites. I don’t know if I’m making sense. It’s a bit that I didn’t.

Student X: Yeah, I understand.

And like I said earlier, that chapter was the hardest. I had to work the longest on that chapter just due to that concept, trying to bring it, bring it to existence and show it to others, you know?

But one of the ways, you know, as you encounter people publicly, one of the ways you can refer to them is you can refer to them by their name if, you know, them, or you can refer to them by their cultural or heritage based identity, or you could refer to them by their colour. Right. Their visual observation. Oh, I saw this colour person or that colour person today on my way. So and so these are all options when we, when we phrase the remarks and the statements we want to make and the effect we want those statements to have as they reach the broader population.

So this one subject shows you, hey, when you’re referring to people by their colour category, because all of us can do it, and all of us, you know, can have it directed at us, this shows you an example, physical colour.

So that’s where you see above each of those colour groups. You’ll see the individual identities crossed out. Those are not being enforced anymore. Right. And you’re just referring to them by what colour they are. And then it kind of shows the reader, it walks the reader through the application process, the effect it has on the general population, the way they react. And then it shows the reader, this is how you can actually pivot this, make it your own and redirect it or wield it yourself. You know, this is how you can strengthen arguments, or you can assign blame to a colour group as opposed to an individual.

And most importantly, this is the way that 100% of the incoming populations, this is the standard way they’ve been trained to speak, think, and write about our population, but our population has not been given that same training to use that same language structure back.

Therefore, they’re not experiencing the same social climate or all of the negative social effects that they have created for ours. And this is really just pointing that out simply by the way you phrase things and structure it shows you the abilities you have to pivot populations and people without them fully detecting it. So.

Natty: Okay, unless Mark or Sally’s got anything to add to that, I want to move on to, very briefly, just touch on this because we. I think most people listening would have heard this before, and it’s one of the most prevalent kind of anti-White terms.

But there’s a there’s a very short chapter on White privilege. And you say something here that is like a perennial truth. You say there’s nothing White about the general concept of inherent rights that all populations have to their own societies and institutions. It’s a universal understanding. The unrelated populations around the world do not possess the same inherent rights or sense of ownership to the societies or institutions of other populations.

So maybe you could just touch on the building blocks that you’ve already laid out in the previous few chapters, how that comes into play with White privilege.

Student X: Yeah, definitely. So I encountered that argument firsthand, personally, and it took me a while to kind of detangle that riddle, so to speak.

And basically, first of all, there’s a number of things that intersect with this. Right? Right. In that chapter I explained. I start off by explaining a privilege checklist can be constructed and pointed at any group. Right. You just have to change the criteria that’s being put on that list, and you could redirect which group’s going to be targeted by it. So what is this exercise, truly? I think it’s one of those public humiliation rituals that are used in past communent movements or the struggle sessions or the public sessions. I think that truly is what this is. White privilege is just one of the flavours that comes in. Right. You can use different subjects, but this is what they get the group to surround you and do.

Secondly, it appears that all they’re doing is changing the name of White rights to a privilege for these incoming foreigners to be instructed to challenge. Right? Which, you know, for those who support globalism and borderless world and whatever this is, what they want those populations to do is they want to take away our sense of ownership to our own societies, our sense of protecting them. And they want to say:

“Oh, what you have is now the property of the globe. And you don’t have any special rights or you’re not more entitled to be here than foreigners are. You just have this privilege that we’re here to challenge.”

Right. And going through that chapter, I kind of talked about, okay, well, let’s say you know why don’t I fly one of you on a plane to Nigeria? I think I put an illustration in there that I don’t know if you saw that one, Nettie, but it just shows you this is how you can wield it. This is how you can turn it back on them.

Natty: There’s a brown guy standing here. He says:

“Why are you moving to Nigeria?”

And the little White kids come in, he says:

“To challenge black privilege!”

Student X: Yeah, simple as that.

So one of the questions, knowing that now, this was one of the subjects that came up when I was in one of my meetings with. There was more than one Dean at this meeting, and I had, I think, people from Academic Affairs there and someone from the curriculum committee. So somebody up there was feeling really important and saying, I have a PhD, and whatever. So I thought, let me ask them this. How are you, like, can you explain the difference between White rights and White privilege? Can you explain how you personally are differentiating between those two concepts when you recite the scripting and they couldn’t? And I phrased the question that way to basically stab it right then and there on the thing that all you’re doing is changing the name of our rights to a privilege. You’re telling invading populations to feel entitled to challenge White rights. And that’s literally all you did.

Natty: Now, when I heard this argument, this is one of the things I wasn’t so sure about, because I imagine that using, using that rhetorical language of saying, how are you differentiating between White privilege and White rights, that the people who are ideologically ingrained with this kind of anti-White narrative wouldn’t have a problem with saying:

“Well, White rights is something that we should oppose as well, because it’s White supremacy.”

And I know that’s a little bit further on in the book, but that seems to me. And now I, it’s all very well me saying this. You use this, you use this against. You use this in a proper conversation against someone who is using the term White privilege. But it seems to me like people who are ingrained and ideologically in tune with anti-White narratives wouldn’t have a problem in saying, I don’t care if it’s White privilege or White rights, we should be opposed to it. Does that make sense?

Student X: Yeah. And there’s like I said, I tested a lot of this literature out online in real life with just random, like, tweets at radicals and stuff like that. And I tested the responses I got back, and what I found was, they do they do engage in semantics, right?

So if I were to take a direct approach and try to argue, no, these things are rights and they’re not privileged, that argue would go on forever. Right? But if I say okay. If I know that they’re trying to flip flop, let me do it this way.

Let me ask them, can you explain the difference between these two concepts? Show me how you’re differentiating between these two. Since you’re the one talking about it, let me put it on them and take away their ability to flip flop when I. When I structure that way. Sure.

Natty: Yep.

Student X: And that even worked up. There was nobody in that meeting with the Deans, the PhDs, the act, the so-called academics and whatever. And I literally took down a room of eight people on my own, not even somebody with a degree. I just. I can cut through the, you know what? You know. So I take a different approach. When I notice manipulation tactics being used in lieu of honesty or intellect, I say:

“Okay, how can I disable this manipulation tactic?”

And I try to take that. So.

Aunt Sally: Can I ask something? And it’s not actually about the book. It’s a phrase that you see it a lot in Right-wing circles, I think, and I don’t like it because it doesn’t. The Kalergi Plan, you know, where they’re supposed. There’s this plan to get everyone to breed with and mix up the races and whatever. Yeah. As if it’s some sort of benevolent thing they want people to do so that we’re all one colour and one race, which is that implies that they really want us all to be all get on, which is nonsense! But I just wonder what you thought. How.

I think it’s nonsense, but it’s for me trying to explain to people, don’t go on about the Kalergi Plan, because it’s really the opposite. They’re bringing that it’s something that they use. People can use it as, oh, this is what they do. And they want us all to breathe. No, they don’t! They don’t. They want us all to conflict. That’s the thing. I just wondered what you thought of it.

Student X: So I do believe that agenda to be real and in motion. I personally don’t use that terminology. I took a different approach, and I kind of built that into the chapter on denial of identity, because it will function. Because to beat that agenda, to survive that agenda, we need the ability to reclaim our identity and reinforce its existence. Right? That’s how we do it.

So I don’t really need to go into, like, historical citations or discussions of older plans like that and walk people through a history lesson, a, because I’m going to lose a portion of them along the way, but be, there’s already verbiage surrounding that where they have names to call you and stuff, if you even try to educate people on it.

So I just took a different approach. I said:

“Hey, when you encounter material that uses denial of identity in it, as explained in this book, I showed people a number of ways that you can challenge that.”

We want stuff that reinforces our identity as the Irish. We don’t want you training everyone to call themselves the Irish and referring to us by our colour. Because what happens over time is if there’s no identifier for your population and you don’t exist on paper, you don’t exist in the census. The definition and the dictionary has been changed and legal precedent has been set. If there is no word for your kind and you get flooded, you know, 20 to one with global traffic, you will be dissolved off and disappear into that global traffic because there’s no name to call you, there’s nothing to keep you together, you know, that’s just how I understand it.

Aunt Sally: No, that’s brilliant! Yeah.

Natty: Just on that term, you say global traffic. Probably a more common term that we would use, or we, I don’t know, in the circles I move in would just be mass immigration. And I think, and I don’t know, maybe you’re going to say I’m wrong here, but I think mass immigration is a more. It has like a more negative connotation, and it sounds deliberate.

Whereas global traffic could mean just a natural occurrence, which is one of the things that the people responsible for this are. Try and argue that it’s just a natural movement of people. Why did you use the term global traffic?

Student X: Agreed. Like I said, as I tested a lot of this verbiage in terms, one thing I encountered was there were already people who had a pre-planned ability to counter argue it or to defame it.

So what I wanted to do was be able to convey things using verbiage or scripting or terms that does not have handles on it, allowing the enemy to grab onto, to really work with. You know what I mean?

So when I just say global traffic, I’m just talking about this tidal wave of people from all over the world. I have excluded, you know, any reference to ethnicity, colour, nationality, or whatever, because I. And I can still convey the concept and educate people, this is what’s going to happen. But I can word it in a way where the opponents don’t really have much to grab onto. And using the term global traffic doesn’t express negative connotation. It just. It’s a it’s expresses an overwhelming volume that’s just going to get dumped in a small space and kind of wash out the existing population there.

Natty: Sure, yeah, I understand that. I’ll pass it back. Mark or Sal, if you’ve got questions.

Aunt Sally: There’s another term that he says, don’t say diversity, use the term variety. I’m not sure about that myself, because variety. Variety is kind of its a nice word to me, it’s a positive word.

And now here, diversity is amongst the general population, the English people, we think of it as a bad word now. Like it’s dividing.

I think that’s the latin root for it, isn’t it? It’s a divisive word, but things like we’ll say where they put barriers up to stop the bombs and whatever going off. In London, we call them diversity barriers. You know, at Christmas, they put up these bombs. We call them diversity barriers. So now, diversity, the word is people associate it negatively here. It’s progressed to that.

So I’m not sure about it might be different in America.

Mark Collett: I’d agree with you on that, Sally, because we also have something here, diversity targets, and they are very unpopular amongst normal people.

So if you say to people, oh my company’s got a diversity target now. That’s something that gets people rolling their eyes.

Whereas there are.

Whereas variety. The thing with the difference between diversity and variety in England is diversity is something that now has a connotation of being forced upon you to cause an outcome.

So it’s not opportunity, it’s not, what am I looking for here? It’s not about bringing about equality of opportunity, it’s about bringing about an outcome. It’s not that everyone has the same starting block and everyone gets to come to the job interview, because a lot of people in Britain agree with that if you say to people in the UK, do you believe in equality of opportunity? They will say:

“What do you mean? Everyone should be able to attempt to get the job.”

People will say:

“Absolutely, we do agree with that. We believe that anyone should be able to walk into that company and sign up in the sense that they can attend the job interview.”

But they will then say:

“Well, actually, though, we believe that the person who gets the job should be the best person for the job and there shouldn’t be a forced diverse outcome.”

Whereas variety is something like, well, if you go to. If you go to an all you can eat buffer, you’d say:

“Oh, there was a lot of variety.”

And that’s like a good thing.

So I do think there might be some linguistic differences in the UK between the UK and potentially, obviously, America. And that might sound obvious to people, but I do think that’s an important thing to raise because diversity is a dirty word here. And I’ll just throw that back to you as soon. X. Is diversity seen as a positive thing still in America? Because, as I said here, it’s much more maligned to the point where if you see a headline in a newspaper that uses the word diversity, obviously anyone, chime in if you think I’m wrong with this. Usually if you see a headline in a newspaper that uses the term diversity or the word diversity, it’s one of those things where people will immediately be like:

“Oh, God, diversity!”

Student X: Same here. What the context that was put in. I think she’s referring to the chapter that touches on some of the top used terms, the higher mileage terms that we see in the media and whatnot. And there’s a couple of things that intersect here and come into play. One, one of the forms of manipulation that we are targeted with is the radicals will make up secondary or altered alternative definitions to words and when. And the radicals use that definition in their normal conversation and stuff without disclosing that they’re doing it.

So a lot of times it leaves someone on the other side kind of scratching their head and saying, is that really what that means? Or whatever, or it goes to debate and so on.

Right now in this book, what was explained to the students is the success of these radicals relies on the whether or not they’re successful at forcing you to participate, to validate and to normalise and to accept this type of scripting and stuff like that. And the way that you cause that to malfunction on the ground level is to opt out, to disrupt, right? So around that term diversity, it says, you know, we’re often told scripting to recite or say that we value diversity.

And I encourage the students to disrupt and say, we’re not going to say that. Instead, I could say I value variety, but I can’t say I value diversity.

And here’s the logic behind that. Diversity is just divestment by another name. There is no difference in the way a divestment policy impacts your country, then a diversity policy impacts your country.

So if I go to, let’s say, Korea, which they’re now being targeted, and I enter a diversity policy, I am divesting and the Koreans themselves and I am transferring all that stuff over to non-Koreans, right, to increase diversity.

Now, we’ve all seen recently in the news that certain boycott or divestment policies have been met with swift action, Executive Orders, media, you know, co-operation and all that. Right. They won’t allow a divestment policy.

So how do you skate through a divestment policy in a majority White country? You change the name of it to a diversity policy, and you kind of push it through the legal system that way, if that makes sense.

Mark Collett: Okay, well, we’ll move on, then. And we’ve got a Superchat here. It’s from Glen19. He says:

“Natty, I hear you’re in the military. Have you checked out the new Antelope Hill book, the 60 year Caucasian War? I think Russia shouldn’t have conquered the East Caucus because it. Because it cost more in political stability than it was worth. Russians hate Caucasians more than any other minority.”

Natty: Well, I was in the military. I’m not anymore, and I haven’t heard of the book.

However, I’m just very, very lightly aware of what he’s talking about.

And I think the if I’m not mistaken, the general idea is that the Russian country, by prosecuting a war in the Caucasus, allowed a certain ethnic group to foment the revolution that happened at the end of the or the beginning of the 19 hundreds, basically, and bled the Russian government dry.

Now, I might be wrong about that’s my very surface level understanding of what he’s talking about. But this book by Antelope Hill seems to go into that in some depth, so I won’t try and talk on it because I don’t really know much, but that’s my basic understanding of what he’s talking about there.

Mark Collett: Okay, well, it wasn’t based around the book anyway. So look, the book we’re reviewing, and we’ve got another dot. We’ve got a very generous donation from Wally Fender, who gave $50 and said:

“Cheers!”

Well, thank you so much, my friend. I’m pleased you’ve enjoyed the stream. That’s the donations for tonight.

So that was short. And to the.1 thing I was going to say is, does anyone have any last questions? Because we’ve got a maximum of 20 minutes left. We don’t have to drag it out. There’s no more questions or nothing else to say. I’ve really enjoyed tonight. I kind of regret doing this now as a book club because we get less viewers or fewer viewers, should I say, when we do a book club than we do if we just do sort of an interview? Because obviously people thought, well, I haven’t read the book. Why would I want to tune in etc. Etc. The football, bloody football was on tonight as well, and all that. And I kind of feel that Student X has given us something far more than a book review, which I don’t often say after these things. But for me, the most interesting part tonight was actually going through what it’s like being in an American school, the racial divides, how bad things really are. And I found that absolutely fascinating!

And to be honest, I could have probably sat for an hour or so more just talking about or asking questions about racial dynamics in a multiracial American school. You know, obviously, California is one of the most mixed race states, whereas there are probably other states out there which are largely White and retain almost a feel in their schools of sort of 1950s America or something like that.

But obviously in California, you’re not going to get that. And I found that really, really interesting.

So I want to thank Student X for that.

But I also want to throw out to you guys, is there anything else that you want to bring up before we go into summations and wrap things up.

Natty: I’ve got one question, and this might be controversial. I don’t know. It’s kind of related to modern, where we find ourselves at the moment, where there’s this war going on in the Middle East between Palestine and Israel, and it’s basically an ethnic cleansing that’s been carried out on behalf of Israel, and it’s generated a schism, as if there aren’t enough schisms on the dissident Right, the Right-wing, whatever you want to call it, where people are saying we shouldn’t be supporting one side or the other. If you’re going to be pro-White, just be pro-White.

Now, I just want to ask you, student time, do you think pro-White is the most valuable route to go down, or do you think there’s some value in recognizing that sometimes the enemy of your enemy is also your friend?

Student X: Well, I’ve actually been kind of passionate about this and recently, first of all, I don’t. I agree with you. It’s a cleansing.

Regardless of the semantics of what you want to call it’s a cleansing, number one.

Number two, anytime young children are getting taken out, there is no arguing about that it’s wrong.

Regardless of which way it occurs, young kids should not be involved in that. But third, I think we need to use this as leverage both in America and in the UK, because what I’ve seen is deliberate acts of disrespect. I’ve seen the government show in so many ways that they won’t defend the White population. Well, then we need to say, don’t ask us to defend you. If you’re not willing to explicitly outlaw anti-White ism, then best of luck, you go fight your own wars.

But you can’t ask us to defend you if you don’t defend us. Right?

So that’s a stopping point. I personally don’t want us to get into that. And it feels like it’s unfortunate, but the level of corruption, it actually takes this level of an ultimatum during this time to force them to cooperate and do what they should have been doing this entire time. That’s just my opinion. And if racial equity wants to come into it, then we can say, hey, we fought the first two.

The other groups have to fight the next two World Wars. You have to make an equitable contribution. You don’t just get free equitable asset distributions. You know what I mean?

So there’s a number of ways I tackle this, but a, we should not be involved in its not ours. And be, we need to use this as leverage against the government to force them to outlaw anti-White ism, restore self representation in all of our institutions at every level, and give us oversight and legal enforcement abilities, and restore our media reporting because we need the ability to report on attacks. You know, that block has to be removed and reversed.

So that’s my stance is a little tougher, so.

Natty: Okay. Yeah, thank you for that. I’ll hand over in case or Mark has got.

Aunt Sally: I’ve got a question I just want to ask. I really love the book. Are you writing anymore?

Student X: Oh, well, thank you. This was the first time I ever attempted to write a book. And I did it because, like I said, I’ve got something that needs to be said. And then I was motivated when I saw another kid and harmed by this stuff.

So this was the one that was the most important to me. I do have enough material to probably do three or four more. And this will be original works, new terms, new concepts, new strategies that no one’s ever seen! I already have a lot of it written out and sketched out, but I didn’t know how much went into writing a book, Sally. And I honestly don’t know if I could put myself through that again. But if the time arises and if I think I can coordinate it, the answer is yes. I already know the title. I already know what the chapters are going to be called. I already know what’s going to be in a lot of its just a matter of framing it correctly, testing some of the verbiage in terms, getting my artists back and getting this out there. You know, I would say, may I touch on a few other things, guys, that I wanted to cover while I had you? But we did.

Mark Collett: Sure, sure.

Student X: Go for it. This has to be done at the student level because there’s so much gate-keeping and so many policy changes that parents and outsiders are locked out.

So it’s only somebody who’s within the belly of the beast that can initiate this process. Right?

So this is why I’m speaking directly to the students. I’m bypassing all faculty, all politicians. Like, if they’re not even there, I’m saying:

“Hey, I’m speaking directly to you. Wherever you are in the world. This is something for you.”

And I’m going to show you this. You need to know this. Okay? So I want them to look for options to dissent, right? Because dissent and disrupt. Because these radicals, if they can’t normalise things through repetition or forced participation, then they can’t. They can’t really get certain stuff off of the ground, and it causes their agenda to fail. So dissenting is something students can do at the student level and cause it to malfunction without getting in trouble. Right?

So if you get. You know, if they want to force you to participate in a public shaming session, whether they call that cultural appropriation or White privilege or whatever other flavour they’re doing, the student can simply say, we’re not going to participate in a public shaming session. I don’t see anywhere in the guidelines or laws that say schools have the authority to force us to participate in these type of sessions.

So we’re opting out. We want something different. That’s all you got to say. It goes directly to the office of the administration. They don’t have recourse. They have to let you go. Right? So that doesn’t give the teacher the satisfaction. We already covered denial of identity. When you encounter material that uses this property, you can say, hey, this has denial of identity present in it. We want something different. This is not adequate for us. And you can dismiss a good chunk of their entire curriculum. You can disqualify a large portion of it just using this one topic.

But it’s really about chipping away. And at schools that have taught it’s impossible to be racist to White people, this one will give you a foothold on campus because they say all students and all people need to know to identify racial discrimination. How to confront it and how to defend themselves when they’re targeted. Right. So if White kids are at a school that says:

“Hey, we use the definition that it’s impossible to be racist to White people.”

Fine. White students won’t learn how to defend themselves or identify racial discrimination by attending your conference on racism. White students will now need their own dedicated conference and training on how to identify race based exclusion, how to challenge it, how to seek justice, and so on.

And this gives a really good example of dissenting right there on the spot, establishing a space that’s only for us, and it gives a valid reason, you know, so dissent, definitely very important. Political. Once these concepts and terms float out to the general population, which I don’t see how they’ll be stopped. They can’t call them derogatory or anything, but once this stuff floats out and more and more people become aware of it, you can now get active in the political arena. You can bring up old tweets or old news clippings of politicians who have used these tactics on public stages and call for them to be removed. Name the tactic, call for them to be removed and replaced with politicians who will pledge to fight against anti-White discrimination and represent us using White positive politics. You can kind of marry those two things together and put them out there in a publicly visible way, in a way that’s palatable to the general population. You don’t have to use negative verbiage words. You don’t have to mention the other groups. It’s really more about the skill and how you word it.

And like I said, in each of these chapters, at the end, there’s a dedicated section for students of what they can do pertaining to that one subject.

And there’s also a dedicated system section for politics and how you can start weaving this into your political action and the way you can phrase things and stuff like that. Like I said, view this more like a training manual the enemy’s playbook. I’m going to open this up. I’m going to show you what their next or what their common moves are. I should say show you how you can kind of get through those, still convey your message, what to ask for, and really start making institutional changes and start rolling a lot of this back.

So that’s what I wanted to say.

Natty: And just to cap that off, the last thing I’ve got written in my notes is how the situation we’re in and the reason that these narratives have been allowed to spread is because we’re not in power as a group.

However, this book gives you some degree of personal empowerment to fight back against it.

And I think that touches on what, basically everything you’ve just said, student time.

For that reason, it’s a really useful, non-worthwhile piece of literature.

Aunt Sally: Can I add to that that nati, that I think it is really important for everyone to read it’s not just for students, because as a parent or my children are all out of the school system now, but as a parent, quite often if your 15 year old is in trouble at school, you’re the one that’s got go and back them up. And if you’ve read this book and you’re behind your children, then that gives you the tools as a parent to go in and help your children child or argue with the teachers of just backing up your own children.

So I think it is an important book for everybody, even this old boomer here, because I can use it in my life and help my grandchildren now, very subtly or whatever.

But, yeah, I think it’s important that parents read it, too, because I know whenever my children were trouble at school and all my children were good children, but if there was a conflict, it would be me to back them up and I would. And it would help for that.

So, yeah, carry on.

Student X: I appreciate that, both of you. It means a lot to me. One other thing I wanted to add is we have to change the way we’re approaching this because we know that on the inside they’re corrupted and they’ve also been instructed not to acknowledge it verbally or to disclose that they’re operating that way. Right.

So we need to change our Angles and think about as far as existing politicians, what are direct questions you can ask them that you can’t get in trouble for? So one is will you work to outlaw anti-White discrimination? Ask that question in a public microphone and put them on the spot. Let’s see what they answer. Think about the optics. For a politician who resists the request, they have no win. When you ask it that way, you haven’t offended anyone and you can bring up a piece of paper or literature from a nearby school that says you can’t be racist to White people or whatever. So to show that it is valid. And we need to know, you know, we have to know how things are going to work here if we’re going to live here. So just that one other thing.

And then two, like I said, I greatly appreciate the feedback this was done more to get this off my chest and help as many people as I can, really, around the world, what’s been fashioned here, and once they’ve polished their rhetoric, so to speak, and gotten the recipe right, that finished product is now getting sent to the UK as a finished product is going to Australia. It’s going all over and it’s just blindsiding people that aren’t ready for it. So I’m hoping this is racing along behind it to help them. And if all of you could, once you get it, once you get time, if you could leave a review on the Amazon or like, a book review online or something to let you know, other people know, it would help make it more visible to all of them, and I would appreciate it.

Mark Collett: So not a problem.

Well, look, let’s do our final thoughts. We’ll go around the group, Natty, Aunt Sally, then me, and then Student X can have the final word and we’ll shut things down.

Natty: It’s very clear that Student X is a very intelligent and well thought out individual. I think there are lots of people on whatever you want to call this dissident Right, the far-Right, who are criminally underrated and have been shut down by a system that doesn’t want their ideas and thoughts out there. And Student X is obviously belongs to these people. This has been a more foreign, in depth and educational stream than I thought it was going to be. I should have known, reading the book, really. But everything you’ve said speaks to your level of intelligence and knowledge on this subject and how far you fought into it.

So it’s been an absolute pleasure and I think the book is an easy recommend for anyone, really. But thank you for being on here and I appreciate it. And go and buy the book, guys.

Aunt Sally: Yeah, I’ll just try. Mean, I wrote that down, too, Natty, about his IQ, because I’m suspicious that he’s got levels of Keith Wood’s IQ, but he’s more relatable for me anyway. Definitely! I love the book. It’s my favourite.

Now, how many have we done? And I love them. I love quite a lot of them, but this is one that I find very, very important that everybody read it. He focuses on solutions and counter tactics as well as explaining how the current agenda works, works, and he does it all in a relatable way. I learnt a lot, also reflected on how it’s been done to my generation and the other generations of my children. I’ve learnt so much from it. I can’t recommend it enough and yeah, definitely. I’ll go and write a review. I might buy a couple more to give away. It’s that good a book. It’s really impressive. Please write some more.

Another one. I’m going to put Mark on the spot now. Please invite this guy on to PWR. He’s just too good to let him go.

I don’t know if you have a

Mark Collett: I think that’s what I was getting at earlier, Sally, when I said that it was wasted to simply have him on the book review because he’s been so good!

Aunt Sally: Sorry, I pre-empted you there.

Student X: All right.

Aunt Sally: Anyway, but just saying, everybody buy this book, please. It’s a diamond of a book. It’s really. It’s worth its weight in gold. I think someone said it’s only $6 on Amazon. It’s really worth buying.

So thank you, Student X, for coming on the show. We never know when we get an offer because some of them are really, especially when it’s the first book, some of them are frightened we’re going to. We’re going to be awful or. And some of them just aren’t very talkative. And it’s just so nice to have someone who knows his stuff and is able to just speak about with so much enthusiasm and written such a brilliant book.

So it’s been great. It’s my favourite one, I think so, even though I’ve not said much, as usual.

Anyway, I’ll go. But thank you. Thank you so much!

Mark Collett: Thank you very much, Anthony. I’m going to give my final say. Maybe I was wrong about this because I said it was sort of a book for specifically one group of people, but an Sully got a lot out of it and it is extremely well written. It’s got some great debating skills in there. It’s one of those books that if you pick it up, it will teach you maybe nothing new in terms of some big reveal on an ideological level, but it will teach you an awful lot when it comes to how to approach these topics in public. And I like these books because they are practical. And practical things are useful. You can spend hundreds and some people spend thousands of hours listening to podcasts, listening to productions which deal with issues on an ideological level. But very rarely do they teach you how to frame an argument so that normal people understand it and so that those who enforce rules against us are stopped in their tracks. And this book does that.

So if you want to think of it as a book, that’s great! But you could also think of it as a shield. If you will as a defensive tool that you can use to essentially turn back the fire that is breathed at you by the anti-White dragon.

So if you are in an institution and it might not be a school, or a university, could be a workplace, you could be advocating, as Sally rightfully said, not even think of this on behalf of your children or your grandchildren. This book is, as I said, it’s not that ideological book that explains it all the people behind it, but it is the book that gives you the arguments and the common sense and easy to understand ways to frame a rebuttal to the things used against White people on a daily basis in all manner of institutions. And because of that, this is a very, very useful book and I can’t recommend it enough. I will say it is cheap on Amazon. Go and grab a copy. The link is in the description below and it’s been a joy to do this stream. Tonight we’ve got a couple more Superchats. Anti Mattoy gave $25. Thank you for your generosity. He says equal training sounds like an excellent guide to navigating and combating the language games that are relentlessly played on us. Student X mentioned Rhodesia earlier. Can he say something more about what he learnt about how manipulative tactics were used in Rhodesia? Would you like to say something about that, Student X?

Student X: Yeah.

First of all, thank you all so much for even having me. This has been great and I love having these conversations and helping anyone of our population in any way that I can. Like I said, I do this because it comes from the heart.

As far as Rhodesia, you know, from what I’ve investigated, it was the anti-White scripting or the scapegoating of the White population which riled up the other populations to a point where they outnumbered and collapsed that White population and even massacred a big portion of them.

And then the instruction was given to the government, do not respond to attacks on White people.

Therefore the Whites were left to defend for themselves and they were outnumbered. And that’s the same playbook that is already at work in South Africa. It’s now here in America, it’s now in Australia, it’s in Canada. And I now see the exact same thing, copy and paste strategy being introduced in the UK and in Ireland. So I even have an interview saved to my phone, a video of a young black lady who was in Rhodesia at the time and she spoke about this firsthand. She goes, yeah, this was, this was intentional to word remarks using these tactics because they want to incite violence and retaliation against the White population. Knowing it’ll be overwhelmed, and the government can just stand down, and then the destruction is complete. You know, they walk off with whatever they want, you know, cash be it, or whatever.

So also, I did intercept that hate law that was going in Ireland around December and January. I emailed a number of Senators. I emailed the school curriculum committee in Ireland directly because I’m outside of their legal jurisdiction and I can do what Irish people cannot.

And I also found that people from Zimbabwe have been installed in Ireland. There’s a lady by the name of Donna Vuma. There’s another guy I came across who was supporting the EFF, the land back movement, and his Twitter listed him as being in Dublin.

So the people that are already trained in this scripting, they’ve already used it to destroy a White population on another part of the planet, have been relocated to Ireland, and the laws are being changed in Ireland, or they’re attempting to where the government only protects those populations and the White population or the Irish population. So it’s there. It’s going to happen rapidly. But anything you want to look up on Rhodesia and stuff, I personally have looked up on YouTube. I’ve talked with people in South Africa, maybe like AfriForum or Africon or networks or something like that could tell you because they’re a lot closer there. You know, they probably saw stuff firsthand. But there. This goes back to what you guys said earlier about, can I just move to a White area? Can I run from this? I argue no. This is all planned. It’s all centralised. It’s, you know, multiple supposedly independent countries are all following one playbook, which tells us it’s coming from a centralised location. People who’ve already done it are being relocated through immigration, diversity, Visa programs, whatever. And it’s gonna hit guys, and I’m giving it five to ten years max, so.

Mark Collett: Okay. And we’ve got another Superchat. RoryHerbert gave $5. Thank you so much, my friend. He said:

“Dear Mark, I just learnt that General Sir Rowley Walker is just been appointed chief of the general staff of the British army. Not only did he go to my old school, but he’s also a member of my old regiment. If you or Natty were in command of the British army, what would you do to ensure its future? Natty, what would you do to ensure the future of the British army?”

Natty: At the risk of starting a long discussion that’s not on topic and also FED posting, I think I’ll skip this.

I mean, there are some pretty obvious and easy steps you could take but.

Mark Collett: I’ve got the best step. Natty.

Natty: Yeah, go ahead.

Mark Collett: You won’t have even thought of this. What we need to do is pull. Pull all the military R & D, that’s research and development money, and pump it into making a real life gundam. Once we’ve got a fleet of real life gundams, nothing would stand in the way. The UK military forces, it would absolutely shake the world.

Can you imagine it? It’d be, you know, where do we go first? You know, not even the not even America and the White House would be able to withstand the firepower of one single gundam. But nobody’s thought of this yet.

Natty: I think there’s a good reason for that, buddy. You can keep dreaming.

Mark Collett: No, no. If I was. Look, it’s very simple, really, joking aside, because this is the guy Superchatted and we appreciate that. But joking aside, I would definitely. I would definitely do a couple of things that would reform the army and it’d be very, very simple. And without sort of going off, off topic for 30 minutes, you just really need to get back to what makes a proper, professional army a good thing, which is proper training, proper standards and proper discipline. The fact the British military isn’t what it was is largely due to it losing the things that ensured a good intake, vetted that intake.

And if you remember, I remember this from when I was a kid. I’m sure Robbie remembers this. I’m sure you do, Natty. But the old British army slogan was be the best. That was it, wasn’t it?

Natty: Yeah, we used to have a joke when we were in the army.

When I was in the army, it wasn’t be the best, it was be depressed.

Mark Collett: Oh, God. Well, be the best was always on the army army advert. And I used to like that slope. And I like the idea that you go through this rigorous selection and the British army would choose the best and then turn them into the best of the best. And we were a professional military nation that had an army that selected for the elite. And the whole idea of the British army post Second World War, the ethos of the British army was, we’re not the biggest, but we punched a so far above our weight. And it was almost seen as if the Royal Marines, and I know the Marines, some people view them as an elite regiment, but they’re not an elite regiment in the same way as sort of the SAS or Special Forces. But the Royal Marines at one point were seen almost on the same level as other nations Special Forces units. And that said a lot about the British army, that we had sort of a regular regiment that was trained to that level, a mass regiment that was trained to that level that the rest of the world feared. And I don’t think we’ve got that anymore.

And I think if we started just doing things as we used to, selecting for the best, stripping out the diversity, stripping out the we need women here, we need women there. Oh, look, we’ve got a midget in that unit, but we can’t get rid of him because we had to abolish the height restrictions, you know, same with the police. I was walking through the city centre the other day near where I lived, and there was a police officer, and she must have been under five foot tall and as wide as she was tall.

Now, how this butterbean was going to stop anybody committing a crime, I mean, if she’d have tried to chase you’d have probably ended up being dumb for some kind of involuntary manslaughter, because in giving chase, she would have had a heart attack and they’d have blamed you for causing her to give chase. These people aren’t fit for duty. And I genuinely think it’s simple stuff like that that could, you know, people seem to think that because we face big problems, the solutions must be, you know, big and complex, and I simply don’t think they are. And I definitely know somebody’s going to clip that Gundam thing out and make it as if I make it as if that was a serious problem, but it wasn’t. But I’ve kind of always wanted to say that imagine being like, mark, you’re in charge of all the money. What are you going to do with it? And I just say to Natty, let’s get the Gundam programme underway.

Natty: I will just. I will just add, I mean, the army. The army is just an institution in this country. Yes, it stands alone, but the problem is where it intersects with politics and who pulls the levers of power in this country.

So whether it was the army, whether it’s schools, which is what we’ve been talking about, hospitals, whatever else, where it intersects with this anti-White power system is where you have a problem. The army, the British army itself is probably still made up, mostly professionals, people who are capable of problem solving and getting things done. But unfortunately, like the rest of us, we’re ruled over by people who absolutely hate the native population, so it suffers like everything else.

Mark Collett: Agreed.

Well, look, that’s the end of the show. Thank you to everyone who Superchatted tonight and we will throw this. Oh, open borders for Israel gave five odds. Can you review the horror cause narrative or The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit by Michael Jones? I’d love to do that. Yeah. I’ll email him. Okay. That’s a good suggestion. I will email him tomorrow morning.

So that brings us to the end of the show. Everyone’s highly recommended this book. It’s been a really entertaining stream. I’m sorry about the slightly depressed numbers because the football was on, but it is what it is. Student X, have you got any short final words? Because we’re ten minutes over.

Student X: No, just again, thank you all for having me on. It’s been wonderful talking with you. Anyone in our population can reach out to me. If there’s anything I can do to help or if you want to know further have further discussions or whatever, I’m here. I’m on standby, so.

Mark Collett: Well, thank you so much! Thank you for being on.

I will be back next week for Patriotic Weekly Review on Wednesday, and I’ll have my German friend Sasha Ross Muller on with me. People have been asking for a European to discuss what’s going on in Europe. We’ve got one, obviously, the general election next week as well. Stay updated with my thoughts on that and all the latest news on my Telegram and gap.

Thank you to everyone who’s been here. Thank you to Natty. Thanks, Ansali. Thanks to Student X. Massive. Thank you to everyone who donated so generously. But the biggest thank you, as always, goes to this incredible community. I love you all.

Thank you for being with us and we will see you again next month. It will be for another wonderful book review and I’ll be back on Wednesday. Until then, stay strong. Keep fighting. Thank you so much! Love you all.

END

top

============================================

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of 7/2/2024 = 89)

Mark Collett
1 day ago
Pinned by @MarkCollett
If you would like to contribute to the stream, please use Entropy:
https://entropystream.live/app/markcollett

2
0

@Aunt-Sally
1 day ago
It was one of the best streams we’ve done. I highly recommend you listen to it.

12
0
Hide replies

@Mcavoy
1 day ago
Thanks Sally, it was a great show!

3
0
Based and Rempilled
21 hours ago
Thank you Sally.

@LottaSense
1 day ago
great guest

7
0
MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
Weimar Britain

5
0

@Glen19
1 day ago
Those who say that they’re anti-Imperialism aren’t really. They ignore all Non-European imperialism. It’s just a way to attack Europeans not imperialism

6
0

@What3
1 day ago
FINNALLY. Someone in the white dissident sphere who’s smart and gets it! Just got the book.

5
0
Vettekid1488
1 day ago
damnit …I’m getting notifications after the streams are finished

5
0
Hide replies

@Apollo
1 day ago
Same

2
0
Based and Rempilled
21 hours ago
Phenomenal book to have on hand for any parent. It’s entirely moral and I’ve heard of people using it at school board meetings. If you attend I highly recommend it. It’s cheap and effective to help stop antiwhite indoctrination at schools.

4
0
Natty
1 day ago
Check out White Student T. on X. Resource offering a combination of Podcast, tutorials & literature to counter #AntiWhite’s. #White #Student #Learn #College #University #America #Europe #School
https://x.com/WhiteStudentT

4
0

@LottaSense
1 day ago
funny how climate crap goes on and on about nons being displaced while they purposely displace White people from their own homelands

4
0
Hide replies
Vettekid1488
1 day ago
so much projection smh 😒

1
0

@WhiteLightKnight
7 hours ago
Sorry but couldn’t make this live. Not because of sportsball but family commitments. Now listening on replay. Absolutely incredible stream. As usual

@Natty
is making excellent points. Especially why has the word Caucasian disappeared?

1
0

@MississippiCoops
6 hours ago
Just ordered his book. Thanks for introducing me to the author and to all your other guests Mark. Great stream.

2
0
Randy McDowell
6 hours ago
Can’t believe I watched Kalergi FC vs SLOVAKIA over this. Riveting stuff

2
0

@AlbionForever
1 day ago
You used to have to be at least 6ft to be a copper, didn’t you?

1
1
Hide replies
Wizard
22 hours ago
Had to be 6ft 2in to be a Florida State Trooper. Which is highway patrol.

@Rixille
1 day ago
Are there alternative online vendors for this book? I deleted my Amazon account.

2
0

@RoryHerbert
1 day ago
“Rhodesians never die”.

2
0
MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
Jews are not “White”

2
0

@EndJewishPrivilege
1 day ago

@LottaSense
White Genocide by the Juden

2
0

@LottaSense
1 day ago
GREAT STREAM

1
0
MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
Please make this book available at pro-White booksellers.

1
0
Bianca Fights The Zombies
1 day ago
this speaker is so fantastic

1
0
Bianca Fights The Zombies
1 day ago
grassroots, decentralized

1
0
WarpSpeedJudas
1 day ago
The Jews will never just give that up. It must be taken back by force.

1
0

@AprilRainFilly
1 day ago
Would be good to get Student X on a full show – so interesting to hear what’s going on in the US and the parallels with what we are seeing in the UK

1
0
Anti Mattoid
1 day ago
$25.00
Equal Training sounds like an excellent guide to navigating and combatting the language games that are relentlessly played on us. Student X mentioned Rhodesia earlier – can he say something more about what he learned about how manipulative tactics were used in Rhodesia?

1
0

@Glen19
1 day ago

@LottaSense
The climate agenda is a massive scam. The carbon trading system Korea implemented isn’t doing anything to stop climate change

1
0

@Glen19
1 day ago
Japan was doing colonialism in the 1500s in Korea

1
0

@GaelicNord
1 day ago
Saw that yea. She said “EUROPE IS NOT WHITE!” In a loud bantu voice. And all the stupid White shitlibs applauded to her. sickening

1
0

@RoryHerbert
1 day ago
$5.00
Dear Mark, I just learned that General Sir Roly Walker has just been appointed Chief of the General Staff of the British Army. Not only did he go to my old school but he’s also a member of my old regiment. If you or Natty were in command of the British Army what would you do to ensure it’s future?

0
2
MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
^

@RoryHerbert
1 day ago
I still have a friend who is serving in the SBS,

@MarkCollett

@FashyChad
1 day ago
butterbean lol

Bianca Fights The Zombies
1 day ago
get the kindle version for $6

@LottaSense
1 day ago
or maybe that is S&H fees to be sent to where you are?

@LottaSense
1 day ago
omy gosh. gatekeeping it already?

MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
This book is listed at $52 in Australia on Amazon.

@Aunt-Sally
1 day ago
You won’t regret it

@keribou
it really is brilliant

Bianca Fights The Zombies
1 day ago
buy it while you can, can’t trust Amazon

Keribou
1 day ago
have just bought it!

@RoryHerbert
1 day ago
Good evening

@Chief_Moody
Sir.

Chief Moody
1 day ago
Evening troops

MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
Will Amazon allow this to go forward?

Natty
1 day ago

@BIANCA
he really is

@Glen19
1 day ago
Japan has a plan to be net zero carbon by 2050. All it has done is raise electricity prices. I suppose it will make us produce less carbon by forcing us to use less electricity

Hide replies
Vettekid1488
1 day ago
all nations will do this …raise costs for our modern conveniences to ween us off of them 😢

Bianca Fights The Zombies
1 day ago
$6 on Amazon, well worth it

@LottaSense
1 day ago
nothing wrong with strategizing and doing tactics

MagicManintheSky
1 day ago
He wants to do an “end-run” around the Jewish gatekeepers.

@LottaSense
1 day ago
the jews did give that up in america technically. They got a supreme court decision a few years ago that says they are not White

@LottaSense
1 day ago
every time you do something it gets easier- look, you already know the title and chapter names

@LottaSense
1 day ago

@Natty
lol i know its a massive scam! saying “climate crap” was unclear,,, haaa cheers

@Glen19
1 day ago
I think it’s a way to get less developed countries into the global market for more profits.

@Glen19
1 day ago
Its just a redistribution scheme

Natty
1 day ago
of course, and it would be easy to weigh in but ultimately, language and narratives have to be understood as tool and weapons used by certain groups of people in certain ways. it benefits the Chinese government to use that language and narrative

@Glen19
1 day ago

@Natty
In Asia you will hear more complaints about Japanese imperialism than European imperialism. The CCP in particular uses as a foundational myth.

@LottaSense
1 day ago

@EndJewishPrivilege
exactly

Natty
1 day ago

@Glen19
yes, its an example of a cropped narrative

@LottaSense
1 day ago
If you research it, there is nothing benevolent about the Kalergi plan. And it is an actual plan that was put forward by the usual suspect group

@LottaSense
1 day ago
OMMMMG you are so right! I never thought of that before! They are just changing the name of our rights to “privilege”

@LottaSense
1 day ago
but then again, public school employees are teaching the same tactics along with the media

@LottaSense
1 day ago
africans are taught the tactics from day one in africa and then they are shipped into our countries

@Insightful_World
1 day ago
Student X sounds like Mike Enoch

@LaylandSue
1 day ago

@SomeRandomBloke
I second that.

@LottaSense
1 day ago
VERY good point whoever just talked about words as weapons and how White people are conditioned to NOT use words as weapons

@Glen19
1 day ago
$2.00
Natty, I hear you were in the military. Have you checked out the new antelope hill book, The Sixty-Year Caucasian War? I think Russia shouldn’t have conquered the East Caucasus because it cost more in political stability than it was worth. (Russians hate Caucasians more than any other minority)

@EndJewishPrivilege
1 day ago
Perhaps Jonathan Greenblatt and the Knesset should be asked for reparations, considering the jewish role in slavery?

@Glen19
1 day ago
Slavery was the economic model prior to the Industrial Revolution. I would say it held back industrialization. Either way it was going to be made obsolete

@RoryHerbert
1 day ago
:heart:

@Aunt-Sally
xxoo

@LottaSense
1 day ago
ty Natty

@LottaSense
1 day ago
It is very strange when you have children many years apart, to see the differences in society that your children have to navigate.

Natty
1 day ago
Check out White Student T. on X. Resource offering a combination of Podcast, tutorials & literature to counter #AntiWhite’s. #White #Student #Learn #College #University #America #Europe #School
https://x.com/WhiteStudentT

@LottaSense
1 day ago
is Student X/WST on x or gab or does he have a website?

@LottaSense
1 day ago
This guy is amazing

@01123581379
1 day ago
mass deportations must happen or Trump is a traitor

Natty
1 day ago
joe*

Natty
1 day ago
hey jo

Joe Marsh
1 day ago
yo guys

@Aunt-Sally
1 day ago
Hi everyone, won’t be long… just setting up on a borrowed laptop

@Amalek61
1 day ago
All sports ball is GAY!!!

Natty
1 day ago
evening all

@Amalek61
1 day ago
Equal training does not guarantee equal learning

Hide replies

@What3
1 day ago
Not the sharpest tool in the shed i see.

@AprilRainFilly
1 day ago
looking forward to this

Open Borders for Israel
1 day ago
5
can you review the holocaust narrative or the jewish revolutionary spirit by e michael jones and have him on as a guest?

0
0

==========================

See Also

top