Joel Davis: Okay, we are live. It is Anzac Day, eve, 24th of April, 2024 [2025]. And a stream for you this evening, a regular Thursday night stream. But we’re going to talk a bit about history tonight. We’re going to talk a bit about the history of our great nation, because that’s what we should all be thinking about and preparing ourselves to be focusing upon tomorrow morning when all of you, all of you better be getting up early, before the crack of dawn and getting down to a Dawn Service, whether it be in the city, whether it be your local Dawn Service! One day a year to get out of bed early and get down there and remember and venerate our fallen ancestors who paid the ultimate sacrifice to secure this continent for the White men! Let their sacrifice not be in vain. But it starts with venerating the ancestors in the here and now, if we’re ever going to ensure that. But we’re going to get into that.

But first, my esteemed colleague, Blair Cottrell. He’s looking a bit like a rock star from the early 90s. I just hope that he hasn’t gone on heroin or something. He’s looking a little bit heroin chic. I mean, not skinny heroin chic, but the sunglasses on at night, so it’s a good look though, it’s fresh!

Blair Cottrell: I wouldn’t usually do this, but a couple of days ago I noticed my eye was irritated. Didn’t think much of it. Then it got worse and then it got worse. And now it looks like this. See that? [take sunnies off] I saw a doctor and apparently it’s some sort of cellulitis of the skin in the eyelid, which is a relatively serious infection. I don’t know how I got it. I don’t remember being bitten by anything. Maybe I just got unlucky somehow.

So taking antibiotics, unfortunately. I don’t like to take antibiotics, but there’s some circumstances where it’s necessary to take antibiotics. I know that I’ve had deep tissue infections on a couple of occasions. Really, if not for modern medicine, I would probably be dead because an infection would have got me by now. And I was told that an infection like this, if gone untreated, can actually cause permanent blindness. So thank God that modern medicine exists. Not everything about modernity is bad, I guess. But I’ll be wearing the sunglasses for the rest of the stream because it just looks terrible. I’m not really confident about being on camera with an eye like that, so you’ll have to enjoy the Sunnies, guys. I’m not on cocaine! I haven’t spiralled out of control. Still here. I’m still me.

Joel Davis: That was a nice cope story, but, I mean, we all know that Blair’s missus packs a punch. And you know, when you talk back, you better watch out!

So we’re feeling for you, Blair, and just remember that you can get help. There is a domestic violence hotline.

Blair Cottrell: Not for man! There’s no help for men, bro! Everyone knows it. Even the lawyers know it. You go into court for a domestic violence dispute and you’re a man, you have no rights! [chuckling] Everyone knows that. So why lie?

Come on, let’s be honest here!

Joel Davis: Anyways, so I guess let’s get into the show. I’m going to try and do this show in a streamlined fashion this evening because we’ve got to get up early in the morning to get down to the Dawn Service. Which I reiterate, if you don’t get up early tomorrow morning and go down to the Dawn Services – this is for the Australians in the audience – and I think in New Zealand, do Anzac Day in New Zealand the same as us? [It’s the same day] I presume that they do.

Blair Cottrell: Almost certainly! It stands for Australian, New Zealand Army Corps, so almost certainly they would do it.

Joel Davis: Yeah, I presume that they do. I don’t know if they have a different day. I don’t know enough. Maybe if you’re a Kiwi, maybe you could let us know what you do over there.

But if you’re an Aussie, you better be out of bed 5am and you better be down at that Dawn Service! Because think about what they did for us and all you have to do is get out of bed early one day a year. It’s really not that much to ask.

But yeah, I want to talk about history tonight and I want to talk about what the Anzacs actually fought for. Because there’s a lot of misrepresentation that occurs at this time of year.

On Australia Day, the enemy is willing to openly admit that this country was founded by the White man for the White man and condemn it as such, and go on about colonialism and the poor abos and blah, blah, blah, as we’re all familiar with. But on Anzac Day, they take a different approach, tack. Because they know if they were going to on the sacrifices of the ancestors at wartime that that wouldn’t go down with the population. We are not that demoralised. You know, they’re barely, they can’t even really cancel Australia Day effectively. We talked about that on Australia Day, how Australia Day is having a resurgence in popularity precisely because of the attacks being levelled by our political enemies upon that day.

But on Anzac Day, they try to subvert it. They try to present the Anzacs:

“They fought for multiculturalism, they fought for against fascism and communism, for freedom. And all this kind of stuff.”

But it’s bullshit! It’s bullshit! If you know anything about history, it’s bullshit!

And what the Anzacs fought for in World War I, because it’s only really proper to talk about the Anzacs in the First World War, because in the other World Wars we were fighting more as Australia, or in World War II we were fighting as Australians, and in Korea and Vietnam and so on, we were fighting as Australians. But in World War I they were fighting for a White Australia, and in World War II they were fighting for a White Australia. And these are really the decisive wars that everyone is really thinking about.

[06:10]

And even in these wars against Korea and Vietnam, against communism, they were fighting to preserve a White Australia. We still had the White Australia Policy, and they were trying to put up a defence against the spread of communism in our region.

So the men that died in these wars, whether you agree with the overarching politics of these wars, which obviously there’s a lot to discuss in that regard, that’s what they were fighting for! And they said it explicitly. And when it comes to World War I and World War II, the Prime Minister himself said it explicitly! Billy Hughes, our Prime Minister in the First World War, when he addressed the nation and he was basically asking people to sign up to go and fight, he said:

“I bid thee, go and fight for White Australia in France!”

He didn’t say:

“Go fight for Australia in France!”

He didn’t say:

“Go fight for the British Empire in France!”

He said:

“Go and fight for White Australia in France!”

And that might seem maybe a little bit strange to people. What could he possibly mean by that? Why was White Australia up for, threatened by events in Europe? And there’s a long version of the story, but I’ll start with the shorter version. The basic version is this.

Australia at that time, obviously a very young country, but only been federated in 1901. About three years after we federated, the British Empire entered into an alliance with the Japanese. And the Japanese were an emerging power in the Asian region. They started building up a big navy. And the British, which at the time had the best navy in the world, and the best shipbuilders in the world, were actually helping the Japanese to build up their navy. As part of this alliance, the British saw fit to make an alliance with Japan because that would then basically take some of the pressure off them trying to command the seas of East Asia if they were allied with the pre-eminent Asian power. And there was a lot of competition at that time for control in East Asia. The Germans were trying to get established here. You had the French, I’m talking about East Asia or the East in general. The French and other European powers were involved, and the British wanted to maintain dominance.

So there was an alliance with Japan. It was widely criticised, but it was ultimately in Australia because of the basically the fear that it would force us to cuck on the White Australia Policy. Because the Japanese did not appreciate the White Australia Policy. They said:

“How dare you lump us in with blacks and Indians and these lesser races. We are Japanese, we’re a proud race, we shouldn’t be excluded from immigration to Australia on the account of being an inferior race.”

And the response at the time, actually by Deakin, who was a founding father of our country and Prime Minister, second Prime Minister of Australia, was to say that:

“Oh, we don’t want you here precisely because we respect you as a race, precisely because we think if we were to let you in, you could take over.”

But anyway, we obviously secured the White Australia Policy, but the British made us kind of tone it down basically not to offend the sensibilities of the Japanese. And so there was a resentment on that basis and a fear of Japanese expansion.

And then in 1905, the Japanese did what at that time was unthinkable. They defeated a European power in a war. They went to war with Russia and they defeated Russia in 1905! And that shocked the world. It was the first time a non-White country had defeated a White country in a war in all of modern history. And so that sent shockwaves through the world that, well, perhaps the White man won’t just be able to rule the world carte blanche with no resistance.

So this struck fear into the hearts of Australians in general because the idea was, well, the Japanese turns expansionist power. A few years later, they conquered Korea. Fears increased.

Now, of course, the British Empire had a formal alliance with Japan. But they said:

“Well, what happens if the British Empire collapses? Or what happens if that alliance collapses and instead the Japanese ally with the Germans and then they come together to defeat the British Empire, then what will happen to Australia?”

The fear was that if the British Empire was to lose its dominance in the region, that we would ultimately fall under the control of these powers and then potentially non-Whites would be able to enter our continent, and the White Australia Policy would collapse.

And so all the rhetoric and all of the political machinations at that time was building a defence force in Australia that could defend Australia, but also propping up the British Empire because Australia had such a small population so that the British Empire could defend Australia and therefore defend a White Australia. Because if we were to fall under the control of some other empire, they could force us to open our borders and bring in their merchants and bring in their workers and so on and we would lose the continent to other races, literally. And this was explicitly, I’m not just saying this is what all the newspapers were saying. This is what all the politicians were saying. This was our primary concern politically in this country at the beginning of our history.

And there were a lot of elements in Australian politics, particularly in the Labor Party at the time, who were upset at the British Empire, who thought that the British Empire, you know, was basically taken over by jews, bankers and so on. They didn’t give a fuck about Australia. That they had this kind of multiracial, international corporate empire that was ruled by not the almighty dollar at that time, because it wasn’t the dollar but the almighty pound. And that they weren’t concerned about the racial future of Australia. But nevertheless they recognised that because we were of the British race, we were part of the British Empire, that it was our best bet at securing our position in the world.

[12:13]

And so they were willing to go – I mean, Billy Hughes was Labor, he was a Labor man – they were willing to go and fight for the British Empire to ensure they won the First World War, to ensure that the British Empire remained strong, to ensure that it continued dominating East Asia, to ensure that we could continue having a White Australia Policy. That’s why we got involved in World War I. It wasn’t just because of some kind of like British patriotism or loyalty to the Empire. It was a pragmatic decision to secure a White Australia.

Of course, people felt good feelings towards the British Empire. We were of the British race, of the British stock. But there was also a strong sense of nationalism in Australia all the way back at that time, a keen sense of what was in our interest as a people.

And so that was what was determined that we have to go and fight to secure the future of the British Empire and also to win the Right by participating in that war to have a say about the direction of the Empire. And what Billy Hughes did at The Treaty of Versailles at the end of World War I and the during the establishment of the League of Nations, is he pushed very hard against members of the alliance, such as the Japanese and others who wanted to push for, … League of Nations, by the way, was the prototype of the UN. It was the first attempt at creating a UN. And there was a proposal put forward by the Allies that won World War I to establish this prototype of the UN called the League of Nations, to basically establish a principle that racially discriminatory immigration policies would be abolished basically in the world. That this was horrible and racist and so on all the way back then. And Billy Hughes pushed very hard against that. He said:

“We came in, we had 65,000 men sacrifice their lives to ensure this victory. We are not giving up our White Australia Policy.”

And we successfully won. We convinced the Americans sided with us, the British sided with us and ultimately that provision was taken out. The Japs weren’t happy about it, but they didn’t have enough sway. So Billy Hughes came back to Australia announcing victory:

“What a great victory that we’d achieved!”

And also New Guinea, today known as Papua New Guinea, was under German control. And this caused a lot of concerns back in those days. We also secured that under our control at that time.

So the idea was not simply about defending the British Empire because we loved the King. And we were Anglo Saxons or something. It was a specific concern with Australian national interests and how to secure this continent for the White man. And everyone knew it! And when the soldiers came back and they formed what became known as the RSL, which is the largest body by far to represent veterans that have fought for Australia and fought for the Empire. They came back to Australia, they set up the RSL [Returned and Services League (of Australia)] and immediately became the strongest lobby group in an already very racist country for the White Australia Policy. With the first president, second president, third president of the RSL and so on, making constant statements that their members fought and died or fought and sacrificed because their members obviously were still alive and their comrades who died for a White Australia to secure basically Anglo supremacy in the world, and to secure this continent for the White man. That’s why they fought. And that any kind of acquiescence on the White Australia Policy they would consider a betrayal. And they reaffirmed this after World War II.

And in fact, the RSL was the last major public organisation in Australia to abandon explicit advocacy for the White Australia Policy. It wasn’t until the late 80s, the late 1980s, long after the White Australia Policy was abandoned by the government that the RSL finally abandoned its advocacy for the White Australia Policy.

So if you see Anzac Day ceremonies tomorrow, they try to tell you that:

“They fought for multiculturalism and against Nazism!”

They did fight against the Germans, they did fight against the National Socialists. And they were misguided, you could say, ultimately, and putting their allegiance to the Empire, because the Empire in the Second World War ultimately betrayed us and it collapsed. It betrayed itself and collapsed.

But that’s why they fought. That’s what their sacrifice was about. Every single man on that battlefield, that’s what he was fighting for. That’s why he went to France, that’s why he went to Gallipoli, that’s why he went to Kokoda*. So that needs to be held in full consciousness and ruminated upon.

[* The Kokoda Track campaign or Kokoda Trail campaign was part of the Pacific War of World War II. The campaign consisted of a series of battles fought between July and November 1942 in what was then the Australian Territory of Papua. It was primarily a land battle, between the Japanese South Seas Detachment under Major General Tomitarō Horii and Australian and Papuan land forces under command of New Guinea Force. The Japanese objective was to seize Port Moresby by an overland advance from the north coast, following the Kokoda Track over the mountains of the Owen Stanley Range, as part of a strategy to isolate Australia from the United States. Wikipedia]

[16:53]

Blair Cottrell: Do you think it’s reasonable to assume that every fighting soldier was conscientiously engaging in the war? That whatever it is, they were fighting in World War I, World War II, because they were fighting for White Australia? Every Australian soldier actually was fully aware and conscious of their ethnicity and they were fighting to defend their ethnicity? Or would you say that maybe war propaganda plays a part in the reason for why they’re fighting? They might have been spelled by some series of slogans produced by the government. They might have been made to hate the enemy. They might be in it for glory, for honour. They might just be in it because they’re bored and they want to do something with their lives that’s interesting. I think there’s probably a complex of reasons. I understand what you’re saying. I understand that the Statesmen who were in favour of the war, they obviously had their reasons, which were nationalistic in essence. But I think the individual soldier, he fought for his own reasons a lot of the time.

However, it’s my understanding, or it’s my feeling rather, that there was a collective, how should I describe it? Some sort of collective understanding that was unspoken, that the Australians understood that they were a specific ethnic group, that they were a certain type of people, an extension of the British colonies, but still their own kind nonetheless, and that they were fighting to defend their kind, they were engaged in the war for that purpose, collectively.

Yet on an individual level, if you were to interview each soldier, if that was possible, for argument’s sake, I’m sure they would give a series of explanations as to why they were fighting.

But I think the collective reason why they were fighting would have been in for the maintenance or expansion of their own ethnic presence, power, that kind of thing, defending their own kind I think. What do you reckon?

Joel Davis: Well at the end of the day though, like these politicians that were talking about these ideas, they were elected, they were running on these ideas. They were saying:

“We must defend a White Australia. This is what we need to do to prepare to fight and defend it.”

And they were voted into government, you know, according to those statements they were making to the public.

Blair Cottrell: It’s funny, isn’t it?

Joel Davis: Australians were not forced, Australians were not forced to go and fight. They were not forced. There wasn’t conscription in World War I. They signed up voluntarily to go.

Blair Cottrell: What I was saying is, isn’t it curious that the phrase “White Australia” right now would be something that a lot of people wouldn’t be comfortable using in regular conversation because they’ll be accused of racism or something worse. But less than 100 years ago maybe even 50 or 60 years ago, that phrase was just commonly used and understood as an obviously present and correct thing. Like everybody understood that White Australia existed. White Australia was a real cultural, ethnic identity and it was who we are. It’s who we are as a people. In such a short time people are now have been, or people have been made to feel uncomfortable and frightened to even use that phrase. It doesn’t take very long, does it with effective propaganda to turn a people against themselves? To make them too afraid to establish any right to exist, too afraid to fight for their own self-determination.

Joel Davis: That phrase White Australia was the central animating concept of federation. It was the central animating concept of World War I. It was a central animating concept of the first half of this federated nation’s existence, in politics. The White Australia Policy was the policy of the government that was most in concern for the people and for the politicians! It was the defining principle of our country. It wasn’t just an idea, it wasn’t just something that people liked or sometimes talked about. It was an obsession!

And those men gave their blood. They died for that ideal. Ultimately that was what it was explained to them that the war was about. In all of the, all of the media publications. All these publications that we still know today, like the Sydney Morning Herald and the Melbourne Age and all these things, they used to be virulently White nationalist racist publications. They used to be! They used to talk, like The Noticer today has tamer language than what the Sydney Morning Herald had in like 1910. That’s just the reality and that’s how the culture was in those days.

And the so-called Anzac Myth. People talk about that, how there was a the soldiers were described rather poetically by journalists and other writers in the Australian press during and after the First World War. That ANZAC myth was fundamentally racist. It was describing the Australian soldiers essentially as great eugenic specimens, talking about how they were the superior Anglo Saxon and like, comparing them as a stock to the British in favourable terms and so on, and describing how on the battlefield they showed our racial fortitude was superior to the enemy and this kind of thing.

And when Australian politicians were justifying certain policies, like policies to make military training compulsory nationally and things like that, they would come to the people and say:

“If you are a proud White man, how could you oppose my policy?”

You know, they would literally appeal to you on the basis of White nationalism, on the basis of your, like, Aryan honour to justify their policies to you. That’s how politicians used to talk to the people in those days.

[22:49]

So when you read Australian history, you realise this country was more racist than like even probably any country in the world at that time. And there was this pressing concern. I just posted on my Telegram this quote from Prime Minister Billy Hughes. He was our wartime Prime Minister in the First World War. And Billy Hughes, by the way, was a full on Darwinist, basically. He had a dog-eat-dog, highly racial, like a kind of view of history as racial competition. You either fight for your survival and assert your supremacy or you get crushed by other races. That’s how he saw the world. It was very Hitlerian, proto-Hitlerian, you could say. And in some, in some ways you could say Billy Hughes was more savage than Hitler in some of his statements and speeches on this, on these issues.

But this is a quote from Billy Hughes. This is during a ceremony that was conducted in 1913, a year before the beginning of World War I, when they started building Canberra. Because at the beginning of Australia, Canberra wasn’t built yet. At the beginning of Federation, there was a dispute between Sydney and Melbourne as to who got to be the capital.

And so the compromise was struck to build the capital city in Canberra for the purpose of serving as the nation’s capital, to kind of assuage this conflict between the two major cities, right? And Billy Hughes said this at this, at the ceremony where the foundational stone of Canberra was being laid. When they started building Canberra, to quote:

“We are here so far as we can to mould the destinies of a nation. The deity has fashioned us out for this purpose from the beginning. We were destined to have our own way from the beginning and America, two nations that have always had their way, for they killed everybody to get it. I declare to you that in no other way shall we be able to come to our own except by preparing to hold that which we have. Now, we are here as visible signs of a continent. We have a great future before us. The people are incapable of nourishing abstract ideals. They must have a symbol. And here we have a symbol of nationality. The first historic event in the history of the Commonwealth we are engaged in today without the slightest trace of that race we have banished from the face of the earth (meaning the Aboriginals). We must not be too proud, lest we should too in time disappear.”

This is how the leader of our country thought before World War I. You know, tomorrow if they do a Welcome to Country, that wasn’t what they fought for. The man who led us, who led the Anzacs into the First World War, said:

“I bid thee go fight for White Australia in France. We have banished the Aboriginals from the face of the earth. Let us struggle so that we are not banished like them.”

That was how this man thought. That’s how this man spoke and addressed our nation. That was the man that we elected to rule us, to run us during that war. And who was celebrated as a hero, a national hero at the time.

So that’s what we need to have consciousness of around this. Like this is not up for debate. Like it is black and white. The Anzacs fought for a White Australia!

Blair Cottrell: Did you ever believe in racial equality at any point in your life?

Joel Davis: I think when I was young, growing up, I did kind of have a default egalitarianism of sorts where I thought:

“Okay, well, you know, fairness would dictate that every people deserve a certain dignity or whatever.”

But I did, as I started to get into my teens, I did become conscious of the fact that there were relations of supremacy and superiority. And I did remember feeling pride from basically the first time I thought about it, in the fact that my race was clearly such a powerful and strong race in world history and in contemporary history that we were all kind of top of the food chain or it felt like we were top of the food chain. And I did also remember becoming conscious of the jews around that time because there was a lot of discussion of Israel and so on we’re talking about this is during like the Iraq war and zionism. And I kind of became vaguely familiar of like conspiracy theories around the Rothschild banking family and so on.

And I remember thinking:

“Okay, well that kind of puts the whole Holocaust thing in perspective. Like they said that Hitler was trying to take over the world and the guy, the guys he decided to take on were the jews. And apparently these jews run all these banks. And now we’re our whole like global superpowers are fighting to defend their country, Israel. What is that all about?”

And so that did make me kind of start to see, … I remember feeling like, okay, maybe that would justify, like I didn’t at that time I didn’t realise the Holocaust was fake, but I started to think:

“Okay, maybe that would kind of justify doing something like that if you felt like that was your main competitor for supremacy.”

But these were kind of vague thoughts. Like it took me multiple years to kind of formulate them more ideologically because the conditioning is very strong in our culture to think in terms of egalitarianism and that like supremacy is in a certain sense immoral.

I just kind of thought about it at that time more as like a kind of, from a realist, pragmatic standpoint, maybe there are necessary evils that you can sympathise with. And you know, in my late teens I became familiar with like Nietzsche’s philosophy and so on and started thinking about things more in those terms. But it probably wasn’t until I was 19 or so that I really fully internalised that as a worldview and came to that like ultimate kind of conclusion of thinking about the world in terms of that like kind of inequality is just nature and it’s just reality. And that either you’re the top of the chain or you eat shit! And it’s much better to be top of the chain than to be eating shit!

[29:01]

Blair Cottrell: I remember I used to get angry at people for being racist, like in primary school and early high school days.

And I thought that was a good thing for me to do because I was standing up for what was right, what was fair. Because as you said, the conditioning was strong. That’s what I had been conditioned to believe was right. But I started to see the obvious realities of racial differences and even genetic differences between people of the same race. And I realised that people aren’t equal. I realised that pretty quickly.

But one thing that always, because I went through, so I’m just getting a message from someone. I went through a stage where I actually felt like White people didn’t have culture. I felt like only dark skinned people were cultured. And White people just didn’t really have anything like that. Because I wasn’t thinking about what culture was. I didn’t have a good understanding of culture. To me, culture meant music and family values and doing things together as a family and painting your face and having all of these kind of spiritual, greater meanings to family traditions and shit like that!

I didn’t see culture as great stone structures. I didn’t see the kind of culture produced by the race to whom I belonged. And I can recall, I always was curious about the Nazis, because whenever I saw footage of the Nazis, the Germans, on History Channel, I heard how crazy and evil they were, yet so many people followed them! And they looked so polished, they look so good!

And so the explanation didn’t really match the aesthetic that was being presented to me on these channels. So I was always curious to learn more about the Nazis. But whenever I tried to, there wasn’t really a lot of information there. It was just like, these guys are evil, these guys are crazy! Especially if you tried to get your information from Hollywood entertainment you weren’t really getting much there.

Joel Davis: Well, let’s talk about World War II, actually, because obviously on Anzac Day, we don’t just venerate people from the First World War, but also the Second World War. And I think that’s important because people say:

“Well, you know, Joel, you’re a National Socialist, you’re obviously sympathetic towards the Germans, yet you’re venerating men who fought many of them against Germans, a lot of them against the Japanese, who were German allies in the Second World War. And ultimately you think the Second World War was a horrible thing, the way that it went and that the Germans lost and so on.”

And that requires an explanation, perhaps, and we’ve talked about it before, but I think on a day like this, it’s important to discuss this.

Number one, recall what I was saying about World War I. The animating concern of the First World War for Australians was the Japanese. And the Japanese weren’t even our enemy during World War I. They were our ally. But we saw that the Japanese would expand and become an increasingly powerful force in the world. And that was why we chose to ally ourselves with the British. Well, we were already in the British Empire, but why we chose to commit so intensely to the British Empire to the point that we sent 65,000 of our own sons to go and die for the Empire in the First World War, in the beaches of Turkey and in the trenches of France.

And the Second World War vindicated these fears. Right? Because what was the Second World War? Well, the Second World War, it started in Europe, in 1939, but arguably it started in Asia in 1933 when the Japanese invaded China. And the Japanese were rampaging their way through China, through the 1930s. And this was setting off massive alarm bells in Australia. And ultimately, of course, the Japanese ended up forging an alliance with the Germans.

And so this very much factored into our enthusiasm to fight in the Second World War, our concern that if, well, if the British Empire was defeated in the Second World War, which ultimately it was, we can get on to that, but it was defeated by the Germans in the Second World War, that basically we would be left defenceless against this radically expansionary Japanese Empire that was allied with what would have been the German victors. That concern is what inspired men to fight.

And ultimately, from a bird’s eye view, it was incorrect for us to fight against the Germans. The betrayal happened really in London. The British should never have gone to war with the Germans. The Germans wanted an alliance with the British. And then even after the war began, they also wanted to make peace with Britain and were rejected many, many times.

And that ultimately was destructive to the British Empire. The ultimate victors of World War II was not Britain. On paper, it was Britain, but it wasn’t. On paper it says that they won, but look at the practicalities of what happened. The British Empire fell apart immediately after World War II at the hands of the Americans and the Soviets, their so-called allies, during World War II. During World War II, the Americans extended massive loans to the British which they made them repay in full. They extended massive loans to the Soviet Union, their supposed communist enemy in the Cold War. They didn’t make them repay, they didn’t make them pay back one cent in order to fight the Germans.

There was an intent by the Americans to use the conditions of World War II and kind of World War I as well, actually, to an extent, but in particular World War II, to basically bankrupt and break up the British Empire and then integrate its remnants into an American led, liberal, democratic international order.

Now moving over to the Pacific, the Japanese were a real threat. They did want to take over our region. I don’t think they wanted to invade Australia directly, but they did attack us. They did bomb Darwin, they did send [mini] submarines into Sydney, they did invade Papua New Guinea, or New Guinea, which was actually our protectorate. So they did attack us. And they also attacked the British Empire and Australian soldiers in Singapore and other places.

[35:27]

So what World War II was primarily for Australians was a race war against Japan to ensure the dominance of the White race over the Asia Pacific region. And ultimately our main ally, and that was the Americans, was the British Empire didn’t have the capacity to defend us. They basically abandoned us in World War II. And we kind of abandoned them largely earlier on in the war. In the early years of the war we went and fought the Germans and the Italians in North Africa on behalf of the British Empire.

But then once the war with Japan kind of began, we pulled our guys out, we said:

“No, we need to bring them home to defend Australia.”

We basically pulled out of the European theatre of the World War and stop really participating in it, brought all the guys back home and just focused on fighting Japan for the rest of the war. We weren’t really involved in the ultimate defeat of the Germans.

So that needs to be also kind of taken into consideration. When we’re venerating our ancestors, we’re venerating mostly from World War II, our ancestors who fought a race war against the Japanese which was a valid race war and a necessary race war in order to preserve our sovereignty. Unfortunately because of basically the traitorous government in Britain which made decisions to the benefit of their jewish financier backers rather than the British Empire itself, they refused peace with Hitler, they refused alliance with Hitler which would have been in their actual geopolitical interest in order to essentially be complicit in the defeat of all European empires including themselves by the communists from the east and the American, like liberals, from across the pond.

And so the British Empire was no more. And now Australia was left even though the Japanese were defeated, we were now left basically dependent upon an American led international order. Basically became part of an American Empire rather than a British Empire.

And due to being part of that American Empire we became infected with all of the ideas that ultimately destroyed and unravelled the White Australia Policy and kind of sent our country on the trajectory that it’s now on today, one of suicidal self destruction!

And the same thing happened to all of America’s so-called allies in Western Europe. Their so-called allies in Western Europe also have gone on this suicidal trajectory of self destruction as is America itself because it’s ruled by a kind of anti-White jewish oligarchy.

So World War II in that sense was a mistake. But at the time America seemed like at that time America was a 90% White country. An America that had millions of members in the Ku Klux Klan, who had a racial restrictive immigration policy, who had segregation in the south, because obviously they had black [post —] slave populations, but they had segregation. No one at that time could have foreseen the trajectory that America was on, except maybe like, a few really philosophically wise individuals. But the average person and the average statesman could not have foreseen what would come of America.

And so the decisions that were made at that time by our leadership and the feelings and sentiments of the people and the soldiers at that time, I think, were fundamentally noble and virtuous. These people were not traitors. John Curtin, our prime minister in World War II, he was not a traitor! I think he was sincere, sincerely trying to take the steps that he needed to defend White Australia. And ultimately, when the war with Japan began, he pulled everyone out, all the Aussies, out of the European and African theatre and said:

“You got to get back here and fight to defend White Australia here right now and mobilise the whole country to fight Japan.”

And we emerged victorious with many great military victories over the Japanese, particularly Kokoda, which was particularly impressive. So that’s worthy of remembrance and veneration. Absolutely!

What do you think about that, Blair?

Blair Cottrell: God, I don’t know. Which part?

Joel Davis: Well, World War II in general. Because obviously you share my sympathies towards the Germans under National Socialism, but at the same time, you’ll be remembering our ancestors. I think you have ancestors who served in World War II? I do.

Blair Cottrell: I’m not exactly sure.

Joel Davis: Okay.

[40:10]

Blair Cottrell: As I was saying before, though, I was getting at something. I was saying that, yeah, I felt White people didn’t have a culture, but I was always curious about the Nazis. And I started to learn more about National Socialism by reading Mein Kampf. And I learnt a lot about it. And I had to tell everybody! I had this girlfriend, right? And I wouldn’t shut up! I kept talking about the point of life basically being about breeding up, about enhancing your genetic stock and not degrading it through miscegenation or just genetic downgrading. And we talked a lot about that. I chewed her head off about it a lot. And sometime later, she said to me:

“Look, I agree with you and I understand what you’re saying, and I’m glad that you have taught me about alternative World War II history. I’m glad that we discussed the reality of race and the point of life, as you call it.”

But she said:

“I was happier before.”

She said to me:

“I wish you didn’t tell me these things because I was happier before.”

She said:

“Now I feel like I can see a giant elephant in the room now. I feel like I’m surrounded by retards, like dysgenic retards, and it’s depressing!”

Yeah? And we parted ways a short time later and I never spoke to her again.

So this is a regular person, a person who’s intelligent enough, a member of Australian society, to understand the reality of race and how important it is not to throw away what you have genetically, ethnically.

But then when she came to understand that, she just acknowledged to me, admitted openly that she was happier before she knew that! The society she grew up in basically pushed the opposite message, and that she felt like an outcast. She felt like she wished she hadn’t been told that. She wished she never had to understand that, because it was depressing for her.

Do you think the average person. This is like the question that I’m getting to. Do you think the average person can be a National Socialist? Do you think they’re capable of enduring what they have to endure? Do you think they need to be a National Socialist in order to vote for a party that represents those ideals? Because I don’t feel they are capable. I don’t feel they have the strength.

I feel like a small leadership group has the strength, but the ordinary people, the masses, they’re neither capable nor willing to be ethnic nationalists. Has there ever been a time in history where the entire country, any country, has been consciously ethnically nationalist, every single member? Or have they just been more concerned about their own personal lives and misgivings? Are they actually geared to participate in politics and philosophy on the level of being a conscious ethnic nationalist? Do they need to be? What do you think?

Joel Davis: Well, I mean, obviously Australia in the first half of the 20th century was a consciously ethnically nationalist people.

Blair Cottrell: Was it, though? Was it, though? Was it, though? Because you go through old footage, there’s old ABC footage, and it’s from like the 60s or something, I think. And even then you’ve got people saying:

“Oh, I’ve got nothing against this race and that race. And a few of them can come in. That’s okay, as long as they’re not intermarrying.”

Joel Davis: That’s in the sixties. So things are starting to change. The television was introduced and the kind of post World War II judeo-American propaganda started getting disseminated and so on, and the culture had shifted quite significantly at that point.

But in the early 20th century I think the culture was very staunchly racialist. The media, the clear political will of the people as represented by who they were voting for and what kind of policies were convincing to the Australian people.

And also the lead up to the Federation of Australia, the Labor movement in this country the political movements in this country in general all geared towards racial preservation. And labour movement was engaged in a lot of industrial action that was basically geared against the use of coloured labour and so on. The public overwhelmingly supported them. When you had kind of race riots and so on, … Because like look at for example the Eureka Stockade*. The Eureka Stockade was essentially like an armed rebellion against the government at the time. The leaders of the Eureka Stockade ultimately were not thrown in prison, they were basically given a slap on the wrist.

[* The Eureka Rebellion was a series of events involving gold miners who revolted against the British administration of the colony of Victoria, Australia, during the Victorian gold rush. It culminated in the Battle of the Eureka Stockade, which took place on 3 December 1854 at Ballarat between the rebels and the colonial forces of Australia. The fighting resulted in an official total of 27 deaths and many injuries, the majority of casualties being rebels. Wikipedia]

And then a whole bunch of them entered politics and got elected into the Parliament and one of them became the Premier of Victoria and then they passed a whole bunch of legislation greatly restricting immigration into the colony of Victoria at the time.

So the people rallied around violent rebels that were opposing the importation of Chinese labour basically. And these policies were also wildly, wildly popular in New South Wales and Queensland, all the other colonies where they experienced non-White immigration.

And then that was the fuel that led to Federation, that was the fuel that led to World War I etc. And the enthusiasm that the people had for these things. When the “Great White Fleet” they called it, which was the American Navy came and toured Australia and visited in a kind of friendly way in 1908 it was greeted by massive crowds. They’re basically described like there’s never been crowds that big in Sydney or Melbourne before to come and see these great ships of the US Navy and then all the speeches that were being given as:

“Look at this great White power from the other side of the Pacific Ocean! Look how exceptional their big ships are. We need to be allied with these, with our kind of Anglo Saxon brothers from across the Pacific against you know, the yellow menace! And what proud, what great White men these people are and what testament to area ingenuity, these great feats of technology are!”

And people were ecstatic about this and it was like a big deal.

[* Great White Fleet – On 20 August 1908 a round the world peace mission by the American fleet arrived in Port Jackson, Sydney. The US navy was on a round the world cruise which had set out eight months earlier on 16 December 1907. The sixteen warships, led by the flagship Connecticut, were painted white to denote peace. They would be known as The Great White Fleet. https://mhnsw.au › stories › general › great-white-fleet]

Can you imagine people acting like that today? No, it was a completely different world back then. When they opened the shrine, …

[46:49]

Blair Cottrell: Do we still have people or do we just have pre-programmed goyim? Is that the problem? Well, think about it. That’s a serious question. The people as thinking, feeling, independent creatures as they were pre-television. Do we still have people like that? Do they still exist? Or are they just morons out there waiting to be told what to do and how to vote? And do we need to adjust ourselves to the receptivity of the moron in order to make any sort of political success? Or are we counting on a people support from a people that are no longer there?

Joel Davis: Well, I think the television definitely radically degraded the consciousness of the masses. I think you can see a massive shift when the television is invented and widely disseminated in the politics of every Western country. And what comes with that you get second wave feminism, you get mass immigration, etc.

Blair Cottrell: And it’s even worse! It’s worse. It’s not just television. Have you, like, Zoomers can’t write. Zoomers cannot write! Have you seen the handwriting? They can’t count money. Like the screen error has made it even worse! Like new generations are even more retarded! They’re kind of more radical because they’re so desensitised, but they’re still more retarded!

So we’re dealing with a different type of humanity than the sort of humanity that accepted ethnic nationalism as self evident. We’re dealing with a completely different type of humanity.

And so I’m not sure whether ethnic nationalism will fly on a large scale. I think Aussie pride might fly or something really simplistic. And you as the leading force, can be an ethnic nationalist organisation with your own extensive philosophy, but the person that you’re trying to appeal to, the sort of human you’re trying to appeal to, isn’t actually capable of understanding anything about ethnic nationalism. They’re capable of being racist a little bit. And maybe you could make them feel more confident about being racist, less afraid of consequences, because that’s what stops them from being racist.

At the end of the day, it’s just fear of consequence. If there wasn’t the applicable or necessary fear of consequence out there in society, people would just be as naturally racist as they’ve always been. It’s fear that stops them from doing that. So you could make them feel more comfortable about being racist. But my gut tells me that the average person out there in society isn’t actually capable of giving themselves over to a conscious ethnic nationalism. But I don’t really think they need to be at the same time.

Joel Davis: Well, the masses don’t necessarily need to be because the masses largely get led around by, … I mean, the masses aren’t really in support of what the government is currently doing either. Most people don’t agree with pretty much all the major policies of the government. Most people are sick of the woke stuff, they’re sick of the transgenderism. Immigration isn’t popular. The policies of the government are not popular and they’re getting less and less popular through time.

And I think as you said, the younger generation, it’s kind of polarising in both directions. But you know, without the television generation, they are a lot less trusting of authority. They’re a lot more kind of open minded to different ideas.

And what we’re seeing in Europe or what we’re seeing in America is that the younger generation is actually extremely Right-wing. So like in America, the younger Zoomers are way more Right-wing than even, than any other generation. Like the age bracket between 18 and, 201 is the most Right-wing of like almost any generation in America at the moment. And also the other thing is that racism and nationalism, these aren’t very complex ideas. Black people, not that smart. Black people are intensely loyal to each other politically.

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, but that’s because there’s no consequence for not being loyal to each other.

Joel Davis: But that shows that like in principle, like it’s not about the stupidity of the masses or anything, as you said, it’s a social game. So what is going to give White people the confidence to be racist? It’s a real question. It’s not that they’re not capable of racism. It’s actually a natural thing. Or that it wouldn’t be possible.

Blair Cottrell: Less consequence.

Joel Davis: It’s about how do you inspire them, how do you basically give them a sense of permission, or a sense of inspiration or some kind of how do you attract them to the principles of nationalism and racism? That’s the question. And there is a way to do it. There has to be because it’s inherent.

Blair Cottrell: Needs to be something in it for them. They need to benefit from it and not lose. And a result of being racist currently they lose and they lose hard. So if they can benefit from being racist, they’ll do it all day. People are selfish and simple.

Joel Davis: We’re not going to be able to get to the point where people can benefit from being racist until we have a critical mass of people that are willing to suffer. Like you don’t need everyone, you don’t need the like 50% plus one to be willing to suffer for it. We do need a much bigger movement that can sustain and grow to a level where you can start to get, where it can start to actually, socially reward its participants more. We have to make racism fun. We have to make it engaging.

And that’s part of what we’re trying to do with the organisation. Like one of the ambitions is to have a network of gyms and pubs that we control across all Australian cities where young White people can hang out and have community and enjoy themselves and throw parties and throw events constantly that are fun to attend for our people so that they can have a communal and social basis to participate in the movement. Make the movement fun, make the movement engaging, give them something to be in the movement and then they’re going to actually stay in the movement, participate in the movement.

And then on a political level what we’re going to put forward is a whole series of policies that are going to materially make your life a lot better. And the current system is making your life a hell of a lot worse. And it’s only going to get worse and worse! And people are happy to go along with the status quo while there’s a reasonable amount of prosperity and comfort.

[53:09]

But in 10 years time, you think it’s bad now, it’s not really that bad yet. Wait, in 10, 15 years time it’s going to get really bad! People are going to be more and more open minded to a more radical politics and a more radical solution. Also racism is the only thing that’s actually funny anymore. You know, they used to be able to control the population through really good propaganda.

Back in the 80s, the 90s, the quality of Hollywood movies was so high. The quality of, just ZOG slop, music, television, etc., was actually quite high. And so you could just kind of like turn your brain off and just get like sucked into The Matrix of Bread and Circuses so much more easily. The prevailing culture was so much more enjoyable to kind of lose yourself in. It’s no longer the case. They can’t produce good films anymore, they can’t produce good music anymore. They don’t have the same cultural cache or gravitas that they once did.

So the ability to kind of prop up the prevailing like Leftist morality is diminishing. Whilst at the same time if we have the fortitude and we have the ambition and the creativity, we have the ability to create a counterculture that can be quite fun and engaging for the younger generation of Whites who are increasingly disaffected and alienated. I do believe there’s a pathway there to making nationalism fun, to making nationalism enjoyable to make, to activating, to making nationalism amenable to people who have selfish rather than simply selfless, romantic reasons to embrace it.

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. I sometimes fear becoming an entertainer, though. I sometimes worry that the content I’m making, the effort that I’m making politically, may just be consumed as entertainment by people sitting on their asses scrolling. They might find it amusing and funny, but then they’re just going to scroll to the next thing and it’s just another 15 to 25 second moment in their lives that they feel amused by. And that’s the only purpose that I’m serving in the lives of ordinary people. That’s very cynical of course. There’s probably greater psychological impacts the content has on people, and that’s why we make it, that’s why we put this sort of stuff out there.

But look, I’m especially cranky because I’ve got this eye infection and my whole eye socket’s just throbbing. It’s very painful. So I’m kind of being a cynic tonight. I’m playing devil’s advocate a little bit, so don’t mind me. I’m doing my best not to crack the shits, but Anzac Day tomorrow, we got the Dawn Service in the morning. This is a very significant day for Australians. It’s very special. It’s really helps, or how should I say it, underpins how important ancestral worship is to us. And by us, I don’t just mean Australians, but every member of our race around the world that is related to us in any way, shape or form. That’s if you pay attention.

And Tom Sewell was telling me this today, he’s been telling me for a while, ancestral worship, veneration of the ancestors is kind of integral to our traditions as a people. Whatever country you go to that is a majority White, there is a great deal of respect, admiration and even worship of the ancestors that were the precondition for our existence. Now we are here because of them. And on Anzac Day this year, the message I’d like people to take away, or the feeling I’d like people to experience, is how little your life actually means, is how small your life is in the grand scheme of things.

The fact that we are mortals and we have to die in quite a short time, but that through our deeds and what we choose to believe in our national community, our race can live forever.

And I think that’s the essence of what we’re doing on Anzac Day, when we appreciate the sacrifices that have been made for us in order for us to be here now. Right. We are respecting, venerating, glorifying all of our ancestors that made the greatest sacrifice that serves as the precondition for our presence here now. That’s what Anzac Day means to me.

Joel Davis: Yeah, absolutely! And ancestor veneration is basically the ancient religion of the Aryans. You know, the ancient Aryans, they practised in different ways, but they fundamentally practised a whole series of rites and rituals venerating their previous ancestors. They had kind of Patriarchal, patrilineal cults and the development of the pantheon of pagan gods kind of spun out of ancestor worship as its foundation. So it’s actually kind of an organic form of our native spirituality of our distant ancestors.

And when you think about the Shrine of Remembrance in Melbourne, which is an incredible building that shrine looks kind of like a pagan temple. It has Christian elements in it, but it looks like a pagan temple, you could say. It looks like something out of like ancient Greece or something. And that temple, which is what it is, was built to venerate the ancestors at. Literally it’s called the Shrine of Remembrance by crowdfunding of the veterans of the First World War.

So the Anzacs literally Pooled their cash together and built that. It wasn’t built by the government, it was very carefully designed. And that’s where I’m going to be tomorrow, venerating the ancestors. When that was opened in the early 1930s, over 300,000 people attended!

Now, let me look up. What was the population of Melbourne? I don’t know exactly what was the population of Melbourne?

[59:26]

Blair Cottrell: Only about a million. Less than a million.

Joel Davis: Yeah. In 1932. Let’s have a look.

1932, yeah. It was a bit less than a million. 950,000. So it’s around a million people. So 300,000 people showed up to the opening of the shrine.

So that’s like three out of every ten Melburnians showing up, basically.

Blair Cottrell: Well, they all. I reckon they all had a personal investment in it because the that wasn’t built by the taxpayer, by the government. It was crowdfunded the funds necessary to build the shrine by RSL, I think. And so everyone who attended those 300,000 people were probably all investors. They probably all put money in for it to be built. So it literally is a structure of the people. Like, this is not something the government built, this is something the people put together themselves.

Joel Davis: Yeah, but not just that it’s such an impressive building. It’s such a powerful, potent building. It shows. I mean, a lot of people would have had family members that fought. Almost everyone would have had family members that fought in World War I. A lot of people would have had family members that died in World War I so obviously it was a big deal to them for those reasons. But the big Union Jacks, I’ve seen the picture they have in underneath the shrine of like, the first. I don’t know if it was Remembrance Day or what, the first kind of big kind of opening, ceremonial opening of the shrine. It was a big event, and it was about venerating those who had given their blood for the Empire. That’s how people used to think back then. It was the biggest deal. Nothing was a bigger deal than that.

And that was when we had a country that had a robust White Australia Policy. That was when we had a country that was a real country because those were people that were conscious of their mortality, conscious of the fact that anything you have in this world you have to fight for that. Blood is what binds us and that the blood of sacrifice is what makes possible everything that we have. That was the people that understood that. And the people that were conscious of the greatness of our race that had been achieved through many, many victories, many, many glories in battle.

And that’s how a great people think. That’s how a noble people think. Now, who thinks like that now? You know, Anzac Day, when I went last year to the shrine, you know, half the faces there were like, Asian tourists and stuff. And there was like this lame speech about how multicultural the army is now and all the women that get to serve in the army now and how great and how diverse it is and how wonderful that is. And all this bullshit from, like, women in pantsuits that don’t have the first idea what the fuck they’re talking about. It’s fucking disgusting and disgraceful! That’s what it’s become. It’s a farce!

So if you go tomorrow, have that content in your heart for these scumbags as well that are up there. You’re standing there for your ancestors, but you’re not there for them. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t go. Some people don’t go to these things because they’re like:

“Oh the politicians and everything get up there and sell this cucked shit!”

And then you see like a bunch of pajeet army cadets marching around or something. And you’re not there for them, you’re there for the ancestors. They’re there watching down, looking at us. That’s why you’re there. So contempt for the scum that rule over us now and the desecration of their sacrifice. But you got to stay true to what it was. When we win, Anzac Day is going to be like it used to be again. The people will be inspired again.

But, yeah, dwindling numbers, dwindling concern. But one thing you’ll notice, the Dawn Service. At your local Dawn Service, there’ll be a lot of White faces, there won’t be too many immigrant faces because the Indians are not going to get out of bed at 5 o’clock in the morning, the fucking Chinese are not going to get out of bed at 5 o’clock in the morning, etc., to come down and venerate our ancestors because it’s our ancestors, not theirs. And they’ll try and say things like:

“Oh, the Anzacs were a multicultural fighting force because there were like five Chinese guys that went to Gallipoli or something!”

It’s fucking bullshit! Those were White men fighting for a White Australia. End of!

Blair Cottrell: I’d like to see any Welcome to Country or whatever bullshit they try to come up with at the ceremonies shouted down personally, you know. Legally, of course, but you have the right to protest. If you’re at one of these ceremonies, you have the rights to voice your protest if you’re not happy with what’s being said by the official bureaucrats on the microphones. This is still your country, you still have a say. So don’t be scared to make your voice heard tomorrow morning. If they try to pull any bullshit!

[1:04:26]

Joel Davis: Old mate in the chat said:

“If there’s any abo shit at the one I go to, I’m not sure how I’ll react. Like, I mean, marching up to the mic and going off about it! I’ll boo at least! Every year I feel it get more tense.”

Yeah, well, if there’s a welcome country, Welcome to Country tomorrow and whatever service you’re at, boo that fucking shit! And hopefully the people around you start booing.

Blair Cottrell: When you take a few mates. If you go with a few people and they agree to sort of echo your sentiments, you know, it can catch on quite quickly. I think I keep cutting out too. Like, sorry, if I’m cutting out my WiFi signals a little bit off.

But like I said the if the feeling is there, it should be contagious amongst other people too. I wouldn’t expect too much of ordinary folks because like I said, there have been conditioned by the fear of consequence for voicing any protest against the official social policy of the government and the bureaucracy. But I don’t know, the thing about regular people is they’re fickle, and if they feel enough people are doing something then they’ll join in with it, whatever it is. So, you know. [chuckling]

Joel Davis: Exactly.

Blair Cottrell: That’s just some advice.

Joel Davis: Human beings are herd animals. They go along with what everyone around them is doing.

And so in the same way that it seems like everyone around you is a cuck, if there are enough nationalists, if there are enough Nazis or whatever, they would be a Nazi, there would be whatever is around them.

And so that’s what our political mission is like giving people the licence to express their instincts. Like the instincts are still in there. But few people have the balls, have the self consciousness to move first. We are the first movers. We are the ones that, we are the trailblazers.

And then eventually, if enough follow in our wake and we build enough momentum, then we will give the people at large the confidence to finally express what they really feel inside. That has been repressed for decades. And that’s what the mission is, that’s what we’re doing, that’s the objective. But is there anything else you wanted to say about Anzac Day, Blair?

Blair Cottrell: Nah. Look, I’m in a lot of pain, so I’m gonna just let you finish up. If you don’t know if you’re tuning in late. I’ve got this like brutal eye infection. Don’t know how it happened. It’s in the eyelid. It’s cellulitis, but only in the eyelid. It’s not actually in the eye socket, which means I won’t lose my vision, but I need to take antibiotics to kill it because it could spread to the eye socket and if it does, that’s bad for me. But I’m just sitting here in a very bad mood and experiencing a lot of pain.

So I’m gonna go.

Joel Davis: Listen, you can’t, can you react at least to Matt Trihey his, …

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, that’s gonna cheer me up!

I just saw a video of that late. So Matt Trihey is leader of, I think it’s called the National Workers Alliance. He’s been very aggressive and very, very energetic for the last, I’d say 12 to 18 months. Hosting meetings, doing protests. The guy is a true patriot! It’s good to see a real Aussie patriot, salt of the earth, working class builder. Pretty sure he’s a builder too. And he’s out there on the front lines doing what needs to be done. And where was he was at some sort of Teals meeting, wasn’t he? Yes.

Joel Davis: So the electorate of Kooyong which is one of the more affluent parts of Melbourne where Toorak and Glen Iris and suburbs like this are located within. Traditionally it’s always been a Liberal seat because it’s a more affluent area. But the last election they voted in a Teal independent by the name of Monique Ryan. And the so-called Teals are a disgusting blend of like the social policies of the Greens mixed with the economic policies of the Liberals.

Basically like the most disgusting all mixed together into the most [word unclear] and appeals to rich White women who watch the ABC religiously. It’s like Hillary Clinton basically at the last election in [word unclear] Anyway she had some meeting and they were talking about why we need to give more money to the ABC or some fucking bullshit like that so we can have more communist propaganda more anti-White tax funded communist propaganda pumped out into all these Boomer White women who are the only ones that even fucking [word unclear]. And he confronted them that mass immigration is causing, is exposing our people to increases in crime, rapes, burglaries, violence etc. And then all the Boomer White women at the meeting had a hysterical reaction. One of them even started shrieking. One of these old ladies punched him in the face! [chuckling] But it was on Channel Nine news tonight actually. He made the news so I think he did this stunt. Maybe it was yesterday and then the video went out today. The Noticer posted it. I shared it on Telegram if you want to watch it.

But I’m going to play. I haven’t actually seen the clip. I want to see how the news covered it. So it made the news. Let’s see how the news covered it because it’s a pretty interesting story. We’ll watch the news and if they spin it really hard I’ll play the original clip.

[Channel 9 news clip]

[Reporter] It was meant to be a peaceful community chat until far-Right agitated Matt Trihey loudly barged in and was punched in the face by a woman in the audience.

[Dr. Ryan] Fortunately it didn’t really connect. She was much smaller than he was quite a big man.

[Reporter] Teal MP Monique Ryan and Labor candidate Clive Crosby shocked by what happened. Dr. Ryan consoled the woman after the incident.

[Dr. Ryan] She was sorry that she’d lost control in the way that she did. But she found the whole thing very distressing.

[Reporter] Trihey is the leader of the National Workers Alliance. He denies he’s a Neo Nazi, but was once a member of Thomas Sewell’s White nationalist group, the Lads Society.

[Rachel Dexter] This individual has been part of groups that are run by neo-Nazis, well publicised Neo Nazis.

[Reporter] Tensions have flared across the campaign in the past, 24 hours. Two men charged over separate violent incidents in Sydney.

[PM Albanese] There’s no place for violence in our political system. We’re a democracy. It’s important that people engage in a respectful way. That includes people who are candidates, but it includes everyone.

[Dr. Ryan] I hope that after this election campaign things will cool down, the temperature will drop a bit, we’ll be able to get back to normal.

[Reporter] Whether those inflaming tensions listen is up for debate. Brett McLeod, Nine News.

[1:11:32]

Blair Cottrell: Do me a favour. Hang on.

Joel Davis: Well, I don’t know what just happened to Blair there, but notice how they basically blamed him for some lady punching him in the face. They’re like:

“Oh, violence is escalating!”

And it’s apparently his fault. They’re victim blaming. Imagine if he went in there and punched someone in the face. It’d be like:

“Far-Right, thug beats people up at a meeting!”

But if they hit him, … Now, Matt Trihey, by the way, was a professional MMA fighter. He was, he fought in, I don’t think he fought in the UFC, but he fought in, I think Pride. So I think an old lady punching him in the face doesn’t really bother him too much. He’s a pretty tough dude.

But yeah, [chuckling] I mean, it’s just kind of ridiculous, the double standard:

“Oh, well like we got to give this poor old lady a hug because she sperged out and punched Trihey in the face!”

Blair Cottrell: Isn’t that weird behaviour! How the aggressor, the person trying to punch someone, who cares if it’s an old lady, she still tried to punch the guy! She’s hugged. She’s hugged and treated like a victim while the actual victim of the assault is like continuously like pushed out of the building as though he’s the cause for concern.

I mean, I realise she’s just an old lady and who cares that she punched someone? I don’t care! I’m sure Matt Trihey doesn’t care. It’s not like he’s at home with some ice on that shiner. He’d just be laughing about it. It’s just still very strange behaviour. You know, we’re told so often that it’s never okay to put your hands on anyone. It’s the you’re a dirty, horrible person if you even think about assaulting another human being!

But then when some lady does it:

“Oh, the poor thing! Let’s give her a hug!”

That’s fucking weird, man! What? Obviously I don’t even know how to interpret it, actually. I can’t comment further than it’s just fucking weird!

Joel Davis: Yeah. I can’t be bothered playing the original video. You can go find it on The Noticer. You could find it on my page. I think Tom shared it. I don’t know if you shared it. I think you shared it. So you can go watch it on Telegram or on Twitter.

But yeah, like, literally, these women are shrieking. He goes in there. He’s calm. He just starts talking about crime statistics and immigration and asking for an answer.

Blair Cottrell: And that’s all he does. That’s pretty much all he does! All he does is list off crime stats about how many immigrants are actually committing crimes, how many immigrants are committing rape, how much rape has increased in certain states and regions in proportion to the increase in immigration. That’s all he does! All he does is list off facts. He just spits facts, and people lose their minds and are now physically attacking him. How insane is that? How retarded are people? How embarrassing it is to be a member of the same race as people like that? Like, do you ever feel like that, Joel? Do you ever feel like you’re born on the wrong planet or something? It’s like, what the fuck, what’s going on here? Who are these fucking cs?

Joel Davis: Why are we letting retarded old ladies participate in politics? Like, shut up, grandma! You’re a retard! [chuckling]

Blair Cottrell: Why do they even have to participate in politics? I mean, I don’t know. Are they bored? Maybe they feel like they’re making a difference or something.

Joel Davis: They are bored. They’re sitting at home watching television all day, and then the news is talking about politics all the time, and they get all hyped up on it.

Blair Cottrell: Imagine the story. Imagine the story. Oh, Gladys!

Joel Davis: Ingesting so much propaganda. And then someone comes in and says something mean coded.

And then they literally start shrieking. One of them was like, fucking shrieking like a banshee! Some old lady punches a man in the face! And they’re trying to drag him out, but he’s like, he’s a strong guy, so he’s just kind of like, whatever. But these old women are trying to drag him out. And then some random, like, soy Jack old dude is like:

“How could you do this in here!”

Like, just like doing this like weird outrage thing. It’s fucking pathetic! But the reaction on social media was funny. Everyone was kind of just taking the piss out of these retarded Boomers.

But then like the news. The news is like, we know about how much bias they have because we play clips of them covering us all the time. You know, they just always frame things in such a ridiculous way.

[1:15:55]

Blair Cottrell: But I think it’s obvious some craze Leftist attack someone physically. The statement from the relevant statesman, and I think it was from actually Albanese, the Prime Minister himself in this particular instance, is:

“Violence from either side it won’t be tolerated!”

But then whenever something mean is said by someone on the far-Right, as they call it, the far-Right, well then, it’s always the far-Right that are targeted specifically. And like you’ve got to change laws to stop them offending people. Then you see some actual physical assault or violence and their response is:

“Well, both sides need to be careful with what they’re doing.”

Joel Davis: It’s so where her outburst was justified because her “feelings” got hurt.

But then we get treated, we don’t commit violence, we hurt people’s feelings, therefore we’re the bad guy. And so like:

“Women can’t be responsible for the fact that they’re hysterical. It’s obviously the man’s fault because we made them upset. Because female emotions and feelings need to rule over rationality or any other kind of modicum of reasonable, consistent standards for behaviour, that goes out the window because an old lady got upset and started crying and therefore she’s the victim.”

And this is what we’re ruled by as a society. I was looking at this study the other day. There was a study that was done, a Meta analysis of basically all forms of literature in the English language. I think they got an AI to assess what’s the prevalence of words that describe rational thought and the prevalence of words that describe emotional predilections, and what’s the ratio. How rational or how emotional is the general language of everything published in the English language. And from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution up to the late 1960s, about 1970, it gets more and more and more rational through time to the point where it’s super majority rational. Then in 1970, after the second wave feminism and women are introduced into the workforce and academia and politics and so on, you get this complete cascade where now everything published in the English language is hyper emotional, more emotional than ever!

And that’s what’s happened to our society writ large. We live in a society where emotions rule over reason. Well, that is a society that is going to become deeply dysfunctional. Because that’s the definition of immaturity. That’s the definition essentially of insanity!

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. When “hurt feelings” are the inspiration for crackdown on free speech. Can’t say this, can’t raise your arm in the air.

Basically, everything, every change legally, every social standard is built around not “hurting people’s feelings”. I can remember when I was in school, when I was in primary school, everything got banned. Everything the boys were doing got banned! And it got banned throughout my time in primary school. It’s like I was born in the exact right generation to see it all happen. First thing that got banned was Pokemon cards. And it happened on the day that I got my first ever deck on my birthday. I remember this like, I think I was in grade three and Mum bought me a deck of Pokemon cards. First time. I was excited to go to school with my new holographic nine tails and flex on all the boys because no one else had that. I think one other kid might have had it, but he was glorified for it.

Anyway, the day I get there, there’s an announcement on the speakers that Pokemon cards have been causing too much conflict amongst the boys and they’re banned. They’re no longer allowed. And if any boys had Pokemon cards on them, they had to leave them in their school bags, take them home and never bring them back. Pokemon cards banned!

So then we started playing Australian League football. We used the trees as goal posts. Three months later or so, that was banned! Because some kid got tackled and cried. And it was all banned by a female vice principal. The actual principal of the school was a man named Peter Williams, but he was never around. He was always absent. It seemed like the vice principal, some woman, I can’t remember her name, she was ruling the roost instead of him. She was the one banning everything. You know, we couldn’t play footy anymore, we couldn’t do Pokemon cards.

So then we started doing marbles that got banned because someone threw a marble at someone and their parents got called and they were unhappy about it. So no more marbles! Then British Bulldogs in the Marble Pit because there was no more use for the Marble Pit now.

So we just started playing British Bulldogs. But some kids shorts, school shorts, got torn a little bit when he got tackled and the parents, the mother called the school and bitched about it. And so that was banned!

And I remember we were sitting around once at lunchtime primary school. By the time everything was banned, we were like grade six, the final year of primary school.

And I said to the boys:

“What are we allowed to do? We can’t even do anything!”

We couldn’t even play brandy, throw a tennis ball at each other. And what is, what does Sewell call this? The gynocracy? I think he calls it the “Gynocracy”, where everything’s banned for the sake because someone might get hurt or it may upset someone, you’re not allowed to do it. No one’s allowed to have any sort of fun or do anything for the sake of saving feelings and someone might get hurt. So it’s not allowed.

And I witnessed all that in primary school. I witnessed the birth of the gynocracy. And now the gynocracy is in politics, now it’s in Parliament and now it’s bearing down on us from that position, from the position of institutional leadership. And that’s what we suffer, my friends, we suffer the giantocracy! And how do we defeat it? How do we defeat the giantocracy? By just not caring and doing whatever we want. Because the gynocracy has gone so far, there’s not even a lot of capable police officers anymore.

So it’s not like there’s any serious consequence waiting around the corner anyway. So I think that’s how you actually get around it. You literally just play whatever game you want to play, say whatever you want to say, make any gesture you want to make, believe what you want to believe, and so long as you’re not actually physically hurting anyone, who cares? Do what you want to do. I guess if enough people do that, then the gynocracy fails, right?

[1:22:21]

Joel Davis: Well, that’s the origin story of an ancient myth in our people, the myth of Percival, or of Parsifal, if you’re a German, who was one of the knights of King Arthur’s knights. One of the knights of the Round Table, who was one of the only ones to actually attain the Holy Grail. And at the beginning, when he was a boy, he was raised in the forest by his mother, and his mother basically kept him away from civilisation because his father and his two older brothers, they went and became knights and they died in battle. And she was all he had left. And so she took him out to the Woods and raised him in the Woods and told him nothing of his of his older brothers and of his father to try and keep him safe. And he’s playing out in the forest one day and he comes across some of the Knights of the Round Table, some of King Arthur’s knights, and they tell him all about what it’s like to be a knight. And immediately he’s like:

“I want to be a knight! That sounds awesome!”

And he goes back and he says:

“Mom, I’m going to go be a knight!”

And she has a mental breakdown:

“No, you can’t leave me. You must stay here where it’s safe!”

And eventually he wins the argument and she realises that there’s nothing that she can say to stop him. And she knits him a sweater to wear at all times and says:

“Wear this.”

And then he leaves and she dies of a broken heart. And there’s a later time where he’s in a great battle where he has to take the sweater off, take off the comfort of the gynocracy, basically, in order to win!

And that’s the beginning, that’s the origin story, is leaving behind security of the womb, the security of the kind of maternal sphere where everything is soft and all the threats are neutralised and everyone has to be nice to each other and sweet to each other and everyone is cared for and nurtured. In order to achieve your destiny, in order to become great, in order to become noble, you have to cast that off and go out. And go on adventures and fight and battle and so on, and find your way to the grail, to the meaning of it all, to be the hero.

So that’s a [word unclear] for a reason.

Blair Cottrell: Don’t you think that men need to be able to compete? Men need an outlet for the energy that they have as men. They need to be able to Barter and trade and fight. They need to be able to play sport. They need to be able to compete! If they can’t for the sake of people not getting hurt or feelings not getting hurt, don’t you think that’s why you see such radical explosions of rage in society now? That’s why men are so angry, because they’ve got all this repressed energy.

I mean, you hear stories about guys just snapping over what seems to be nothing, and you’ve got this domestic violence problem where a lot of the time it’s blamed on men, but really it’s just men are being pushed too far, or they’ve got so much repressed energy because there’s no way for them to actually express that basic competitive element, the desire to achieve something, the desire to build something, to work towards some greater projects. You know what I mean? Like there’s just kind of like no real outlet for a lot of men.

And so I think that’s why you’ve got examples or scenarios in society where some guy is setting a car on fire with his whole family inside, or just losing his shit at seemingly nothing. But really it was 20 years of the gynocracy telling him he’s not allowed to do anything because he’s bad because he’s a man! I don’t know. It’s something to think about because you can’t just cancel everything men do and expect men to react in some sort of obedient, passive way.

Obviously there’s going to be consequences for that. Men aren’t going to accept that. Men aren’t going to react well to that kind of system. I need to think more about this because the idea just came into my head then I’m so I’m not going to be able to articulate it as well as I’d like to.

Joel Davis: Also, everything wrong with our society is downstream from fucking cucked men! Men who adapt their behaviour to make their girlfriend or wife happy. Which means avoiding risk taking, not spending time with the boys, but spending time with her in the security of the lounge suite, watching goy flicks, eating Uber Eats, or taking her to out shopping or something. That’s what she wants to be doing. She wants to be safe. Maybe if she’s a so-called tradition wife, she wants to go move to the countryside and have chickens and shit! And she doesn’t want you getting arrested, she doesn’t want you going to jail, she doesn’t want you getting into fights, she doesn’t want you dying, and like okay, fair enough.

But ultimately that’s your destiny if you’re a political revolutionary, that’s your destiny. If you’re a true, if you’re a warrior, if you’re a man of nobility, a man of strength, you want to go and solve your own problems with your own strength. You don’t want to retreat to safety. That’s the pathway of the coward.

[1:27:41]

Blair Cottrell: I still don’t see it as either, or, though. I don’t see it as either, or. Like you should be able to spend time with women and fight for what you believe in. You shouldn’t have to choose. Why should you have to fucking choose?

Joel Davis: Well, I mean you don’t have to choose because women might try and gaslight you and pressure you, but at the end of the day if you just do what you want, they’ll just accept it. [chuckling] Like realistically.

Blair Cottrell: It’s nice to make a woman happy. That’s also nice to fight for what you believe in. Like I get reward chemicals from doing both of those things. So I’d like to not in order to do the other. I don’t think it needs to be so two dimensional.

Joel Davis: No, I’m not suggesting that it is but ultimately like there’s going to be times where you have to choose one or the other and if you just always choose the cucked safe wife guy option, your life will pass by and you will have been domesticated. And you will not have actually expressed your virility and truly stood for anything. And you will become pacified and you will become neutralised and then you’ll die.

Blair Cottrell: Have you seen those dads that actually admit that they’ve been domesticated in an extreme way? And they make a joke out of, they’re like:

“Yeah, my wife has my balls in a glass of water next to the bed, ha, ha, ha!”

And they like joke about it. What’s with that? That’s nothing to be proud of, bro! It’s not funny at all! [chuckling] You know, if your dad’s like that, if you know someone like that, tell them to wake up to themselves. You know, it’s not funny to not have any sort of sway over your domestic situation. To have no freedom.

Joel Davis: That’s what the weak do they do self depreciating jokes as a form of allaying their anxieties be like:

“Yeah, I’m a weak piece of shit! Isn’t that relatable? Aren’t you a weak piece of shit too? At least I can like have some kind of common ground with you in my existential dissatisfaction and shame.”

I was like:

“No, I actually can’t relate to that.”

Anyway, let’s do the Superchats and let’s. And let’s end the fucking stream! What do you think?

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, well, I was gonna shuffle off anyway because my eye hurts so much.

Joel Davis: Just hang out for five minutes and we’ll be done.

Blair Cottrell: All right.

Joel Davis: Jake 1219 said:

“Coming back to what Joel was saying, Winston, with the help of the British political (Winston Churchill), with the help of the British political establishment and the aristocratic establishment’s old money sold the West out for communism. 100%, right?”

I wouldn’t say communism. I’d say jewish interests.

But yeah, sure, we talked about that before. There was a show we did on World War II revisionism last year that I thought was pretty good. You can go back and watch that.

Home of the Brave said:

“‘Neo-Nazi boss’ Thomas Sewell, (as in quotation marks). The way the media covered your registering as a political party couldn’t have gone better. Can’t wait to see how you guys roll it all out. Could be the blueprint for us all.”

Well, yeah, it’s nice to get the promotion and it was funny. But yeah, it’s gonna be a process. It’s not happening tomorrow. The election is coming up obviously in a week. The next show is going to be about the election. I’m going to do other streams this week about the election and we’re going to have some other, we’ve got some other things planned for election week. We’re going to get Anzac Day over and done with first and then we’re going to focus on that.

But I will say it is funny how the Trumpet of Spastics party, how all of a sudden started copying half baked versions of our talking points and ideas in the last [chuckling] couple weeks and it could help sink the Liberal Party. So it’s pretty funny!

And as I said on Telegram:

“Clive, if you just called me up three months ago and gave me one of like one of the $90 million you’ve already wasted on this failed election campaign, I could have helped you run it much better and you would have got more votes.”

But instead of just stealing my ideas with no credit in a half assed way in the second last week of the election campaign. So you missed the boat on that one. Jake1219 also said:

“Question for both. 30% of Australia’s population were born overseas. How do you go about working jobs, operating current society socially, cordially with so many migrants in your face?”

I don’t personally. [chuckling]

Blair Cottrell: With great difficulty and a great amount of selectivity! And not without the urge to headbutt people on the regular. So it’s frustrating! It is, yeah. But when running your own business like I do, you can be selective especially because it’s like word of mouth through people who know people in an area where most people are Aussies, it’s not so bad.

But yeah, I could imagine it depends on the field in which you’re working. I know construction is getting pretty bad and you know, I’d probably stay right away from tech. The closer you are to the city, the worse it’s going to be. There’s various factors to consider. But the closer to the city you are, the more patience you’re going to need. I don’t have the patience man to work around these illustrious skilled labourers from overseas.

Joel Davis: Fellow Comrade said:

“I’m late. I will watch the replay. Thanks guys!”

Yeah, cheers.

Blair Cottrell: Did you see we had $20 from the Comfy Friend who [chuckling] says:

“Gerard Rennick White power!”

Joel Davis: Yeah, well if you’re in Queensland, give Gerard Rennick a vote. I hope he gets back into the Senate. He did call out the jews, the Mossad and so on.

And I think he’s a good man. You know he’s not everything that we would want, but he’s the best of the bunch. So I hope that he gets re-elected And I like him. I think he’s an all right guy. And a few our guys are working in his campaign team so respect to the grind. And yeah, obviously hail Comfy Friend, friend of the show. I think that’s all the Superchats. Let me check. I think that’s all the Superchats for this evening.

So yeah, everyone up early tomorrow for Anzac Day. And yeah, make sure you’re down there. And be there for the ancestors. Venerate tomorrow. Treat tomorrow like a religious holiday. That’s what it is, a day to commemorate our national religion of the ancestors who gave blood for our people. That’s what it’s about. And hail White Australia and hail the Anzacs. Why Power! Fellow Comrades said:

“One more Superchat for fun.”

Well thanks dude and we’ll end it there. See you next time.

[1:34:46]

END

top

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

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 4/25/2025 = 10)

Supporter
6 hours ago
same thing the Americans in WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam etc fought for….. Nothing Their lives were wasted
4 likes
Report

‹ Hide 1 reply
TheBeardedIndian
Supporter+
3 hours ago
Top comment. These war memorial events should not be a celebration of sacrifice, they should be annual reminders of not being duped again into dying for no good reason. Celebrating these wars furthers the Jewish plan for Christians to slaughter each other.
0 likes
Report

ThigASteach
Supporter
8 hours ago
Great conversation. Appreciate you guys. #PeaceAndRespect
3 likes
Report

katana17
12 hours ago
[Joel Davis – So Much Has Happened, But We’re Only Just Getting Started – Apr 11, 2025 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2025/04/12/joel-davis-so-much-has-happened-but-were-only-just-getting-started-apr-11-2025-transcript/ [In this livestream video episode Aussie nationalist activists Tom Sewell and Blair Cottrell have a discussion, followed by a separate Blair Cottrell and Joel Davis discussion. The two separate discussion are a result of severe and unreasonable bail conditions imposed on Tom and Joel as a result of police and court harrassment.
2 likes

Delete
fastnail
5 hours ago
And the British and Irish.
1 like
Report

TheShowgun
SubSupporter+
5 hours ago
prayin for your well health Blair!! although, Blair with an eyepatch would go hard af..
0 likes
Report

BlueNorth88
3 hours ago
Blair’s missus can really bang
0 likes
Report

GlobalistJuice
3 hours ago
Joel would be an awesome teacher of history in Australia’s schools – his storytelling is sublime, a flowing voice that is detail engaging with appropriate inflection while retaining a smooth masculine tone that is easy-on-the-ears.
0 likes
Report

evon626
VerifiedSupporter++
1 hour ago
Blair said something like “The youth are more radical because they’re desensitized,” not because they’re more intellectually curious and open. Sounds correct. I’ll take it though. The masses are a force multiplier for whoever can move them. We just need to be the coolest thing out there and the mindless kids will follow.
0 likes
Report

evon626
VerifiedSupporter++
1 hour ago
Blair is wondering if he’s a “mere” entertainer. He is, but shows like this are crucial to making these concepts cool and normalizing them. So he plays a crucial role in allowing us to eventually instrumentalize the normie to our ends (and for their benefit).
0 likes

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

See Also

top

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Joel Davis: No Blair tonight. It is the 3rd of October 2024. Blair’s got some things that came up. He couldn’t do the show. Blair and I might do a stream, though, maybe Sunday night or something to make up for that, but nevertheless, gotta have a show for you guys this evening, and you got a show with Tom and I, so should be good. There’s a lot to discuss. It’s been an interesting week in global politics, at least, you know, things to Israel, European politics, etcetera. Yes, some interesting things I wanted to discuss.

So there’s a lot on the agenda.

First of all, I guess, like a place to start would be, we could talk about, obviously, things have kicked off where Israel about a week ago, they did a pretty extensive bombing campaign in Lebanon. They managed to take out the leadership of Hezbollah with that bombing campaign.

And then they did a, I don’t know if you would call it an invasion, but they went over the border into Lebanon and they’re doing, their military is active fighting Hezbollah within Lebanon as we speak.

And obviously what made a lot of news was the fact that Iran sent over a shitload of ballistic missiles into Israel. They blew up a few, I think, air bases and some other things inside Israel, Israeli air defenses, which are state of the art, thanks to American taxpayers, weren’t able to intercept, because they Iran has hypersonics. I think that they got them from the Russians or something that are pretty, like high tech.

So the situation is pretty heavy. Shit has kind of escalated from just what it was for the past year, where it was just a kind of war in Gaza against Hamas. Now it’s going to the next level. And this really shouldn’t be something that we’re that concerned with, but it is something that we should be concerned with purely for the reason that there is a sequence where this keeps escalating to the point that you get an American intervention, and if there’s an American intervention, that could escalate into a full on war in the region with Iran. Or maybe they deployed troops to fight Hezbollah, maybe war kicks off in Syria, and that could also rope in Australians as well. We’d probably send troops if something like that happened. And that is quite concerning.

Obviously, we don’t want to expend any White blood for fucking jews, particularly after the shit show that was Iraq. We don’t want a repeat of that. And I think this time around it would probably be more brutal.

So that’s on the horizon. I’m not predicting a war. I think it’s a low percentage chance, but it’s nevertheless a possibility. And I think what’s also interesting about this is the way that there’s a reaction within the domestic politics of Western countries. Like, let’s bring it back to Australia. We’ve seen a lot of the Zionist conservative element be very forceful. There were protests in Sydney. People were waving Hezbollah flags. And some Arab chick was charged with terrorism offences for waving a Hezbollah flag. It’s illegal in Australia to support a listed terrorist organisation. I think they can actually use maybe the same legislation or similar legislation to what they’ve used to ban NSDAP symbols to go after them specifically for the Hezbollah symbols. I’m not so sure about that. Might be different legislation, but anyway, it’s relevant.

The point is its pretty testy. Peter Dutton has been out and very forceful in defense of jews, in defense of Israel, holding the Left’s feet to the fire on the issue. And we’ve seen a lot of Zionists that align themselves with the political Right in this country, basically coming out demanding that the Muslims are deported. Not all Muslims, necessarily, but any Muslims that participate in any of these anti-Israel protests.

And so that’s quite interesting to kind of break down and analyze. And even, like, Drew Pavlou, who apparently was on the left, and when I debated him, he’s like a wholesome chungus, you know, multiracialist now. He’s almost, like, sounding like hard Right. Because that’s how much he shills for Israel.

So it’s kind of interesting to dissect the hypocrisy of that, I think, and analyze it where it’s incredible how the conservative movement can organise so staunchly in defense of jewish interests and the jews.

But, you know, crickets when it comes to White Australians, actual Australians. And what concerns us and what the fuck does Israel have to do with Australia? Like, seriously, like, it obviously has nothing to do with Australia. It’s just jewish capture, jewish elite capture of our political institutions.

So what do you think about this, Tom? I see you made some comments on Twitter, but how do you kind of take in the whole situation?

[05:12]

Thomas Sewell: Well, a lot has happened. A lot has happened, but nothing has really impacted our lives at this stage. I did notice that in the US there has been a hurricane, or a flood of some sort that’s damaged a lot of people, and that’s been all over my timeline. And something that I think should be said is its so obvious. Well, I’ll give a bit more information. The National Guard is being deployed to the Middle East at the moment. And the National Guard is meant to be a line of defense for what we did when I was in the army, neo-SAS operations like non-combative evacuation operations, security and stability operations. It’s not really meant to be deployed to war zones. It’s more for like, domestic affairs. And this is the one time where it should be really, a lot of resources should be going into helping these people. But they’re sending billions to Israel for missiles. And their readiness level for their soldiers is not to help their own families but to go overseas. And I saw some screenshots from text messages from people saying, like, active service people in the US saying that they:

“Couldn’t go home, they couldn’t get leave to help their families or help their neighbourhoods because they’ve got to be on standby to get the Middle East because of what’s happening.”

So this is some collapse of Rome stuff. And I’m not saying that this is what is about to happen. I’m just saying that this general attitude that the US government has towards its people and all governments, all White governments or traitor governmentss have towards White people, they’re teetering on the edge of mutinies, mass mutinies! I’m not saying it’s going to be a mutiny overnight, but this behaviour leads to mutinies. You have to let people, soldiers and civic minded people, you have to let them clean up their homes first before they can go overseas and fight.

And yeah, there’s just a general zeitgeist, I think, for Whites globally, that’s very different to when the first Iraq war happened. The zeitgeist back then was quite anti-islamic from just a pure, visceral, you know, guttural dislike for Muslims. I still think that that dislike still exists. And it’s potentially even stronger because of the way Muslims have treated White people over the last, 20 years in our own countries because of the mass migration. I think that feeling still exists. But what it’s not paired with which it was definitely even as a weaker feeling, paired with a stronger sense of going over there and kicking some arse.

So when 9/11* happened [an Israeli false flag – Kat] and the 7/7 bombings in the UK and these terrorist attacks in the early 2010s, there was a huge civic patriot, anti-Islam movement to go overseas and kill hajis. And it was as explicit as that. I was in the army and probably 90% of the guys I was in the army with, that was their main reason for joining. It was they want to go to Afghanistan or Iraq and kill Muslims, like, for what they’ve done to the basically to Western civilisation. They weren’t really there to just like, get a meal ticket. That there was like, a racial, a subconscious racial mindedness to do it. I don’t think that exists anymore to. At the same capacity. It still exists, but I don’t think it’s anywhere near as strong as it once was, because there’s so many factors. I won’t even go into it. But it was good to see Israel getting bombed by some proper ballistic missiles. That was awesome to see.

[* See: The Realist Report with Christopher Bollyn – Sep 2018 — TRANSCRIPT]

And I think a lot of people get caught up not saying that you’ve done this, Joel. I think you introduced the topic very well, but I have seen a lot of discourse online where people are saying that:

“Everything’s a psyop, nothing ever happens. Israel let themselves get bombed!”

And this was probably discussed on an earlier show. It’s like, that’s the wrong attitude. Why do we always have these people acting as if Israel and the jews are some omnipotent force? Yes, they’re very powerful! Yes, they have a completely disproportionate amount of power. Yes, they own the US government, they own the Senate, they own Congress, like, through AIPAC and the Federal Reserve and the media. But sometimes they actually can take a punch, you know what I mean? Sometimes a missile gets through and actually hits something and people saying oh, like there’s a lot of black pill. Whenever something happens, I don’t want to get too excited, obviously, because Israel’s been bombed a lot of times.

But, you know, Iran stepping up, when I saw it in my newsfeed, when it said that Iran is basically declaring a state of war and they sent those missiles, I thought to myself:

“Wow, I can sleep a bit better tonight. At least they’re doing something. [chuckling] That’s great!”

Joel Davis: Yeah. When I would say, though. So followed it kind of closely, and I think Iran didn’t declare war on Israel directly. They bombed them. Yes. And you’re correct that the jews didn’t let the bomb get through. That was jewish cope. They actually blocked out on Google Maps or whatever the satellite footage, like the Israeli bases that got bombed so that you couldn’t see the damage from the satellite imaging. So why cover it up? And they said initially:

“Oh, everything’s fine. No one died and everything’s fine. They just killed one Palestinian. Ha ha, idiots!”

But then now the truth is coming out. And no, actually the missiles did do some damage. But at the same time, I mean just from a geographical standpoint, like Iran, it’s very difficult for them to do much to Israel because just for geographical distance, like there’s Iraq and Syria between them and Israel.

And so it’s a long fucking way! I don’t know if Iran even has carrier ships for their air force, but they wouldn’t be able to use them even if they did because the Americans are sitting there with their much better navy and much better air force kind of as a check on much of what they can do.

So, yeah, they can lob some missiles at Israel from a distance and blow up a few things. And that’s good optics for them. And it does restrain Israeli behaviour. And I saw that the French and the British basically said to the Americans and to Israel:

“We don’t want you to respond. We’re not going to back you if you respond, you’re on your own.”

Kind of thing. They don’t want to see an escalation.

[12:22]

And so I think Iran, they kind of played a strategic hand here. They thought that maybe because Israel is kind of in a precarious situation, it’s tied up, they can lob a few in and maybe get away with it and not get much of a retaliation. But if they were to continue doing it and continue escalating, it would get to a point where the US military would be brought in to then bomb the shit out of Iran in defense of Israel. Like, Israel can wear a few of these and be told by the Americans to wear a few of these. But if they keep escalating, keep escalating, keep escalating, there’s a point at which the jews can pull the strings in ZOG to make America bomb the shit out of Iran. And Iran, I think, is aware of that.

So it’s a little bit of an optics game where they want to look like they’re standing up to Israel and they have like, one strategic capacity, which are these long range, like, hypersonic ballistic missiles, but there’s a limited strategic benefit to them.

What is interesting, though, is that going into Lebanon, like, there was a lot of hype last week when Israel took out the leaders of Lebanon with their own bombing campaign, which showed that they had really good intelligence because they were able to pinpoint where the leaders were and take them out with aerial bombing. But Hezbollah are, like, 100,000 men, and it’s a guerrilla war.

So if they’re going to go into Lebanon, what are they going to do? Occupy all of Lebanon and systematically uncover 100,000 men and execute all of them? That’s totally unrealistic military operation.

So they can go in skirmish, try and do some damage to Hezbollah, try and use intelligence to identify where they’re holding some rocket storage facilities or whatever and take them out. But they’re not going to be able to defeat Hezbollah. It’s just not possible. And fighting against the guerrilla enemy with the conventional military is so difficult. Like, the Americans lost in Afghanistan for a reason and in Vietnam for a reason. It’s because, you know, guerrilla technique, when you have the sympathy of the people, creates a disproportionate, like, a massive disproportionate advantage against a conventional occupying force. Conventional force versus conventional force. It’s more of who’s the stronger power will win. But, yeah, with the asymmetric warfare, it’s very, very difficult.

And then the longer that this goes on, you have to remember, I had Mike Pinovich on to talk about this because he’s like a spurg about Israel kind of subject. So if you’re interested in his analysis, you can go watch that stream if you haven’t already.

But he was making a very accurate point I thought that while all this is going on, Hezbollah are lobbing rockets into Israel. Yeah, like, their rockets aren’t as good as the Israeli rockets or the Iranian rockets, right? But they still blow shit up. They can still kill people. And the jews that live near the Lebanese border, a lot of them, like, have had to evacuate from their homes or if you have businesses in that area that had to shut down.

And so there’s millions of jews that are their whole life is on hold while, like, shit is just getting randomly blown up all around them every night. And there’s, like bomb sirens going off all the time, and they’re living in fear. They don’t have a normal life, like a massive portion of the country.

And so, like, Israel has a limited window and under which it can conduct this operation. They can’t just go into Lebanon and fight a guerrilla war against Hezbollah for four years, because that means four years of random jews getting their houses blown up in Israel. And that’s just not tolerable. So like, what can Israel realistically do here? Like, they can go in, they can kill some people. A few of them will die. And also, Israel doesn’t have a massive military with a lot of forces. It’s a small country, like in population size.

So their high level, like special operations and, like the high quality, high grade fighters, they don’t have a lot. So their strategy has to be either dragging the Americans in, which is going to be difficult, because I think Iran will basically try to push as hard as they can without crossing a line that would drag the Americans in mixed, or basically they can go in and then blow some shit up and declare victory and then go back to Israel. And then Netanyahu probably gets voted out the next election, and the Israeli Left takes control and has a more moderate foreign policy. This whole exercise has just destroyed Israel’s international reputation and pissed off all of their enemies.

Thomas Sewell: There’s huge protesting at the moment in Israel, huge protesting!

So they are in a difficult situation as to how they can escalate this war without escalating, as you said, there’s a huge percentage of, they’re living in what would feel like a war zone, or a prison. And because it is, and they’re locked in. Now, even though they’re not being directly invaded, they’re the difference between the Lebanese or the Palestinians or the Gazans and the jews is the jews are accustomed to a high standard of living, whereas the southern Lebanese, the Gazans and the Palestinians are accustomed to suffering. So they can tolerate a lot of stress and it only strengthens their resolve, whereas the jews actually can’t tolerate that much stress.

[17:50]

So it’s an effective strategy what Hezbollah and Iran are doing by just keeping them under constant stress without provoking America. That would really be their goal, because obviously provoking America is going to result in the B2 bombers coming over, the Stealth bombers coming over and just bombing Tehran, which is everything that all the power grid’s going to go out. Like, they’re going to try to send Iran back to the Stone Age, which is what all the Hawks in Washington are trying to go for.

But there’s obviously two factors at play. There’s the Israeli election and there’s the American election, and I think everything is really in this kind of, it’s not a stalemate, but everything’s in this kind of play on. They’re doing this kind of rigmarole. They’re playing war on the Lebanese border. Like I saw the footage today from the Special Forces soldiers going in. It looks like they wanted to get some. It’s not, as you said, it’s not a full ground invasion. They’re just looking to get in, probe, you know, they’re looking in to get some. And, yeah, they’re not going to get very far with that.

Regarding taking out the entire or the vast majority of the Hezbollah leadership. Obviously, the jews have good intel, and they would be leaning entirely, I think, on the Americans. I think the American intel, you know, would be the superior intel. The jews obviously, would have the backdoor to a lot of the Google, and a lot of the kind of modern tech.

But I think it’s the American spy network. The Americans just have so many spies on the payroll, and it would just be subcontracted out to. Well, Israel would be subcontracting their workout without paying, obviously. You know, the Americans do it for free.

So yeah. I also think it’s interesting that the media or the ABC [state run Australian Broadcasting Corporation], it sounded like they’re trying to defend Hezbollah. It shows you how Left-wing the ABC is when Peter Dutton* was speaking about that girl charged with waving the Hezbollah flag.

[* Peter Craig Dutton (born 18 November 1970) is an Australian politician and former police detective serving as the current Leader of the Opposition, holding office as the leader of the Liberal Party of Australia since May 2022. He has been the Member of Parliament (MP) for the division of Dickson since 2001. Dutton previously served as the minister for Defence from 2021 to 2022 and the minister for Home Affairs from 2017 to 2021. He held various ministerial positions from 2004 to 2022 in the governments of Howard, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison. Dutton grew up in Brisbane. He worked as a police officer in the Queensland Police for nearly a decade upon leaving school, and later ran a construction business with his father. He joined the Liberal Party as a teenager and was elected to the House of Representatives at the 2001 election, aged 30.]

Regarding that legislation, I’m fairly certain that when they made the recent amendment, they took out the ISIS flag, because originally the ISIS flag was on that amendment as a banneed, like as a designated sort of terror symbol. And they took it off, added the swastika and the double-sig runes, specifically the double-sig runes [SS symbol]. But I can’t remember whether they included the Hezbollah flag in that legislation. But I do know in previous legislation, they named, I think, two random, like, I think was like, Atomwaffen and Sonnenkrieg Division, which was like a Finnish Discord chat as, like the two neo-Nazi groups that were designated terror groups. Yeah, Sonnenkrieg Division isn’t real. It’s like, I think it was like a 15 year old on Discord that had a few, like, international people on it, and I think they just shared BT videos on Discord.

So anyway, Sonnenkrieg Division, and I think The Base or Atomwaffen got listed and then there was like seven or eight Islamic groups that were listed, and obviously one of them was Hezbollah. So that would be a separate legislation that would imply the symbolism of Hezbollah would also be designated.

Joel Davis: Yeah.

Thomas Sewell: Interesting times.

Joel Davis: Yeah.

Thomas Sewell: It’s a pretty brazen thing to do, that girl.

I don’t know if you can get that up. Was a Noticer article?

Joel Davis: Yeah, I could probably get it up. I’ll pull it up in a sec.

But you know, on the subject I also want to make this take, and I said it actually on social media, but there’s a lot of jews that are coming out now, and we saw this actually, this is a repeat of what we’ve already seen a few times over the past year since shit kicked off between Israel and Hamas last October, where the jews are coming out and calling for deportations. And then that’s just immediately turning on all the conservatives, like:

“Yes, yes! Deportations! Oh, my God, let’s get these browns out!”

Because, it’s like they’re getting a licence to express their inner racism. But the jews have been saying this for a year, and the jews have a lot of political power in this country. If they really wanted a deportation plan to be seriously implemented, they’re like think tanks and NGO’s and so on would push them very heavily in a systematic way. But we haven’t seen any of that.

I feel like a lot of the leading jews, like, I’m sure like a lot of jews just like Zionist sympathizers want these people deported. I don’t doubt that.

But I think a lot of the leading jews realise that having these pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah, pro-Palestine browns protesting on the streets is actually a great look for them and helps get the sympathy of conservatives on their side because they can play into White racism and they can say:

“Hey, look at these fucking browns! They shouldn’t be in our country. They don’t share our values!”

And then immediately, I can feel it. You’re like:

“Yeah, let’s get these browns out!”

And I agree with deporting them, of course, because they’re brown. But I also want the jews deported. I mean, when they say that their terrorist sympathizers. Well, when has Hezbollah committed a terrorist attack against Australia or any terrorist attack against the British Empire, against us? I don’t think that’s ever happened. Someone can quote, if I’m wrong, let me know.

But I don’t think that’s ever happened. Israel has committed terrorist attacks against us [yeah 9/11 for example – Kat]. In fact, that’s how the state of Israel came into fucking existence in the first place, through terrorist attacks. And that is land that was won, by the way, by Australian blood. We went in World War One and we fought the Ottoman Empire, and Churchill fucked us over and sent us into the beaches of Gallipoli. And how many men did we lose in that complete fuck up by Churchill in World War One?

Thomas Sewell: I think about 8,000.

Joel Davis: Yeah, we fought basically for that land. That was like our land as the British Empire.

And then the jews committed terrorism against us and stole it!

[24:24]

Thomas Sewell: King David Hotel.* They killed like a dozen or more.

[* The British administrative headquarters for Mandatory Palestine, housed in the southern wing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, were bombed in a terrorist attack on 22 July 1946, by the militant Right-wing Zionist underground organisation Irgun during the Jewish insurgency. Ninety-one people of various nationalities were killed, including Arabs, Britons and Jews, and 46 were injured. Wikipedia]

[See: The Realist Report with Christopher Bollyn – Sep 2018 — TRANSCRIPT]

Joel Davis: In multiple acts.

Thomas Sewell: Oh, yeah, there was a lot. Well, I think the first. Was it Perez? Was he the first president or prime minister? I think Perez or one of the first. They’ve all got strange jewy names, but one of the first prime ministers or the first prime minister was actually the head of one of the terrorist wings.

So it’s the same situation as, like, Nelson Mandela being the head of the ANC terror wing.

Joel Davis: There’s some idiot in the chat here. He said:

“You didn’t fight for Israeli land, you muppets.”

Yeah, in World War One we fought the Ottoman Empire and the Ottoman Empire controlled what is, like Palestine. And then Palestine became under the control of the British Empire.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. Syria, I think, became part of Syria, and Lebanon, I think, became part of France. Like, the French controlled that part and the British got Palestine.

Joel Davis: Yeah, that’s just the history of it.

Thomas Sewell: There was a transfer agreement. The British Zionists made a deal to transfer all the European jews, or not all of them, but the vast majority of European jews in 1933 into British Palestine. Which Hitler even supported.

Joel Davis: Yeah, the Havara agreement. I mean, that made sense. Like, it was a way to get the jews out of Germany. You know, I would gladly deport all of our jews to Israel tomorrow if we could.

Thomas Sewell: Yes, yes!

Joel Davis: But, yeah, like, anyway, the point is that supporting Israel is actually supporting an entity that came into being through terrorism, against us. So is it rich when the jews are trying to morally grandstand about terrorism? It’s like:

“Okay, so you care about terrorism when it’s against you, even though you committed it against us historically!”

And also the only reason that these fucking browns are even here in the fucking first place is because you conspired to destroy the White Australia Policy! Like, jews, like, jewish groups infiltrated the Australian government and systematically attacked the White Australia Policy from the fifties to the seventies and were instrumental in its deconstruction because they felt that they basically were the odd man out in Australia.

We didn’t even want them here! There was barely any jews here before World War Two, they then snuck in against our will, largely through, you know, larping as Greeks and Italians. And there were a bunch of American based, like, jewish organisations that funded and facilitated jewish migration to Australia. The jewish diaspora sets up shop here. Immediately, all the communist jews, like, infiltrate our government and start sending all of our state secrets to the Soviet Union.

So then we had to create ASIO [Australian Security Intelligence Organisation] because we had a high trust Anglo society before that. We didn’t even need ASIO. And then leading jewish community groups were like:

“Well, we should try and turn this into a multicultural country, open up the borders, end the White Australia Policy, because everyone else in this country are White Christians and we’re jews! And so if we don’t, like, crowd them out with some other minorities, you know what’s going to stop them turning around and looking at us as the odd man out and wanting us out on at some particular point in the future?”

And they explicitly said this, more or less like, I’m paraphrasing. So it’s pretty rich when getting lectured by the jews on all this shit!

But anyway, like, I digress. I think when you get these calls from a lot of these jewish leaders, it’s a little bit of a bait and switch. They kind of throw the carrot out of kosher racism. And it’s a way to get conservatives to emotionally side with Israel and the only democracy in the Middle East and kind of view jews as White. Like, I saw this clip of Barry Weiss. I think she was doing a podcast with Douglas Murray or something that Keith Woods posted it, like, a couple hours ago on Twitter. Maybe it was only an hour ago, actually, because I just saw it before we went live. And she was sitting down and they were talking about, she’s an American Zionist, by the way, a high, high ranking Zionist jew in the United States. And she was talking about how, like:

“Oh, the Qataris have infiltrated America. They’ve infiltrated our sports teams, our education system, our media, and they’re subverting American society!”

And it’s like:

“You did that! Like, worst. Like, you literally took over the whole fucking country!”

But so, like, jews are now just going to pretend like they’re White because it’s suiting them to make Whites identify with Israel.

But then when it comes to White issues that directly face us or we talk about, well, rather than deporting people from our country because they upset jews, what about because they upset Whites? Well, then jews freak out!:

“That’s literally Hitler! You’re going to commit a “Holocaust”. How dare you? As a jew, White people can’t be allowed to think like that.”

So then they magically are not White. So they’re like Schrodinger’s White Guy*, they just flip-flop based upon how it suits them. They’re just subversive scum.

[* In quantum mechanics, Schrödinger’s cat is a thought experiment concerning quantum superposition. In the thought experiment, a hypothetical cat may be considered simultaneously both alive and dead, while it is unobserved in a closed box, as a result of its fate being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. This experiment viewed this way is described as a paradox. Wikipedia.]

Thomas Sewell: Exactly!

[29:34]

Joel Davis: You know, just today, like, Australia’s richest jew, Triguboff came out and we need more immigration, apparently. Apparently like the ridiculously high record historical immigration into Australia that’s caused a housing crisis, and he’s jacking up the crime rate and ruining Australian society. It’s not enough immigrants for him. He wants even more! And who’s going to win? Because we’ve got 74% of the country in a recent poll saying they oppose immigration, we’ve got one richest jew in Australia that supports it. Which way do you think the government’s going to go? Because apparently we live in a democracy. I think the government’s probably going to go with the rich jew!

So what does that say?

[See: https://www.noticer.news/harry-triguboff-demands-immigration-increase/]

Thomas Sewell: He’s been doing that forever, though. He’s made all his billions of mass immigration.

So they’re not exactly unbiased sources of public discourse, are they? They’re profiting from it. I mean, you obviously know that, but it’s important for the public to be aware that everyone that advocates for it is either a traitor or they’re profiting from it, or both.

Joel Davis: Yeah, well, he’s like Australia’s wealthiest property developer, so of course he wants mass immigration, not just is it crowding out the White demographic but, it’s kind of inflating the housing market. So when he creates these big high rise apartments everywhere, there’s all these jeets to pack into them.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, well, he was complaining last year about how many of them were empty and how he needed to raise immigration. So they just build them. They build them and no one’s even in them yet. They’re not even 50% sold, but they just keep building.

And then they build the next one, and they haven’t even sold off the first one yet and they just keep building. And he went and lobbied the government and I don’t remember the exact conversation and obviously I wasn’t there and it wasn’t documented. But the article that I read that discussed the conversation that he had with the government when he spoke to them was:

“Who’s going to buy these apartments? I built them all and now they’re just sitting empty. Who’s going to buy these apartments, you need to raise the immigration level.”

So it’s absolutely disgusting!

Joel Davis: He’s one of the biggest campaign contributors to the Liberal Party and the Labor Party, by the way. And yeah, he’s been advocating for big Australia immigration policy for decades in a very prominent way with the property lobby and other lobby groups, pro-immigration lobby groups. So, yeah, that’s how it works.

But this is a bit of a digression, but I think it’s an important digression because when we’re talking about the Israel issue, like Blair said last week, it was kind of provocative. I think Blair said words to the effect of:

“I don’t care if Israel go in and genocide a million Palestinians tomorrow, and I don’t give a shit if Hamas invades Israel and gas a million jews tomorrow, it’s not my fucking problem!”

And I agree with that sentiment. It isn’t our fucking problem! But it’s made our problem because of the fact that they’re here in our fucking country!

So now we have to deal with it on the basis of what’s in, and also that the jews are trying to drag us into it as well and fight their wars for them. So that’s what makes it our problem.

And so I think there’s a pro-White perspective here. It’s like, I don’t really give a shit about. I don’t want to have to give a shit about it, but I’m forced to because of their presence here, their parasitism, their subversion of my society. And that’s where I differentiate from., … There’s certain elements in the movement that have this view:

“That we should really focus upon the plight of the poor Palestinians and waving Iranian flags and supporting the struggle of browns against Israel because they will pull on the heartstrings of Whites. They like an underdog, and they’ll come around and support the enemies of Israel, and it will help them to see the problem with zionism and with jews.”

And I just fundamentally disagree with that approach. I think that’s already basically the mainstream position of the Left. And all of them see Israel as a kind of evil, kind of they almost see it as White and as, like a Western settler colonial project, much like Australia. And they hate it for the same reasons that they hate Australia or they hate America, insofar as it’s, like, a White dominated country.

So I don’t believe in that kind of universalistic, like, moralism. I think we should just simply assert the fact that as Whites, we want our money, our blood and treasure to be entirely focused upon defending our own fucking people and our own interests and to hell with everybody else! And that’s basically how everyone in the world thinks, except, you know, Whites that have been psyopped into this deranged humanitarianism.

And I think the average Australian, like, you can look at opinion polls, do you support Israel? Do you support Palestine? I think the average Australian really doesn’t give a fuck either way. I think only a very small fraction of society really cares either way. And that’s actually natural and healthy because it’s on the other side of the fucking world, and these people have nothing to do with us! Why would they care? Like, if something was happening to a European country, like, if something was happening to Britain or to Germany or to the United States, then, yeah, of course we would care because they’re like racial kin. Who the fuck cares about, … I laugh at the jews getting blown up by Iranian bombs, but I don’t really care about what’s going on there personally.

I think the messaging has to be, how does it affect Australians? How does it affect Whites in general? You said before the stream that you didn’t see because Keith Woods debated. I can’t, but this guy’s name. His name was Daniel. It’s like some Muslim guy who lives in America, Daniel, some fucking, like, gibberish, right? He’s got some gibberish, fucking, you know, brown, like, Arabic name or something. I don’t know exactly where he’s from. But they were debating White nationalism, and the debate was interesting because Keith Woods was going for this kind of wholesome chungus White nationalism, where he was like:

“Hey, look I think we should have White countries for people of European descent, because those are our native lands, and I don’t want our countries to be involved in Middle Eastern politics or imposing ourselves over the Muslim world either. So we’re happy to leave you alone if you leave us alone. So what’s wrong with that?”

And what Daniel the Muslim, responded to that with, which I thought was really interesting, was he said:

“But if we let Whites have their own countries, what’s going to stop you creating all this super advanced technology, AI, robotics and so on, and then imposing., …”

And he literally said:

“Whites have higher IQs and they’re better at creating technologies. And what’s going to stop you from creating this satanic technological mega empire that then completely fucks us up. Whereas if we stuff ourselves into your countries now, we can stop you from developing basically, and prevent this kind of like, Faustian runaway where the Whiteman re-ascends to global domination status.”

[36:55]

And I’ve never heard a brown person ever make that argument before, but it was actually really interesting that he did.

And it’s like, I can actually see his point. That actually is a rational position for a brown person to take. I’m sure that’s actually implicit in how a lot of non-Whites think about this. Where the reason why they are so indifferent to our plight, it’s not just because they’re just selfish and only care about their own group. I think it’s because they’re afraid of us. They’re afraid, like right now, the Whiteman is weak and they can smell blood. And it’s like:

“We got to take these motherfuckers out now while they’re having their retard moment. Because if they wake up to themselves and go full Hitler mode, we’re fucked! Like, they’re just going to Giga Chad their way over the world again and we’re going to be their bitch!”

Thomas Sewell: Mmm.

Joel Davis: And they’re not wrong. And Keith Woods can come along and give, like, his wholesome chungus:

“No, no, no! We’re nice guys. White people are nice. We just want to have our homelands back. And we respect you if you respect us.”

And I can see why the browns aren’t buying it because it actually does kind of smell like bullshit! And the reality is, for every Keith Woods, there’s a Joel Davis or Thomas Sowell or whatever, that if we look, yeah, we are coming for all your shit! If we get back in power, like, of course we are, because someone’s got to run the world. And if we don’t do it, the Chinese are going to do it, or some other group is going to do it. And so the only guarantee against someone else taking over the fucking world is taking it over yourself!

So there’s a zero sum kind of reality.

And actually Nick Fuentes, like, kind of criticised Keith on this point on his show, and I agreed with his take because he was saying, like:

“So what are we going to do? Like, we’re going to take back all of the White countries, and then there’s all of these vital resources, natural resources in Africa, and we kind of need them to advance our civilisation. And we’re going to go to the African tribesmen and be like: ‘Hey, can we have some of your minerals?”

And then, you know, chief, like I don’t know, some gibberish African name is like:

“No, you can’t have it!”

And they’ve got like a bunch of sticks and rocks and we’ve got like nuclear weapons and like all this advanced tech, and we’re just going to be like:

“Okay, you’re right to self-determination. You can keep all the vital minerals, like lithium ion and all this shit that you’ve got that we kind of need, and we’ll just like, stagnate our civilisation and just not come take it.”

And it’s like, that’s obviously pretty unrealistic. That’s just not how any civilisation has operated ever in world history. And the argument, I want to get your take on this because the argument from Keith Woods, I haven’t spoken to him about this directly this week, but I’ve spoken to him about this a lot over the years because we’re old friends. And his argument is that, well, the thing is he’d be like:

“Okay, I can see what you’re saying. But the thing is that if we put ourselves about in that kind of realistic supremacist way, we’re going to freak out all the other White people. And then White people aren’t going to want to do White nationalism because they’re going to get freaked out by this, like unoptical supremacism that makes it seem like Whites organising politically really is what the jewish media caricatures it as. It really is this genocidal, immoral, you know, evil, maniacal force in the world. And maybe the jews are right. Maybe the White race does need to be, … Maybe Daniel is right. Maybe the Muslims have to come and replace us to make sure that we don’t create some kind of dystopian, like, techno futurism that enslaves the world or something.”

But my retort to that is that I don’t think that Whites who are too morally cucked to embrace supremacy will have what it takes to take our countries back. I think the only Whites that will be capable of having the grit to rise up, take back control, do what needs to be done to assert ourselves back over our countries, which is going to require a hard struggle. And we’re going to have to basically ruin the lives of all the non-Whites that live in our countries to send them back. And some of them might want to fight us, as. Well, that’s going to require a kind of stomach for doing that. Kind of the assertion that:

“No, we are going to put our people first, and we don’t really care if that ruins your life. We don’t really care if people have to get hurt. We’re gonna do it!”

And I think really only, like, for someone to have that attitude, they have to kind of leave the humanitarian, you know, chungus, equitable. Like, let’s sit down in a room in suits and work this out like civilised individuals. Like, I don’t think that’s realistic. I don’t think we’re going to sit down and negotiate our way out of this. I’m going to have to fight our way out of this, and we’re going to have to impose ourselves in a very forceful way.

And the people that impose themselves are ultimately going to be supremacists. And Whites aren’t, like, innately incapable of having a supremacist worldview because we literally used to! We literally did White supremacy already and ran the whole fucking world! We had colonial empires that spanned the entire globe. We almost conquered the whole fucking thing! Like, 100 years ago. We literally ran everything in the entire world except Japan and China, and that was about it. We ran everything else.

So, yeah, like, it’s not like Whites are inherently cucked and unable to embrace this worldview. But I think we have to overcome the source, that spiritual source of that cuckoldry to win! And all else is folly!

But how do you see it?

[42:22]

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, Keith is playing that optical game, and maybe he does genuinely believe that. And that is certainly a much stronger position than the people that are currently in power or that currently are ruling over White people.

So that’s fine and noble. But, just because you remove your claws doesn’t make you a good person. Ultimately, White people need to have their claws back. And I kind of had a strange discourse today, just responding to another Telegram page, a big Telegram page that was talking about how cruelty was a bad thing or an evil thing, that was just completely off the mark, which we don’t need to go into. But you did mention cruelty in your little segment, and you mentioned re-migration, and you mentioned taking resources.

And so in this thought experiment, we’ve got this idea of we’re going to need resources. Let’s say we end our finite supply and Africa is there for the taking, and it’s more or less gone back to the Stone Age. What process do we initiate in order to get the resources? Well, the way I understand White people to be is that we’re very polite. White people innately are very polite. And we would probably try to get what we want through peace before just going straight to war. I don’t think White people are innately barbaric, that are just like, yep, let’s just smash everyone and everything in our way. We generally look for a path of least resistance. The jews often do the same thing, but then when they don’t get what they want, they usually look towards subversion.

And so when you have kind of Anglo and jewish influences within a federal government like the United States or Great Britain, you have all these kind of different foreign policies in order to obtain the resources that you want.

So the English, obviously, with some heavy influence from the East India Company and some jews in the banking sector established gun boat diplomacy, for example, and gunboat diplomacy expanded massively through the American empire post World War Two. And it goes under many different names.

There’s many books written about it. But more or less, it’s like how to conquer nations through debt slavery, through embargoes, through pressuring them and these stages of escalation until they fucking, you know, funding coups to take out, you know, Saddam or take out Gaddafi or whoever it is or Bashar Al-Assad. So we can see that that is an innate kind of hybrid policy versus the kind of Faustian or Aryan spirit with German National Socialism where Hitler’s like:

“All right, Germany needs living space. We’re going to push the Slavs, like, further into Eastern Europe or further past the Volga into the Caucasus, and Germany is going to expand down these river systems where all these German colonies exist already in Eastern Europe. And we’re just going to bridge these gaps so that we’ve got more land and we’re just going to fucking do it!”

So obviously, there’s this kind of just outward force, and then there’s kind of more calculated, maybe a little bit more Machiavellian, maybe a bit more subversive forces in order to get what we want.

But ultimately, when we, as you said, when we unshackle ourselves from this spiritual virus, which centres around White guilt and this guilty consciousness for what’s happened in the past, when that’s gone, when that’s no longer, you know, containing our will, we’re going to see White colonialism on a whole new level.

Now regarding re-migration, because that’s actually more important than taking resources in Africa because, yeah, like, whenever I get asked questions like that:

“Are we going to do this? Are we going to do that?”

Yeah, sure. Like let’s clean up the house first. And when the house is clean, we can focus on the street.

[46:32]

So it’s like, let’s deal with the immediate issue, which is obviously jewish control of our nation, and the traitors, the traitors that are in control of our nation. When we deal with that, I think the vast majority of non-Whites are going to leave Australia. Once White people rise up and we take back our government and we kick out and deal with all the traitors and all the jews, and either go to Israel or whatever. That’s a good point in itself because people always FED post with that. But I had my, like the 10th or 11th bank account shut down recently.

And I remember the first time I had my bank account shut down. My politics was very, very, I wasn’t very fanatical. I don’t know how to express it. I had the same essence of what I have now, but it was nowhere near as strong, it was nowhere near as radical. It wasn’t fanatical. I wasn’t obsessed the way I am now. I wasn’t a seeking justice, I wasn’t personally hurt, I wasn’t personally aggrieved. I wasn’t motivated by a sense of deep, deep pressure! There wasn’t a deep pressure to change the problem. It was more just like a holistic:

“There’s a wrong, it needs to be corrected. This is a better way of running the country.”

It was more rational, less emotional.

And then they shut down my first bank account. This goes back to 2015. And I thought to myself:

“Whoa, that’s an escalation. I don’t like the symbology of that. Where is this going? Is this how this government behaves? This is how this corporate state behaves? They’re willing to go to that length? They’re willing to eventually take food off my table, so I starve to death, or I can’t provide an income for myself or my future family. Okay, that’s an escalation!”

And my politics started radically changing after that point! Because I was personally aggrieved.

So what that where I’m going with that, at a tactical, strategic level. Sorry, not tactical, strategic level, is everyone’s going to get exactly what they deserve. So if this is resolved nicely and quickly in the next, say, like, decade, I’m sure there will be these, like very astute, you know, Keith Woods approved policies of how we’re going to do re-migration and how it’s going to be packaged and the optics of it. And it starts with these:

“Can you please leave? And here’s the plane ticket.”

And then it kind of escalates. It continues escalating.

And so what’s happening is the longer this goes on for, the more damage done to White people in the process, the worse, the more cruel, the more horrible, the more violent, aggressive, dominating, exhaustive is the energy and the violence that White people are going to be capable of! It’s not even that I want that or don’t want that, it’s beyond that! It’s like that’s what we’re going to be capable of as a collective the longer this goes on for.

So you have re-migration, but we’re not even calling for re-migration. We don’t even use that term. We do a little bit, but the term that we put on our banner was “deportation”. And that’s a whole different kind of conversation. When you talk about re-migration, it’s kind of packaged nicely and softly. We talk about deportation. It’s at bayonet point! It’s a completely different kind of, it’s a more aggressive approach because I think fundamentally our belief is that re-migration is not enough.

What re-migration entails is a polite conversation, and asking people to leave and maybe getting rid of some troublemakers, versus deportations implies actually changing the structure of the society completely! Totally! Absolutely! And the team, like Keith Wood’s team, I’m sure he’ll progress, and I’m sure as time goes on, they will sense the further aggrievement of society as a whole, and they will sense the further escalation. Because this ultimately goes back to Israel-Palestine or Israel Lebanon or Israel Iran. It’s the same sort of concept. It’s a type of warfare that is escalating, that’s constantly escalating. So where it is at the moment, re-migration, Keith Woods, friendly optics. Where it is right now at this exact point in time, is probably the most popular thing as we’re seeing with European elections at the moment. Is that going to be the case in ten years time? I don’t think so. and that’s why our optics are built different.

So that’s what I think about it.

Joel Davis: Yeah. Like, I know Keith pretty well, and I don’t doubt that he is well intentioned. I never question his intentions. I think he’s trying to do what he thinks is the best thing for, not just for the Irish, but for the White race in general. I think he is sincere.

But, yeah, for me, because I used to have a little bit more of that strategy in my approach. That was partly due to also trying to make my nationalism and my Catholicism fit together. It was partly because of that as well, or I think largely because of that.

But when I look at things objectively in some of these European countries, I can see maybe a cleaner way of preserving their demographics. But when I look at the core countries, which are really where the power is distributed, like the United States, Britain, France, Germany, or here, I don’t think it’s going to be so simple. And those are really the key countries, the key geographical locales that need to be secured.

Whereas I think in Hungary and in Austria, they can probably vote their way to maintaining a 95% White country, plus. Hungary basically has that already. The Austrians, very positive signs. I mean, I want to talk a bit about the Austrian election, but I guess this will bridge into it a little bit. But I want to discuss that as a separate topic.

[53:05]

But, yeah, but for me, I’m kind of looking, like, three steps ahead, and I’m like, okay, I’m already there. And I’m trying to prepare people for the fact that that’s where we’re going. That’s kind of like the inevitable destination. And the sooner that people accept that and prepare accordingly. And by preparing, I don’t mean, I’m not FED posting, I’m not saying:

“Stockpile your guns. Race wars are coming!”

I’m not saying that. Don’t misconstrue me.

What I’m saying is preparing yourself, like, mentally and spiritually for the attitude and the mentality that is going to be necessary at that point.

So anyway, yeah, my view on this is that uh, things are going to accelerate into a more, … And what I mean by that as well, White people are at the moment, yes, the majority of White people are afraid of going full where we are, with our position, obviously. But the resistance is weakening. You know, in the last two years, I posted about this today. The discourse even within our movement has become so much more radical and also, generally speaking. Just think about it. Like, across European politics, conservatism is dead. There is not even one country where the conservative Party is getting more votes than the populist, Right-wing, anti-immigration party. Except England. Like, except Britain, just. Where, the conservatives are only slightly ahead of the Reform Party. And by the next election, I think Reform could overtake them because the Tories are either going to put some jew in charge who’s going to shill for Israel egregiously, and he might do somewhat better, or the other main candidate seems to be this black woman.

So the conservatives, I really hope they put the black woman in charge of the conservatives, [chuckling] because that would be hilarious! They’ll completely die. So conservatism as a political aesthetic is dead in Europe. In the United States we criticise Trump, and the criticisms are valid.

But if you look at it objectively, Trump’s campaign this time around is more radical than the last two times. Like, he wasn’t promising mass deportations the first two times. That’s now his signature policy. And that’s actually an intensification. But our movement has progressed so quickly and so radically that we’re further away from Trump. Like, Trump moved, like, 10% or 20% towards us, but then we moved, like, 80% away. So then we’re just like:

“What the fuck is this?”

Whereas in 2016, there was all of this kind of energy from the Alt-Right, the dissident Right, whatever, for Trump, and people are acting like, as if Trump cucked and he used to be based, but now, it’s literally the same shit! It’s actually a slightly more radical version of what it already was. And that’s something interesting to behold.

There’s been this radicalisation, and then even in Australia the response to our organisation you know, people wouldn’t touch. Even, like, twelve months ago, people wouldn’t touch us with a twelve foot pole now. You know, attitudes are softening massively, massively!

Thomas Sewell: Mmm.

Joel Davis: And what I kind of prophesy is that as the situation gets worse, as White people are not just demographically crowded out by all this immigration, like, I just saw, I have to confirm this and look into it, but I saw some posts on Twitter about the New Zealand census, which New Zealand is only 55% White now! Which, like, their census from last year, which is insane! Because I thought it was 80% White. I haven’t been to New Zealand in five years, so it’s a small population, and a lot of the Whites in New Zealand move here.

So I don’t know. I have to look into that. I’ll talk about it more on the show next week when I’ve had a chance to check those figures for myself. But I mean, that’s insane! If that’s true, that’s fucking insane! That is such a quick transition. America is almost majority, …

Thomas Sewell: Canada’s had the fastest transition. I saw some statistics today that said, I think it said five out of the top six cities. I’d have to find it again. But I think from memory what it said, five of the six cities with the highest percentage of foreign born people were in Canada.

Joel Davis: Yeah, that doesn’t surprise me. And the rates of immigration here have been obviously crazy in recent years. Australia is lucky in the sense that we do get a decent amount of White immigration. We get people coming here from Britain and Ireland and stuff, and that helps preserve our demographic to a certain extent.

And I actually posted about this again recently that if you look at the voting patterns, like, I really find it annoying when you get these Australian parochialists wherexx they are like:

“Oh, like, fuck the Poms!”

Like, they have an issue with White immigrants. It’s like White immigrants are a blessing. If you look at the data, European immigrants are way more Right-wing than native born Australians. They’re majority Right-wing voters. They’re more opposed to immigration as well, I’ve seen in certain polls than native born Australians. There’s plenty of people in our organisation, by the way, that weren’t born here and we’re in the situation as a race.

So I think that is kind of like really short sighted and narrow minded to take that view. The problem isn’t immigration necessarily. The problem is non-White immigration. Like, White immigration is fine. This country was built off White immigration.

[58:42]

But, the point though is that the demographics are getting ridiculously destroyed in a super quick way now. Like, the rates are boosting and at the same time the anti-White persecution is boosting. It gets to the point now Muslims are organising to have their own independent power bloc and so on. The racial lines are getting a lot more explicit.

There’s a point at which you have such a high degree of racial conflict at the core of your political system that these kind of highfalutin ethical ideals like “justice and rights” and all of this kind of stuff that is like the bedrock of liberal democracy, where these things start to really subside in kind of relevance. And all that people start to care about is just the existential reality of:

“My team winning, my team losing, my team being subjugated, my team fighting back against oppression!”

Or whatever. And people just start seeing politics in these kind of tribalistic friend-enemy, distinction, us versus them turns, and they start to see the world in a dog-eat-dog way.

Like, if you look at the data on Trump supporters, the Trump supporters that live in cities, I saw a poll about this years ago, they have more of, like a dog-eat-dog understanding of the world, and they’re more concerned about immigration. Where the Trump supporters that live in the really White areas, they’re like generic Christian, Evangelical Christian Republicans who are just voting for the Republican Party because that’s what they do. But they aren’t anywhere near as concerned with immigration. And they’re a lot more soft on racial issues, because they live in a White neighbourhood in a nice part of America. So they don’t actually have to deal with the same issues that the city dwelling Whites have to deal with. Where there’s black ghettos around them and beaners are pouring in and they’re getting crowded out in the place where they grew up. There’s lots of places in major cities where they’re just not the same place that they were 10, 20 years ago when you were younger. They’ve been completely transformed.

So that is going to incept over time, more of this kind of existential framing on politics, and it’s going to soften people up to hearing what we have to say, which is a very simple message, which is that:

“Forget all the noise. Either we come together and fight back and defend the ourselves and our interests against all of these people that are targeting us and that are against us and want to destroy us, or they’ll destroy us!”

And all of your ideals about fucking freedom and justice and humanitarianism, like, you can shove that up your ass! Because that is really, like, almost irrelevant at this point. Because none of those principles are being given to us by anyone else. None of these other groups that are, they’re all hypocrites! None of them extend any of these rights or concerns to us. So why the fuck should we care about them? We should reassert ourselves, take back control. And when we have power and control and stability, then we can worry about them again.

And that message might seem radical right now, but it’s becoming less and less radical by the day. And people are more and more for it because, and I think in a lot of ways as well, that’s actually the only way to make politics interesting to a lot of Australians. I think a lot of Australians, they’re apolitical because it’s not necessarily because they have no interest potentially, in politics whatsoever! And they’re just totally just apolitical zombies. It’s because politics hasn’t been interesting. If politics is a battle between conservatism and socialism, they don’t really give a fuck!

But if politics becomes race war, that’s infinitely more interesting. And if politics goes from being like this kind of gay argument about ideology and it becomes something concrete, which is:

“Are we going to have control of this country? Or are we going to just give it away and become subjugated in our own country and just be, like, cucked by this whole process?”

That actually is a fight! Like, it’s not about:

“Who are you voting for and how much taxes should we pay. It’s like, this is a fucking knife fight for who controls the country!”

So I actually have a lot of faith in our politics to become very popular and very engaging to a large group of people in the coming decade. That’s the main difference that I have with, I don’t want to use the word “optics cuck”, because that’s not necessarily accurate. I think, in a lot of cases. But with the very ethically constrained humanitarian version of White nationalism, where I think that that approach, the idea that Whites will only embrace a pro-White position within that purview, and they won’t embrace a kind of more like, realistic dog-eat-dog world existential White nationalism, which is just like:

“It’s us or them! Which side are you fucking on?”

I just don’t buy that. I don’t think that’s actually true.

But I guess I don’t know where Tom went. I guess he’ll be back soon. I wanted to get his take, but I was just kind of finished that point.

But while he’s gone, I guess we can talk about the Austrian election. The Austrian election was quite interesting. The Freedom Party of Austria, which is, I think it’s one of the most radical parties in Europe that actually gets votes and is like, a mainstream power player. So their policies are like:

“We’re not going to take any asylum seeker, even applications, we’re not even going to take refugee applications. Full stop. Fortress Austria!”

They call it “Fortress Austria! Fortress Europe! No immigration!” Like, literally no immigration from outside Europe into Europe is their position. And re-migration plans to start repatriating non-Whites back to wherever they came from.

So it’s a very radical set of policies by the standards of European politics.

[1:04:42]

As I said, there’s not really many other parties in Europe that have any kind of support behind them, that have policies that radical. And they just got the most votes of any party. They got like 30% of the vote in the Austrian election and they could make a deal with the conservatives to create a coalition and rule. So right now, the Chancellor of Austria is the leader of the conservatives, who got, like, I think, 25% of the votes.

So they’ve got enough seats between them to run the government. And they’re now, I think, going to negotiate, you know, potentially some kind of coalition government. Those negotiations could fail. I watched a few Martin Sellner* interviews, who is the most, like, well known identitarian nationalist activist in Austria. Did a few streams with him back in the day, actually, very intelligent guy, an incredible activist, very successful.

[* Martin Michael Sellner (born 8 January 1989) is an Austrian far-Right political activist, and leader of the Identitarian Movement of Austria, which he cofounded in 2012. He is considered to be a key figure in the Neue Rechte in the German-speaking countries. He is also deemed to be part of the alt-right movement. In March 2018, he was denied entry to, and deported from, the United Kingdom. A year later, he was denied entry to the United States because of the Christchurch shooter event. In March 2024, the city of Potsdam tried to ban Sellner from entering Germany for 3 years, because of his speech on “remigration” at the 2023 Potsdam far-Right meeting, that ban was revoked by a German court in late May 2024. Sellner talks about the Great Replacement. In March 2024, Sellner was arrested by Swiss police while he was giving a speech at an event of the Swiss Identitarian organisation. Wikipedia]

And I think he’s the individual that is most responsible for the normalisation of the term “re-migration” in the world. So you have to give him a lot of credit for that.

And he was saying that obviously, he has a lot of connections and a lot of understanding of Austrian politics. He was saying that he is doubtful that the conservatives will ultimately be willing to form a coalition with the Freedom Party, that they will allow Kickl, who’s the leader of the Freedom Party, to become the Chancellor, and that those negotiations might be unsuccessful and the conservatives might go to the socialists and some of the other Left-wing parties and try and create a coalition there instead. And they’ll have to rule with a slim majority.

And maybe this is actually good, because if the conservatives can’t make a deal with the nationalists and instead go and make a deal with the socialists to rule, even though the nationalists are the most popular party in the country, that will look very bad for them. The government that they negotiate out will be obviously even more cucked than the conservative government has been because they’ll have to make all these concessions to the Left. Meanwhile, the Freedom Party will be able to kind of fight both of them as, like one thing as a pure opposition movement.

And if you look at the voter demographics, the majority of the conservative votes are coming from Boomers, whereas, like, younger voters, like even like Gen-X, Millennials and Zoomers are way more voting for the Freedom Party than any other party in Austria. So demographics are on, age demography is on their side. They are the ascendant party, like the ones that have been making gains for the last few years.

So if they don’t get a coalition sorted I could see them doing even better at the next election and then being at that point too big that they’ll be able to kind of form the government. They’ll be too big to fail at that point, and the conservatives will be so decimated that they can subjugate them basically to their coalition at the next election.

So it’ll be interesting to see what happens, like, whether they actually get into government now or not. But what it shows is that a hardcore anti-immigration platform and a pro-re-migration platform can win politically in central Europe.

And obviously parties like that, like the AfD in Germany and other parties with similar policies, are doing incredibly well all over Europe.

And so it is kind of white pilling to see that European voters, particularly young European voters, basically awakening to their interests and backing the further Right parties. And, yeah, there’s, like so much momentum behind the idea of not just shutting down immigration into Europe from non-Whites, but actually fucking sending them back and kind of just securing Europe for the White race.

So I think that’s quite positive. I’m quite white pilled about it. Not that I think that these guys are going to get in and fix everything in the next year or something, but that the trajectory is very good. It’s very good.

How do you see it?

Thomas Sewell: The quote that comes to mind is Adolf Hitler. He says:

“The strong man is strongest alone.”

And that applies perfectly to this exact scenario. There’s a lot of Hitler quotes that are taken out of context or used for things that aren’t necessarily relevant. But that quote is relative to the NSDAP struggle, their historical struggle, and they obviously entered in a lot of coalitions. They had a lot of election success in 31 and 32, but not enough success to completely take power. And even right at the end, they had to, well, just before the second last thing, I guess, that they did was they entered into a coalition with the monarchists. That was the last faction left. But there was many, many circumstances where they were doing very well. And in order to have some sort of share of power, they had to make these concessions. And Hitler refused to make the concessions. He said:

“The strong man is strongest alone.”

And so it’s very good to see this kind of progress. And the politics is just so rapidly changing across Europe. I mean, Martin Sellner and all these freedom parties across Europe, from the Netherlands to Austria to AfD to the Swedish version, all these parties were just microscopic ten years ago, they were just micro parties, kind of like here in Australia, how we’ve just got all these useless micro parties. And they just had a vision of where they wanted to be. Where they wanted to go. They didn’t really keep too many secrets as to where they were going. They played the very optical game, which if you want to have a sort of five or ten year period success, you do that you don’t do what we’re doing, that’s for sure. And they’ve achieved a lot of these parties are either the second or third or now, in the case of the Freedom Party in Austria, they’re the biggest party in the country.

[1:10:48]

This rolls downhill and this should be very white pilling for everyone, even if this isn’t the be all and end all for Europe or central Europe, obviously, it’s going to be a much more serious party, or a more serious version of the Freedom Party that’s going to be equipped with The Right Stuff to really make the big differences. And that brings me to the point that I discussed before when we brought up Keith Woods. The subject of re-migration is really important because the second half of the statement re-migration is not when, it’s not why, it’s how! And it’s with, what army?

So that’s the second half of the question with what army? And why we are doing what we’re doing and why we’re doing it differently to, say AfD or Freedom party or the party in the Netherlands or SD or whatever it’s called in Sweden.

The reason why we’re doing what we’re doing is because you can’t use the current state apparatus to achieve the goals that you actually need to in its current form. Where Australia needs to go, where America needs to go, where Britain needs to go, where all of Europe needs to go, where all of us together need to go. We need a state apparatus that can enforce the political party.

So we don’t actually have that. What we have is a liberal democratic system where, let’s say, hypothetically, we take power in ten years or 15 or five. The number doesn’t really matter, the timeframe doesn’t matter for the scenario.

But then you start these re-migrations, so you turbocharge., … We have Customs here in Australia. We have, like, Customs. We have border security. We have a similar version to what they have in America called ICE*. We have these things here in Australia, and these things are everywhere in America and in Europe. Now, are they very large? Are they large enough? No! Could we turbocharge these things? Could we put more funding into them because now we’ve got power, now we control Parliament, we can put a couple hundred million dollars into these parts of the state apparatus. But this is not something that can be fixed with money, because just like how the government is telling American soldiers that they can’t go help their families, they’ve got to be on standby to go to the Middle East and its bordering on a mutiny.

[* U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is a federal law enforcement agency under the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. ICE’s stated mission is to protect the United States from cross-border crime and undocumented immigration that threaten national security and public safety. Wikipedia]

Likewise, if the State Department is full of people that are fundamentally traitors or they’re not actually supporters of the Freedom Party, or they’re not supporters of the re-migration effort, you’re only ever going to get these kind of piss poor attempts at really attacking the nerve centre of migration. You’re going to have criminals sent back. You’re going to have all the loose hanging fruit is going to be sent back. Anyone that’s kind of just easy to grab is going to be sent back. But there’s still going to be millions of non-Whites in Austria, there’s still going to be millions of non-Whites in England or Australia and tens of millions of non-Whites in the United States, even with a million or two being deported.

So then you’re back at square one. Okay, well, so what do we need to do then? So then either you force the state apparatus through further legislation, you force them to go even further and you’re going to face a mutiny. You’re going to face an ineffective government. And the people in the Freedom Party, the people in the Republican Party, whoever’s going to be in charge of deportations in this first round of deportations, they’re not stupid. Sorry, not in charge of but the people that are going to be soliciting it, they’re not stupid. They know when they’re going to be on the brink of mutiny. They know when the state apparatus is going to say no. They know when the general public are going to strike and protest. And they’re going to have, they’re going to want to do it in a way that escalates the situation but doesn’t escalate enough that you’re going to see mass hysteria in the public. You’re going to see the media kick off, you’re going to see some Lefties complaint and some protests in the city. But you’re not going to see like what happened with the Freedom Convoy and the Freedom Rallies [re Covid] where a quarter of a million people are in the street and the CBD is just at a standstill for days. You’re not going to see that with a small amount of deportations.

But with mass deportations, you are going to see that. The state apparatus isn’t able to actually do what it needs to do to clean the country up, to fix the problem. So then we’re back at square one.

So it’s not money that you throw at the department or the apparatus. It’s now a change in manpower. It’s a complete change in manpower. Now, the entryists or the reformers, the Fuentes types, they want to trickle people in to the state apparatus. They want to say:

“Hey, you know, do you want to join the military? You should join the military! Hey, you want to join border control, you should join border control. You want to be a lawyer, you should become a lawyer. You want to do these things? Do it, and then be our guy on the inside. And then when we take political power, we’ll be able to promote you internally up in the ranks, and you’ll know your guys, and they’ll be on our team.”

That’s an interesting theory, and it might work for some small scale stuff, but the kind of scale that we’re talking about that’s necessary to secure the existence of our people in the future for White children needs a complete reshuffle of the state apparatus.

[1:16:45]

And so what we’re doing is not just building a political movement, or a political party. Sorry, we are building a political movement, but we’re not just building a political party. We’re actually building a state apparatus. We’re building a replacement state apparatus. So that when we take political power and the state apparatus doesn’t do what it’s told, we can just replace them. So re-migration with what army? That’s why people need to consider their physical involvement, not just their political support, not just a donation, or a vote at a ballot box. You need to actually consider yourselves part of a machine, part of a mechanism that can actually not just take state power, but actually enforce state power.

So the last point I’ll make on the subject is the historical example of Adolf Hitler. Hitler went through this interesting process where he didn’t need to take totalitarian control as much as people say that he did. He didn’t actually need to.

For example, one of the biggest issues he had with the SA* was demobilising them. The SA didn’t want to demobilise. He had two and a half million men. They didn’t want to demobilise. He integrated some of them into the Wehrmacht. And obviously the SS eventually became the Waffen SS, so it became an armed part of the political wing, and it became way bigger as Waffen SS than it ever was as just the SS. But Hitler didn’t need to actually take control of all the state apparatuses. He could just replace some key people and just the machine just started operating as it needed to, because, again, Hitler was in part a reformer. He had a revolutionary ideology, but when he actually took power, the country only had a small percentage of traitors in it, and it was still 99% German.

[* The Sturmabteilung (German SA; lit. ’Storm Division’ or ‘Storm Troopers’) was the original paramilitary wing of the NS Party. It played a significant role in Adolf Hitler’s rise to power in the 1920s and early 1930s. Its primary purposes were providing protection for Nazi rallies and assemblies, disrupting the meetings of opposing parties, fighting against the paramilitary units of the opposing parties, especially the Roter Frontkämpferbund of the Communist Party of Germany (KPD) and the Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold of the Social Democratic Party of Germany. The SA were colloquially called Brownshirts (Braunhemden) because of the colour of their uniform’s shirts, similar to Benito Mussolini’s blackshirts. The official uniform of the SA was a brown shirt with a brown tie. The colour came about because a large shipment of Lettow-shirts, originally intended for the German colonial troops in Germany’s former East Africa colony, was purchased in 1921 by Gerhard Roßbach for use by his Freikorps paramilitary unit. Wikipedia]

So we’re dealing with a different situation, where Hitler had the insurance policy. If the Wehrmacht went on strike, or if the Wehrmacht said:

“No, actually, we don’t support this regime change, or we don’t support the Reichstag degree, or we don’t., …”

You know, if they try to do a coup, they weren’t able to, because he had the SA and he wouldn’t have demobilised the SA, he would have militarized the SA and he would have removed the Wehrmacht from the opinion. So, I’ll say it again and then I’ll finish:

“Re-migration with what army?”

Joel Davis: Yeah, well, I think the Austrians are very well organised, like, across the board in their nationalist movement, from what I’ve seen. And there is a lot of behind the scenes organisation there as well. And their activism, street activism, is first class. They’re very impressive. I think we should really study the Austrians and look to them as a model for how to develop the nationalist movement in other European and White countries in general, because they’re one of the leading countries for this.

So I think we have to give them a lot of credit. And I do really respect a lot of the guys that have really put in over there over the years. And in many ways, I think the Freedom Party was in, of Austria, was the first, like, modern, like, contemporary style, like, populist, Right-wing, anti-immigration party that really existed in Western politics.

So there have been innovators, and it’s, I guess, unsurprising that the Austrians are the innovators of the new paradigm. Austrians have a penchant for this kind of thing. And they’re in a unique position because Austria is not in NATO, so they have a little bit more independence.

But they’re in the EU.

And that’s the thing when also, that’s another aspect of this whole thing about controlling their borders is that, … And they’re aware of this as well, obviously, they really want to create coalitions within the EU to push for EU wide policies, because the EU is, the borders are open within Europe. So if Austria and Hungary and some of these countries are like:

“Fuck immigrants!”

But the Germans and the French and everything are like bringing immigrants in and they’re dominating the EU, then there’s only so much they can do, because they’re part of the EU. Like, yeah, they can deny asylum applications, they can send some people back, but they can’t have full control over their borders. There has to be a European wide solution.

But the fact is that these kinds of parties are rising everywhere and they’re different levels of quality. Like, I think the Austrian populists are far more radical and far better ideologically than the French or the Italian. Like, you know, Meloni’s clique or whatever. There’s Lega, like the League of the North in Salvini’s party in Italy, that’s a little bit better. But I don’t know, Italian politics is a little bit complex. They aren’t as popular, and they still aren’t as radical as the Freedom Party, I think. So but the Germanosphere that seems to be leading the way, like anti-immigration politics are being very successful also in Scandinavia. Like, it’s growing in Sweden, it’s growing in Denmark, obviously in Germany, the AfD is doing fantastically well. So that kind of like central European corridor.

I mean, even in the Netherlands, their populist Right party is kind of fucked up! The People’s Party or whatever it is that Geert Wilders runs. Wilders is like mixed race and I think part jewish. And he redirected all that energy into like shilling for Israel and hasn’t really done very much since he got elected to resolve things there.

But I think the Freedom Party will do a lot better, if they get in.

[1:22:19]

Thomas Sewell: They built off a primarily anti-Islam movement. So they were kind of like a Civnatty pro-zionist. It’s kind of like Tommy Robinson, the political party with like a quarter Indonesian Dutch dude.

Joel Davis: Yeah. So I think people have this tendency, I saw people saying like:

“Oh, who cares about the Freedom Party? Look at what happened with Meloni in Italy.”

And it’s like, no! Like, if you understand the history of this party, it was actually like the Freedom Party, by the way, was created by like an SS officer. But it’s not really about that history, that goes back to the fifties. But from the nineties onwards, it’s been kinda kind of a leading party in Europe for the anti-immigration cause. And the Austrian kind of nationalist movement, identitarian movement, is very advanced and has really like, pushed the Overton Window in Austrian politics. And they look to Hungary as a model. And you could say about Viktor Orban in Hungary that he is surrounded by jews. I think he has a jewish wife, and that’s true.

But also, like, as far as European leaders go, he’s like the best on immigration and preserving the demographics of his country. That’s just an obvious truth. Obviously Austria, Hungary have historical links, but they’re kind of looking to that as a model.

And what’s interesting about that is that what you were talking about before that in Hungary, you have an example of the Right-wing seizing control of the state, not just winning an election, but like actually capturing control of state institutions and, basically kicking out, like reforming the education system and reforming the media and kicking out a lot of elements out of Hungarian society. And Orban calls it a “illiberal democracy” as he doesn’t subscribe to this liberal idea that we’re just going to allow all these NGO’s and like communist and like American backed, jewish backed necessarily. There’s probably some, like Zionist things, institutions that operate in Hungary. But the Left-wing institutions have been really defeated at the institutional level.

And now if I was Hungarian, I would vote for Mi Hazánk. I’m sorry if I pronounced that wrong, who seemed to be like a more pure, like, nationalist party that doesn’t have all these jewish links, from what I can see. But just looking at it objectively like, the Hungarian political system is in a much better place than almost any other Western country. And it’s because of embracing a kind of illiberal kind of philosophy. And Martin Sellner has written books about institutional capture and this kind of thing that are very popular in the Freedom Party circles and in the AfD circles in Germany as well, even in Swiss politics. And the leader of the Freedom Party refused many times to disavow Martin Sellner. And they brought up that Sellner did some activism when he was a kid, defacing a synagogue and accusing him of being a neo-Nazi. And Kickl refused to cuck.

And so that indicates that the identitarians over there hold a lot of sway, and they aren’t as radical as us, but they’re pretty solid on a lot of the key issues.

But it’s something that we need to keep an eye on and watch with keen interests and particularly if they can seize power to see how it goes. And how successful they are, what challenges they run into, because, yeah, there’s nothing like that in Australia. [chuckling] Like, at this stage, we want to build it. We want to build something.

But when you look around at the Australian populist Right, I mean, there’s nothing doing. I mean, One Nation is a joke. It’s almost, it’s a toss up whether it’s a joke because Pauline Hanson is an egomaniac, or it’s a joke because that homosexual that basically runs the party, who’s her, you know, top staffer James Ashby is like a Liberal Party operative, like, purposefully sabotaging the party. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but it’s a totally dysfunctional party. Like, what we’re seeing in Europe would be replicated here if One Nation opened itself up to membership. Like, I’ve talked about this before, like, if you become a member of One Nation, you don’t get any voting rights, there’s no branches.

So the activist, you know, cadre of the nationalist movement in Australia, there’s no party for them to go into. They can’t go into One Nation and fill it up with fresh, young blood and have all the talent accumulate there and have a kind of dynamic campaign. If they did have something like that, heaps of our guys would be in there. The party would probably be 50% more radical than it is, and they’d probably be getting 15% to 20% of the vote and really challenging the Liberals from the Right. But it’s totally incompetently run.

And all the other options, like, what else have you got? Like, you’ve got the United Australia party, Clive Palmer’s outfit, and he basically folds the party and then reconstitutes it just before the election, every election cycle. There’s no continuity, there’s no branches. Again, it’s just all, Clive Palmer just throws money around because he’s a billionaire, in a very arbitrary way. There’s no ideological structure to it and its policies are kind of vapid. And, yeah, there isn’t a lot of other options.

Like, it’s interesting, the Libertarian Party seems interesting because I’ve heard noises internally that they’re going to embrace a officially an immigration policy that is totally restrictionist, that is to the right of Pauline Hanson, and One Nation. If they do that would be very interesting because I think there’s a recognition with a lot of the libertarians that libertarianism itself isn’t that popular. You kind of have to mix it with nationalism to get anyone to actually vote for it or care about it.

So that’s interesting to see how that develops. But there isn’t really much cooking on the Australian Right.

[1:28:24]

Meanwhile, our population, like, we have a naturally I think, racially minded and Right-wing population in sentiment, but it’s just totally depoliticised and there’s nothing really engaging within the political system. Like, I was watching a little bit of the vice presidential debate in America the other day and there was all these Americans posting about it on Twitter. And I was thinking to myself:

“I’ve never watched a political debate between two Australian politicians before in my life!”

I’ve never even had a conversation with someone about, oh, in the debate between, like, I’m sure they have debates. Like, they must have had a debate between Albanese and Morrison for the last election. I didn’t fucking even know it was on TV or care. I don’t think anyone really did. Most of the time, I don’t even remember that the election is on and my mum called, calls me and is like:

“Make sure you vote!”

Like, I don’t even remember. And I’m like a political guy.

And that’s how boring Australian politics is and how disengaging it is so whereas, like, Americans are like:

“Oh, my God!”

Like, it’s not even the presidential debate. It’s like JD Vance versus, I can’t remember the other guy’s name. vv Tim Walz or something.

Joel Davis: Yeah, it’s totally uninteresting. But like this, it’s like this big thing and there’s like tens of millions tuning in and like, it’s a big deal. It’s like:

“Got to watch the game, got to watch the debate!”

Kind of thing.

So, yeah, we don’t have a society like that. And I think that’s part of, part of the problem, maybe part of the solution ultimately could be if it’s like judo flipped against the establishment. What’s the term you always use, Tom? You say they’re all, … You need to use the term “skin suits”. You use the terminal “skeleton crews”, all the major parties.

Thomas Sewell: Yes. It is a skeleton crew. Our capture of Australian politics and the state apparatus is going to be extremely slow and painful and nothing is going to happen. And then it’s going to be really quick. It’s going to be really quick and everything’s going to happen. Because they’re just so stretched thin. And there’s no genuine interest. Like the political parties themselves. The Greens are actually going to be the hardest party to defeat because they have the most, … And obviously, when the Muslims finally mobilise, they will be quite difficult. But the Liberal Party and Labor Party, … It’s interesting that our goals align actually quite nicely with just the way things are going to be moving. The Liberal Party is actually the easiest party to destroy out of the big three. Even though it’s usually the most powerful, it’s actually the easiest to destroy. It’s just held in place by some private school boys and jewish money. That’s really all that’s holding it in place, so.

But do you want to get onto the Superchats? We’ve covered all the topics for tonight, or most of them.

Joel Davis: Yeah, we can. You said you wanted me to pull up that Noticer article. I got it here.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, we can go through a little bit of current affairs.

Joel Davis: So this is the woman charged with the Hezbollah flag. She looks like a ganger from Bankstown kind of thing. Sarah Mouhanna. So some Lebo [Lebanese] chick.

Anyway, that not a particularly interesting story, frankly, if I’m totally honest.

Thomas Sewell: But I didn’t want you to necessarily pull it up to discuss it. I just wanted, if you could pull it up. Yeah, it was a funny article.

Joel Davis: This is interesting.

Thomas Sewell: It was kind of funny that the poster girl was pretty good optics as far as Lebs [Lebanese] are concerned. [chuckling]

Joel Davis: [chuckling] Yeah, that’s funny. Yeah, it’s kind of weird!

Thomas Sewell: They were joking in the chat, like:

“Oh, you know, Jacob’s going through the illegal symbols. This girl’s going through the illegal symbols. Maybe they could do a stream together.”

Joel Davis: I don’t need any more Syrian Girl, One Struggle nonsense, I don’t think.

Thomas Sewell: [chuckling] thought it was funny!

Joel Davis: I saw Syrian Girl got upset at me because I said, all Muslims should be deported. Or I said something like:

“All these sand people problems wouldn’t be our problem if we had the White Australia Policy. Like these sand people, ethnic disputes, and they should all be deported.”

And then she was like:

“Oh, but like, Zionists are terrorists, too. And the jews!”

And I was like:

“Yeah, like, jews are sand people as well, to me, as well. You’re all sand people. You should all be deported!”

And she was happy with that. She’s like:

“Well, at least you’re consistent.”

Whatever that means.

But it’s like:

“Just get the out of my country. You’re brown!”

That’s kind of my attitude towards these ethnic women. I’m not interested in one struggling with from the Arab world they’re like nine or ten out of tens [in beauty] is really, like, mid at best. So it’s not even worth it.

[1:33:46]

But yeah, this abomination is in Martin Place in Sydney in the middle of the city. And this is disgusting! Because it’s like, literally 50 meters from the Lindt Café where there was an Islamic, … It was like a terrorist attack. It was like a siege. And like, two White Australian women, I believe, died in that siege. He executed one and another one died because of stray bullets in some kind of shootout exchange with the police. And now we’ve got this black Islamic cube nonsense! I mean, it’s fucking disgusting!

Yeah, I mean, it speaks for itself.

And that’s the thing, like, I talked about this and there were people getting upset at me online that, like:

“Oh, you’re just playing into what the jews want you to say. The jews want you to hate Muslims!”

It’s like, wait a second, wait a second. I don’t have to fucking accept this crap in the middle of the first city the biggest city of my country, 50 meters from where a Muslim committed a terrorist attack. I don’t have to accept this crap being built in the middle of my city. This is disgusting! Why the fuck is this alien religion having its monuments built in the middle of my city? It’s fucking absurd!

Like, it’s possible to fucking hate jews and Muslims at the fucking same time and want them both out at the same time. Like, I don’t have to go easy on the Muslims and just let them get away with mobilising within my society and raping White women and putting themselves about with this kind of total disrespectful bravado and just be like:

“Oh, yes, but, like we’re on the same side against Israel!”

That’s fucking cucked! Like, fuck them!

So, yeah, but what do you think about this monument? Do you have thoughts?

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I agree with David Hiscox with his article. It is just another humiliation ritual. I saw some libtard saying:

“Oh there’s no need to get so offended by its only temporary.”

It’s like, I don’t give a fuck whether it’s temporary or not. It has no place in our society. I’m offended by it. And gone are the days where the conservative talking point, was:

“Oh, you know, facts don’t care about feelings, or if you’re offended by it, good.”

It’s like, no, what offends White people, what is egregious towards White people and White culture and our customs should be illegal, straight up. We should have the laws that the Left are trying to put in place where we can’t hurt the feelings of brown people. It should be the other way around. If you’re a foreigner and you’ve come to our country, you’re a Muslim or you’re some other, you’re not of European descent and you’ve come here, I mean, if you’re a tourist, you play the game, you play by the rules you visit the sites and you go home to your country. That, like, that’s what, I don’t know if that’s a healthy society that has tourists, but that’s what a liberal, like a White nationalist liberal democracy would have. It would have foreign tourists in it. And these people are just overstaying they’re welcome. They’re rubbing it in. They’re just looking for a fight to put those kind of displays up. And the traitors exacerbate it as. Well, I mean, as I said, once we’ve dealt with the traitors and we will deal with the traitors, once we’ve dealt with them, the Muslims and all these other ethnic groups are going to come to the table and they’re going to say:

“Okay, you guys are obviously pretty serious. So what are we going to do about this?”

You know, there’s, it’s going to be pretty straightforward. What’s going to happen? I don’t think there’s going to be, … Well, again, it depends on the timeline. It depends on the timeline.

Joel Davis: Yeah, I think it’d be pretty easy to just put them on boats and fuck them off. The real issue is the White traitors that are holding us back and preventing us from asserting ourselves with their cuckoldry. I always say this, and it’s so important to reiterate, we can talk about the jews and other non-Whites, but ultimately what it comes down to is that we aren’t resisting this with almost any of our strength.

In fact, more of our race, like, our race, is doing more to contribute to our own destruction than it’s contributing to resisting it. So that’s the issue. If we got enough White people together, organised to resist it, we would easily defeat it and restore ourselves. It’s totally within our capability. We don’t need anyone but ourselves to fix this, but we need to find ourselves to fix it.

And right now, you know, bar, a few of us, people are like, lost, depoliticised, cucked, you know, cowardly asleep, whatever, you know whatever the case may be. And they need to be engaged, and then we can fix the problem. But that’s literally all it comes down to. It’s like it’s within the hearts and minds of the White race that this is either solved or not solved and nowhere else.

And that’s why I don’t believe in really giving a shit about the sensibilities of Muslims or soliciting any kind of association with them whatsoever!

[1:39:02]

And also this view that, like:

“Oh, we should go easy on the Muslims because hating Israel is really in right now, and we don’t want to present ourselves in a way that is going to alienate people.”

It’s like hating Muslims is in right now as well. Muslims didn’t become popular anytime recently. There were polls done around ten years ago on Australians attitudes to Islamic immigration. And the majority of Australians said in that poll that they want Islamic immigration completely stopped to Australia. They want a total ban on Islamic immigration. That included, like, it broke it down by party affiliation. That included like, 33% of Greens voters and 40% of Labour voters. So, like, a very substantial, like, more than a third of Left-wing voters are against Islamic immigration. That’s an old poll, but, it’s not a popular position to be pro-muslim. People don’t like them. And particularly in Europe they’re the most hated group, really, because they’re the largest and they’ve committed the most amount of crimes and then the most objectionable to deal with in public. And they’ve raped and murdered countless of our people. So, yeah that doesn’t actually make any sense. It’s actually harder to explain to the average White person the problem with jews because, yeah, White people are against Israel on the Left, but they’re not against jews. Like, they’re against “zionism”, quote unquote, which is completely different in their minds. It’s not different in reality, but it’s different in their minds.

So, yeah, obviously we have to educate the people about the jewish problem. But we’re going to alienate people that have patriotic sentiment, that are already kind of somewhat like spiritually aligned to our message if we don’t talk about the racial issues that they have to deal with in a more direct way that they already somewhat understand. Like, the average patriotic White Aussie already doesn’t like Muslims coming into our country. They already have an issue with the Indians.

And so the idea that we should sacrifice talking about that and just purely fixate upon the jews is like this autistic Internet ideology that doesn’t actually bear any resemblance to real life. And some people justify it by saying:

“Oh, but Goebbels said that we should just focus everything on the jew.”

And it’s like, yeah, it’s because in 1920s, 1930s Germany, there were no fucking Muslims! There were no pajeets! There were no chinks. Right? So why would they focus on them? They weren’t even fucking there. Like, it’s not that complicated.

But, yeah, anyway, we can get into the Superchats. Adolf Caesar said:

“Good evening, gentlemen. What are your thoughts on using Australian culture and folklore and using terms like, quote, ‘mateship’? Would that be effective rhetoric for Australian NS?”

What would you say to that, Tom? You’re muted.

Thomas Sewell: I think we’re incorporating it very well, already. You can see a lot of the speeches that I’ve done personally in the past and the things that we’ve focused on. I mean, our biggest rallies have been Australia Day in Victoria there have been things like Eureka Stockade. So we are trying to revitalise Australian folklore. We are focusing on what some would call the “Nativist angle”.

Jacob has even extensively worked for the last three years to revitalise the original Australian sort of folklore anthems, like the White Australia song, which was probably the second most popular song in Australia 100 years ago after the national anthem. And, yeah, I think we’re already doing a good job. Could we do more of it? Yeah, sure, we could do more of everything. I think what we have to focus on the most at the moment is, well, from a purely cultural perspective, hmm, I don’t think that’s our main focus culturally at the moment. I think our main focus socioculturally is making everyday, average Australians, working Australians, making them more politically motivated, making them politically charged. And so appealing to that kind of what is now more of a niche, well, I don’t think the purpose of us doing it is to appeal to that niche. We’re not doing it to appeal to people that have that as a personal subculture, this niche folklore, Nativist type attitude. We’re actually doing it as an act of preservation and Cultural Revolution or cultural rebirth.

So we’re actually doing it as a back end cultural process. Our front end is to try to capture as much attention to our important talking points, like mass deportations or living space for White people or destroy pedo freaks or whatever is. That’s our front end.

And then in the background, certainly, to do a cultural shift within our membership and within the people that are engaged within our politics. That’s my answer.

Joel Davis: Like, for me, it’s got to be organic. Like, we’re already naturally Australian, so we express our own cultural attitudes in an organic way. That’s good.

But then this kind of contrived, like, parochial, like, kind of harkening back to some bygone era of the stereotype of what Australiana was about. Like, that can come across as quite cringe if you’re kind of overdoing it, I think. And also it’s kind of alienating. So it has to be authentic.

Like, obviously we expressed our Australian character and attitude, but we don’t want to act like Boomers or whatever just to kind of recapture some old Australiana. Like, we’ve got to relate to young White people in the current era and how we conduct ourselves.

And I think we do that pretty successfully.

But, yeah, somewhat like the legacy of White Australia, though. Like, what you were talking about with Jacob, you know, trying to preserve, like, old songs and, like the phrase “Australia for the Whiteman”, that’s a classic political slogan that predates Australian Federation. Like, we believe in honouring the traditional White Australian nationalism because we’re the successors to that. Like, we inherit that tradition. And that’s spiritually very important that we connect ourselves to that because we’re trying to continue on that project of our ancestors, of our forefathers.

So in that sense, yeah. But this idea that we’ve got to be super parochial and use the word “mateship” all the time. I mean politicians do that. Like, you hear Anthony Albanese and shit like that talk about “mateship”, and it sounds cringe. Like, I don’t want to become some, like, cringe cliche Lord. I would rather just talk like a normal White Aussie into 2024 talks, so that people realise that I’m just like them on a certain level rather than, like, as I said some kind of contrived you know, set of cliches. I got another Superchat here from, one second, from Apollonian JL. He said:

“Have you read the Myth of the 20th Century by Alfred Rosenberg? And do you really think that non-northwest Europeans can assimilate into Anglo Saxon Australia?”

I have read the Myth of the 20th Century. I’m actually thinking of doing a podcast, or a series of podcasts on that book down the line.

[1:46:59]

So if you want to get the Joel Davis take on that text, we’re not doing it now in the Superchat, it’s too big.

But obviously, in that text, Rosenberg goes over, you know what he sees as the kind of unique character of the Germanic European, but he also talks about the Aryan Greeks and the similarities and differences between, like, northwest Europeans and the ancient Greeks. It’s quite an interesting discussion, and I think a lot of his assessments are accurate. And obviously, Australians are Celto-Germanic peoples. That’s what the Constitution of the nation is if you look at the data, like, on the racial demographics of White Australians, we’re, over 90% plus Celto-Germanic. There’s a little bit of Slavic and Mediterranean DNA here, but it’s a small minority.

So that’s the character of the nation. That’s the founding stock, and that gives our national character, and that’s what the majority of us are. And a lot of the people who have some ancestors from southern or Eastern Europe are mixed, like, with northwest European.

So the amount of people that are pure southern European or pure Eastern European are actually quite small, and we’re not really getting much immigration from those parts of the world now. Like, the Whites that immigrate to Australia are mostly northwest European. They’re mostly coming from Britain or Ireland, or sometimes from Germany or Scandinavia or America. They’re not really coming from those places.

So I would anticipate that through the generations, they’ll just become more and more fused with the founding stock population, and there won’t be very, very many pure Italians or pure Ukrainians or anything like that left in Australia.

So I think we should just focus on that Celto-Germanic kind of cultural foundation for understanding ourselves, and that’s what we are. And if you’re someone that has mixed ancestry or ancestry from southern or Eastern Europe, then if you want to be an Australian, you kind of have to assimilate into that. I think we can be inclusive to the ones that genuinely want to assimilate and over time, they’ll just kind of mix in with the rest of us down the generations.

So people might say that, like from a Puritan standpoint, that’s a big problem. I always say, though, like, if you’re a Croatian who lives in Australia and you really care more about being Croatian than you care about being Australian, I don’t personally understand why you wouldn’t move to Croatia, as an example, back to Croatia. That’s true for any group. Like, if you’re a German and you live here and you care more about Germany than Australia, why are you here? Like, I don’t really understand. Like, for me, like, I’m an Anglo Saxon, so then it’s easy for me to be like, well, Australia, because I’m of the founding stock, so I can identify with the country.

So I don’t really know what that’s like to feel like a kind of ethnic minority. But if I felt like Australia, I didn’t really identify with Australia as much as I identified with Britain, I would literally move to Britain and just start a life there and focus on, like, returning to the land of my ancestors, if that’s how I felt.

So I don’t really understand why you would like these groups that they want, like, almost Australia to become multicultural and to be:

“Super accepting, of Australia is not primarily an Anglo or Celto-Germanic people, it’s just European. And whether you’re Macedonian or Bulgarian or Anglo, it doesn’t matter.”

It does actually matter. And our national culture is a specific way for a specific reason. And if you truly love Australia, you would respect that.

But, yeah, the people from those places that want to embrace that, I am accepting of I’m not like, so I might get caught a cuck by the Nordicist, like, hyper Nordicist people. But I think that it doesn’t really make any sense, the position that we’re in right now, to be alienating those people if they’re going to fight for our race and for White Australia alongside us, they are pretty similar to us. Like, they are of the same race as us, even if they’re of a different subgroup of the race. It doesn’t existentially threaten who we are to be inclusive to them. Like, it just simply doesn’t.

Whereas being inclusive to non-Whites does. Like, that literally completely undermines the racial character.

So that’s how I see it. But if they get offended by that idea that shows that they’ve got a hostility. If you’re someone of Italian descent and you’re getting offended that I’m saying Australia was founded by Anglo Saxons and that it’s a Celto-Germanic nation, then I’m sorry, you need to fucking go! You’re part of the problem! Because you literally don’t respect Australia, you don’t fucking respect our national history. And the literal, like, racial stock that founded the fucking country! Like, so you’re basically an anti-Australian. You know, you have the mentality of these other non-White immigrants, basically. You’re trying to undermine Australia’s identity to fit you. And you’re getting angry at a founding stock Australian for having my own identity and asserting it. So you have to join our team. We don’t have to join your team. That’s the way I see it. Tom probably doesn’t want to go into that. We’ve answered that question too many times. RSA Liberty, …

[1:52:44]

Thomas Sewell: That’s the fifth time we’ve had that question.

Joel Davis: Yeah. RSA Liberty said:

“Fuhrer, is the first hundred man march going to be the next national meet? Issue the order!”

Thomas Sewell: [chuckling] I hope that that’s someone that’s involved in the organisation asking that question. I won’t go into too many details, but we have been doing account of who we think we can put forward.

And obviously that’s not including the recruitment that we’re going to have between now and then. I think the next national is going to be very impressive. I’ll leave it at that. I’m not going to say a number because it’s still in the air, but., …

Joel Davis: It’s always difficult getting everyone in the country to go to one place like that. Always presents challenges.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah.

Joel Davis: But, yeah, recruitment’s been good and it’s looking good!

Thomas Sewell: I’m sure if it was a Zoom call, if it was a Zoom call, national meetup, we’d have a thousand people on the Zoom call. But because it’s not a Zoom call and there’s a lot of logistics involved, and cost as well. A lot of our members are young and it’s a big cost to travel to the other side of Australia or whatever, but we try to make it a holiday, we try to make it an adventure as well. So that way that they’re getting something out of it at a personal level, not just as a concept of duty.

So it’ll be impressive. I hope you’re involved and yeah, January is some time away. It’s over three months away. So if guys want to get involved between now and then you’re going to have to be involved for probably a couple weeks, or a couple months to be able to get the orders for where it is so get involved now. At this stage, it’s mostly under wraps. Will we go public? Maybe a couple weeks, or a month out? Maybe there’s a chance we’ve done that in the past, certainly with two of the national meets in Victoria. We went public with it. Obviously, Sydney and Brisbane weren’t. We didn’t go public with it until the last minute that we were there. And that’s just because if you look at the pressure, the police pressure we had.

So, anyway, I’ll leave it there. I won’t go any further. But you better be involved, [word unclear], if you’re going to make comments like that.

Joel Davis: Yeah, come to nationals. Like, get involved now. You come to nationals, you’ll get to see Tom fight someone in the ring. I’ll fight someone. Blair said he wanted to get into a punch on at nationals in the ring. So you get to watch your favourite streamers punch on IRL. Racist UFC. It’s Keno.

Thomas Sewell: A whole weekend of racism!

Joel Davis: We’re gonna have a lot of fun, so, yeah, obviously we’ll be doing some activism. I’m not looking forward, to be honest, at the 10k run.

Thomas Sewell: [chuckling]

Joel Davis: But got to do it. Got to smash it out!

Thomas Sewell: Get ready for the 10k run. I did a 4K run tonight and it wasn’t at a good speed, I’ll tell you that. But it actually, it felt fine. It was easy to do it. I just wasn’t very fast. So I’m hoping to drop ten kilos and get my speed back.

Joel Davis: I did it. I did a I just did a 2.4, like, locally tonight and, yeah, it wasn’t too bad. Yeah. But I’m nowhere near the fitness level that I’ll be at nationals. Because over the wintertime, we haven’t really been running. I’ve just been lifting weights and putting on, like, chungus. You know, I might look a little less bulked because I literally lost, like, eight kilos in the last month because I’ve just been trying to cut weight so I can get my run time up and we’re getting back into kickboxing and stuff. And, yeah, I was punching harder, but I was punching harder for 45 seconds, and then I was starting to breathe heavy. So what’s the point? [chuckling]

Fellow Comrade said:

“Buy yourselves a based, racist looking sandwich or an extra racist, wholesome chungus roast cooked by someone’s grandma.”

Well, I don’t think grandma is charging $10 to eat roast. You know, that’s why we love the grandmas, because the grandmas they got a, …

Thomas Sewell: Maybe we can get a bottle of San Pellegrino or something for when we go visit grandma.

Joel Davis: Yeah, we got to take something. We got to take little chocolates or something for Grandma.

Thomas Sewell: Grandma wants chocolate.

Joel Davis: Yeah, but, like, these days, with inflation, a $10 sandwich? Get the fuck! Get the hell out of here! You’re not buying anything. Like, what is this, 2018? Like, yeah, the jews have fucked us. Immigration has fucked us. You know, you can’t buy a sandwich for less than $20 now. It’s ridiculous! That’s not your fault, of course.

But as I said, I blame the jews. I blame ZOG. Fuck ZOG!

Thomas Sewell: Maybe I should get a racist sandwich with that Max Caruso guy?

Joel Davis: Yeah, that’s obviously a reference to that Max Caruso interview that you did a few years ago.

[1:57:36]

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I hope he puts up the full interview. Not the full interview, but, yeah, the snippet he put up was very small. Like, there was one point where he was saying, like, he was asking if he has to go back to Italy. This kind of ties in with that long winded question that we answer every stream. But he said:

“Do I have to go back to Italy?”

And I was like:

“What are you talking about?”

And he goes:

“Well, I’m not White. I’m Italian.”

I was like:

“What? What are you talking about?”

And he’s like:

“Well, isn’t that how it is? Like, are Italians White?”

And I was like:

“Man, you’re doing the meme. Do you really feel that way? Do you feel like you’re not White? Do you feel like you’re much different to me?”

And he was like:

“Oh, I don’t know. I never really thought about, are Italians White?”

And I was like:

“Man, I didn’t realise you were Italian. I mean, obviously your last name’s Caruso, so I figured you were like, you had some sort of Mediterranean influence in you, but, yeah, like, it’s cool, bro. You can stay. Like, you’re White. You and any Italian that acts and behaves and looks like you can stay. You’re all right. You’re one of the boys.”

And he was like:

“Oh, cool. Well, yeah, maybe I can get on board with this is all right!”

That’s pretty funny. [chuckling]

Joel Davis: That’s probably why he didn’t put it in the video, because he didn’t want to come across as too sympathetic.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, he would have cut that.

Joel Davis: But I saw he uploaded, because he uploaded to YouTube, and it did reasonably well, but then he uploaded a section of it to TikTok, and that went crazy on TikTok! It got like last time I checked, like, 300k views or something so maybe it’s more now, I don’t know. I haven’t even checked back in. So Tik Tok is great for viral racist content. Hitler’s going viral on TikTok. TikTok had to shut down all the Hitler speeches because they kept going insane! And it became a meme where people would be like put the Hitler English AI translation, and they’d be, like, dubbing it with their face, but then putting them in the humourous situations where they’re upset at their girlfriend or waiting in line or they’re in these frustrating, you know, interpersonal situations, and they’re just channeling, like, Hitler’s rage! And that just became the new TikTok trend. 2024 is cool! [chuckling]

When we sat on the show a few months ago, the vibe has shifted. Some people doubted it, but there’s no doubting that the vibe has shifted. The vibe has definitely shifted.

Yeah. What else we got here in the someone Odysee. In Reality said:

“Finally catching a live stream. It’s early morning where I’m at. Thank you both for the education and inspiration. Hail our people!”

Well, thanks, In reality. Glad you enjoyed the stream. And GoyBoy1488 said:

“He’s taken a week off politics, but he wanted to pop in and support his favourite Aussies. How do we feel about small breaks? Does that go against the quote? ‘We will never slacken, never tire.’ See you next week.”

Thomas Sewell: You got to be tactical. You got to be tactical with your breaks. You got to have a reset. You got a rest between sets. Yeah.

Because if you don’t have small breaks, you’ll break. You’ll like the whole point of having these small breaks. Sorry, I’m being distracted. I can hear Luna calling my name, which is odd for her. I don’t know why she’s talking in her sleep. Well, she’s not asleep. She’s already woken up.

But, yeah, now you can’t, … The first couple of years I was involved with politics, I went really hard, and I learnt very quickly that you kind of, it affects your mental capacity, it affects your intelligence, it affects your stress levels. You have to learn to enjoy the struggle. And that’s one of the important principles of this, is that it’s a marathon, not a sprint, and you have to learn how to enjoy it. You have to learn how to take time off and deload and rest, and you come back better! You come back a lot better.

But most people don’t even do enough to take a break. Most people just need to change their lifestyle so that they can afford more energy towards nationalism, because 99% of people that consider themselves nationalists, don’t actually do anywhere near what they’re capable of doing. It’s not them that needs breaks. They need lifestyle changes so that more of their effort is dedicated towards nationalism, which starts with getting involved in real life.

Joel Davis: Yeah, I’m someone that doesn’t take a lot of breaks and just kind of keep, like, chipping away at things with, yeah, very seldom do I actually. And maybe that’s bad. Maybe I should recharge the battery sometime, because, I don’t know, that’s more my approach, kind of just keep plugging away.

But it’s a personality thing. Some people really need time on their own. And I know, for example, Blair is like that. Because Blair is someone who, he’s got a lot of energy output, so if he can kind of burn himself out very quickly. He’s got to manage his energy distribution. So it’s a personality thing.

[2:02:49]

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I benefit a lot from being alone. Like, I’ve noticed that the greatest periods of political growth, like, sorry, not political growth, but personal growth. The greatest personal growth that I’ve been through has been when I’ve been alone, not just prison, but just in general.

So I think being alone, truly alone, like, without distraction, is extremely important for personal growth. And that would be considered a break because for me, one of the biggest parts, I don’t have a massive social battery.

So one of the biggest parts of nationalism that’s quite taxing for me is dealing with lots of humans. I wouldn’t say I’m extroverted or introverted. I’m probably in the middle somewhere, but you have to be pretty extroverted to be a political character, a political leader. And a lot of people., … Look, if there’s 200 people that want your time, you don’t have 200 people’s worth of time.

And a lot of people, they want your time. They know who you are, they admire you or they respect you or whatever, or they just want to have a conversation with you. But you don’t have 200 people’s time for them. You have you have one 200th of a person’s time for them. And that, not to be rude. When I first got sort of like popular or famous, however you want to put it, infamous. Like, when my Telegram went from like 200 followers to like 15,000 or something, I noticed that a lot in, whenever I was online, I would just get so many DM’s, and it got to the point where I had to take my Direct Messenger off my public Telegram.

That’s why it’s not on my public Telegram anymore. If, you know what it is, you know what it is, but I don’t advertise it anymore because I don’t want direct messages. You either want to get involved or you don’t. I just don’t have time. I mean, I was talking to Joel about Twitter recently, and he keeps telling me to get my Twitter back up. But again, like, having the Twitter DM’s open is like as soon as I opened the Twitter DM’s, just immediately it started flooding in. And it’s just paragraphs and paragraphs and paragraphs, and it’s all good faith. It’s all people wanting advice and people explaining how they’re inspired and this is what they want to do. And it’s awesome! It’s awesome stuff!

But, yeah, I just try to direct people towards like, a local representative or local leader because, yeah, otherwise I’ll burn out. I’ve done it before. I’ve done it in the past. I’ve responded to every single message. I mean, I’ve got about. Shit! I can show you my phone. I got like 999 unread personal messages on my phone. I just don’t open personal messages anymore unless they’re from, like, someone that I know or deal with in person or they’re a representative of a movement already. I just don’t have the energy for. I’ll burn out! I’ll burn out and I’ll have to go hide in my room for like, three days and not come out. [chuckling]

Joel Davis: I think I have a little bit more social battery than you to an extent.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, you do you do.

Joel Davis: But even still, I get overwhelmed as well by the same thing. People really, they expect your time. Like, they expect you to. Like, okay, they get offended. It’s like you don’t understand the amount, the sheer quantity of people that are trying to talk to me all the time. It just becomes overwhelming and then I just lose track of it. Like it just gets dropped. It just goes into vertical scroll. And it happens even to my own family or my own friends. Like, I’ll see they message me and be like:

“Oh, I’ve got to go back to that.”

And then just so much crap fills everything up that I just forget to check back in.

Thomas Sewell: I still get probably half a dozen random messages a day. But it’s a huge improvement in the quality of the messages, certainly, I think, because you can only get my direct message through someone that already knows it. So that helps. Unless they’re just lucky and they just search it.

Yeah, I’m gonna call it a night.

Joel Davis: Oh, yeah, we’re done. This is the last Superchat is just a statement. A Hitler quote from Keep Asking for Truth, saying:

“From my dead body, my spirit will rise again and people will know that I was right.”

And I guess we can end it there. Also saw Hitler’s Big Toe asking me if I was drinking breast milk. No, it was raw milk.

Thomas Sewell: [chuckling]

Joel Davis: You know, if I had this much breast milk, I’d give it a crack and see how it is. I’ll give you a review. I could do a review bro on breast milk, but I don’t have a pregnant wife at the moment. I wouldn’t want to be drinking some random bitches breast milk. That’s weird!

So anyway, we’ll end the show there.

Thomas Sewell: No comment on the breast milk question. No comment! Good night. Hail Hitler!

Joel Davis: See you guys later.

[2:07:49]

END

top

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

Odysee Comments

top

(Comments as of Oct 8, 2024 = 151)

HyperChat min: 100

@BMC1488
4 days ago
Australia for the White Man! o//

8
1
jojoNora
2 days ago
I wish we could clone a Joel for each Western country.

3
1
Hide replies
MrWebster
1 day ago
same can be said for Tom and Blair!

1
0

@katana17
3 days ago
Here’s the transcript:
[Joel Davis – Political Existentialism, Zionist Hypocrisy, Austrians Vote for Remigration – Oct 3, 2024 – Transcript]

Joel Davis – Political Existentialism, Zionist Hypocrisy, Austrians Vote for Remigration – Oct 3, 2024 – Transcript

[In this livestream episode Aussie nationalist activists Joel Davis and Tom Sewell discuss the following:
Blair was unable to join the stream due to other commitments.
Discuss recent events in Israel, including bombing campaigns in Lebanon and Iranian missile strikes on Israel.
Express concern about potential escalation leading to US intervention: “that could escalate into a full on war in the region with Iran.”
Criticize conservative politicians’ strong defense of Israel and Jews.
Jewish interests have too much influence on Australian politics: “jewish elite capture of our political institutions.”
Discuss the US National Guard being deployed to the Middle East instead of helping with domestic disasters.
They note a shift in public sentiment since previous Middle East conflicts.
Express approval of Iran bombing Israel: “It was good to see Israel getting bombed by some proper ballistic missiles.”
Discuss the difficulty Iran faces in significantly damaging Israel due to geographical constraints.
Analyze Israel’s military options against Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Dscuss the Freedom Party of Austria’s electoral success and radical anti-immigration platform.
Express optimism about the rise of nationalist parties across Europe.
Criticize the lack of effective nationalist political options in Australia.
Discuss their approach to white nationalism and racial identity in Australia.
Argue for focusing on Australia’s Anglo-Celtic and Germanic heritage while being somewhat inclusive of other European ethnicities.
Discuss plans for future nationalist gatherings and activism in Australia.
Emphasize the importance of in-person organizing over online activism.
More, …
Less

1
1
Mr
4 days ago
Q: After the zombie apocalypse occurs and Western Civilization collapses, where do Joel Davis followers think that White civilization will rise and re-establish itself as the globe’s premiere society….Europe, North America, or Australia?

2
0
The Crucible 01
4 days ago
Keith woods is a pseudo intellectual pussy, and even maybe a grifter.

6
4
Hide replies

@popovacianen
4 days ago
are they talking about him? you have a time stamp by any chance?

Hide replies
The Crucible 01
4 days ago
umm gee like watch the stream

1
3
Hide replies

@popovacianen
4 days ago
umm gee thanks for nothing lol

0
1
Hide replies
The Crucible 01
4 days ago
umm gee your welcome lol

The Crucible 01
4 days ago(edited)
Honestly cant remember where they mentioned him, 45 minutes in i think. lol

Wesselmania
4 days ago
full-on “grifter” is a stretch.. his weakness is fame-seeking

Heartland
3 days ago
Keith puts his head above the anti-white parapet. What do you do to defend the white race?

Hide replies
The Crucible 01
3 days ago
oh of course because i dont make streams i dont do enough in defense of my race, piss off with that dribble, I could ask you the same question. On fact let me ask you this does Keith get money for what he does?

InReality
4 days ago
review “bra” get it?

1
1
MrWebster
15 hours ago(edited)
Tom and Joel think I am too extreme and insane on this. But basically I believe once Us White nationalist retake our own nations again and deport all the Non Whites out our Nations. We as Whites must then think in a Supramacist and World Conquering vision. Where we will have no choice but to create an Anti white Ethnic artificial disease that makes all whites on Earth immune to this disease. But once this disease is released on all corners of planet earth. Once invented and released against non whites, it will wipe out more than 70% of all Non whites on earth. After the first sucessful wipeout run, we as whites would need to siege all non white Nuclear and Weapons cache arsenal before they can use it against us. We will have to in next couple of years wipe out the last non whites vestiges on planet earth down to the last single Man, Woman and child towards total genetic Extinction. We will have to also eliminate all genitic tissue dna of non whites, preserving non white DNA will be a very treasonous crime resulting in executions. We all have to come to the final solution as white people that all non whites have to be driven towards extinction to ensure White Survival in 21st century. There is no alternative to this solution. They want us extinct, we should drive their extinction. Peaceful/tolerant coexistence is mere deception and illusion.
Less

1
0
Smokey
4 days ago
I feel this chat is a little boring now. Why no comments?

1
0
Weltenesche
8 hours ago
It shows you don’t know too much about Austrian politics. The Freedom Party is extremely philosemetic and their leadership makes regular trips to Israel. They’re also civnats and have put out ads about how “great” it is that Turks are voting for them and how Turks are welcome and accepted in the Freedom Party. Honestly the best advertisements for the Freedom Party came from the Greens and the Liberals, comparing Kickl to Hitler

Heartland
3 days ago
1:05:32
is that raw milk Thomas is drinking?! >>> !

Archipelago Woes
4 days ago
o/

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
JoelTom

InReality
4 days ago
o/

Randall_Waffen
4 days ago
o/

@CampsLindburgh
4 days ago
wp

DOLO
4 days ago
o/

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
ooops

InReality
4 days ago

@Smokey
It’s a public forum. Why don’t you try to add something of value to the conversation? Be the change you wish to see instead of whining.

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
lol

InReality
4 days ago
That’s ironic.

InReality
4 days ago

@Smokey
are you serious? Weren’t you just comment policing just a min ago? Very feminine behavior.

DOLO
4 days ago
lol

InReality
4 days ago
I’m excited to see!

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@smokey
Mostly replying but I’ll shurrup now o7 o/

Secure the future of our people
4 days ago
Follow Joel and Blair on twitter, Tom on (telegram)

https://x.com/joeldavisx

https://t.me/Thomas_Sewell

https://x.com/b_cottrell89

InReality
4 days ago
“i feel like” lol

Smokey
4 days ago

@InReality
Okay, thanks.

InReality
4 days ago

@Smokey
speak up then, bub!

Smokey
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning

@InReality
I feel like you’re dominating the chat. Why not lot other people post a comment?

InReality
4 days ago
We should call raw milk “white powerade”. Not sure if Aussies know what Powerade is but it’s an American sports drink.

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
Didn’t some “Turks” try to blow up a railway in Ballarat circa 1920?

InReality
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning
cheers

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@InReality
IKR? I removed the comments btw.

InReality
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning
can you imagine the media scrambling to decide what to say about that? “Do we support the muslims or the lgbtp???”

ThinRedLine
4 days ago
howdy

WaffleStake
4 days ago
i haven’t seen a non white in tent cities full of white Australians

InReality
4 days ago

@CampsLindburgh
kebabs

WaffleStake
4 days ago
pain

@CampsLindburgh
4 days ago
god?

@CampsLindburgh
4 days ago
what’s in the box

WaffleStake
4 days ago
Lindt cafe siege

InReality
4 days ago
White World Policy

Smokey
4 days ago
Does Syrian Girl live in Australia still?

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
All in one? I’ll have a look

WaffleStake
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning
Alex Linder did that one too

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
Pete Quinones on Odysee did a reading of “Camp of the Saints”. It’s in his playlist.

WaffleStake
4 days ago
Palmer is the archetypal example of the goy billionaire wasting his wealth on vanity project

@CampsLindburgh
4 days ago

@TASMANIANDEVIL
Camp of Saints, horrifying in some ways. but also it describes the fruits of the do-gooder mentality, overrun by the stinking muds, which is kind of satisfying

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
Many have Brazilian links, geneticaly. Ditto with Chinese ancestry. Look at world maps & it makes sense.

InReality
4 days ago
Austria: home of the original leader!

WaffleStake
4 days ago
in Tassie?

InReality
4 days ago

@TASMANIANDEVIL
That’s how it starts, huh.

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
now we have the inbred rapey ones

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
we had those more white seeming ones about 10 years ago

WaffleStake
4 days ago
on the other hand all the “kiwis” we have are islanders, not Anglo

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning
no need to go to India when India comes to you…

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
They’ll be Brahmans – the richer caste.

WaffleStake
4 days ago
i agree that they shouldn’t be here simply because this isn’t their country

WaffleStake
4 days ago
Queensland is the suburbs. There are lots of them here to be sure, but they seem to be white presenting in their behaviour for the most part.

InReality
4 days ago
FORTRESS EUROPE NOW

DOLO
4 days ago
Rohem was the leader of the SA before the putsch

WaffleStake
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning
How can they be part Brazilian?

@CampsLindburgh
4 days ago
needs a completely different moral foundation. with pro-14 words as 1st principle

Secure the future of our people
4 days ago
Help this channel grow! Repost and like the Twitter if you can guys.
https://x.com/joeldavisx/status/1841790466012102935

Secure the future of our people
4 days ago
o/

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
Maori aren’t merely Polynesian. They were part Brazilian & Chinese before they also miscegenated with Europeans.

InReality
4 days ago
Love the milk

BASEDVLAD
4 days ago
White Power Drink \o

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago

@DawnBrowning
no, I’ve heard of it tho. sounds horrifying

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@TASMANIANDEVIL
True Have you read Camp of the Saints?

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@TASMANIANDEVIL
Have you been to India/Pak/Bang?

InReality
4 days ago
The level of focused seriousness and decorum these Aussie’s have is really appealing to me.

@TheGreatWillDo
4 days ago
English politics is the option of being fucked from the front or from behind

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
Ah right. I’m not sure which state, but I’m not sure how you’ve avoided the smelly lower caste Indians who ruin every public space

@TheGreatWillDo
4 days ago
all it takes is proper internet censorship & its game over

InReality
4 days ago
Low-caste Indians especially are rapey, scamming street shitters.

WaffleStake
4 days ago

@TASMANIANDEVIL
Australia

Dawn Browning
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
Until beef isn’t allowed on your BBQ?

InReality
4 days ago
One of the things that did it for me was all the indian scammer videos on youtube. And the travel vlogs. Check out Bald and Bankrupt’s latest video on India

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
which country are you in, Waffle?

WaffleStake
4 days ago
personally I haven’t had problems with Indians but my personal experience is irrelevant

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
Yeah Indians are disgusting

InReality
4 days ago
I have to say, I have a particular distaste for Indians.

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
there are more Asians in New Zealand than Maoris

DOLO
4 days ago
Yeah, it’ll be Indians at a guess

@TheGreatWillDo
4 days ago
Hello London

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
Indians

WaffleStake
4 days ago
Asian, islanders

DOLO
4 days ago

@InReality
Hobits

InReality
4 days ago
wtf??? NZ 55% white? Who is moving there, asians?

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
The THEY are already tying themselves in their own knots.

DOLO
4 days ago
Trump also said that America needs more legal migrants.

Dawn Browning
4 days ago
No need for a drivers licence if you can’t legally pay for one? Hmmmm.

InReality
4 days ago

@GoyBoy1488
Even Hitler had the Berghof. Everyone needs to recharge the vital energies.

@GoyBoy1488
4 days ago

@InReality
o/

InReality
4 days ago

@GoyBoy1488
o/ have a nice break

@GoyBoy1488
4 days ago
$14.88
taking a week off of politics, but wanted to pop in an support my favorite Ausies. How do you two feel about small breaks? Does that go against “we will never slacken, never tire…”? See you next week!

InReality
4 days ago
I assume that the Germans who thought that the NSDAP were too extreme and unoptical probably changed their minds once life got a lot better for them because of Hitler.

@TimeToWakeUp
4 days ago
Whatever “evils” Whites are capable of, non-whites would do in a worse fashion ten times over

Svxdrifter
4 days ago

@lewpers

@lewpers
4 days ago
The mudslimes are not going home until the jew issue is solved first, never forget that. As such, the latter is technically the more pressing issue.

InReality
4 days ago
Daniel’s statement is very telling.

InReality
4 days ago
$20.00
Finally catching a live stream! It’s early morning where I’m at. Thank you both for the education and inspiration. Hail our people!

Harry Holler
4 days ago
with zero sense of irony

Harry Holler
4 days ago
Joel, Barry Weiss accused the Qataris as “having dual loyalty”.

WaffleStake
4 days ago
Then ASIO is turned against the White population

InReality
4 days ago
What’s up, based Aryan chads?

Whiterabbit
4 days ago
Frank Lowy was in the Irgun who shot British soldiers

DanTheOracle
4 days ago
plus russia runs their own missile protections in both iran and syria from what i understand

DanTheOracle
4 days ago

@WaffleStake
yea russia gave them their new fighter jets not long ago and they already have i think its s400 missile protection

@WhiteWalker
4 days ago
Macron lost ‘3rd place’ yet he still rules, you are not going to vote your way out of this.

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
i thought it said Australia voted for remigration. i was getting excited

@WhiteWalker
4 days ago
WE just saw this take place in France

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
first

@WhiteWalker
4 days ago
Even though Austria voted, make no mistake about it, the Globohomo will circle the wagons and not allow them to lead, 30% verses the traitors.

@katana17
4 days ago
Transcript of last week’s show:

Joel Davis – Building Nationalism from the Ground Up – Sep 26, 2024 – Transcript

DanTheOracle
4 days ago
o/

DanTheOracle
4 days ago
hello lads

@lewpers
4 days ago
Isn’t Atomwaffen all feds too? Pretty sure they were exposed during a court case, unless I’m wrong.

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
bt?

WaffleStake
4 days ago
Iran probably has advanced Russian anti air defenses which would make the Americans think twice

@lewpers
4 days ago
The importance of Iran’s strike is that it has now showed the world that Israel is far from invincible, and without the JEWSA it’d fall overnight.

@TASMANIANDEVIL
4 days ago
that was a good stream with the Israeli sperg

DanTheOracle
4 days ago

@WhiteWalker
hitler tried to not vote his way out of this… he completely failed before quite literally voting his way out of this… change my mind?

Hide replies
DOLO
4 days ago
You could argue that was one of the main reason that the vote even worked to begin with. The way Degrelle describes it, the failed putsch sort of turned Hitler into a rock star, and i can see that being the case, but don’t forget that the officials were largely on his side as well. Famously the judge at his trial actually sympathized with Hitler, but obviously that wouldn’t happen now.
Funny take though because it’s basically true what you’re saying.

Hide replies
DanTheOracle
4 days ago
“You could argue that was one of the main reason that the vote even worked”
ok lets argue it…
how many people took power in 1923 vs 1833?
how many people died in 1923 vs 1933 to take power? like, what is the percentage? the ratio between power taken to the loss of your own supporters?
how much more power did the commies get in 1923 vs 1933 because of the putsch?
when were more volumes of mein kampf put into peoples hands? 1923 or a decade later in 1933?
what single positive thing came about because of 1923? you quite literally cant even name one can you?
Less

DanTheOracle
4 days ago
“The way Degrelle describes it, the failed putsch sort of turned Hitler into a rock star”
is degrelle here to debate with? because i would be more than happy to debate him on this… but i think ultimately the thing that made hitler a “rock star” wasnt the putsch, it was his unscheduled speech before the DAP long before it even became the NSDAP…. he was sent there by the german government to “spy”on political parties to ensure they werent commies, after a commie gave a speech as to why they should become more marist to the workers, hitler was so incensed he got up to leave in disgust and gave a 15 minute “off the cuff” unscripted speech on how wrong marxists were…. the head of the DAP didnt just want hitler to join his “beer hall” party… but signed the party over to hitler on the spot….
you think that hitler just voting in the beer halls of the time had more or less of an outcome than his speech that won him the whole party?
how many people died in the putsch vs his beer hall speech? what, ultimately won hitler more power? losing members in the putsch? or winning over a whole party without losing even a single member and taking power in the party? im pretty confident i know which was more important.
“Funny take though because it’s basically true what you’re saying.”
yea the idea wasnt to agree with me… it wasnt even just to argue with me… it was to change my mind that sitting at home in your basement doing nothing is somehow better than simply voting.. simply voting isnt going to replace them… you need to take as much power anywhere you can while voting is the only thing that will work…
Less

Hide replies
DOLO
3 days ago
is degrelle here to debate with?
He doesn’t need to be, he wrote several books, why don’t you read them and stop sperging out, faggot.

0
1
Hide replies
DanTheOracle
3 days ago
loooooool fucking owned.
youre the one who was trying to form an argument for it… i simply called you out on your retarded bullshit… i dont need nor want to make your argument for you, youre ment to have the IQ to do that yourself, you completely failed.
nigger level intelligence…

Hide replies
DOLO
3 days ago(edited)
The city of Munich had been stirred to intense feelings for Hitler after the failure of the putsch. There had been not the least sign of solidarity with Kahr and Lossow and their people. In powerless rage, they had pounced on the movement that had made them tremble. Its offices had been closed, the Vélkischer Beobachter banned and all its assets seized. But the harder they hit, the more indignation they aroused. “For some days,” writes Benoist-Méchin, “the people, prey to a strange agitation, have been roaming the streets singing patriotic songs and booing von Kahr.”
“The streets of the city,” adds historian Pierre Soisson, “resounded with enthusiastic cries of Deutschland Erwache (‘Germany Awake’] and ‘Heil Hitler’.” On the day after Hitler’s imprisonment, a referendum was organized at the university. Reproducing the official report of this opinion poll will tell it best: “Meeting at the university: 70 percent for Hitler, 20 percent von Kahr, 10 percent indifferent.
Less

Hide replies
DanTheOracle
3 days ago
wheres degalle so i can answer him and his point? can ya run and grab him for a moment? i would love to explain to him how wrong he is and why exactly hes wrong…

Hide replies
DOLO
3 days ago
Now you’re making yourself look like an idot. Look up who Léon Degrelle is before making a comment like that.

Hide replies
DanTheOracle
3 days ago
lool its hilarious. only a midwit cant work out im using the absurdity to point out your stupidity…
you really think someone like me does not know about degrelles work, life and arguments for and against his positions?
the fact is im so used to easily winning these little debates and you midwit always end up going “oh yea? well read this thing i read and that will tell you why youre wrong” but in reality i can explain to you why your interpretation of their views
and opinions are wrong and do it in my own words without having to rely on a midwit like you not reading someone elses work to see my point….
but i guess being so new to this you have not worked out how it works or your own views
rather than just parrot someone elses….
Less

Hide replies
DOLO
3 days ago
Literally nobody is debating. It’s just you sperging out. There is a difference.

0
1
Continue Thread
WaffleStake
4 days ago
Drew Pavlou is a Gunt Guard for Zionism

@WhiteWalker
4 days ago
That national guard if I understand correctly is actually from the disaster area, it’s disgusting.

@KeepAskingForTruth
4 days ago
$3.88
From my dead body my spirit will rise again and people will know that I was right.

Tendie Research Room
4 days ago
are they late?

0
0

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

RUMBLE COMMENTS (41) as of Oct 8, 2024.

Dan762
4 days ago
we need yall in America or we need to colab
10 likes

autonomousthought
4 days ago
The argument about Africans not trading their minerals to us is wrong. In a natural state whites could dominate the world through trade alone. Africans would absolutely trade their minerals to us, and for what would be something of miniscule value to whites, just like when we traded with Native Americans. They’d be living in even more squalor than they are now. Keith wasn’t pleading with brown people arguing that we’re nice and can get along. He made a basic argument for self determination of different peoples. Counter signaling that is really weird and dumb
8 likes

› Show 5 replies
WhiteBloke
4 days ago
Rumble is pumping more ads on the replay that fkn jewtube. Unreal.
8 likes

› Show 1 reply
katana17
4 days ago
Last week’s transcript: [Joel Davis – Building Nationalism from the Ground Up – Sep 26, 2024 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2024/09/28/joel-davis-building-nationalism-from-the-ground-up-sep-26-2024-transcript/ [In this livestream episode Aussie nationalist activists Joel Davis, Blair Cottrell and Tom Sewell discuss the following: The show has expanded its audience significantly by broadcasting on Twitter. They’ve grown their audience despite being deplatformed from YouTube. They talk about the upcoming Australian Football League grand final weekend, and critique the commercialization and politicization of Australian football, while discussing the potential for politicizing sports for nationalist causes. They discuss the concept of building nationalism from the ground up, and argue that existing institutions have failed and a new movement needs to be built from scratch. Emphasize the importance of organizing white men around a “no compromise white nationalism.” Discuss strategies for building a parallel economy and community for their activists and the need for physical spaces and property for the movement. The challenges of fundraising and managing finances for their organization and the importance of transparency and accountability in handling donations. They critique excessive moralizing and ideological debates within the nationalist movement, and argue for a focus on racial identity as the foundation for their movement, despite the challenges of uniting different factions within white nationalism. National Socialism and its relevance today and strategies for normalizing their ideology and breaking the “spell” of anti-Nazi sentiment. The importance of building a distinctly Australian form of nationalism. The need for white people to collectively fund pro-white organizations and the potential for creating nationalist labor unions. The challenges of digital currencies and financial deplatforming. And more, …
4 likes

Delete
Motion937
3 days ago
I disagree somewhat with Joel when he mentioned Trump supporters in the USA who are rural vs. city dwellers…with city dwellers being more concerned about immigration. I am in a more rural area & am hard core anti-immigration. We are less soft on immigration. In the cities people are actually too tolerant of it. To the point that they are less likely to say anything because of persecution. It puts a target on your back by people who hate you. So people keep quiet about it. The whole thing is complicated. Very much like having friend groups, where the viewpoint changes depending on the quality of people you are associating with. Which is why a larger movement has to grow here so we are not in our little boxes. It needs to become the standard position for all our neighbors as well. I appreciate what you guys are doing, & I follow your channel from here in the USA.
2 likes

IvarHalfdansson
3 days ago
why are they always drinking milk?? weird
1 like

‹ Hide 3 replies
Motion937
2 days ago
Because being healthy & strong is better than being weak. Wanting to be weak is weird.
2 likes

PansophicGothi
2 days ago
It does seem kind of forced lol. Also it’s just the Aryans drinking milk meme from 2016. HWNDU
2 likes

GovMarioPalmieri
18 hours ago
because it’s good
1 like

PeroErcegovac
3 days ago
Joel is absolutely correct. Croats who feel for Croatia should come home as to be Australian one must be Anglo Celtic. You Dinaric Croats have to come home to Croatia. We need you and it is the best way to say thank you to the Aussies for giving us shelter post WWII. Do it. I did it. Only from our homelands can we truly network and create lasting alliances.
1 like

‹ Hide 1 reply
Motion937
2 days ago
It would be nice to have you debate or have a conversation with people in the USA like Ben Shapiro to help people gain perspective that they are deprived of. Ben doesn’t have a problem with the USA being subverted with racial demographics & thinks ideology is all that matters. I disagree & align with your way of thinking far more. It would be nice to see you talk with him to help wake people up in the USA as to how cucked we have become. I don’t see that happening because as the Jews have already said before they began their subversion tactics, “Never again.” Well, I would like to get to the point where White Anglo Saxons finally say, “Never again.” Then enforce it with a zero tolerance policy.
1 like

Rockwell1488Pierce
4 days ago
Follow Joel and Blair on twitter, Tom on (telegram)!!! https://x.com/joeldavisx https://t.me/Thomas_Sewell https://x.com/b_cottrell89
0 likes

Alimac801
3 days ago
I was a member of the Australian Libertarian Party. I know them well,attended many fundraisers:Ross Cameron and John Ruddick are total zionists and want to engage jewish money.
0 likes

katana17
3 days ago
Here’s the transcript: [Joel Davis – Political Existentialism, Zionist Hypocrisy, Austrians Vote for Remigration – Oct 3, 2024 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2024/10/04/joel-davis-political-existentialism-zionist-hypocrisy-austrians-vote-for-remigration-oct-3-2024-transcript/ [In this livestream episode Aussie nationalist activists Joel Davis and Tom Sewell discuss the following: Blair was unable to join the stream due to other commitments. Discuss recent events in Israel, including bombing campaigns in Lebanon and Iranian missile strikes on Israel. Express concern about potential escalation leading to US intervention: “that could escalate into a full on war in the region with Iran.” Criticize conservative politicians’ strong defense of Israel and Jews. Jewish interests have too much influence on Australian politics: “jewish elite capture of our political institutions.” Discuss the US National Guard being deployed to the Middle East instead of helping with domestic disasters. They note a shift in public sentiment since previous Middle East conflicts. Express approval of Iran bombing Israel: “It was good to see Israel getting bombed by some proper ballistic missiles.” Discuss the difficulty Iran faces in significantly damaging Israel due to geographical constraints. Analyze Israel’s military options against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Dscuss the Freedom Party of Austria’s electoral success and radical anti-immigration platform. Express optimism about the rise of nationalist parties across Europe. Criticize the lack of effective nationalist political options in Australia. Discuss their approach to white nationalism and racial identity in Australia. Argue for focusing on Australia’s Anglo-Celtic and Germanic heritage while being somewhat inclusive of other European ethnicities. Discuss plans for future nationalist gatherings and activism in Australia. Emphasize the importance of in-person organizing over online activism. More, …
0 likes

Delete
PansophicGothi
2 days ago
Saying that we’re going to dominate the globe and take whatever we want from everyone is not just bad optics, it’s a non-starter. You will never find a useful percentage of White people in the modern world to agree with that. It’s an edgelord position at this point. As someone else said, we can get whatever we want through trade, and cheaply. Besides that nothing is really exclusive that white people don’t have access to already, if we want to develop it. We only go to other countries now for slave labor and/or resource exploiting without any environmental concerns. Not only are neither of those Aryan principles, they’re ultimately horrible no matter where we cause it to happen on the globe and will come back to bite us.
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
StreamAddict
1 day ago
“You will never find a useful percentage of White people in the modern world to agree with that.” Yeah because we’re still brainwashed retards, we’re trying to reverse that, obviously. If we actually had white nationalists in power it would be just standard procedure. Of course we just take what we need, within reason, not just go out of our way to create conflict, but if a bunch of africans or something are sitting on shit we need and theyre not cooperating then one way or the other theyre getting out of the way. We dont owe any more fair treatment than the nons would give us so its a reasonable take, just seems crazy now cuz we’re in this ridiculous situation.
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
PansophicGothi
1 day ago
No one on Earth is ever not going to trade with Whites, that’s a strawman argument. Especially poor brown people, who will be desperate for anything we trade to them and have no use for the things we want. There is no reason for us to go around subjugating everyone else, it’s a net resource drain and also always comes back to bite us later . Wall off their brown nations and leave them there.
0 likes

FJB6666
1 day ago
Which country is taking in all these religion of peace morons????? Australia, we are the pathetic dumping ground for low IQ, allah snackbars. F labor traitors for now endangering Australians security.
0 likes

GovMarioPalmieri
18 hours ago
read Mario Palmieri available on Amazon and free pdf online. totally great.
0 likes

GovMarioPalmieri
18 hours ago
thanks guys. so many others are pretending to be natty because of elections and it’s really enervating. Hey yo y’all ya hear what Tim Pool and Candace Owens said yo? They get real spicy every four years for some reason. So sick of the coopting. I’d rather they be true lefties than fake nationalists.
0 likes

Baran319
7 hours ago
“A short time ago Mrs. Besant, in an interesting essay, announced that there was only one religion in the world, that all faiths were only versions or perversions of it, and that she was quite prepared to say what it was. According to Mrs. Besant this universal Church is simply the universal self. It is the doctrine that we are really all one person; that there are no real walls of individuality between man and man. If I may put it so, she does not tell us to love our neighbors; she tells us to be our neighbors. That is Mrs. Besant’s thoughtful and suggestive description of the religion in which all men must find themselves in agreement. And I never heard of any suggestion in my life with which I more violently disagree. I want to love my neighbor not because he is I, but precisely because he is not I. I want to adore the world, not as one likes a looking-glass, because it is one’s self, but as one loves a woman, because she is entirely different. If souls are separate love is possible. If souls are united love is obviously impossible. A man may be said loosely to love himself, but he can hardly fall in love with himself, or, if he does, it must be a monotonous courtship. If the world is full of real selves, they can be really unselfish selves. But upon Mrs. Besant’s principle the whole cosmos is only one enormously selfish person. It is just here that Buddhism is on the side of modern pantheism and immanence. And it is just here that Christianity is on the side of humanity and liberty and love. Love desires personality; therefore love desires division. It is the instinct of Christianity to be glad that God has broken the universe into little pieces, because they are living pieces. It is her instinct to say “little children love one another” rather than to tell one large person to love himself… (to be continued in next comment)
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Baran319
7 hours ago
This is the intellectual abyss between Buddhism and Christianity; that for the Buddhist or Theosophist personality is the fall of man, for the Christian it is the purpose of God, the whole point of his cosmic idea. *The world-soul of the Theosophists asks man to love it only in order that man may throw himself into it. But the divine centre of Christianity actually threw man out of it in order that he might love it. The oriental deity is like a giant who should have lost his leg or hand and be always seeking to find it; but the Christian power is like some giant who in a strange generosity should cut off his right hand, so that it might of its own accord shake hands with him.* We come back to the same tireless note touching the nature of Christianity; all modern philosophies are chains which connect and fetter; Christianity is a sword which separates and sets free. No other philosophy makes God actually rejoice in the separation of the universe into living souls. But according to orthodox Christianity this separation between God and man is sacred, because this is eternal. That a man may love God it is necessary that there should be not only a God to be loved, but a man to love him. All those vague theosophical minds for whom the universe is an immense melting-pot are exactly the minds which shrink instinctively from that earthquake saying of our Gospels, which declare that the Son of God came not with peace but with a sundering sword. The saying rings entirely true even considered as what it obviously is; the statement that any man who preaches real love is bound to beget hate. It is as true of democratic fraternity as a divine love; *sham love ends in compromise and common philosophy; but real love has always ended in bloodshed.*
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Baran319
7 hours ago
Yet there is another and yet more awful truth behind the obvious meaning of this utterance of our Lord. According to Himself the Son was a sword separating brother and brother that they should for an aeon hate each other. But the Father also was a sword, which in the black beginning separated brother and brother, so that they should love each other at last. This is the meaning of that almost insane happiness in the eyes of the mediaeval saint in the picture. This is the meaning of the sealed eyes of the superb Buddhist image. The Christian saint is happy because he has verily been cut off from the world; he is separate from things and is staring at them in astonishment. But why should the Buddhist saint be astonished at things? — since there is really only one thing, and that being impersonal can hardly be astonished at itself. There have been many pantheist poems suggesting wonder, but no really successful ones. The pantheist cannot wonder, for he cannot praise God or praise anything as really distinct from himself. Our immediate business here, however, is with the effect of this Christian admiration (which strikes outwards, towards a deity distinct from the worshipper) upon the general need for ethical activity and social reform. And surely its effect is sufficiently obvious. There is no real possibility of getting out of pantheism, any special impulse to moral action. For pantheism implies in its nature that one thing is as good as another; whereas action implies in its nature that one thing is greatly preferable to another. Swinburne in the high summer of his scepticism tried in vain to wrestle with this difficulty. In “Songs before Sunrise,” written under the inspiration of Garibaldi and the revolt of Italy he proclaimed the newer religion and the purer God which should wither up all the priests of the world: ‘What doest thou now Looking Godward to cry I am I, thou art thou, I am low, thou art high, I am thou that thou seekest to find him, find thou but th
0 likes

Baran319
7 hours ago
“When the business man rebukes the idealism of his office-boy, it is commonly in some such speech as this: “Ah, yes, when one is young, one has these ideals in the abstract and these castles in the air; but in middle age they all break up like clouds, and one comes down to a belief in practical politics, to using the machinery one has and getting on with the world as it is.” Thus, at least, venerable and philanthropic old men now in their honoured graves used to talk to me when I was a boy. But since then I have grown up and have discovered that these philanthropic old men were telling lies. What has really happened is exactly the opposite of what they said would happen. They said that I should lose my ideals and begin to believe in the methods of practical politicians. Now, I have not lost my ideals in the least; my faith in fundamentals is exactly what it always was. What I have lost is my old childlike faith in practical politics. I am still as much concerned as ever about the Battle of Armageddon; but I am not so much concerned about the General Election. As a babe I leapt up on my mother’s knee at the mere mention of it. No; the vision is always solid and reliable. The vision is always a fact. It is the reality that is often a fraud. As much as I ever did, more than I ever did, I believe in Liberalism. But there was a rosy time of innocence when I believed in Liberals. . . .
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Baran319
7 hours ago
This is the first principle of democracy: that the essential things in men are the things they hold in common, not the things they hold separately. And the second principle is merely this: that the political instinct or desire is one of these things which they hold in common. Falling in love is more poetical than dropping into poetry. The democratic contention is that government (helping to rule the tribe) is a thing like falling in love, and not a thing like dropping into poetry. It is not something analogous to playing the church organ, painting on vellum, discovering the North Pole (that insidious habit), looping the loop, being Astronomer Royal, and so on. For these things we do not wish a man to do at all unless he does them well. It is, on the contrary, a thing analogous to writing one’s own love-letters or blowing one’s own nose. These things we want a man to do for himself, even if he does them badly. I am not here arguing the truth of any of these conceptions; I know that some moderns are asking to have their wives chosen by scientists, and they may soon be asking, for all I know, to have their noses blown by nurses. I merely say that mankind does recognize these universal human functions, and that democracy classes government among them. In short, the democratic faith is this: that the most terribly important things must be left to ordinary men themselves—the mating of the sexes, the rearing of the young, the laws of the state. This is democracy; and in this I have always believed.
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Baran319
7 hours ago
But there is one thing that I have never from my youth up been able to understand. I have never been able to understand where people got the idea that democracy was in some way opposed to tradition. It is obvious that tradition is only democracy extended through time. It is trusting to a consensus of common human voices rather than to some isolated or arbitrary record. The man who quotes some German historian against the tradition of the Catholic Church, for instance, is strictly appealing to aristocracy. He is appealing to the superiority of one expert against the awful authority of a mob. It is quite easy to see why a legend is treated, and ought to be treated, more respectfully than a book of history. The legend is generally made by the majority of people in the village, who are sane. The book is generally written by the one man in the village who is mad. Those who urge against tradition that men in the past were ignorant may go and urge it at the Carlton Club, along with the statement that voters in the slums are ignorant. It will not do for us. If we attach great importance to the opinion of ordinary men in great unanimity when we are dealing with daily matters, there is no reason why we should disregard it when we are dealing with history or fable. Tradition may be defined as an extension of the franchise. Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our father. I, at any rate, cannot separate the two ideas of democracy and tradition; it seems evident to me that they are the same idea.
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Baran319
7 hours ago
The ancient Greeks voted by stones; these shall vote by tombstones. It is all quite regular and official, for most tombstones, like most ballot papers, are marked with a cross.
0 likes
vigilantejustice23
4 days ago
Blair has been annoying me lately, I’m glad he didn’t show up tbh
-2 likes

‹ Hide 6 replies
hadefo
4 days ago
make your own content then. lazy and pathetic
2 likes

GhostDogMan
Supporter+
4 days ago
Why not be specific in your criticism. “Annoying” sounds like the Left when they call conservatives “weird”. What can one do with that info?
1 like

Seanybruv
3 days ago
Annoying you because he gets your brain ticking with interesting and unique perspectives and doesn’t just say what you expect/want someone to say? Honestly, complaining about someone active in the fight for whatever reason, especially something so trivial and subjective as being annoyed, is so feminine, soy, and low T.
1 like

Whatsthefrequencyken
3 days ago
Blair is quirky and somewhat mercurial. It’s not bad to have a stream with just the two grown-ups but I hope he’s back next week.
1 like

GovMarioPalmieri
18 hours ago
well I like Blair. I doubt he’s going anywhere. He’s been with the show for a long time.
0 likes

RoseRock444
Supporter
4 days ago
Me too. But what are your reasons?
-4 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
EnglandAwake
4 days ago
You sound like a bunch of Jews to be honest.
4 likes

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

See Also

top

/>

Joel Davis – WWII Revisionism Re-enters the Mainstream – Sep 6, 2024 – Transcript

Joel Davis: And it is the Joel, Blair and Tom Show this evening. We have come up with a new name, but I just wanted to get the graphics made, so I don’t want to launch the new name until the graphics are all sorted and we can launch it with a coherent graphic style.

So you’re still waiting for promised name.

Blair Cottrell: What is the new name? Are we’re not going to know?

Joel Davis: We’re not going to announce it now. We’re not going to kill it now. Like:

“I don’t know what it is. I don’t know what it is!”

Blair Cottrell: I actually don’t know either. I literally don’t know!

Joel Davis: So there you go. That’s even better. Like, you won’t.

Blair Cottrell: I wasn’t consulted. If the name is shit, if the name sucks, I wasn’t consulted! [chuckling]

Joel Davis: You were consulted. I did consult you. I don’t know why you don’t remember this conversation, but it’s good that you don’t remember because that way you won’t say it and that way it’ll remain a surprise for the audience.

Blair Cottrell: Strategic. I like it. Yeah.

Joel Davis: Don’t worry, I will reconfirm with you now that you’re telling me you don’t remember our conversation to make sure that you are happy with it. But I’m basically going with something that you said that you already liked.

Blair Cottrell: No, that’s all right. You guys do what you want. I’m just a passenger on this ship.

Joel Davis: [chuckling] You’re not a passenger! We’re all in the same team. We’re a unit. You know, we were to move together as a unit.

But anyway, speaking of moving together as a unit, it is the 6th of September 2024. And on this stream we’re going to just talk a lot about World War Two, World War Two revisionism in particular. But where I want to start is I want to talk about the interview of, he goes by Martry Made on Twitter. He’s got a very large Twitter account. He actually has me blocked on Twitter, which maybe we could talk about. [chuckling]

Blair Cottrell: How do you spell that, Joel? Because I want to look him up right now. Martyr Made. MARTYR.

Joel Davis: What was his name again? His actual name? Was it?

Blair Cottrell: Darryl Cooper?

Joel Davis: Darryl Cooper.

Blair Cottrell: Darryl with, two Rs, I believe.

Joel Davis: Yeah. So he’s an American. He has a Substack, he makes a podcast, and he talks about history on his podcast. Tucker Carlson had him on the show. It got retweeted by Elon Musk. He then deleted it because the jews attacked him for retweeting it. And the jews are attacking Tucker Carlson pretty hard right now. It was probably the most based collection of statements we’ve ever heard from Tucker Carlson. He interviewed him extremely sympathetically. He called him:

“The greatest historian, popular historian in America right now.”

And then just set him up to talk about how our whole narrative on World War Two is total bullshit!

And then they then went on after Martry Made, after Darryl Cooper broke down a lot of talking points that are actually David Irving talking points, kind of softened them up a little bit. Talking about how he kind of intimated a Holocaust revisionist narrative. He didn’t quite go there, but he kind of gestured towards it. Then he said that:

“The real bad guy of World War Two was Churchill.”

And then he then argued for that position by talking about how Hitler sent the British multiple attempts at making peace, and that it was actually in the strategic interest of Britain to make peace. But Churchill was determined to continue on with the war because, well, he gave a few BS reasons.

But ultimately, he pointed out that his backers, the so-called “Zionist financiers”, ultimately installed him in the prime ministership for a reason, which was to pursue war with Germany at any cost. Which is basically the key thesis of David Irving’s book Churchill’s War, which I highly recommend! It is one of the greatest books ever written on history, period!

But it’s integral to understanding the Second World War.

So he kind of made that argument. Tucker Carlson was very sympathetic.

They even then got into a discussion about the World War Two narrative and how the narrative around World War Two was used to justify, essentially White genocide. And they basically talked about the problems in Western Europe with mass immigration and the replacement of White people in European countries and so on. And they related it all to the World War Two narrative. It was, Tucker Carlson even said at one point that:

“We should have the Nuremberg trial for the people responsible for filling up Europe with non-Whites.”

For the Liberal elite, basically.

And also, I noticed Martry Made actually used a Thomas777 talking point. And I know that he definitely listens to Thomas777 because I think he follows him on Twitter.

And also, they’ve been interviewed by the same people on multiple occasions. And Thomas is a friend of mine who I’ve streamed with just a few weeks ago, actually. And we’ve done many things together. He’s an American kind of like dissident, academic, eccentric guy, interesting guy. And he’s a Nazi.

But Thomas, one of his favourite talking points is that after Nuremberg, Nuremberg initiated a new paradigm in international law. This is something which is part of David Irving’s thesis as well about the Nuremberg trials. The Nuremberg trials initiated a new paradigm in international law, that was their express purpose. And effectively, it made it illegal to be Right-wing in the Western world after the Second World War. The Nuremberg paradigm.

[05:22]

This is a Thomas777 talking point. It’s true. And it was repeated! Anyway, this video has got like 50 million plus views already across different platforms. It’s kicked up massive controversy, particularly on Twitter, because that was the main place where it was posted.

But you can watch it on YouTube. You can watch it on probably other sites as well. It’s brilliant! I thought about playing clips, but the clips are so long, we just end up spending half the stream re-watching the clips. So after this stream, if you haven’t seen it, I do encourage you, go and watch the interview. It’s a very interesting, enjoyable interview. They talk about some other subjects that are quite interesting as well. It’s like 2 hours.

And it’s a really interesting cultural event because this is the re-mainstreaming for the first time in that I can remember in living memory of World War Two revisionism. So this is a pretty interesting watershed moment.

And if Tucker Carlson can stick the landing and just continue going forward, that basically gives licence now to the conservative movement in general in the English speaking world to go there on this subject, because he’s pretty much the biggest conservative political commentator in the English speaking world, I would say, at this point in at this point in time. So very, very interesting stuff!

That’s why I thought, you know, of everything else that’s happened this week, this is by far the most interesting thing that’s happened. So we should just do a whole show talking about this and spurg out in general about World War Two.

But I want to go to you guys, Blair and Tom, like, what you thought about this. I know, Blair, you watched it today, the whole thing. I know, Tom, you only saw clips.

Nevertheless, obviously, you have a lot of thoughts about the Second World War and the importance of World War Two revisionism.

So anyway, it’d be very interesting to get your takes on it.

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, I’ll go first. I guess. I’ve watched it nearly twice, but I skipped to parts which I considered more interesting and relevant. And it made me want more from Darryl Cooper. Apparently, the guy does 30 hours long podcasts! Multiple episodes!

So the guy really spurgs out and gets into really fine details about specific historical events in which he’s interested. And one that he brought up in the interview, you’ll know if you’ve watched it, was Jonestown and Jim Jones. The Jonestown suicides.

And I was surprised to learn that 75% of the Jonestown suicides were black people! Black children and elderly, mostly pensioners over 60. I suppose they were the most malleable, people most likely to follow a cult leader like Jim Jones. But Jim Jones was also, according to Darryl Cooper. I know we’re going to keep it to World War Two. I’m just kind of segueing for a couple of minutes because I was interested in this.

Jim Jones was a big political power broker back in America during his time, which I think was around the sixties, where he was most active. And he rubbed shoulders with various politicians at the time who really fed into his ideology, or at least encouraged his followers to believe in his own special status. And he was one of the first ever racial equality Civil Rights Activists in America.

And what Darryl Cooper said in this Tucker Carlson interview, was:

“Had he not gone rogue and committed mass suicide in the jungle with all of his followers, he would be regarded as a similar figure to Martin Luther King junior this day by liberals.”

He had that sort of impact on the racial equality culture. And he was one of the first people to pioneer that sort of revolutionary ideology, which was very revolutionary and unpopular back in those days.

I was surprised to learn all that. I didn’t know that. Every time I’ve learnt anything about Jonestown, I see video clips of White people drinking Kool Aid. I didn’t know it was mostly black people! But when I discovered that fact, I wasn’t surprised. I realised, yeah, black people seem to be the most receptive to that kind of fundamentalist, radical religious stuff. I mean, a lot of missionaries like to go to Africa to sell versions of Christianity to Africans because they seem to be a lot more receptive to that kind of thing for some reason. So they abandon Europe and go to Africa to get better results

But I’ve written down a few notes. But specifically, …

Joel Davis: I just wanted to say quickly. I didn’t know that there were blacks either, watching this interview. I never really looked into it. But I guess I should have known, considering that they all drank Kool Aid*! It just seems so obvious now. Like, what kind of group of White people commit suicide with Kool Aid? You know what I mean? It doesn’t make any sense.

[* According to Wikipedia is was actually a brand called, “Flavor Aid”.]

Blair Cottrell: Yeah.

Joel Davis: White people gonna commit mass suicide with watermelon lq ike, yeah, [chuckling]

Blair Cottrell: Whatever you can poison. But Darryl Cooper approaches all of these talking points, whether it’s Jim Jones, the suicide in the jungle, or World War Two, whatever it is that he studies, you can tell he makes strong effort to approach it, or at least explain it from the perspective of a humanitarian.

And his way of, I suppose, making himself appealing to his audience, to who’s listening to him, especially in this interview, is to help people try to get into the boots or look through the eyes of the people that he’s talking about specifically. He reminds the audience that Jim Jones was once a three or four year old boy. And he said he’s very suspicious of biographies and versions of history where it’s said that:

“The child already possessed some sort of psychopathic quality. And everything was kind of established from some schoolyard bullying incident.”

He was like:

“Oh, I’m going to get revenge!”

And that’s what makes the Stalin’s and the Jim Jones is of the world. He said:

“That’s not really true. There’s a series of events which leads to causing these people to do what they do and become the men that they become.”

Which I think is an honest approach. But it is very humanitarian as well. But it makes him seem more honest. And therefore, I think it’s a skillful way, Darryl Cooper opens the consciousness of the listeners because they’re ready to hear something now from a fair and honest man. So even if it’s not deliberate, it is a skillful way to open up the interview.

Now, his exact words regarding Churchill weren’t that he was the “bad guy”, but “the foremost villain”.

So it’s not necessarily that he was declaring Churchill was the leading bad guy, but he was the worst of the bad bunch, I think, is what he’s trying to insinuate, maybe? But he didn’t really say that specifically. He just said:

“He was the foremost villain of the Second World War.”

And he did say, you were correct. He did say that he wanted some style of Nuremberg type rallies [lol] for what, … Darryl didn’t say this, tucker Carlson said that.

Joel Davis: Not Rallies, trials! The Nuremberg trials, very, very different.

Thomas Sewell: It’s important to mention that as well, because we can’t have the Nuremberg trials without Nuremberg rallies.

[12:07]

Blair Cottrell: That’s a good point. But that’s what I meant, the Nuremberg trials. I’ve just made an error in my notes here. Keeping up with Joel’s opening. They’re trying to keep up. But Darryl describes the Nuremberg trials or what they’re talking about, Darryl and Tucker Carlson, when they’re bringing up that we should have Nuremberg style trials for the people who have done this. The people who have done this, who they’re referring to is who Darryl describes as a “superclass of limousine liberals” is how he puts it. Right. An international superclass of privileged, powerful people, most of whom are jewish or Whites. And far removed from the working class. Darryl specifically says they don’t identify with the working class of their own nation. They identify with each other. They identify with other members of this international superclass, which has all of them, the majority of the influence in Western institutions. And he’s right about that. He’s right.

But interestingly, after that was said Joel, did you pick up on the fact that Darryl said after Tucker Carlson said:

“Why can’t we have Nuremberg trials for these people, for what they’ve done to our nations?”

Darryl reiterates:

“We have to win first!”

That’s an interesting phraseology. “We have to win first”, as though he’s associating himself with our side, with us. We have to win first. I thought that was a really interesting statement by him.

But what do you reckon, Tom, from the clips that you saw, what was the vibe you got? Do you like the guy? Do you think he’s useful? What do you reckon?

Thomas Sewell: He’s definitely very intelligent and he’s definitely our guy. The talking points that he had, again, I haven’t watched the whole thing, but the clips that I’ve seen.

And while Joel was doing this introduction, actually, I didn’t realize he had a Twitter. I just went through his Twitter Martyr Maid and he’s just doubling down. He’s resharing stuff that’s completely consistent. It looks like one of our news feeds, really. It looks like one of our Twitter feeds. He’s even resharing people that are having a go at Drew Pavlou, which is hilarious! Like, even Pavlou somehow gets in the into the hive mind here.

Blair Cottrell: Which I’m sure he loves. I noticed that Andrew Tate, I noticed Andrew Tate had to get in on the comments of the main Tucker Carlson post with a video of him doing like shoulder press or something while watching the video. All of these people, they just need to get in on the action every time, don’t they?

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, they do, they do.

But, yeah, just going through his feed and seeing the clips, especially the one you shared about how he mentions the little spot of England and I think Tucker Carlson talks about Germany and Spain and France and, I mean, the point of the show here is, I think, twofold.

Firstly, the importance of World War Two as revisionist history becoming a mainstream talking appointment.

And secondly, how World War 2, 100% is connected to the White replacement, the White genocide, and a collapse of Western civilization! And that you cannot separate the two. It is impossible!

And anyone that tries to address White nationalism or White genocide or being pro-White and tries to avoid, somehow they think:

“If I don’t talk about World War Two or I don’t talk about Hitler or I don’t talk about the Holocaust, that somehow we’re going to make more progress this way.”

Not realizing that it is the linchpin! It is what everything rests on! And it’s just so wonderful to be, … I guess I’ll go into a bit more depth.

I started my journey with watching David Irving videos and Ernst Zundel videos on YouTube back in 2013.

I started like, it’s been eleven years. And I was up at 03:00 in the morning watching David Irving or Zundel or Frederick Tobin talking about the Holocaust being a lie, or talking about, … Because I loved World War Two, I loved studying it, but I didn’t necessarily, back then, think:

“Oh, Hitler’s the best! Hitler was the best guy!”

My dad and my granddad are English, so they’re like:

“Churchill’s the best!”

And then I studied in history that maybe Roosevelt was pretty based. And I never had any affinity with Stalin or anything like that. But I always had this kind of secret admiration for Hitler. Not a strong admiration, but a secret one.

And then watching all these videos on YouTube back in 2013 was like:

“Oh, my God! Hitler was the guy! He was actually the man. Churchill was actually the villain. Churchill was actually the bad guy. And he dragged Hitler into war!”

And when I learned about Hess, and Hess flying over to personally try to, … I don’t know if this is covered in the interview. I didn’t see any of the clips, but correct me if I’m wrong, …

Joel Davis: It wasn’t.

[17:13]

Thomas Sewell: It wasn’t? Well, a lot of people need to know that Rudolf Hess, who was Adolf Hitler’s right hand man from day one, he was just his most loyal supporter, follower, brother, leader. He was an absolute legend, Rudolf Hess. And he actually flew over against Hitler’s orders. Probably the only time he disobeyed Hitler’s orders, he flew over to the UK. I think he landed in Scotland, to personally try to hand the British government, or Churchill, the peace treaty that Hitler was asking for from the British, saying:

“We don’t want to go to war with Britain. We don’t want to firebomb Britain.”

Blair Cottrell: What did they do when Rudolf did that? Didn’t he parachute in? And what did they do? Did they arrest him?

Thomas Sewell: They locked him up! They locked him up for the entire duration of the war. They trialed him, they imprisoned him basically for life. And then he was put in Spandau prison back in Germany at the end of Nuremberg.

And then the day before his release, they had an African kill him. They assassinated him, when he was like. I think he was like, 87 years old. He was an old man. He was very old. I think it was in the 1980s. And they just killed him. Yeah, the day before he was. So they punished him to 50 years prison or something like that. And then he did the time.

And then they didn’t release him. They just assassinated him the day of his release or the day before his release.

So, you know, learning all this back in 2013 completely, radically changed my life! I am who I am now, and I’ve set the course and path, and I’m involved in the politics that I’m involved in, and I’ve been doing all the activism that I’ve been doing and building the Mannerbund and the organization that I’ve been building. And it’s the reason why I first met you, Blair, and I’m sure later on, it’s the reason why I met Joel, because we all have this common knowledge, this common understanding of the truth! And it’s just drastically changed all of our lives.

And for that to now be put in front of 50 million people is game changing! We’re just one step closer. It’s over for this evil, lying tyranny! It’s over! It’s getting so much faster that it’s impossible to tell when it’s going to be.

I’ve always said we’ve got about 40 or so years to get this done, between 30 and 50 years to get the job done before it’s basically impossible to get it done. We’ve got to get it done within about 30 to 50 years.

And a lot of people say:

“Oh, it’ll be done a lot sooner than that.”

And I always try to be a bit open minded to how long Roman Empire collapsed.

I mean, these things can drag out for a long time. It can be intergenerational, it can be fucking horrible! It can get a lot worse.

But then you see things like this and you’re like:

“Maybe it’ll be quicker!”

At this rate. It’s gonna be like five years. We need to get organized. Anyway, I’ll leave it there, for now.

Blair Cottrell: Well, if it’s gonna move, if anything moves as quick as the Internet does, it will be quicker because the Internet moves faster than reality, and we’ve all got to speed up to try to keep up with the Internet. Maybe that’s why society moves so quickly these days. I still remember after the day I first met you, which I think was April 4, 2015, first ever Reclaim Australia rally?

Afterwards, we spent probably an hour and a half, 2 hours on the phone, and you were just so excited! I remember you told me you didn’t think this moment would come in your lifetime, but you were so enthralled and fascinated by the public activism, and you saw it as an opportunity. You were really excited and you just were genuinely inspired by it all, I remember. I still remember that phone call. I took it in front of the fireplace.

Thomas Sewell: Talked about Hitler for about an hour as well.

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. And we’re like:

“What are we gonna do? Like, we’ll start a political party.”

And I’m just like:

“Alright!”

So that was kind of how we tried to springboard ourselves into politics. Didn’t work out that way, but here we are now.

But look, one thing I want to say before, … Yeah, yeah. You have to learn by doing! You have to make mistakes. You have to make mistakes, learn from your mistakes and keep moving forward. It’s the only way you gain experience. And I don’t think a lot of the mistakes we made were even that bad. Like, we always managed to still look pretty cool! [chuckling]

So, anyway before I throw it back over to you, Joel, what I have to say is Darryl Cooper, in the Tucker Carlson interview, presents himself as someone who is an objective historian. Okay?

But regardless of how objective Cooper considers himself to be, I think he does realize this, but maybe he’s pretending not to realize. By being truthful and more facts based. You’re actually serving yourself, you know how should I say this? You’re putting yourself forward as a propagandist for our side. Right? So even if he’s claiming to be totally objective and honest, it only helps our cause, because that’s what our cause is essentially. It’s based on the truth!

And World War Two, I said in the Space last night with Joel, really is the datum point from which all perspective of the present day is forged. And the reason people have the views that they have in society today, and the reason people have been so Hoodwinked by racial equality, mass migration, feminism, etcetera, is because of the perspective they have of the Second World War. And if we can flip that perspective or shift it somewhat. We need to totally reverse it, in my opinion.

But if we can flip it, then suddenly the perspective of reality for the ordinary person in our country will shift. It will change. Suddenly they’ll realize who they are and who their enemy is. Suddenly they’ll realize what they’re fighting for and what they’re losing as a result of these mass migration programs, something they can’t get back, their ethnic identity.

I’ve got a few notes on the interview itself. What’s the subject we want to move into next? Do we want to move through it structurally? How do you want to do it, Joel?

[22:59]

Joel Davis: Well, we can just kind of move naturally, but I just want to make a few comments on, like, building off what you just said, because most people that follow me, I noticed because I have pretty consistently, for some time, taken the view that World War Two is this, like, central event, which is the most important event in the “what went wrong” narrative. Like there are more abstract answers to the question, like talking about the history of jewish involvement in Western civilisation going back millennia, talking about the development of Greek metaphysics and Christianity and the fall of Rome and so on, and how that set up the modern world or the rise of nominalist theology or the Renaissance and the Enlightenment and the Freemasons. And there’s all these different aspects to the problem. Like the British monarchy being decapitated by Cromwell, basically, and then reinstalled but then overthrown again, and William of Orange being brought in with the jews, so the Rothschilds could set up in London and so on. There’s all these pivotal moments in history.

But at the end of the day, World War Two is the most pivotal, because prior to the Second World War, we lived in a completely different world ideologically. And afterwards, a completely new world has been constructed. And Europe lost political agency in World War Two. That’s the key point, is that Europe lost World War Two! It wasn’t just Germany that lost World War Two. Europe lost World War Two! Britain lost World War Two! That is something that people don’t think about enough, because people say:

“Oh, Joel, you’re an Anglo Saxon, you’re an Australian. Why do you side with the Germans and Hitler in the Second World War? You’re betraying your own side!”

Well, no, my side lost World War Two! Okay, we beat the Japanese like Australia beat the Japanese with the Americans, but the British Empire lost World War Two.

During World War Two, the official flag of Australia was the Union Jack. We didn’t even officially have our current flag yet, like, that’s how still British we were. Like, it was just taken for granted that if Britain goes to war, we go to war. We had this imperial Anglo consciousness, this pan-Anglo consciousness. We were all one king, one flag, one race, one people, at that time.

So it was a completely different world than the Australia that we grew up in that has more of its own identity in those days. And obviously, the Australia at that time also had a White Australia Policy and also was kind of anti-semitic, actively tried to stop jews from immigrating to Australia and so on.

So the Australia that existed prior to the Second World War simply cannot be counterposed to Germany in the way that the post-war narrative is put up.

But secondarily, the Second World War meant our empire collapsed. And now we were behest to the United States. Now we are basically America’s bitch, as is Europe. So we fell under American control due to the Second World War, as well as part of the British Empire. Not just Britain, not just Europe, but also us.

And that American influence is jewish influence! Because America is run by jews. So that meant we fell under jewish control1 And you could say that the British Empire had jewish infiltration and jewish influence. Obviously, it did that was one of the main reasons why they went to war against the Germans. But it wasn’t to the same degree of what we have in the post-war international order underneath the so-called Americans. So that’s very important to take into consideration.

But also when examining Churchill’s treachery, and we can get into this a little bit more, maybe later in the show. Churchill sacrificed the British Empire to go to war on behalf of the jews, and he tried to drag America into that war. And he mentioned this in the interview, Darryl Cooper, that after there was the successful annexation, basically, of France, after basically the British and French forces were routed in France by the Germans. The blitzkrieg just smashed through in six weeks, basically, and they kind of fled at Dunkirk. There were no British forces left on the Continent. All of Western Europe was basically under German control, and Britain had no hope of reinvading Europe and doing anything about it. They were still at war with Germany, but they were in no place to really do much about it whatsoever in terms of actually changing that basic kind of landscape geographically.

[27:36]

All that was left for them to do was either basically negotiate peace or drag one of or both the Soviet Union and the United States into the war. That was all they had left to do. And Churchill was fundamentally determined in particular to drag the Americans into the war. And what dragging the Americans into the war meant was he was basically saying:

“We’re going to drag Europe under the control of America. By dragging America into the war now, America gets to set the tone for once the war is won the fate of western Europe.”

And also that support that the Americans gave to the Soviet Union also enabled the Soviet Union to resist the German invasion. And that was part of why Hitler wanted peace with Britain. He wanted peace with Britain for two main geopolitical reasons.

Reason number one is that Britain had one of the world’s best navies. The only nation that could compete with the Britain as a naval power was the United States. But they had to build it up. They really rapidly built up their navy through the Second World War. But the United States and Britain were the world’s two pre-eminent naval powers.

And Germany needed access to the world’s oceans. Because Germany and Europe in general lacks a lot of natural resources, which it needs to get through trade, that is primarily through the oceans. It’s very expensive and difficult to move freight by land across large distances, like from East Asia or the Middle East or wherever. Obviously its impossible to move from America to Europe without using the oceans.

So controlling the oceans means controlling global trade. And that is vital to Germany, because if they don’t have access to the worlds oceans, that means they don’t have access to a reliable supply of oil and other significant resources, which means if they are cut off from accessing oil in a state of war, their entire war machine, which depends upon oil to function because it’s mechanised, can collapse and they can be brought into existential peril.

There were oil fields in Romania that were key for Germany to have access to because they were connected to continental Europe. But that was then under the shadow of potential military action by the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union has massive oil reserves as well, that it controlled in like Ukraine and other territories, that was under its control.

So that was a lot of the reason for Barbarossa, by the way. It wasn’t just about the threat of communism. Obviously, the ideological threat was significant, but it was also the geopolitics of managing resources and securing resources. Hitler did not want to be caught with his pants down, where Stalin moves on the oil fields in Romania, cuts the Germans off. And now they don’t really have the means to defend themselves, potentially against the communists sweeping across Europe.

So Hitler wanted a peace with Britain because he studied history and he saw Germany tried to go to war with Britain and Russia at the same time, in World War One, didn’t work. Napoleon tried to go to war with Britain and Russia at the same time and fight on two fronts. Didn’t work.

And so he didn’t want to make the same mistake again. He wanted peace with Britain for that reason, but also because Britain neutralises American influence. He didn’t fundamentally trust America. He understood that America was falling under jewish control, that America was basically an emerging superpower that would assert itself in the world and that Europe would lose its capacity to assert its own destiny, and Germany in particular.

But Europe in general would lose its capacity to assert its own sense of destiny and will in the world if America rises and the Soviet Union gobbles up half of Europe, and basically the Western European powers are kind of cornered and their empires are stripped of them, and they are kind of isolated. Which is exactly what happened at the end of the Second World War.

So Hitler saw those threats rising and saw a strong British Empire as key. The Germans would try and control the continent, repel the Soviets, and Britain would basically try and maintain a global order that prevented America from rising and kind of consuming the whole thing. That was his grand strategic vision.

So it was actually in his interest, which is why the Germans were so fair to the British, and they were offering peace offer after peace offer after peace offer, and they basically demanded nothing. The Germans didn’t demand anything for peace. They were like, basically:

“You keep everything that’s yours. Let’s just have peace. We don’t want to take anything from you. We don’t want to exact anything from you, even though you declared war on us first. We’ll just give you peace for free!”

And the way that it was responded to ultimately was, as was mentioned in the interview, the largest scale terrorist attacks ever in human history committed by the British covertly from, in terms of their own population, against the Germans.

So Churchill started ordering his bombers to go and bomb civilian areas all across Germany. And no one in Britain knew about this. It was classified top secret. While the Germans are trying to send peace offers to Britain, saying:

“We want peace, we don’t want war. We don’t want anything from you. Can we please shake hands and do a deal?”

At this exact same time, Churchill is ordering for women and children to be bombed in Germany! While, by the way, the British had – we know now that with the records – that the British had full access to the internal communications within Germany. They had decoded their internal communications and knew exactly what the strategic mentality of the German leadership was for the entire duration of the war, which is a big reason why they won, because they were able to get on the phone to, … Not on the phone. They would Telegram the Soviets and say:

“The Germans are about to attack here, and then they’re going to do this, and then they’re saying they’re going to do this next week.”

And so the Soviets were always one step ahead of them, because the Germans didn’t realise that the British could literally hear and see everything in all of the key high level communications.

[33:41]

So they had full knowledge of the fact that the Germans were sincere in wanting peace and that they wanted peace, and they just wanted to go and focus on fighting the Soviet Union, and they wanted no beef with Britain. And they saw what they were saying publicly was actually what they felt privately. They knew that and they had full knowledge of that.

Nevertheless, they started bombing the shit out of innocent civilians! They also knew that Hitler had an order, a directive to the Germans to not bomb civilian areas in Britain.

And even though German towns were getting blown up and some of the bombings were egregious, where like, 20, 30,000 innocent civilians are, like, burning to death in the space of an hour, …

Blair Cottrell: Imagine your own mother melting into a tar road!

zz Imagine not just your mother, everyone all of your friends, all of their children and so on in your whole neighbourhood just being, yeah, incinerated! This is what was happening across Germany. And Hitler ultimately broke. Like, he couldn’t handle it anymore. And it was like:

“Well, fuck! Like, fuck them! We’re going to bomb them back!”

And started bombing, you know, started bombing the shit out of London, which was he showed a lot of restraint waiting that long. Or his generals are practically begging him, saying:

“We’ve got to retaliate. This is getting ridiculous!”

He finally retaliates. And then Churchill spins at:

“Look at the German aggression! We will not stand for this! And we will fight them on the beaches when they try to invade!”

Churchill knew that they weren’t going to invade. They had no plans to invade and that it would make no strategic sense for them to invade.

Nevertheless, he made out like:

“This German aggression, we won’t stand for it!”

And so on.

Meanwhile, all the efforts of British intelligence was concocting BS. Kind of like how the Israelis concocted a bunch of BS narrative to drag America into war in Iraq. They were doing the same thing, like, creating all these fake documents, spreading them in America that that Germany was going to go and invade South America and had plans to take over the Americas and that they were going, …

Thomas Sewell: Propaganda!

Joel Davis: Yeah, exactly! All this bullshit that they were spinning, which was total nonsense, as if Hitler is going to know, try and invade South America while he’s in the middle of fighting the largest ever individual war between two countries in world history, between Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union. Like, the scale of that war is so far beyond the scale of any particular front in the history of warfare! As if he’s going to go and invade, like, on the other side of the world!

By the way, Germany at this time is under naval blockade, and can’t even sail to South America, let alone invade the whole place. It made no sense.

But anyway, this shit is getting spread so much. You know, everything that could be done is being done to try and drag the Americans in. And Roosevelt wants the war with Germany because Roosevelt has plans to create a kind of globalist, liberal, international order, much like what was ended up being created after the Second World War. And saw the kind of battle with Germany as key for American dominance over Europe to be asserted, and then therefore over the world.

But the American people didn’t want to go to war with Germany, didn’t want any bar of it. And ultimately with the Pearl Harbor bombings and the issue with Japan. Which, by the way, was also by design, because they imposed such intense sanctions on Japan while Japan is at war with China, to basically cripple the Japanese. And all through Asia to basically cripple the Japanese economy. Japan, like Germany, was reliant upon getting oil from the outside and other key natural resources from the outside. Because Japan doesn’t have a lot of natural resources. And so sanctions and naval blockades basically being imposed upon the Japanese completely cripples their capacity to have industry, and therefore cripples their war machine while they’re engaged in so much active warfare across the whole Asian region at that time.

So the Japanese felt they had no choice but ultimately to just start fighting the Americans directly because the Americans were crippling their war effort already.

And the Americans knew that it would ultimately result in Japan attacking. And actually, Australian intelligence told the Americans two months before, or six weeks before, or something, that Pearl Harbor was going to get bombed by the Japanese. And the Roosevelt administration allowed it to happen, just kind of like, move people that they were quite happy to die into the area and ships that they were happy to get blown up, moved all their key personnel out and just let it happen, basically, so that they would have a pretext to go to war with Japan.

[38:24]

Blair Cottrell: It makes me realise what like, passive “good guy Greg” role Australia played in the Second World War. We basically just fought some battles for the English. Won most of them. Apparently, Menzies* was involved in a lot of the war cabinet meetings with Churchill and kept a private diary about how insane Churchill was.

[* Robert Menzies-Australian politician, 12th Prime Minister of Australia (1894-1978) Sir Robert Gordon Menzies was an Australian politician and lawyer who served as the 12th prime minister of Australia from 1939 to 1941 and 1949 to 1966. Wikipedia]

And then the Japanese are heading to Pearl Harbor, and we’re like:

“Hey, they’re going to Pearl Harbor. We’re the good guys down here, just going to try and help!”

Joel Davis: Yeah, exactly! I don’t think anyone in the Australian leadership at the time would have wanted the war to become what it became because it wasn’t in our interest.

But ultimately, we had to fight the Japanese because we couldn’t, …

Thomas Sewell: Even in the United States, there was a survey done, a very large survey, basically one step down from a census, done on America’s involvement in World War Two. Well, obviously, before World War Two existed as a concept, but involvement in the European war, I think, is what it was described. As and they polled, like, less than 30%. I think like, 20 something percent had any interest in going, engaging, and involving in that war. And both political parties at the time, the Republicans and the Democrats, both ran their election campaigns on not being involved in it. So, obviously, the jews had ulterior motives. And, yeah, it frustrates me. It’s been a frustrating, I guess, eleven years of dealing with a certain faction of, I think Hitler describes them as historical, not “historical enjoyers”, but he has a really unique way of describing them in Mein Kampf, in one of the later chapters. I think it’s around, I could do quote and verse. I think it’s around page 168. [chuckling] I don’t know why I know that! But I really like Hitler.

Blair Cottrell: Paragraph three, beginning at word 17, …

Thomas Sewell: I’ll just get it. I’ll just get it out. I didn’t actually prepare this earlier. But he talks about people, but they don’t see the forest for the trees, …

Blair Cottrell: Is that the Mannheim books? Is that Mannheim books? The black one?

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. It’s a Rolf Mannheim that everyone hates.

Blair Cottrell: Have you got more than one of those, or is that yours? Because I need one of those.

Thomas Sewell: I should have a couple of them. Yeah. I’ve got an order in at the moment for the one Jacob was recommending.

Joel Davis: You should get the Dalton one as well, Blair, because the translator, Thomas Dalton, is very competent and is actually a National Socialist. And tried to do a translation that really honoured what the original German says to the that, as accurately as possible. Whereas the other translations, because of ideological bias, you still get the idea, obviously, of what he’s saying.

Blair Cottrell: But is Ralph Mannheim jewish?

Thomas Sewell: I don’t know. I could Google it, but I don’t know. I don’t think the translation of Mannheim is the problem. It’s mostly the footnote, obviously.

Blair Cottrell: I think the Mannheim translation is quite good.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, I enjoyed as well. I just ignore the footnotes. So sometimes I read the footnotes because they just add context. It’s not necessarily biased, obviously, just there’s footnotes about the Holocaust in there. But that’s nonsense!

But the most important thing about reading Mein Kampf is, I mean, Joel just went on, like, a 30 minutes rant about the history of World War Two and its relationship, obviously, with Australia, the UK, America, the Soviet Union.

When you read Mein Kampf, Hitler describes his idea of a New World Order without jewry. Without world jewry. He describes that alliance between Germany, the United States, Germany, and Great Britain. It describes these relationships all the way back in 1925. So Hitler was completely transparent with his intentions. Hitler was completely, like, he’s writing stuff, how many, basically two decades before the end of World War Two, before the Nuremberg trials, and before all the lies and slander really started to go hard. But he already wrote it, and it was the most published book, I think, in history, after the Bible and the Quran.

So that’s why it’s so important to read, because when you read the words from the man, you can feel a sincerity, and it deprograms all of the “Holocaustianity”, as Jacob and William Luther Pierce call it. There’s a Holocaustianity. That’s the new religion. I think there’s a Catholic, a famous Catholic anti-semite as well. I can’t remember his name. Maybe Joel knows him, but he calls it “Holocaustianity” as well.

And I think that’s a really important understanding, too.

Joel Davis: [words unclear]

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. I’ve actually never heard you say call it, but it’s a very good way of describing it, because it really is a religion built around the Holocaust. And reading Mein Kampf and learning the truth about World War Two breaks the spell of Holocaustianity! And when you break the spell of holocaustianity, your politics is now free. You can choose to be whatever you want to be politically, but you’re most likely going to be on some sort of pipeline between racist, libertarian, and National Socialist. And you’re going to probably argue about something benign or irrelevant rather than the securing the future for our people. And to have a free mindset, to not be shackled by holocaustianity, and to have a free mindset allows you to address all information from that free mindset.

And so it’s interesting how everyone gets involved in the movement, if we want to describe it by that, I mean, we’ve got Darryl Cooper. Is it Darryl Cooper saying “we have to win first”?

So we’re a movement that’s trying to win! We’re trying to achieve state power across Western civilisation, across White civilisation. And it’s fascinating that we all come into the movement from maybe these different angles.

[44:20]

And a lot of the people our age that have been around for some time, we probably got red pilled through 4Chan or YouTube or some sort of alternative media source, even if it’s on a mainstream source, but the backwaters of it that are now banned as part of dead end Internet theory. But we were in that part of the Internet that doesn’t really exist anymore, but it doesn’t need to anymore. It’s become mainstream. Like, they tried to smother it! The Pandora’s box is open. They tried to rig the YouTube algorithms.

And I talked about this with Blair. You were there when we talked to, … Who was the guy from Mirror Mirror, the Channel Ten reporter, that American or Canadian guy? What was his name? Journalist Todd Sampson asked me a leading question because obviously they were trying to get it on the documentary. He said:

“Did you, when you were on YouTube, did you feel that the algorithm, that it was YouTube’s fault, that the algorithm set you down this path?”

And I was like:

“No, it was the opposite. I just randomly came across these videos by just deep diving into history, autistically.”

And then, I didn’t say that, obviously, on television, [chuckling] but, …

And then the algorithm tried to take me out. I’d be watching a Hitler video. And then the most recommended, the top recommended was like, a Ben Shapiro video, or a Jordan Peterson video. It was these astroturfed system people or Joe Rogan video. It was like always trying to pull me out of the rabbit hole. The algorithm was doing the opposite.

And he just paused and stopped his line of questioning and then just looked at his notes and then asked a different set of questions. He was like:

“Damn it!”

He wanted the sound bite. Like:

“I was groomed by YouTube. YouTube’s responsible. We should sue YouTube because YouTube’s making all these people racist!”

And now it’s like, [chuckling] Tucker Carlson is making all these people wake up to the true the World War Two. And obviously they’re going to go after him.

It’s interesting, the observation about Musk supporting the show and then realizing the implications of that and be like:

“Oh, shit! I’m not ready to go that far yet!”

And there’s a lot of people, a lot of chatter. I have checked the comment section of the show today, and there’s a lot of chatter about:

“Oh, this person’s controlled opposition. This person’s controlled opposition!”

It’s like:

“We’re all here! We all made it!”

And if the system is doing these things in a controlled manner, well, look, they’re clearly losing! [chuckling] Like, if that’s what they have to do to control the narrative, that’s the down, …

Joel Davis: This is losing control of the narrative. This is like:

“Well, in order to stop White people from waking up, what we need to do is talk about how actually Churchill was the bad guy in World War Two and maybe slightly deny the Holocaust and talk about how the jews were behind it in an indirect way and how that’s what’s justifying White genocide.”

That’s the controlled demolition!

Like, if the system is doing controlled demolition on the World War Two mythos, which is literally the fundamental pillar in the kind of ideological structure of the modern world, that’s victory!

I don’t think the system is doing that. I think Tucker Carlson is from a faction of the American elite, which are somewhat free agents to a certain extent, and who, I think, look at basically the current state of the United States and of the American empire and realise that if White people aren’t resupplied with some kind of dignity, then, basically the empire is toast! Because you need to have young White men moving up within the system, occupying positions of power and prominence and running America so that it maintains, that they can have a functional empire.

And right now, the way that it’s set up, they’ve denied so much dignity to young White men and to the White race in general. They’re being so destructive towards the high quality blood that is necessary for the empire to sustain itself, that it is on a trajectory to self destruction in very short order.

So I think there are a certain element of the American elite, I think, which are still kind of WASPy. They’re not jews, because, you know, his dad’s a CIA agent, and he’s got a lot of connections. So, I mean, he’s a part of the elite. He’s not just some guy.

Thomas Sewell: When people say:

“Oh, Tucker Carlson, you know, he’s, …”

I agree. He wore that Kabbalah bracelet. That’s suspicious, on a previous show. That’s an odd thing to wear, that crimson bracelet. Maybe it means something else in other circles, but most people are aware that’s a sign of tether or tie or submission to the Kabbalah mysticism.

But again, let’s say that’s correct. Let’s take that information and we all agree on it. How does that explain or justify what he’s done today? To me, I can only think of, obviously, that’s a clear answer, that there’s infighting within the Deep State and even there’s cabal, and it’s just CIA agents that are trying to get the American empire back on track and White people back supporting the government, because they’ve lost all trust. There’s no trust at the moment.

I think Republicans are at like 7% trust in the mainstream media, or it’s basically hit, … We’re like a couple years away in theory, a couple years away from the collapse of the Soviet Union. If you think about where public trust was in the mainstream institutions of the Soviet Union in 1987 or 1988, it was pretty obvious that the whole thing was going to come apart.

And there’s a lot of history, a lot of firsthand history of people that talk about how they would walk around in the Soviet Union in the late eighties and walk into car dealerships and pretend to buy a car, because they knew they weren’t for sale, because they weren’t getting manufactured. And they would have these fake conversations with the car dealer, like pretending to buy a car and pretending that they had the money to buy the car. And everyone just like, played pretend. And it was just like this really strange time where they were living in this, I think the term was called hyper, maybe not “hyper realism”. I think it was hyper realism. I watched a documentary called Hyper Realism on it, and that’s kind of similar to what we’re living. We’re living in a different version of hyper realism. But the two notes I have is that, …

[50:42]

Blair Cottrell: We’re in hyper faking gayism!

Thomas Sewell: Yeah, exactly! [chuckling] Yeah. It’s the same thing, but just gay and brown.

Joel Davis: They kind of had, like, ironic communism at that point. Like no one actually believed. So it was just like this ironic performance art. Because no one can step out and openly criticise it because that’s a capital offence, Gulags.

So everyone just ironically goes along with it to show that:

“Yes, I’m aware that this is bullshit and you’re aware. We’re both aware that this is bullshit, but we’re not breaking any laws.”

And it’s almost like liberalism is getting to that point where no one actually fucking believes that this shit is actually true anymore. Except retards! Even Drew Pavlou does not believe liberalism is true!

Thomas Sewell: No he doesn’t.

Joel Davis: He knows that the jews run everything and that racism is actually the only thing that’s actually funny or interesting. He’s a totally cynical actor.

Thomas Sewell: What he said on the Spaces last night that why do Right-wing people, someone asked AI, or maybe it was you, Joel. Why do Right-wing people wink at each other and that, …

Blair Cottrell: Some Leftist, why do like, Nazis smirk at each other in conversation or when they’re in an interview together, and the AI answered:

“To indicate a connected consciousness and the fact that they’re both in on some propaganda ploy.”

And I said:

“Yeah, yeah, that’s right.”

Thomas Sewell: It’s the bees. The bees. I probably told the story many times, but I’ll do it in the short version. When the wasp comes into the beehive, the bees don’t fight back straight away. They kind of just, … Bees are industrious. They’re kind of like, they’re kind of Anglos without, you know, well, they kind of like Anglos in a lot of ways, the bees. And they don’t necessarily fight back straight away. It takes a long time for the Saxon to begin to hate. Like, the bees kind of just tolerate the wasps coming in, just like eating people. Sometimes the wasps, even eat the young and start fucking up the royal jelly. And the bees are just like:

“Oh God! And they just, they got to get to work. You know what I mean? They’re stuck in traffic and there’s a traffic jam and life sucks! And I got to get the pollen and get the pollen back to the beehive. And this is more important things. Yeah, we get there’s a wasp, but it’s not my job. I don’t have to deal with it. It’s a police job!”

And the police are like dysfunctional, the bee police.

Anyway, how they eventually kill the wasp is they just start like, waving their wing a certain way, like a different way. And the wasp doesn’t really realise it.

And then eventually when all the bees are all just like doing this little twitch with their wing, and when everyone’s doing it, like, it starts with just a couple bees, like:

“Hey, we got to deal with this problem.”

And they start doing this little wink, this little smirk, this little. Like a little bee sieg heil. And they all start, …

Blair Cottrell: Like they’re bashing their spears against their chest plate.

Thomas Sewell: Yeah. Yeah, sort of but it’s like a subtle one. It’s like an Anglo. It’s like subtle racism. It’s like an Anglo subtlety.

And eventually, when they’re all doing it, then the bees. It’s a hive mind, you see? And when the bees all tune into the hive mind and they’re all geared together. And I say this on purpose because, I mean, Joel didn’t want to give it away, but we’ll talk about it later.

But when all the bees are all doing the little mini seig heil and the hive mind is all activated, when the hive minds all mobilised, then when that hive mind has achieved its purpose, then the bees just swarm the wasp and they vibrate the wasp to death. They can overheat the wasp and actually have a rotating meat grinder where they basically can overheat the wasp, and the wasp dies. But the bees just pass out before they die.

Blair Cottrell: I think, in there, there’s a clue as to the new name for the show, is there?

Thomas Sewell: [chuckling]

Blair Cottrell: I picked up on that. Yeah. A couple of questions I have, you guys.

First of all, I’ll make a remark regarding Mein Kampf. What you’ve basically explained, Tom, is that in a world where most books, especially books on politics and philosophy, are just spells trying to spell you, trying to get you to believe and invest yourself in a certain thing. Mein Kampf stands out as the spell breaker! It’s the book that dispels you. And allows you to think clearly for yourself see things as they are.

And whether Tucker Carlson realises it or not, he’s essentially putting himself forward now as a propagandist for nationalism, hardline nationalism, even National Socialism.

I did feel that Tucker Carlson was a little bit soft in the interview on a few occasions. Maybe he does it deliberately to try to seem fair. I know that that’s his game sometimes. But he brings up certain talking points that are quite “humanitarian”. Human rights and everyone having the right to live peacefully and in freedom. But those are the same talking points that led us to this fiasco in the first place. Like this mass egalitarian, mass migration culture that we have to tolerate now, the dispossession of our lands and eventual genocide of our people. So I hope that he realises that at some point and lays off that kind of rhetoric.

But question for you, Joel. You said that, or you alluded, … And both Tucker and I don’t know if Darryl Cooper did, but Tucker also alluded to the same point, that Winston Churchill, as a result of his stubborn refusal to accept Hitler’s peace offers, is responsible for the state Britain is in right now. But do you think Churchill knew that? Do you think back in 1940, world leaders could even conceive of the fact that a superclass of Leftist psychopaths were going to try to replace native Brits with Muslims and Indians? Right. Do you think Churchill actually understood that?

[56:10]

Joel Davis: The answer is absolutely that he didn’t! But Churchill was drunk off his tits every single day! I mean, the man was a total mess!

Blair Cottrell: What you’re saying is where Britain is at now is a consequence of Churchill, but it’s not what Churchill wanted.

Thomas Sewell: He didn’t necessarily know the exact plan, but he knew that these were nefarious agents because he wrote about them. Millions of dollars from the jews.

Joel Davis: Yeah, exactly! Yeah, exactly, Tom, is so, …

Thomas Sewell: He knew they were nefarious for a fact.

Blair Cottrell: He’s in bed with snakes. Churchill’s in bed with snakes. He knows he’s in beds with snakes. He talks about the fact he’s laying in a bed with snakes, but he stays in the bed anyway.

Thomas Sewell: Because he’s compromised.

Joel Davis: Churchill wrote a book in the early twenties talking about two strategies for jews, zionism and Bolshevism.

[Churchill’s 1920 article in the Illustrated Sunday Herald on “Zionism versus Bolshevism”. (click image to enlarge)]

[See: Book – The Myth of German Villainy – Part 04 – The Russian Revolution of 1917]

And also, there are other private communications. David Irving talks about this, of things, because Churchill was a prolific writer. There’s so much documentation of things that he wrote throughout his life. You know, Churchill had a very long life in public life. You know, he was a high ranking, a very successful politician, a high ranking member of the navy and so on. And World War Two is quite towards the end of his life. So when he was a younger man he was incredibly anti-semitic in some of his remarks. His book on the jews shows a very deep understanding of the jews.

Martyr Made in that interview, by the way, or Darryl Cooper, I should use his real name. He actually totally misrepresented that book, by the way, because he was like:

“Oh, I think Churchill was always a Zionist and he had sympathy to zionism because he thought that, like, jews, if they could either become Zionists or communists, and we would rather they become Zionists rather than communists, because communism is the real kind of threat.”

But if Churchill really felt that way, why the hell did he enable the Soviet Union to, why did he allow the Soviet Union to invade Poland, but not Germany? Why did he enable the Soviet Union to gobble up half of Europe with its actions. Why did he effectively ally with the Soviet Union if he was so [word unclear] communism?

Blair Cottrell: Apparently he had serious problems with Germany because of several military blunders that he was responsible for.

Joel Davis: That’s bullshit! When he said that was total bullshit! The reason why Churchill was fixated upon going to war with Germany was because Churchill went fucking bankrupt! Churchill was voted out of office. His political career failed. His military career was a fucking disaster, and he was a failed man, and he went broke. But he wanted to live a high society life of a rich, well to do, noble, you know, high ranking Tory British guy.

So he wanted to live in the fancy manor and have all these maids and servants and be part of high society and so on.

Blair Cottrell: And bottles of whisky, …

Joel Davis: He needed cash! And he was actually. He was engaged in all kinds of nefarious behaviour. Like, he would create counterfeit, he would do counterfeit painting where he would try and paint like, this famous French painter and pass off paintings like they were painted by someone else, so that he could sell them. Basically commit fraud to sell paintings at high values and so on. And he was doing all kinds of odd jobs, but he was completely broke.

And then jewish financiers came in and offered him literally the equivalent today of, like I think five or $10 million or something, or even more to become their guy, basically.

And the condition was:

“Here’s a whole bunch of money. We’re going to fund you back into politics, as well as paying off all your debts and enabling you to live this highfalutin lifestyle. And we’re going to get all, …”

The jews ran the media, right?

“So we’re going to get the media to start shilling you. But you’re going to be the guy who leads the charge against this Nazi threat against the Germans!”

And Irving points out that when Hitler rose to power, he actually has Churchill’s diaries and Churchill’s writings from that time. When Hitler comes to power in the early thirties. And Churchill doesn’t really care, he barely writes about it. If he was so passionate about Germany being a problem and Hitler being a problem, wouldn’t he have said something? It’s only after the jews come in and bail him out in the mid thirties with literally millions of dollars in today’s money, I can’t remember the exact figures. That all of a sudden he becomes, like, this public advocate within British politics for an aggressive foreign policy against Germany, and he becomes the biggest critic of Neville Chamberlain and the appeasement over Czechoslovakia and so on.

And so Churchill was effectively funded and promoted by the jews to be the anti-German war hawk in British politics. And ultimately elevated into the prime ministership, fueled by the jewish media and jewish financing, backing him and putting him in that role. So he owed his entire political, like, his kind of revived political career to the jews 100%! And it was conditional. And if he was to take Hitler’s peace offer, that support would be totally gone!

[1:01:24]

[See: That Blackguard — Winston Churchill]

And also he would look like a fool because he had basically pushed for war with Germany for so many years. If he then finally becomes prime minister and then goes and signs a peace deal with Hitler and tries to become Hitler’s ally, he’ll immediately get voted out because the British people have been sold this idea by Churchill that Germany is the greatest threat, we must defeat Germany and so on. So if he then cucks to Hitler, then there goes his political career, and also the jews would totally abandon him. He’d get cut off all the funding, all the money that he was receiving, or he can keep going along with, keep the jewish money flowing, keep the media on his side, save face, drag the Americans into the war and become the hero and so on, which is what ended up happening. Right?

So he basically sold out his people! He sold out our people. He sold us out. He destroyed our empire, because he’s of our blood. I mean, he’s an Anglo Saxon. He basically sold us out, destroyed Europe for petty personal reasons, ultimately. His own personal ambitions in politics and in lifestyle and so on. And Churchill was a racist and an anti-semite. He understood the theory. He didn’t have the honour!

[Something to keep in mind is that Organised jewry would have has several potential traitors like Churchill ready to replace him if he didn’t fullfill their agenda, so in other words he was a useful tool, but not indispensable – Kat]

Blair Cottrell: Wasn’t almost everyone racist and anti-semitic back then?

Joel Davis: Definitely! Yeah, but we have documented evidence showing that he understood. It wasn’t like he was a retard that didn’t understand ideology, didn’t understand race and what was going on, and that he didn’t understand jewish power and influence and the nefarious nature of the jews.

And actually, when Churchill tried to revive his political career again, because, remember, he was basically voted out immediately after World War Two ended. When he tried to kind of relaunch his political career again in the late 1940s, he actually, I think, almost ran with the catchphrase or whatever of “Keep Britain, White” or something akin to that, those words. He was going to try and do White nationalist populism as his, like, final hurrah to take back over the Tories and go back into the prime ministership and so on. They ended up kiboshing that idea. But like that shows that Churchill was not like some anti-racist libtard or secret communist or something.

He was just literally a piece of shit sellout! And yeah, and as I said, he was wasted drunk. Obviously that demonstrates like a lack of character to be running the British Empire, basically, be the prime minister. It’s such a pivotal moment in history and you can’t like, fucking sober up and make decisions?

But you just see, like, throughout his life, like so many incompetent decisions, so many selfish decisions, and just a complete train wreck within his personal life.

You know, David Irving talks about the fact that Churchill’s wife or widow, I guess, after he died, was willing to actually work with David Irving and hand over a bunch of Churchill’s records, knowing that David Irving was trashing him! Because she hated him so much, because of how much of a piece of shit he was! He didn’t have loyalty even from his own wife or whatever, or mistress or whatever she was.

Anyway, the point is that he was just a total piece of shit, like as a human being on every level. And that is, I think, the core to his motivation, which makes it all the more worse. Like if at least if he was like a anti-racist libtard, then at least like he would have actually had some kind of even though they’re completely wrong morals, at least he would had some principles that governed his behaviour.

Like Roosevelt seemed to have like a certain kind of ideological motivation behind what he did. You know, like he wanted to create this, like liberal globalist world order or whatever. And obviously that’s evil and fucked up, because it’s fundamentally immoral construction and look at what that has led to. But it was more conscious with Roosevelt, where Churchill was just like a scum piece of shit that was just used by these forces ultimately to bring down probably the society that he actually loved and wanted to be a part of he just wanted to be “the guy”, he wanted to be the hero, he wanted to be the high status, you know, Englishman with the top hat and respected and so on and so that makes it all the more disgusting!

[1:05:51]

Blair Cottrell: Seems like standard narcissism. Like the guy had deep feelings of inadequacy maybe, and was overcompensating. That’s just standard narcissistic behaviour. Every man’s flawed, and obviously Churchill was significantly flawed.

But it’s like no matter where you look, what Darryl Cooper is trying to put forward in the Tucker Carlson interview, that is that Churchill is the foremost villain of the Second World War. You find evidence of that everywhere you look!

When you look at other revisionists, when you look at former soldiers. I can recall watching an interview of some former members of the Royal Air Force from World War Two saying that:

“They felt like their orders came from cowards, that they were carpet bombing Germany, German civilians on orders, but they didn’t want to do it, and they felt sick about it afterwards.”

They didn’t understand why they were being ordered to do that.

So I suppose I harbour some resentment towards the man. And it’s funny because I’m not particularly well read on Second World War. I have a good general understanding. I remember, I suppose I first started developing my understanding by watching William Luther Pearce edits on YouTube, edited by Norse Wolf, who was a clever editor, back when YouTube allowed these clips.

And that’s how I learnt that what started the Second World War was actually Britain and France declaring war on Hitler, and not the other way around. Not only did Hitler not declare war on England or France, Hitler had nothing to do with the start of the Second World War, other than invading Poland to retake former German territory, which German civilians or German citizens were being slaughtered in because they still hadn’t moved out of that territory. And the Poles thought they had the British and the French on their side. So they thought they could just keep slaughtering those Germans and not suffer any consequences. According to Darryl Cooper, …

Thomas Sewell: It was a Polish variation of the NKVD. [words unclear] Part of the jewish administration in Danzig.

Blair Cottrell: That means they probably didn’t stop at murder. It was probably worse than that, too. And so Hitler was in a precarious position where he could either just continue letting these Germans get raped and slaughtered in former German territory because the Poles were ignoring Hitler’s advances and requests to stop killing his people so he could get them out of there safely, or he could just go in there and take the land back to protect his own people.

According to Darryl Cooper in the Tucker Carlson interview, Hitler didn’t actually expect England and France to declare war on him after retaking that land because he saw it as a perfectly reasonable thing to do, considering the circumstances and the position that he was in. And he was really surprised and upset when they forced him into a war, which is why he put so much effort into trying to sue for peace. Apparently, he was firing off peace office for months and months and months!

Damien Richardson: Welcome back to Damienrichardson.online where we are continuing, definitely today we’re continuing to have the difficult conversations. We’re talking to retired academic Frank Salter. Once we hear the title of the book that he’s recently published with a colleague of his, Harry Richardson. I think we might wonder whether he actually retired if he was thrown out of academia because the name of the book is Anglophobia, the Unrecognized Hatred.

Frank Salter, welcome to the show.

Frank Salter: Nice, nice to be here.

Damien Richardson: Now, Frank, what prepossessed you to even be to begin to write a book with that title?

Frank Salter: Well, what began it was I received a 6,000 word email, in effect from my co-author Harry Richardson. And he said:

“I’ve got an idea for an article.”

We thought it would be maybe about that long, 6,000 words. It went to almost ten times that.

And he had this argument, which is the structure of the book, which is talking about everyone else can have their home country but not us. Anglo Australians and all other European nations are not permitted to have their own country where they remain the super majority. Not just a 51% majority, but an 85, a 90% majority, which most other peoples aspire to. They might not have it, but they aspire to it. They can lobby for it, they can agitate for it and they’re not called Nazis. Right?

So territory is homeland is a basic one, or control of immigration and so on and so forth.

And I thought this is rhetorically really powerful.

So between us, his concept of the book became a book project, took us a year. And with my academic training together, it was a great combination. And we came up with this book that I think covers a lot of the sensitive areas.

Damien Richardson: The book was only recently published, wasn’t it?

Frank Salter: Yeah, earlier this year [2023]

Damien Richardson: Earlier this year. How’s it been received in academic circles and also by the broader public?

Frank Salter: Not one review! It’s just been ignored, except on the dissident side of politics. It’s dissident Right. It’s been acknowledged, been reviewed. It was published initially in Quadrant magazine, which is Australia’s premiere intellectual magazine for conservatives. Quadrant magazine’s been running for 50, 60 years.

So it was published in a huge, you know, series, four long articles with other part of the book.

So that was good. And we had good responses from readers there.

But in academe, no, I think I can’t think of one review.

Damien Richardson: So why is it being ignored? Talk us through that process. Why would it be ignored? You have fine credentials, you worked overseas, as part of academia as well as in Australia, as well as your colleague, so why would it be ignored?