Joel Davis: It is The Joel and Blair Show. I’m at a bit of a different background this time because I’m in between places at the moment, and so it’s a bit of an ad hoc setup, but it looks okay, I guess. Gotta hold the mic with my hand, though. I couldn’t find a good resting point for it, so hopefully that works out okay.

 

But anyway. How you doing Blair? You got a haircut?

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. Hang on. You’re going to hold your microphone the entire time like a news journalist?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. Well, I guess it’s good. It’s a little bit of a bicep activation or something, maybe. Solbra [sp] would probably say:

 

“Oh, it’s a good. You need to do, like, weird exercises or something to have a more complete workout.”

 

So this is just another workout. Maybe I should put a dumbbell on the microphone next week and just hold, like a 15 kilo dumbbell attached to it or something. And then eventually I’ll just be, like, so jacked.

 

Blair Cottrell: Impressed as always. I own by your dedication and resourcefulness. Like, if the stream is scheduled, Joel’s doing it no matter where he is and how limited he is. Doesn’t matter. He’ll just hold his microphone if he has to! It’s great!

 

Yeah, I’m doing fine, man. I’m really busy lately. I haven’t really uploaded much content or being that active online because we have our national weightlifting event coming up hosted by Tom and the guys. Same one I injured myself at last year, and so I’m really determined to come back this year and push some big numbers to kind of demonstrate that [I’m] freakishly strong at the moment, and I’ll demonstrate that at this year’s weightlifting event. I’m excited to get up there. I’ve got to travel a bit of distance to get there, so I’m doing some extra work to make sure I can do that comfortably. I think you’ll be going to. Is that right? Joel’s going to be pushing some big numbers as well. I think you’re up there with probably. I reckon you’ll be up there in the top five.

 

Joel Davis: I don’t know if I’ll make the top five. I’ve been pretty happy with that. But my squat shit, because of my knee injury, that will cost me a little bit.

 

But, yeah, I think my bench and my deadlift are coming along strong every week. The number keeps going up,. So this is the first year I’ve really trained for this. So I’m pretty. I’m kind of kicking myself, to be honest, that I didn’t get into this earlier because then I could maybe be challenging a bit higher up the rankings.

 

But I guess it’ll do my best, set a number and then next year come back and try and smash it.

 

Blair Cottrell: Better late than never, bro. Like you’re into it now and you can only improve from here.

 

It’s been an interesting week. Obviously not as intense or exciting as a presidential candidate being, you know, an attempted assassination on a presidential candidate. And I’ve just done a big leg workout quite intense. I’ve actually been doing less volume, more weights, and I’m really packing on tissue as a result. And it’s got me feeling a bit spaced out.

 

So if I do slur my words or something, know that I’m not retarded, my blood is just drained out of my brain and is currently sitting in my quads. And I’m not as articulate as I usually am when I’m in that state.

 

But the couple of things that I think we should cover this week. Everyone’s really angry about that Australian woman being raped in Paris by Africans, and rightfully. So there’s that, and there’s a couple of other topics I wanted to bring up as well, but are you happy to start with that?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. By the way, apparently I had the wrong mic selected. Didn’t tell me that I sounded like shit, so I couldn’t tell.

 

Blair Cottrell: You sound fine to me. Like you’ve got a voice that comes through nice and clear regardless of the mike.

 

Joel Davis: I actually checked the chat for once. Often I ignore it. It was an O7 to the chat.

 

Blair Cottrell: I better do that too, actually. I better keep an eye on the chat because I haven’t been doing that either.

 

But, yeah, this, …

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, the French, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Because I’ve been, … Sorry.

 

Joel Davis: Well, I got The Noticer article here, but I pulled that up, because you said you don’t know too much about the story.

 

Blair Cottrell: I’ve seen it in newspaper. Like I said, I’ve been really busy with work. Haven’t had a lot of time to really read all the details, but I know it happened and I’ve seen newspaper reports, but I haven’t read The Noticer report. So yeah, let’s have a look at general perspective here.

 

Joel Davis: So here we go:

 

“Australian tourists, 25, gang raped by five Africans in Paris. One attacker followed her into a kebab shop where she took refuge.”

 

Well, the fact that she had to take refuge in a kebab shop probably says something about what part of town she was in. That’s the thing about going to these European cities. You know, the locals there probably know the areas that you’re not supposed to go to the areas that are full of Africans and Arabs and so on.

 

But, you know, this woman obviously was naive. Doesn’t really know Paris. Maybe had an idealistic notion of Paris, a romanticized notion of Paris. Thinks she can just walk around like she can on the streets of the inner city of Melbourne or Sydney. Which isn’t necessarily the safest place in the world, but it’s a lot safer than Paris, and obviously wandered into the wrong neighbourhood.

 

Anyway:

 

“Australian tourist was gang raped by five African men in Paris before fleeing to a kebab shop where one of her attackers followed her inside. The woman, 25, was attacked 03:00 am. Saturday morning near Boulevard de Clichy in the French capital’s 18th arrondissement, (whatever that is) close to the famous Moulin Rouge cabaret just days before the Olympic Games is due to begin. She sought refuge in a nearby kebab shop with her dress on backwards and partially torn, only for one of her rapists to confront her again, CCTV footage from the store obtained by 7 News shows.”

 

I guess the video has been removed by [word unclear]. That’s interesting, actually, that 7 News took the video down, probably because the video., … This was such a big story, everyone, …

 

 

[06:06]

 

Blair Cottrell: It may have been hot linked from YouTube, and YouTube took it down.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. It says here that the video has been removed by uploader.

 

So that’s interesting. Like, are they trying to memory hole this because they realised:

 

“Oh, this story’s a little bit too racially charged!”

 

“The footage shows the victim being helped by customers and staff before an African man in black pants and a white T-shirt walks in. According to seven News, she tried to tell locals he was one of the attackers, but they were unable to speak English. As he made an order and lingered in the shop, she was able to alert an English speaker, who confronted the African. He fled the shops just minutes before police arrived.”

 

Blair Cottrell: Did you watch the, … I sent you the footage of this [word unclear] Did you watch it?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I saw it. I didn’t see what you sent me, but I’ve seen it. Yeah.

 

Blair Cottrell: Uh, uh. It took a while for anyone to actually register that not only had she been sexually assaulted by a gang of Africans, but one of them was in the shop and had followed her there. Obviously, they weren’t done with her yet.

 

And I think someone in the footage actually took a swing at him, eventually attacked the guy, and the guy ran off just before the police arrived. But, man, it’s really frustrating to watch that footage! You’re in a kebab shop. There’s going to be utensils there. There’s going to be cutlery. You know, there’s opportunities you have there to defend yourself viciously because you’ve been assaulted viciously!

 

So it’s just really frustrating to see the lack of, I don’t know, protective community spirit that no one jumped to her aid. It took a woman to stand up first, and then a guy eventually stood up because he understood that there was a serious problem here. And someone who assaulted her actually followed her into the shop.

 

But he didn’t do enough. Like, he just had a jab. He took a jab at the guy and then let the guy run off. Why didn’t they restrain that guy? Why didn’t they restrain him until the police arrived? Why didn’t they do more? They just let a rapist run away. What the fuck is wrong with these people? What the fuck is going on in Paris! Why can’t an Australian citizen go to Paris without getting raped by gangs of Africans? Well, we know why that is! Because:

 

“Diversity is our greatest strength!”

 

And the government has to let all these people in from incompatible cultures who have no respect for French people or German people or Italians or Australians. Who see them only as targets for sexual assault and whatever else they want to do or feel like doing. I’m really frustrated by this! I’m frustrated by the response that I saw in the front page of Herald Sun News, which is a major Australian newspaper. They’re suggesting that Australian Olympians competing at the Olympics, which I believe is scheduled to be hosted in Paris. Is that right?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah.

 

Blair Cottrell: They’re suggesting that Australian Olympians don’t wear the classic Australian green and gold colours. This is what the Australian Olympians who represent our country typically wear.

 

Joel Davis: It wasn’t the newspaper Blair, it was the actual Olympic Commission that has instructed them.

 

Blair Cottrell: Not to wear green and gold because they may be targeted just for being Australians. Because typically, like, even though we have a very pro-multicultural society down here in Australia, most of our athletes are still good stock White people, because they’re the people who are the most athletic, I suppose, and also have access to the best facilities, private schools in Australia. They’re still majority Whites. Our country is still majority White.

 

And so our athletes are majority White and usually the highest of our stock. Because if you’re going to be competing on an international level. You’ve got pretty good genetic stock, generally speaking. And they can’t even wear colours that represent their own national team because they might be targeted by Africans. This is where we’re fucking at! This is where, this is how fucking bad it is! And the Olympic Committee, what’s the Olympic Committee’s response? Not get these people out of the country. Not remigration, mass deportations now, which should be their message:

 

“Oh don’t wear your national colours when competing in our country because you might be raped by Africans! Sorry. That’s just how it is. Part and parcel of living in diverse modern society!”

 

Very frustrating to me, man! Very aggravating! And people have a right to be angry about this. I don’t know who this woman was. I’m slightly angry at the woman too. You’ve got to not be holidaying on your own as a woman.

 

Like, this is a tendency that, …

 

Joel Davis: And going out at night.

 

Blair Cottrell: And at night as well. The world’s not a playground! You know that wanderlust hashtag. And there’s all these movies about girls going and finding themselves in these different countries and going on adventures, discovering themselves! It’s all bullshit! Like, you’re just a victim! You’re just a target for people who want to exploit you. The world’s not a playground. It’s a dangerous place!

 

 

And if you have the perspective that:

 

“Oh, I should be able to go and travel where I want.”

 

Yeah, theoretically, you should be able to buy whatever you want and do whatever you want and live an imagined life of luxury and thrill. But that’s not the way the world actually is so stop treating it like it is. Stop treating the world like a fucking playground! I don’t know. These wanderlust, young, stupid girls! It’s the boomers that put it in their heads a lot of the time, has the message that a lot of boomer parents pumped into the soft heads of their daughters:

 

“Don’t get pregnant early. Don’t worry about traditional standards. Just get a job, get a mortgage. And before you do that, go party up in Eos, do the Greek cruise, sail Croatia, and travel Europe, and drink fancy, colourful cocktails on some beautiful beach somewhere! And do that until you’re 38. Then come back and think about having children!”

 

If your uterus can still you know, generate the power to do it.

 

And a lot of young girls took the advice of their boomer parents, and now that’s what they value. That’s their priority in life, is to go party up in Europe and travel around like it’s a playground. And then get raped by gangs of Africans. It’s so fucking ridiculous, man! The boomers really need to pull their heads. And if you’ve got children, you’ve got to inoculate them against this nonsense and actually raise them to understand that the world is a dangerous place and they need to be prepared for stuff like this to happen.

 

The woman shouldn’t have been there. She shouldn’t have been on her own. I’m not going to say, actually, I won’t go as far to say that she shouldn’t have been there. I mean, you can visit Paris, but she shouldn’t have been on her own out at night. I mean, it’s just, I don’t know. What have you got to say about it, man? I’m just going to end up going on a long, angry rant.

 

Joel Davis: Well, I agree with you. What I said this morning on, I did Mark Collett show this morning, and we discussed this a little bit. And my take was, well, obviously some responsibility has to go to this woman’s father because he obviously wasn’t a protective father who instilled within her a sense of value that she, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Exactly!

 

Joel Davis: Because that’s the thing. Like, there’s a sense of value that I guess can be instilled in a woman that’s feminist, which is kind of perverse, … It’s kind of like her autonomy is where her value is derived. Her freedom, her autonomy, her ability to take care of herself and so on. And that’s what gives you value.

 

But that’s a load of bullshit because as you said, she doesn’t actually have the capability to defend herself in situations like this.

 

So the other kind of value that you can instil in your daughters is the idea that you’re so valuable that you need to be protected, that you deserve protection, that you should seek protection.

 

And when you’re raised with good parents who instil that in you as a woman, then you end up behaving accordingly. I know women that have been raised by more conservative parents who wouldn’t put themselves in that situation because they would be genuinely afraid of that outcome and would just simply make different decisions.

 

So, yeah, it’s obviously a parenting failure, but that’s part of a larger cultural failure, like you said.

 

But also secondarily, it’s also because of the anti-racist ideology perpetuated in our society. People, White people, have mental blocks against assessing these kinds of risks. They have an innate kind of trusting nature. Like when you said:

 

“Oh, well you know why is this woman out at night?”

 

Well, if France was still only full of French people, she probably could go out at night on her own and not get raped. It still probably wouldn’t be advisable, but she probably wouldn’t be getting gang raped by a bunch of White French people, because that’s not how White people operate.

 

So there’s a kind of innate kind of high trust sensibility that White people have, and, then they’ve been kind of psyopped into extending that to out-groups, even though it’s totally illegitimate.

 

And obviously she must have, and all White people must have a certain amount of trepidation or fear response or whatever. They’ve done studies that show when they look at the kind of neurological scanning of, like brain scans, literally, and they’ll show people images of White people, black people, Asians, whatever. And when you get shown an image of someone who is of a different race, a complete different part of your brain lights up, which is associated with the kind of primal fear response, like your lizard brain lights up. And this has been reproduced by multiple studies. So, you know, there is a certain innate kind of:

 

“Oh, this isn’t a safe neighbourhood!”

 

But then you have this overriding self talk that has been instilled in White people that:

 

“Well, that would be racist to acknowledge that feeling.”

 

And so it gets repressed.

 

So then the internal psychological resources that have been given to this woman by, and all of us, by evolution aren’t activated, which are there to defend yourself against out-groups. And then shit like this happens.

 

Obviously it’s a multifaceted problem. It just demonstrates the it’s an example, or a manifestation of a lot of the main ideological problems in our society, like the individualism, the feminism, the anti-racism. I mean, why the hell are there even a whole bunch of niggers in Paris, anyway? There shouldn’t be! It makes no sense that they’re there.

 

So, yeah, it’s just a failure on so many levels.

 

I mean, they shouldn’t be having the Olympics in Paris. It’s basically a third world city. We see so many reports, there was massive race riots there last year.

 

There’s been so many terrorist attacks by Muslims. It’s one of the worst cities in the world for pickpocketing, and it’s just an absolute nightmare! Everyone that I know that has been to Paris only has negative stories. I’ve never heard any story from anyone except from a boomer that went there in like, the 1960s, who has a positive Paris holiday story. Every single person I’ve ever spoken to that’s been there has a negative story, and just rants about it. And it ends up just being a conversation about how it’s been ruined by mass immigration.

 

[16:46]

 

 

Blair Cottrell: Do you remember that Japanese tourists who went to Paris and expected to see French people, but just saw mostly Africans and Arab people and was like:

 

“What the hell? Like, I came on a vacation to Paris because I wanted to see Paris. This is not what I expected.”

 

That was kind of a viral video about five or six years ago. So it’s obviously been this way for a while. But I just want revenge, man!

 

I mean, this is close to home. This is an Australian woman and I just want revenge. I’m just so dissatisfied with the result that the guy was allowed to just run away. And what’s akin to rape? Like, what’s, you know how do you deal justice in a situation like that? I don’t know, man. I’ve just got my imaginations running wild and I feel vengeful about it. I don’t know the woman, but she’s Australian. And so for that reason I just feel so torn up inside about it.

 

So, yeah, it’s very unfortunate you gotta tolerate shit like this in this fucking society, you know?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, it shouldn’t be tolerated. Like, we should demand nigger scalps from the French as restitution.

 

But, yeah, it’s a pretty horrific story. It’s quite an obvious take in response. Blank Actual said:

 

“France needs a revolution.”

 

Well, that’s one thing that the French have always been pretty good at doing, is revolutions, so why not another one?:

 

“Diversity is up rated stench with a poo emoji.”

 

What were you saying?

 

Blair Cottrell: There’s a saying:

 

“That the whiff of grapeshot has prevented any revolutionary spirit in the French people ever since that particular incident.”

 

And grapeshot is when Napoleon fired broken up cannonballs, which have a shotgun type effect. Like, imagine a row of giant shotguns is blowing people apart because after the first, the new revolutionary government took power, the people were very offended because the regular people thought they were going to come to power. That didn’t happen, of course.

 

And so there was a bit of a counter revolutionary effort. And Napoleon was given the task of quelling that counter revolution, and he did it with grapeshot. And I don’t think there was a significant case of any French rebellion against the government since then. But we’re starting to see it now, definitely. I’m sure there’s French nationalists that are active and I’m sure they’re busy.

 

So I don’t want to take anything away from the French. As I said I’m very angry about an Australian citizen being raped by Africans in Paris. Just, I won’t harp on about it, though. I think we’ve almost said enough about it. Unless you’ve got more thoughts.

 

Joel Davis: No, think it does bridge, though, to a larger theme. Which is, when would enough be enough? Like how many of these stories do we have to hear?

 

And even in South Africa there are still White Leftists.

 

So the view that I take on this subject is that basically there is no amount of tragic or brutal outcomes that will eventually fill up the meter of what White people can tolerate before they respond. I think the only way enough will be enough is if we actually build a counterforce, a movement that people can believe in, that can make them believe that there is an alternative.

 

I think basically now most people have just kind of accepted and become accustomed to this being the reality of Western society, that you’re just going to have this massive violent, particularly in Europe, immigrant population, that you’re going to have all the other problems associated with mass immigration. And it just is what it is. Most White people are not happy about it, but they have a kind of learnt helplessness.

 

And moreover, I think from an evolutionary biology perspective, I think the vast majority of people have kind of been selected with a lot of pro-social traits that make them trusting, that make them forgiving, accepting of others and so on. Which are good traits on an interpersonal level. Like the kind of traits that make you a good person to work with or be neighbours with or be friends with or in a family with, are not the same kind of traits that make you good at analyzing threats on a political level and coming bringing the right attitude towards politics.

 

And this is kind of, I think the problem with democracy, or one of the main problems with democracy is that the average person just doesn’t have the correct psychological constitution to be able to see politics clearly.

 

[21:32]

 

Blair Cottrell: They’re taught that everyone’s their friend, like people in, under democracy, it’s everyone’s your friend, treat everyone like a friend. But that’s not how other people are seeing you. Especially people who aren’t from your country. Not everyone is your friend. People are trying to exploit you, people are trying to take advantage of you, and you have to go through life with that perspective. Not all of the time. You be kind to people as much as you can be because I think that’s reciprocal. If you’re kind to people are kind to you, generally speaking.

 

But, yeah, I definitely don’t go through life thinking everyone’s my friend and believing in some universal human equality, because it’s bullshit! It’s just that’s not reality of the world we live in. It’s not the reality of human beings and all of the races that we sum up under the phrase “humanity”. I actually don’t even like the phrase “humanity” because, or for the exact reason I just outlined it. It just categorizes too many different, radically different types of people under one phrase. I think that’s why egalitarians coined the phrase humanity and love to use the phrase “human being” or “us”. Everything’s about “us”. But that’s not the way all these other races and nations in the world see us, see White people or Westerners. A lot of them think we’re idiots, actually.

 

I was given a book recently by a colleague. I forgot the name of it. I think it’s called something like How the Rest Fight the West. And it’s a modern interpretation by a former soldier, I think a high ranking soldier, as to how other nations currently view the West and their understanding of how to sort of gain advantage over the West in certain social, political situations. So that’ll be a good read. I’ll look it up now, actually, so I can get more information to you guys on that book.

 

Joel Davis: But, yeah, I think it isn’t just what democracy teaches people. It’s a democracy empowers people that don’t really have any business making political decisions. Like, for the vast majority of human history, up until very recently, the average pleb, the peasant, wasn’t involved in political decision making in any meaningful capacity. There is, I think in order to have a sound political mentality, you have to be somewhat anti-social. You have to be able to look at the world through a dog-eat-dog lens, analyze the world dispassionately and rationally in terms of threats, in terms of the potential for violence, the potential for conflict, and ensuring self preservation.

 

And if you have this mentality in your daily life, you might be a bit of an asshole! You might not be the most considerate and caring and forgiving person. Being really considerate and caring and forgiving is great on an interpersonal level. That’s how you should be within a community, if you have a community of White people all taking care of each other, or a family, or a friendship group, those are the traits that actually hold the group together. But on a larger political scale, those traits, if they take over the society, end up basically weakening it and opening it up and exposing it to a lot of these threats, and democracy opens that up.

 

Whereas if you have a society where you have a kind of selection mechanism to bring people with a more anti-social, dog-eat-dog world mentality, select them up the hierarchy into positions of power and influence, that they can make political decisions that ensure the preservation of the race, of the nation and its interests. And the rest of the masses are able to basically be wholesome chungus. They’re able to be caring and altruistic and so on, because it won’t impact politics. They’ll just be like that in their everyday life and produce the optimal society.

 

And I think that’s basically what European society was when we had more of an aristocratic government. And as that has been whittled away, I think we’ve gone in the complete wrong direction. We’ve had more and more egalitarianism.

 

Obviously, there’s more to the story than that because we had mass democracy in Australia or in other countries prior to the Second World War, and we still had White nationalism. Obviously, Hitler was voted into power and so on.

 

So there is the capacity for democracies to function better than the current one that we have. This spectre of the Second World War and the way in which academia and media institutions have been captured by our racial enemies who have then propagated an anti-racist ideology throughout our society. And that obviously can’t be negated.

 

But I think the masses are susceptible to that message because it plays upon these emotional triggers. And those of us who aren’t susceptible to it, maybe there’s, on a certain level, something slightly wrong with us. Like a lot of people pathologise the far-Right and say:

 

“Oh, the far-Right. You know, they’re psychotic! They’re narcissistic!”

 

They kind of portray us as like pathological in some way because we have maybe a certain amount of anti-social aggression. But that enables us probably to see clearly a lot of these political issues.

 

So, yeah, I think the kind of brutality of my mindset probably turns a lot of people off. But the brutality of my mindset or your mindset or whatever is the what is necessary to actually protect the functional society.

 

[27:03]

 

 

Blair Cottrell: Well, I think it’s important to cancel some of that receptivity. Australian people, American people, European people have to subversive hostile influence, by making certain things illegal or not tolerated on a government and social level.

 

For example, you’re coming over here selling transgenderism and setting up clinics for sex changes. That’s illegal! You’re going to jail! You can either leave the country or go to jail. Same is true with pornography or something like that. You’re coming over here with some new type of extreme porn that you’re trying to pedal to the Australian masses. Ban! Illegal! Go to jail!

 

There needs to be clear stops against efforts to subvert and undermine the social fabric of Australian culture, or what Australian culture once was. It has been subverted and undermined as a result of the people being taught to be receptive, or our entire country being receptive to outside influence that was hostile from the beginning.

 

And what sets us apart from ordinary people, as you say, isn’t that there’s something wrong with us. It’s just that we’re able to recognise social and psychological threats. Not every message, not every book, not every show is just completely passive and exists for the purposes of entertainment. They exist to influence, often in a hostile fashion, for very special, specific (((interested groups))), which often aren’t even Australian, as we know. Right?

 

So the only real thing that sets me apart, I think, is I’m able to recognise threats and hostile influence. I’m not going to be receptive to messages about transgenderism, or feminism or anything that’s, like, in the realm of atheism and nihilism. I understand that these things are peddled deliberately to attack spiritually, socially, psychologically, us as a people, our nation!

 

And it’s been this way since the beginning. That’s why I think hostile forces to Australia have laughed at our Democratic principles, understanding that it makes us receptive to hostile influence. If you’re stupid enough to allow everything, then you won’t really have a nation or civilisation eventually. Something, some cancer, is going to grow. Think of your country or nation like an organism, right? Like a human body. The body has an immune system and it’s intolerant of certain bacterial infections and viruses. It doesn’t allow these things, it’s not receptive to these things, it fights these things.

 

And we as a nation, we have to do the same thing. We have to have boundaries and rules where certain influence, certain external bacteria that’s going to do damage to our national organism is not allowed to come in the first place. And if it does, it’s fought and attacked until it’s destroyed! It’s simple stuff, man, really!

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, of course. I talked to you about this a little bit the other day when we had lunch. I think Jonathan Haidt’s moral foundations theory is quite interesting and pertinent to this discussion. So for some background, Jonathan Haidt is, I think he’s like a part jewish social psychologist, researcher. And his research is interesting because he is a liberal and he kind of set out to analyze, … So he’s a moral intuitionist. In other words, he believes that people don’t really reason their way to their moral judgements, but they have a set of moral intuitions that they reason from.

 

And so people have a certain kind of psychological instinctive predisposition to come to certain moral judgements, and then they just find the reasons that fit with those fundamental intuitions. And I agree that’s true. I think that’s how people operate. Which explains why ethical arguments are never done, are always just kind of people clashing over having different fundamental intuitions. They’re never really like technical arguments that people can reason towards some kind of agreement upon.

 

But anyway, what he ended up finding was that conservatives are actually morally balanced. And liberals, or Leftists, obviously they call Leftist liberals in America, are morally unbalanced, which is probably for him a counterintuitive judgement. That’s what makes the research interesting.

 

And basically he identified five core moral foundations. Three of them you could say are collectivist, and two of them you could say are individualist, although they might appear collectivist. But I disagree.

 

So the two that are individualist and these are the only two that Leftists generally care about are harm avoidance and equality. And I say these are individualist because equality and harm avoidance, they might seem like they are altruistic. Like:

 

“Oh, you want everyone to be equal, you want everyone to be included. You don’t want anyone to get hurt.”

 

But if you’re weak, or if you’re not capable of ascending the hierarchy to a prominent position within a hierarchical social model, which is the majority of people, then equality and harm avoidance, as universal principles, are in your personal self interest. And you can actually present your personal self interest like it’s altruistic through signaling towards those values. If you’re afraid of engaging in violence or competing in hierarchies, it’s the perfect ideology for you. And that’s why it’s so ubiquitous.

 

And that’s why we see Leftists or Leftism has a very large correlation with physical weakness, with a whole series of like low testosterone and a whole other series of negative traits. Conservatives on average are better looking, particularly the women. Right-wing women are much better looking than Left-wing women. That’s been like, scientifically proven through a series of studies, obviously, on average. And Leftism also correlates with a whole series of mental illnesses. Right-wingers, generally speaking, have way less clinical diagnoses of basically every kind of mental illness. So Left-wingers are kind of just mentally and physically less healthy.

 

But anyway, the point is that they have like a two stroke morality. They only care about those things. Where conservatives generally care about those things. But they’re balanced out with three other values, which he defined as sanctity, loyalty to the in-group, and respect for authority.

 

Sanctity basically being like respect for traditions and, just kind of the customs of the group and so on.

 

So you can see how sanctity, loyalty and authority, these things are all groupish traits that kind of hold together the cohesion of the group. And Leftist’s just forsake all of these things, which is why they have no regard for tradition, they have no regard for custom. They have no regard for in-group loyalty. They’re often, they’re basically traitors to the in-group.

 

[33:36]

 

 

Blair Cottrell: They’re powered by a hatred which really invigorates them. Hatred can be a really powerful motivator, and it actually doesn’t matter. Like the dominance of the Left in the institutions demonstrates that with enough leverage, a specific philosophical group, or a group pertaining or holding to one idea, in this case, you know, Leftist liberalism, it doesn’t actually matter how respectful or fundamentally correct that group is. They just need to hate!

 

And then they need to have the brutal us versus them dynamic, the black and white perspective, and they need to hold to it like a Christian’s holding to his church faith, or a Muslim is holding to their mosque faith. They need to believe that much in whatever it is that they’re parroting. And they’ll eventually rise to prominence and have a lot of influence in those institutions.

 

So I think it’s being demonstrated through Leftism that it’s like brutality and hatred that actually gets you power in politics. It’s not being fair and respectful.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, of course. But for Leftists, it’s always brutality in defense of equality and harm avoidance, the kind of Drew Pavlou:

 

“All people are equal. You want to kill millions of people!”

 

That’s basically Leftism in a nutshell. That’s basically what it is. That’s the two main moral intuitions. Anyone who disagrees with that is a threat to them. Because if you’re, as I said, physically weak and physically unhealthy and you lack, in certain areas, a society that is hierarchically structured and where violence actually can exist, where you don’t have a guarantee of peace, where you can run your mouth and say whatever you want is a threat. It’s something that really undermines a social position.

 

But I would say that someone who is far-Right, and I think there’s some evidence to support this as well, is someone who basically has those three values that conservatives also have, sanctity, loyalty and respect for authority, but cares less about, equality and harm avoidance.

 

And so therefore, someone who is far-Right is someone who has a purely groupish morality, someone who is willing to basically face a society that [can] face violence, face force and face hierarchy, be subjected to the test of violence and hierarchy, because someone who is far-Right knows that ultimately that is what’s necessary to strengthen the group and to maximize the strength of the group.

 

So being far-Right, it’s actually the most purely selfless and the most collectivist of all the moral intuitions or moral points of view. I would say, therefore, it demonstrates that we’re actually the noble element in all of this. Conservatives have a noble element, but it’s kind of balanced out. They’re kind of like centrists that have a balancing between us and Leftists, which makes sense. And Leftists are just purely kind of like spiteful individualists that are willing to basically destroy the cohesion of the group and destroy the strength of the group in order to maximize their own personal self interest and protections and advantages and privileges. So under like a false moral pretence.

 

So I would say, like in response to all of these issues, I think the primary reason, I guess, why we’re facing the problems that we’re facing is because our morality has been pathologised. You know, we are seen as kind of scary. We’re seen as brutal because we have no regard for equality or harm avoidance. And if you’re a kind of a weak person, you’re afraid, or you just kind of, just generally don’t have the minerals, you’re afraid of the kind of brutality perhaps, of us enacting our moral vision. You’re afraid of the tough love!

 

And so my view, it’s just the nothing is going to really improve until people of our persuasion can build up a power base where we can seem like a necessary corrective, where society gets so bad and we can rise and become strong enough, where people say:

 

“Well, we have to turn to the far-Right. We have to turn to the bad boys to restore order because look at what a mess everything has descended into.”

 

So we need to become credible enough to be able to provide an alternative.

 

But at the same time, everything has to., … It’s not just that things will get worse and then people will become Nazis or something. I think Nazis have to become strong in addition to everything getting worse. And that’s when the Whiteman will eventually turn to us as a solution.

 

Like, if you look at 1930s Germany, you had the crisis of the Great Depression and all the problems with the Weimar Republic, but you also had a massive movement that showed strength and vitality and power that people could then turn to secure themselves.

 

So I think that’s ultimately the problem. It’s not just we’ve got the social conditions degrading that are necessary for the far-Right to rise, but the far-Right is not able to basically power through into a position of a genuine alternative. And it’s mostly because so much of the movement is preoccupied with, rather than just simply showing strength, building strength and exhibiting strength, they’re obsessed with trying to get our mentality to be translated into the moral values of conservatives or the moral values of Leftists even, and warp the language and warp the presentation and have the right kind of clean optics that makes our ideas more agreeable.

 

And I don’t think that can ever work, because ultimately what that is a form of acquiescence to the sensibilities of our opponents. I think the only way in which we can actually provide a credible challenge to the system is by tripling down upon our own morality, our own perspective, and just building up strength within our own perspective to the point where we seem like a powerful enough horse that could actually be backed, because we can credibly actually challenge for power.

 

So I think strength is all that really matters in politics.

 

You said that about Joe Biden the other day, that there’s one rule in politics, “don’t appear weak”. He broke that rule. That’s why he’s out. I think that was so true. I think ultimately, politics really comes down to, it’s ultimately a gang fight, at the end of the day.

 

[40:00]

 

 

Blair Cottrell: Because people vote like a woman choosing a mate, a woman choosing a leader. People are feminine, and so they’re responsive to strength. And I don’t necessarily mean, you know, brutality or violence when I say strength. I just mean you know, stoicism, being above pettiness, holding yourself with confidence, you know, et cetera, et cetera. All of these things are very important. Putin’s very good at understanding this. That’s why he’s been in power so long in Russia.

 

You spoke of harm avoidance, and I realised there’s a quality that probably comes from our ethnicity or some sort of spiritual realm, if you’re into that kind of stuff. And it’s the romanticisation, I suppose you could call it, of harm avoidance. Like, I romanticize lack of harm avoidance is what I’m trying to say, meaning, like, enduring harm for the sake of something greater. It’s kind of the bread and butter of human romance for me.

 

Joel Davis: That’s bravery.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. I wonder if that’s being used against us, wonder if our enemies understand that we’re willing to put ourselves in harm’s way, a minority of us anyway, and that might be understood and used against us somehow. I haven’t thought enough about it. But I do know that I romanticize having no harm avoidance. Well, I don’t have no harm avoidance. I have some harm avoidance. Obviously, I want to stay alive. But my past history in politics and activism shows that I’m willing to endure harm for the sake of what I believe, years of it.

 

And like I said, that’s a romantic thing for me. I think that’s something that every man should have. I don’t really understand men who don’t have that compulsion, but how that could be used against us could be interesting to explore in the future.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. I was listening to a audiobook by Thomas Carlisle, who was a really famous. I don’t know whether you would call him a pure historian, but he’s kind of like a philosopher of history. He’s English, from the 19th century, and he was a romanticist. And in the first part, because he kind of has a heroic conception of history, history understood through the narrative of great men. Great men move history, according to Carlisle.

 

So it’s like the complete opposite of Marxism. You know, Marxism is a theory of history where classes and structural forces move history. And what individuals do doesn’t really matter because everything is subject to the dialectic of material relations between economic classes or whatever. And Carlyle is the complete antithesis. Carlyle is like:

 

“No! History is moved by great individuals, noble, heroic individuals, challenging epochs, challenging paradigms, and dragging civilisations, nations and civilisations into new realities.”

 

Anyway, Carlyle begins by talking about Germanic Paganism. And it’s quite an interesting discussion. And in his discussion of what is at the core, it’s the core value, ultimately, of Germanic or Norse Paganism or traditional Anglo Saxon Paganism. He just talks about how the ultimate virtue is bravery. You know, like the you go to Valhalla because you are a brave man. Odin sends his valkyries to collect brave souls after death, dying on battlefield, dying with valour, dying with honour. So that really is something that is at the core of our people’s ethos in some kind of essential way, that romanticism of bravery as the highest virtue that you just mentioned.

 

So I definitely agree. I agree with that in terms of how that’s weaponised against us, as you said. Yeah, that could be an interesting discussion. I’d have to think about that some more. Do you want to say something in response to that, or do you want to move on to another story?

 

Blair Cottrell: I think what’s on my mind now is the revelation made by Elon Musk in a Jordan Peterson interview that his eldest son in 2019, when his son Xavier was around about 18 years old, I think, became officially transgender, changed their name to Vivian. And Musk’s former wife. I’m assuming it’s his former wife, and the mother of Xavier conned Elon into signing a document which basically gave his permission for his son to start taking puberty blockers. I don’t know why permission was needed at 18. Maybe you can’t do it until 21 in America or wherever it is they are. But I thought that was a huge revelation for him to make publicly, and he’s kept that quiet since 2019. That’s, like, five years ago now.

 

And you can see how that’s probably influenced his activity in the past five years because he was really upset about it. His exact words were, and I found this really profound, that “my son is dead”. He said his son is dead. And what he means is Xavier, the boy he helped to raise, no longer exists. In the place of Xavier, there is this drug addicted, deluded Vivian.

 

And the image that came into my mind, you know how in that horror universe, Alien, where there’s those, like, facehuggers and they lay an egg inside you, I saw the transgender influence of being the facehugger that latched itself onto the face of this boy, Elon’s son, and laid this egg of twisted ideology and perspective inside of him. And then bursting forth from his carcass was Vivian! This new transgender character, you know, made possible through drugs.

 

But, it’s not really transgenderism, is it? Because I don’t actually believe that transgender is a thing. I’ve said it before. I think that as transvestites, I think that it’s drug addicted transvestites. Meaning they’re taking drugs that confuse them, change their hormones around a little bit, but not enough to actually biologically change them, because that’s not possible. And they dress up like the other sex.

 

[46:06]

 

So we’re not talking about transgenderism. There is no transgenderism. There’s just drug addicted transvestites. That’s all they are. And now that’s what Elon Musk’s son is. And his exact words, as I said, were:

 

“My son is dead! Killed by the woke mine virus!”

 

And he said to Peterson in this interview:

 

“Since then, I vowed to destroy the woke mine virus!”

 

And that’s pretty profound stuff. I actually did a little bit of research on who Elon Musk is, where he comes from, and a little bit learnt a little bit about his personality after that.

 

And I think he’s a guy who’s a lot more sensitive than most people who become very powerful in the realm of finance and business. He doesn’t seem to be like everyone else who gets, … I’m not blowing smoke up his arse or anything like that.

 

I mean, the guy’s really vehemently pro-Israel, and we’ll get into that a little bit, too, so we’ll discuss how that ties into the changing political landscape. But I just thought it was really profound that he came out with this. He revealed this about his personal family, his life. And the way he explained it, I think, was perfect. That when a child, or a young person becomes, quote, unquote, “transgender”, goes down that trajectory of drug abuse, hormone blockers, which Elon Musk describes as simply “sterilisation drugs”. And he said it wasn’t explained to him that that’s what they were when he signed the document allowing his son to take these drugs at the request of his former wife, too. Sorry. I know I’m pivoting from the point I was just closing with there, but I want to add this in, because this has been my perspective.

 

Isn’t it interesting that it’s always the fucking women pushing for children to be taking puberty blockers and transgender drugs to try to make them into another sex! Basically killing off their child and having this thing be born from its dead carcass that doesn’t understand what it is, and then, you know, is basically just addicted to drugs and its own delusions. It’s weird because women are supposed to be the caregivers, so why are women doing this to their children? I don’t know.

 

I guess we can get into that a little bit, too, and try to understand the psychology of these White women, who are mutilating their children for some fucking reason! I mean, is it all just for likes and attention on Instagram or Facebook? Is it all just to feel like they’re good people because they’re giving their child what they think they what the child thinks it wants, but really it’s not what the child wants. It’s just a result of how the child’s been influenced by decadent culture? I don’t know. What are your thoughts, Mr Davis?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, well, I mean, you open up a lot of interesting topics with that. I mean, first of all, I would say that Elon’s remarks I found to be a little bit befuddling because I also saw him say on Twitter about this, that:

 

“Oh, well, my son was just a homosexual.”

 

And then these doctors convinced him that to this transgender nonsense!

 

And so if your son is a homosexual, well, then he’s basically dead, also.

 

I mean, the genetic line is done at that point,. So I’m not saying that:

 

“Well, what’s the difference?”

 

Obviously, transgenderism is even worse! But I know at that point, like, when you have a homosexual son, it’s basically over anyway.

 

So the fact that he’s kind of fine with that, but not fine with transgenderism, I didn’t think actually made any sense:

 

“Oh, he’s been sterilised!”

 

It’s like, yeah, but he was going to have sodomy instead of sex with a woman anyway, so he’s already sterilised by his own homosexuality. So I thought that was a little incoherent, but yeah.

 

Second of all, you know, Elon Musk you mentioned his celebration of Israel, his sycophantic love of Israel that has come about over the last year in a very explicit way, all of a sudden. He seemed to be like last year he seemed to almost be leaning in our direction and criticising the jews in a kind of in a soft core way. And it was quite interesting. And then he snapped back into a kind of very rigid pro-jewish stance after that.

 

Netanyahu just travelled to Washington, DC to give a speech, you know, early this morning, Australian time, and Elon Musk personally went to the Congress to go and see the speech.

 

And I remember when he did get in trouble, originally from the jews for basically criticising them. And in a certain way on Twitter. He went and he went to Auschwitz, and he was on a stage with Ben Shapiro and just did all of these, you know, really good goy, shabbos goy kind of signaling activities to re ingratiate himself with the jews. And he was on the stage sitting next to Ben Shapiro, and Elon Musk said something to the effect of:

 

“I’m not a jew, but I’m jew-ish.”

 

Implying that he must have some jewish ancestry or something. I know that one of the women that he has had children with has jewish ancestry, at least, in addition to that.

 

So, anyway, the point is, if you’re really so upset about transgenderism, well, why don’t you do a little bit of a trace and see where the hell did this transgenderism come from? And it’s one of those every single time moments. You trace it right back to jews! Whether we want to go back to the Weimar Republic and the jewish doctors that invented it, quote, unquote, “doctors, sexologists”, quote, unquote, “that invented it”, the pervert freaks that invented it.

 

But also in its modern or more contemporary iteration, it has been pushed in the United States by, particularly the Pritzker family, which are one of the billionaire jewish families, really influential in American politics, particularly in the Democrat party. They’ve been one of the biggest backers of transgenderism, as have many other jewish organisations and interests. So, it’s basically the “woke mind virus”, so to speak, is a “jewish mind virus”.

 

[52:16]

 

 

Blair Cottrell: I think the Nazis in Germany, as they were coming to power, burned down the world’s first transgender clinic. I saw a story on that years ago. I can’t remember all the details, but I thought that was significant.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. When they were doing the book burnings, they were basically burning books. They were probably burning some communist books, but they were burning a lot of this kind of gender ideology stuff that was being spread in the Weimar Rebublic.

 

Blair Cottrell: There was actually a clinic, though. It was like the first ever clinic for actually trying to change men into women or vice versa. And that entire building was burned down by the Nazis back in the day.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah.

 

And anyway, so I thought that was interesting, that he apparently is going to war against the work mind virus, but he’s fine with homosexuality and he’s fine with jews. It’s like this doesn’t really seem that coherent.

 

But anyway, those are a few of my initial thoughts. In addition, when you mentioned that his ex-wife, … He has many ex-wives and women that he’s had children with, and it just really exposes the stupidity of that breeding strategy, where instead of picking one quality woman that has the Right psychological constitution, he’s got this philosophy of, let’s just have as many kids as possible. I’m a billionaire, so I can afford to just, basically pay infinite child support. And so he’s knocked up a whole bunch of women.

 

But you know, this woman is transing his kid. I remember Grimes, one of the other women that he’s had children with, also made pro-transgender comments and so on, refusing, I think, when they had a kid, she was saying something how she refused to basically give it a gender, gender pronouns or something when it was a baby, and they had like, a kind of public spat over it on Twitter back in the day. I remember seeing something like that years ago.

 

So he keeps picking these really horrible women that are obviously themselves mentally unwell, which probably indicates, … I’ve been reading this book by Edward Dutton recently that was just released by Imperium Press called Woke Eugenics, where Edward Dutton advances this thesis that because in industrial society, infant mortality has fallen from almost 50% to 1%. Previously, before the industrial revolution, babies that had high mutational load, because even if you have two genetically healthy parents, if they have enough kids, eventually one will be a mutant. Because that’s just kind of how it works. The combination is just keep iterating. Eventually you get, like a mutant baby. Well, in pre-industrial Europe, that baby would probably wouldn’t survive the first year or two of its life, because it would just mutate. It would just get sick and die.

 

But with modern Medicine, we can keep those babies alive and then enable them to breathe and so on and so genetic mutations have spread rapidly through the White population. And then Dutton then points out a whole bunch of research that links all these different correlates of Left-wing political belief with genetic mutation, particularly coming to things like mental illness.

 

And then he posits that the wokeness, in a certain sense, is the genetic trash taking itself out, that it’s this kind of evolutionary mechanism whereby the mutant Leftists develop a series of memes that prevent them from passing on their genes to further generations. They take themselves back out of the gene pool so that only the more healthy, conservative and Right-wing people breed. And all these mutant bloodlines just kind of eviscerate themselves to kind of restrengthen the race.

 

And it’s an interesting idea, and that’s probably an example. We say, what are these insane women doing with the abortion and transing the kids and I and raising their kids to not have a gender identity and so on? What is this all about? Encouraging their daughters to not have children young and go and get a career? And what are all these behaviours about or delaying childbirth until very late?

 

Ultimately, what all these behaviours sum total to is basically not passing on their genes, more or less. There’s a decent amount of heritability in traits that predispose you to Left-wing political belief. So kind of like wokeness is like the trash taking itself out, basically. It’s just like all the genetic trash of the White race, like throwing itself into an oblivion.

 

And so that’s why you have to be very careful which woman you select.

 

Because if you have children with a woman that is psychologically Leftist or really psychologically unwell. And I know people could say all women are crazy, but no, there’s a difference between a normal kind of feminine crazy, which is just feminine hormones and so on, and like abortions, transing the kids crazy! And just complete lack of maternal instinct. Maternal instinct is supposed to be life affirming and life giving. It’s supposed to be fundamentally about nurturing the children and putting them in a position where they can then breed successfully and so on down the generation. It’s supposed to be enriching and protecting the bloodline so that it continues.

 

But this you know, this kind of Left-wing femininity is the complete opposite. It’s like this kind of self destructive tendency. If you breed with that doesn’t matter if you have eight kids and you’ve got all this money, your bloodlines are still on a trajectory towards oblivion, whether it be through all these different methods, sexual perversion or just nihilistic delaying of breeding to the point where you run past the window, you run out the clock, or outbreeding with other races or whatever.

 

And so then what’s the point? It’s much better to just pick one actually mentally healthy woman and make it work with her and actually have some kids that will end up just being normal and having normal families themselves and so on. So that there’s still, in his case, little Musks running around in a thousand years. Otherwise, what was this all for?

 

So I think that really shows the kind of perversity of his mindset.

 

[58:47]

Blair Cottrell: What about the mindset of the women who do this to their children? Any thoughts on that?

 

Joel Davis: Well, I mean, obviously they’re just completely mentally unwell, so.

 

Blair Cottrell: There’s a must have some sort of motivation. They still must be compelled by something other than just insanity or mental illness. Because these women started off as relatively normal people. Like, they were born, they were little girls, and they grew up just like anybody else. Then they had their own children, and then they’re giving their children sterilisation drugs and mutilating them to become different gender. Why are they doing that? Why is it always the women? It’s never the men doing this to their children. The men are always opposed to it.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, well, I guess the idea is that there’s this idea that within the feminine nature, there isn’t just a life instinct, but there’s also a death instinct. You know, if we go back to, like, Mesopotamian mythology, the female deities, they were depicted as, like, fire goddesses that not just gave life, but also death. And Mother Nature kind of had this kind of, it’s a life giving quality, but also a destructive quality. It takes the trash out. And the gene pool has become so perverted by modernity, there’s so many mutant freaks out there, that there’s probably this kind of death instinct within the feminine that is engaging in this kind of arc of self destruction, cleaning out all of the defective bloodlines. And so that’s kind of, I guess, one way of explaining why we’re seeing this.

 

There was this one experiment that I found out about recently, and I’m surprised I didn’t know about it sooner, where these scientists got all these rats, and they created a rat enclosure that basically provided them with all the necessities of life so that they had basically everything that they needed.

 

Blair Cottrell: Like the rodent utopia experiment. Is that what you’re referring to?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, And then over time the rodents start developing all these mental illnesses, and they become homosexual, they become depressed, and then a whole series of killer rodents rise up and just murder all the other ones. And that’s kind of, I think maybe what’s happening in modernity, that modernity is too good, that nature couldn’t do its thing of basically selecting out all the bad blood.

 

And so we’ve had so much dysgenic breeding, and all the bad blood has been kept alive by modern science and egalitarian social mores, that now the death instinct, that’s what all this, you know, feminism and gay rights and this kind of scorn, pathological femininity, what all of these forces are like, Kamala Harris is an example of this. She’s like a mixed race woman in her sixties with no children. So she’s obviously got this kind of mutant defect.

 

And then, you know, she’s, like, now going to be the poster woman of basically Leftism in the presidential run. And she has this kind of sassy girl, boss energy. But she’s a complete idiot.

 

You know, that is the that is the kind of, as I said, the kind of trash taking itself out where there’s so much defective blood out there that it has this internal drive, maybe programmed into it by Mother Nature to just destroy itself because it’s not supposed to exist.

 

Blair Cottrell: Well, interestingly, I remember that rodent utopia experiment, well. I think it was mice in some of the experiments, rather than rats. And because they had unlimited food, the rodents that started out in the experiment, that just ate a lot. They had a lot of children. These were kind of like the baby boomer generation. They got really fat, lots of kids.

 

And as their kids grew up, though, the kids resented their parents. And the rats, the main rats, the first ones, the ones beginning in the experiment, the ones that got fat, they were out during the day, but their children would actually stay in the enclosures that they had for them all day and would only come out at night. And they were very anti-social, very lethargic. And they started to turn gay. They started turning gay and weird and really violent as well. And they eventually just all killed each other. That’s how the experiment ended every time.

 

And the determination or the conclusion for the experiment, they did it multiple times to see if they got the same result, and they did. The conclusion was, without natural selection and the struggle for daily bread, a species can’t survive. It just destroys itself.

 

[1:03:39]

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, exactly!

 

And you can see that maybe that’s the White race. We created a civilisation that was too good for our own good. So then one idea developed, which was eugenics and National Socialism and building an entire society around struggle. And artificially taking over the natural selective process in order to simulate nature in order to keep the blood healthy.

 

And then another idea arose, which is quadrupling down upon egalitarianism, which is this Leftist idea. And obviously, the Leftist idea won because of how World War Two went. And what is that idea? Well, that idea is kind of like a dark eugenics. It ultimately will produce the same outcome, because by inviting in all of these foreign races and proliferating all of these degenerate ideologies, ultimately what they are doing is they’re creating a selection event. They’re creating conditions under which the majority of the White race now won’t survive.

 

So now it’s like, what elements of the White race can survive this crisis that we’ve (((self))) constructed? It’s only going to be those that are able to basically adapt to it. Which means how are you able to create bloodlines that are going to survive institutionalised, psycho-cultural memetic mass suicide?

 

And so those of us that can adapt will be the only White people left and then the blood will be re-purified and we’ll then go on to create probably another civilisation and probably it will be too good and maybe the same process will happen again. Maybe that’s just how nature works.

 

Blair Cottrell: Maybe, hopefully we can break the cycle and achieve something greater in one of our civilisational, … God, how would you describe it? Periods?

 

But it’s all very interesting. And exploring human psychology is something that you can do for a long time. You can really go down a rabbit hole with it.

 

But I think unfortunately, people seem to be more bad than they are good, which is why they’re more easily led by their bad instincts, and which is why violence, terror, fear usually produce the best results in governing them. I think people are capable of being better, but I think we have taken the easy route which is appealing to people’s lower instincts, because that’s going to result in faster success and faster profits.

 

And the problem with this is we’re breeding a dumber race! We’re dumbing people down, we’re making people worse than they need to be in order to profit from them and in order to make them easier to control. And that’s the trajectory that we’re on a civilisational level. And there’s only one place that goes, and it’s not to some sort of higher culture or greater civilisational achievement or even greater technology. I even think we’re starting to see technology plateau, reach the limits. Like you get a new phone these days and it’s basically the same phone from six years ago, just maybe with a slightly better battery. But that’s because it’s just new and it hasn’t been used yet. It’s like technology is kind of almost capped now. Where technology is seeming to develop is with AI, but where that’s going to go is anyone’s guess.

 

But I think society is going in the opposite trajectory, compared with where it should be going. And what we believe is essentially antithetical to the current system because we believe in higher breeding, we believe in actually having children who are genetically better than us, smarter than us, stronger than us, and that would send society in the opposite direction. I suppose in order to implement a culture that was beneficial to what we understand to be humanity, we would have to stop appealing to people’s lower instincts. For the time being to actually get power. I think we still need to appeal to the lower instincts of people because that’s the only way to actually get people’s attention and to get people to trust and have faith in you, as the Churches understand better than anyone.

 

But I think long term we would have to gradually try to stop doing that. There would have to be a long multi-generational project where we actually would have to ban certain advertisers and expressions of certain political persuasions that were appealing to the lower instincts of people because the results of that we can see for ourselves.

 

I don’t know if you guys have noticed this, but when you go out in public these days, people have really bad spatial awareness now. I mean, 20 years ago, 25 years ago, people would be able to feel when you were close to them.

 

And I’ve said this a few times on stream because it’s really significant. It’s a significant change that I’ve noticed in people now where there’s so little consideration for what’s going on around them or for people walking in their path, people being close to them.

 

Especially true with Zoomers. You know, Zoomers have got their good qualities. But when I’m in the gym, man, I’m surrounded by these broccoli haired fucking kids that are standing, like right next to me. Like, right fucking! Their shoulders are almost touching mine. And I’m a guy that’s got a pretty intense aura, I think, like, you can feel when I’m there. I’m not a small person, not physically nor spiritually. Right? But they just don’t seem to pick up on my energy. They don’t seem to understand that them standing that close to me, working out right near me like that is fucking annoying, man! Like, it’s not just annoying, it’s just inappropriate and weird as well.

 

But I think there’s some sort of damage that’s being done. The intuitive senses of the Zoomers, probably as a result of early exposure to too great a technology. I spoke about this with you last time we talked as well. I think one of the benefits of being born in my generation is we became very adaptable. We had to be adaptable because we saw technology change very quickly. We experienced literally landline phones on the wall. That’s all we had.

 

And then the first mobile phones were coming in when I was like ten or eleven, but we didn’t get them yet because they were too expensive. And then by the time we were like 14, we had Nokias or something. Then the Internet gets introduced and we’re all on, like, file sharing programs like Kazar and Limewire, which aren’t around anymore. Then we get the first ever social media. Like, with there’s probably stuff that predated MySpace, but then there was MySpace, and everyone moved over to Facebook when I was about 18. And then suddenly there was iPhones and smartphone technology.

 

And basically we had to leave behind old stuff in the old ways, and we had to adapt to the new very quickly. This technology was introduced and developed, evolved very quickly, and so we had to develop very quickly along with it. But we were used to sort of a different range of experiences.

 

Like, I grew up in a sort of a pre-technological era, you might argue, where I was riding bikes and skating with the kids on the street, and we didn’t have phones, we didn’t have Internet. The only people I knew at that time in my life when I was a kid were the people in my immediate community, right? And I wasn’t connected with the rest of the world. I didn’t understand what was going on in the world, and I didn’t really need to or want to. And that feels like you remember times like that with nostalgia because it feels like a simpler time.

 

Probably because you weren’t so connected and plugged into everything everyone else was doing all the time, and you weren’t so worried about the online presentation that you were making and staying relevant and all that sort of stuff. Like everything that people are worried about now. People probably have access to too much information now, which is why on the back of the iPhones, there’s a picture of an Apple with a bite taken out of it, right? Like the forbidden fruit of knowledge. Maybe there’s a bit of a conspiracy around that. I don’t know if I believe it, but it’s interesting.

 

But the point is the Zoomers, they just had smartphones and iPads when they were like five years old. They didn’t understand any sort of life before that where there was any delayed dopamine response, where they actually had to wait for something to come out or they had to wait for something to load, or they had to put some sort of time in to achieve something. They became accustomed to instant gratification, instant reward, everything loading instantly, everything being right before them right away, getting what they want right away. Their parents all got divorced, too.

 

[1:11:44]

 

So what happens? The dad’s trying to win the affections of the child, as is the mother. They’re competing against each other, and they’re just buying the kid everything. The kid gets whatever they want from their dad, whatever they want from their mom, more than they could possibly ever want. And as a result, it contributes to that down regulation of the dopamine response.

 

And I think Zoomers are fucking cooked! I think they’re too cooked to have the intuitive sense to understand that they’re standing too close to you. There’s something that’s happened to them that’s shrunk down their auras. It’s like they’re small spiritually. Their presence is small, contained in some weird way. And it could, I think, have something to do with the introduction or them being introduced to technology too early in life. That was giving them too fast response of dopamine, as I just explained.

 

But, yeah, there’s an interesting difference in the generations, and I think it’s influenced largely by how technology is developed.

 

But am still glad, as I said, that I grew up in the time I grew up in, because I got to experience what life was like before all this shit existed. And I still remember it fondly. Like, I would prefer. I would still prefer to live in a world where there was no Internet, straight up. Everything would just be much smaller and simpler. Everyone’s world would be much smaller and simpler. Everyone would be more immediately community focused and less tied in with international nonsense that didn’t actually mean anything to them in any meaningful way, in any significant way, and is what I’m trying to say. So I think everything changed with the Internet.

 

Someone asked recently, they’re like:

 

“What do you think caused all the political extremism and all the turmoil across the world and shit?”

 

I said to them:

 

“I think there was always radicals and extremism and turmoil, but I think everyone just being able to see it and everyone being able to contribute to it, even in some small way, with an opinion, and everyone thinking their opinion fucking means something. It doesn’t.”

 

If you’re watching this, your opinion means fuck! All my opinion means fuck all. No one’s that important. No one’s that special. Everyone thinks they are. And that’s one of the ways they manipulate you, actually.

 

But, yeah, I’m just kind of rambling at this point. [chuckling] But the fundamental purpose, or the reason I was bringing this point up is I’m frustrated by the lack of consideration and energy observance or energy awareness of the average person out there. And I’ve, as I’ve probably just demonstrated, I’ve thought to some length about what’s causing people to be this way. And I do think it comes down to people just being cooked on a level of their meaning. Their dopamine response rate is just completely fucking fried out from too much instant gratification through technologies.

 

But anyway, I digress.

 

[1:14:39]

 

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I would say that I’m thankful that the Internet exists because the people in my immediate vicinity would have been really boring. And through the Internet, I’ve been able to have a far more interesting social experience because you can put out a unique signal and then basically transmit it across the entire world and then draw people in from a much larger pool to find people who vibe with you. So I’m actually, …

 

Blair Cottrell: You could have just made pamphlets.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I don’t know. I’m a little bit of like an international citizen, I guess. I like being a participant in the entire world rather than just the kind of what’s [chuckling] happening in Australia, which could be, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Sort of like the people who are at home here, there and everywhere. Yeah.

 

Joel Davis: I mean, international, Anglo. That’s the thing we have a global empire. I have an imperial mindset. I don’t have a narrow Australian parochialism. The Anglo Saxon is a global ethnic group. I like being plugged into all of our affairs around the world.

 

And actually, Australia always, like, has been part of an empire and will necessarily need to be. We were talking about this before, like, if we had a situation in which the United States lost the war with China and Australia became basically subsumed under Chinese influence, obviously the current situation, we’re being replaced, but maybe it could be reversed. Maybe if Whites could get back control of the West, it could be reversed. But if we basically disconnected from the West because the imperial power projection of North America and Europe is basically kicked out of our region, then it’s over for White Australia. Like, now we’re basically stuck in a Chinese run region. And I just don’t think we would have the capacity to defend White Australia under those conditions without any assistance.

 

And that was basically what Australian foreign policy has been built around from the very beginning. That’s why we fought for the British Empire. That’s why we basically signed up to the American led international order as soon as the British Empire collapsed. Because our founders understood this Australia was an outpost of the White race or the British race on the other side of the planet.

 

So to me Australian politics is inextricable from the global situation of the European race. And so also, I think the same is true for culture. So, yeah, I don’t, therefore, I don’t have a super narrow minded parochialism.

 

I mean, there is a certain amount of childhood nostalgia that I guess you can tap into that has a certain value. But and, yes the Internet kind of makes everything bad, worse, obviously. Like, you wouldn’t probably have transgenderism if it wasn’t for the Internet on, like, a mass scale. Like, it accelerates everything, but it also can accelerate things in our direction as well. Like, we wouldn’t be able to grow our movement if the Internet didn’t exist. Like, we have no capacity to build our own television networks and national newspapers and things like that.

 

We never would have been able to compete with the jewish media or the establishment without the Internet. And you could say the Internet is also controlled, and so we can’t really compete on a level playing field. But at least we have a fighting chance on the Internet, where we had absolutely no chance under the previous paradigm, which is why from the 1960s to the development of the Internet, we were just basically constantly taking L’s. And only since the Internet became ubiquitous has there been a little bit of a counter revolution, has there been a little bit of a punchback from the Right. And the far-Right has kind of reconstituted itself and managed to get our talking points and our ideology out there again.

 

So I think the Internet makes everything bad, worse, but it also makes a lot of good things now possible that previously wouldn’t have been possible.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, there’s pros and cons. I just still think, well, look, people are much. People are actually easier to control before the Internet launched for special interest groups with influence and power and the wealth necessary to maintain that power.

 

What I mean is, they could have everyone in the West thinking the same thing, just with a few TV channels, because no one had alternative news sources. Like, everyone just watched the same channels, and so everyone thought the same thing. Problem now, especially with the youth, is they don’t watch TV. The youth are on social media applications, but also trolling the Internet and finding information from, how should I say, unfiltered sources.

 

And as a result, people have kind of split up. Like, remember how everyone used to like the same songs, basically, like, everyone had, … And I’m talking about normal people, so don’t personalise this. But normal people, you would only hear new songs on the radio, and there was a few genres, and everyone had a favourite band or genre that was probably something from the radio, because that’s the only place where people got music from.

 

Now, the different genres of music and styles of music and artists there’s thousands of them! And everyone likes weird stuff now that I’ve never even heard of and that’s because I think the Internet obviously has made this possible.

 

But I think the thing that I deal with on a daily basis, especially with younger people, is I see how social media and the Internet has negatively affected real life social interactions. Have you been through, like, a drive through lately, like, for KFC or something? You’ll say:

 

“Hey, I’ll get a large Zinger Stacker Burger meal with water for the drink, please.”

 

And then the response will be:

 

“Okay, what size was that?”

 

And I’ll say:

 

“Large.”

 

And they say:

 

“Okay, and what drink would you like?”

 

And I’m thinking, I already said all this, but they didn’t listen. They were only able to listen to one aspect of my request at a time. “Zinger Stacker Burger” was all they heard, even though I said everything that I wanted. And that’s a new phenomenon that never used to happen 20, 25 years ago. And when you speak to young people, it’s like they don’t know how to use basic manners.

 

But now it just seemed like I’m ranting about young people! Like, maybe I’m getting old?

 

Joel Davis: Boomer coded rant! That’s fine.

 

Blair Cottrell: Am I the boomer now?

 

Joel Davis: [words unclear] They’re fucking retards!

 

Blair Cottrell: One more thing while I’m on the train, actually, while I’m on the rant train about young people, I noticed something else I don’t like about young people.

 

But look, it’s not really something I don’t like. It’s just an objective observation. Despite some of these people actually knowing my personal history. Like, I was into street fights, and I was selling drugs, and then I went to jail. And then I was a popular political spokesperson on live TV panels and stuff. And then I got censored hard, shut down from Facebook, and three years through court for hate speech. And now here I am on this stream with Joel every week.

 

You would think they would ask me questions like they’re interested in politics, some of them. You would think they would ask me some questions, but they don’t. They just talk about themselves and their own ideas. And they just tell me how to think about certain philosophies and how smart they are. And how they came to think the way they do it. I’m just like:

 

“Huh, huh. Tell me more. And when did that happen? How long did that take? Yeah, tell me more.”

 

But inside I’m thinking:

 

“You fucking retards!”

 

You’re standing here before someone who has more life experience than average, I would say. And I used to ask people questions all the time when I was young, especially in the gym, the bigger guys and stuff. But all I did was ask questions because I wanted to learn. But I noticed young people struggle to do that. Now all they want to do is fucking talk about themselves!

 

And I suppose it ties back into that fried out dopamine response rate. They’re probably just geared towards the sort of social interaction and behaviour that’s going to give them the highest reward. And asking questions and actually listening to responses and waiting while they listen, that kind of thing. Like, that’s not really going to give you as much as a reward, like, chemical reward response in the brain as talking about yourself is. And I suppose that’s why they do so much talking about themselves, maybe.

 

But like I said, am I the am I the old one now? Am I just saying:

 

“Oh, back in my day!”

 

I mean, I’m only 35 this year. I’m not that old. But I suppose that’s approaching middle age, or maybe it is middle age. It’s definitely middle aged for me. I won’t be living past 70, not with the choices I’ve made. God won’t allow it. So I’m probably about halfway through my life.

 

Don’t take offence if you’re a young person. I still appreciate that. Fire a young spirit. I’ve said this. You don’t lose your youthful vigor. You say vig-or, don’t you, Joel? Not vi-gor. You say vig-or?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah.

 

Blair Cottrell: You don’t lose your vigorousness. I mean, problem with getting older is, you see people lose their passion. They become burned out. They just get tired and lazy. And they get, I suppose, more susceptible to that harm reduction that we spoke about earlier. They’re worried about losing the little things they have, and they think that’s wisdom and growing up, but it’s not really. It’s just cowardice and laziness!

 

And what I love about the youth is they’re willing to take risks still. They still have that energy, that bravery, as Joel put it earlier, which in a lot of people can die out as they get older. As they get older, their bravery can die. And I’ve taken certain steps to make sure that my youthful boldness doesn’t die out as I age. I think it’s important to do that.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. I agree with that. But should we get to talk about any other stories?

 

Blair Cottrell: I don’t know. We had a really big week. I missed the stream most of it. I got the end of it last week, but it was a huge news week last week.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah.

 

So this is another Noticer article:

 

“Young nationalists marched through Vienna demanding mass deportations with banner reading, ‘The Kids Want Re-migration’.”

 

This is Martin Selner’s boys over in Austria, the Identitarians, they were chanting:

 

“Fortress Europe! Re-migration! Close the borders!”

 

And they look pretty good. They look healthy young people. They look normal and yeah, I saw some videos of it going around. I feel like the Austrians really set a good standard for activism, and they’re very influential in Austrian politics. Austrian politics is a lot more Right-wing. The attitudes of the people are a lot more anti-immigration, on average, than most of the European countries and here.

 

Blair Cottrell: Did Austria, …

 

Joel Davis: Something to, like, admire or look up to this is what’s possible. Nationalist movement can develop and grow. And Martin Selner has been around for over a decade. A lot of work has gone into refining and building their street movement over there, but it seems like it’s going strong.

 

Blair Cottrell: So did Austria ever experience communism on a government level?

 

Joel Davis: No.

 

Blair Cottrell: Okay. But they were pretty close to it, I suppose.

 

[1:26:38]

 

 

Joel Davis: Yes, they were right on the border. I think part of what has made Austria resilient is Austria never joined NATO. They kind of stayed neutral between the two sides in the Cold War somewhat. And Austria, of course, they still have the kind of anti-Nazi programming, but they didn’t get completely reprogrammed to the extent that the Germans did. And Austrians are basically Germans. They speak German, they’re part of the Germanosphere. So it’s maybe an example of where the Germans would be if they had a little bit less of the de-Nazification. And Austria used to be part of the Austro-Hungarian empire. Obviously, Hungary fell to communism, but Hungary is very Right-wing, and obviously, and they’re very resistant to immigration, and so is the Czech Republic in that area. That central European area is quite resilient against mass migration and quite nationalistic.

 

So, yeah, they’re definitely case studies worth looking at. How come they’re resistant? You could say partly it’s because of the Cold War conditions. And so on, but, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Oh, hey, we’re talking about. Sorry, I just asked a stupid question. We’re talking about Austria, not Hungary. For some reason I had Hungary in my head. That’s why I asked if they experienced communism. Did the Hungarian people experience communism?

 

Joel Davis: Yes.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, that’s what I was thinking. Sorry, I got Austria and Hungary confused there for some reason. Sorry about that, guys.

 

Joel Davis: But, yeah, no, it’s just good to see the Austrians making progress. I think the Freedom Party of Austria, which is the largest Right-wing party in Austria, I think they’ve decided to include remigration policies in their official platform. And they they’re getting over a quarter of the vote, I think, in a lot of polls. And in the recent European elections, they did very well. So Austrian politics is one of the more white pilling of the European countries.

 

So I think that’s a bit of a good news story. It shows that there’s examples of countries where everything., … They’ve still got all the same problems, of course, that we have in other Western countries, but they just seem to have more of a resilient opposition movement.

 

And so there’s a model to look to in some of these European countries to emulate. In Australia, I think we should be studying some of these central European countries in particular, trying to copy some of the things that they’ve done, not necessarily copy and paste, because it’s different conditions, different culture, obviously, in Australia. I think in Australia, we have to be a little bit more edgy, a little bit more bombastic, a little bit more, because Australia, that’s the Australian personality. We’re very like, no bullshit, get to the point! And we kind of have a little bit of that, like, convict energy in our. In our collective psyche. So you kind of need to have a little bit that outlaw element, a little bit of that abrasive bogan quality, but intermixed with a no bullshit attitude.

 

Blair Cottrell: It’s what made me popular. [chuckling]

 

Joel Davis: Yes, of course. So I think a lot of other countries will look at us and say:

 

“Oh, the Aussies go a little bit too far!”

 

But I think that you have to in the Australian environment. I think in our culture, if you try to copy and paste too much from these other countries, I think you would end up coming across, like nerds, to a large portion of the Australian population.

 

And the problem that we have in Australia isn’t even, like, winning the argument. A lot of Australians are quite willing to hear our arguments, but it’s about making them give a fuck! A lot of us, we have a very apolitical society. Like, if you look at the opinion polls on Australian attitudes towards immigration, we actually have far more anti-immigration attitudes in our population than any other country in the Anglo-sphere and most countries in Europe.

 

But we have some of the worst Right-wing politics of any Western country because of how apolitical everyone is if you ask them:

 

“Oh, yeah, there’s too many immigrants!”

 

But then they just completely checked out of politics.

 

So we have to find a way to make people find politics interesting and get engaged in politics. And so then we have to kind of attune ourselves to the nuances of the Australian psyche. I think it’s a different problem for a lot of other countries. I talk about this before. Like, in America, it’s a very political society. So their problem isn’t that people don’t care about politics in America, but their problem is that people get sucked into the wrong kind of politics.

 

So it’s a completely different issue in America than in Australia. And I don’t know too much about Austrian culture, but anyway, it’s just good to see White power, global White power. So we support all nationalists everywhere doing anything, and have a lot of respect for the Austrians, that’s for sure.

 

Blair Cottrell: That remigration, mass deportation slogans seems to be becoming popular. It’s like amongst the general working class. I mean, there’s not a lot of disagreement, from what I can tell, with that particular message. I mean, people don’t want Africans living here. They don’t want free entry from India.

 

I mean, there’s 1.6 billion people in India! And we don’t want all those people coming here to Australia. Like, every working class Australian would agree with that. Most Indiana residents would agree with that, too in Australia, I think! [chuckling] Like, even I’ve seen some posts from Indian people saying:

 

“We’ve got to stop bringing in all these Indians!”

 

And they themselves are Indian!

 

But, yeah, like I said, the remigration thing, the mass deportation slogan, it’s generating some support from the working class, even here in Australia, from what you describe as an apolitical society. Very atheistic, too, if you’re watching this and you’re not from Australia. Australians aren’t very big on religion or politics, so it’s really hard to get through to them with anything.

 

As Joel suggested, the best way to penetrate their ignorance is just through being like them, being one of them and having that robust, vigorous patriotism and just kind of calling it as it is, pushing things to the point of being abrasive, taking some damage in the process from the institutions and the repercussions that come from these institutions.

 

They respect all of that, they liked seeing someone stand up. They love an underdog Australians! They love seeing someone who doesn’t have power. Yeah. Who doesn’t have wealth, stand up and win or make something of himself, or at least just create controversy to the extent where the system, the government, the police are pulling their hair out. The Australian working class loves seeing that! So I think that’s worth knowing.

 

[1:33:39]

 

 

Joel Davis: But, yeah, one of the only countries in the world that would lionise a figure like Ned Kelly as a national hero with, you know, Ned Kelly was, for those who don’t know, just basically a gangster of the people, basically. [chuckling] That’s what he was!

 

Blair Cottrell: He was a bank robber. He was treated unfairly by the authorities and he ended up becoming a bank robber, I think. But, yeah, it was basically just a renegade bank robber. But he had his own principles and he felt like, as an Irishman, …

 

Joel Davis: No only robbed banks, he’d also burned the mortgage records of everyone in the town, so everyone loved him. And then he’d shout a night out on the piss. When the police showed up the people:

 

“Oh, we didn’t see him!”

 

Because he just burned, … They weren’t going to cooperate with the authorities. This guy just basically forgave their mortgage and shouted them on the beers. [chuckling] so, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Bit of an Australian Robin Hood, in a way, Ned Kelly, up against the rich, representing the little guy. And he had sympathies for the little guy, but he was an Irishman and as the story goes, he was experiencing some serious oppression from the Victoria police, which was largely British or English. And they had a bit of a, how should I say, racist sentiment towards the Irish settlers, you know. So there’s always been racism in Australia, even between Europeans.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I don’t know if that would be racism. That’s more just kind of ethnic conflict. But, yeah.

 

Blair Cottrell: Well, that was the greatest racism we really expressed or experienced for thousands of years was just against others who were still kind of like cousins to us, but they were still different enough to be weird, you know what I mean? [chuckling]

 

Joel Davis: We fought the Muslims. We kicked the Muslims out. A lot of our people, the Brits and the Irish, went down to Spain to help the Reconquista and kick all the Moors out of Spain and fought in the Crusades, and we kicked the Muslims out of the Balkans. And they got as far as almost, basically, almost all the way to Austria at one point. So no, race war has kind of been almost a perennial reality in European history. I mean, yes, as we kind of protected it from it more in Britain and Ireland than almost anywhere else, because it’s one of the absolute most secure zones for the White race, historically speaking.

 

But, yeah, of course, it’s a different kettle of fish in Australia. We get here and we’ve got abos and Chinese are coming over to the gold fields and there’s a different paradigm, similar to what the Americans experienced in North America, where they’re fighting the Mexicans and the Native Americans, and then you got black slaves to deal with and so on.

 

And so we kind of threw ourselves into a bit of a racial meat grinder. But, no, I hear what you’re saying. Like, in those days, the Irish and the English and their mutual rivalry kind of was what was the kind of dominant issue in Australia, because Aboriginals, we had obviously, a massive power advantage over them.

 

And one of the key precipitating, …

 

Blair Cottrell: They were never seen as a legitimate, like, organised threat, the Aboriginals, because they weren’t.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. One of the precipitating factors of White nationalism developing in Australia was the Chinese coming over, not the Aboriginals. The Chinese coming over. Then a bunch of English, Irish and Scotsmen realised:

 

“You know what? Yeah, we’ve got our little disputes with one another, but we’re all White men and we’ve got to get these chinks out!”

 

And so an amount of White unity formed around a mutual threat, which is obviously how these things often go.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, as I was saying earlier, we had a big news week last time you and Tom covered a lot of that stuff, and I chimed in on the end. I’m pretty ready to wrap this show up and have an early one this week if you’re keen. You got a Superchat?

 

Joel Davis: Okay. This wasn’t a Superchat, but I saw someone mention in the Odysee chat. “Mass Deportation Party, MDP”. I like that.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, maybe. Maybe?

 

[1:38:01]

 

Joel Davis: I like that’s cool! I like that. I like it. That’s all! I got a couple Entropy Superchats. One is from Borderland Rising. He said:

 

“Blair clicking his fingers when talking about Zoomers was fucking hilarious! Good show, lads. Keep it up.”

 

Thank you. And Ravenkeeper said:

 

“Greetings from the United States. Thanks to you, Blair and Tom, for all your great work! Have either of you been to the United States? If so, where? And what were your impressions?”

 

Blair, you never left the country, have you?

 

Oh, might be frozen. I don’t know if, … Blair’s frozen. Okay, I guess I’ll just answer this Superchat, then. Put ones in the chat if you can still hear me. Okay. Blair just dropped off.

 

I have been to the United States quite a few times. I’ve been to New York and just the tri-state area, I’ve been to Florida. I’ve been to Texas briefly, California briefly, and Hawaii. And my impressions of America are, I love the food. The portion sizes are massive! How good is the food? And so on. Yes. Like, particularly Texas had some really good steaks. I do like, whenever you get to the kind of White suburban areas in America where you get away from the major cities, and you get out into the White flight, it’s beautiful. And the people are really wholesome. There’s a big difference between Americans and Australians. Americans are super friendly, they’re super enthusiastic, and they’re quite warm. And I definitely appreciate that about them. So do like that aspect about Americans and America.

 

But, yeah, one thing I didn’t like about America was when I was in Manhattan in New York. I really do not like Manhattan at all! The buildings, there’s so many of them. They’re so tall and imposing. You feel like you’re in this kind of concrete cauldron, and there’s just so much, such a negative vibe. The whole place stinks of weed. There’s, kind of freakish looking people everywhere. There’s a lot of blacks, you know, particularly in a lot of public service jobs and so on. Like, public sector jobs and service jobs. And that’s a really kind of jarring experience. And there’s a lot of jews.

 

And so the whole energy of the place. The women are exceptionally slutty and the yeah, the whole energy of the place. Everyone’s very rude. Everyone’s very obnoxious. People are very inconsiderate. It’s not a good environment, I think when you squash so many people into one area, particularly with a whole lot of jews and non-Whites, it produces a very negative attitude. And homeless people produces a very kind of negative general attitude because you basically can’t give a fuck about all the people around you because you just can’t operate in society effectively being considerate to others because it’s such a dog-eat-dog environment. Such a obnoxious environment.

 

So you have to become obnoxious yourself in order to survive in that environment. And so, yeah, the place just has this very dark, unspirited energy. I really hated it. So that’s New York. America isn’t like that in general.

 

As I said, there’s other parts of America I went to. White picket fence, White flight suburbia, where everyone’s gorgeous! So it really depends where you go. But I think Americans are both the best and the worst of the White race in many respects.

 

But, Blair, you’ve never been to the US, have you? Never been overseas.

 

Blair Cottrell: I’d be surprised if they let me in, because I’ve got, even though it’s a long time ago, it’s still a criminal record, which is pretty serious. And that, coupled with my politics, I think if I went there for a brief holiday, I could argue my rights to entry, but they could always, just on the whim of some border security bureaucrat, they could say:

 

“No, mate.”

 

And I kind of respect that about America, the fact they have, you know, strong principles against, or attitudes against criminals entering their country. But it’d be easy for me to get into a Commonwealth country, probably because I’m a Commonwealth citizen obviously.

 

But, yeah, never been to America. Never really had a strong desire to go. I’m not a travel around the world and see sights kind of person. I’m just happy at home usually. But if I had the opportunity, I wouldn’t waste it.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I definitely am keen to go back to America. Hopefully I can get back in. And they let me back in. My girlfriend’s American, so that gives me a reason. I’ve got a lot of friends to go there as well. I want to go to America, and then when I get there, I’m going to get an AR 15 and I’m going to film myself shooting it into the air while throwing a Roman. And just enjoy my [words unclear]

 

Blair Cottrell: I was worried. I was worried what you’re about to say. I’m like, what the are you going to say? [chuckling]

 

Joel Davis: I’m going to enjoy my First and Second Amendment rights, my ancient Anglo Saxon rights that still exist, at least somewhere.

 

Blair Cottrell: Somewhere I would actually like to go is like, to the Nordic countries. Like, just because I like the cold, and I want to see the mountains and the forests like, where would be a good place to go for that? Like Germany, Finland. Germany is not necessarily Nordic, but, you know what I mean, you’ve been to Sweden, we’ve spoken about Sweden before, but also Japan. Like, I wouldn’t mind seeing the mountains.

 

Joel Davis: Denmark as well.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, Denmark, right? Yeah.

 

[1:43:56]

 

Joel Davis: I thought Copenhagen was actually quite a nice city. The physiognomies, as well, were very familiar. I was like, I guess because that’s where the Anglos came from. Right? Denmark.

 

But, yeah, I was very surprised. I was like, the people kind of look Australian to me in a certain way in Denmark, but that was, that was a very pleasant place. I thought it was quite funny because the people are very kind of reserved and friendly, as most Scandinavians are.

 

But then when I went out drinking in Copenhagen of an evening, everyone gets fucking hammered! Like, it’s crazy! Like, [chuckling] they go hard. The inner Viking spirit comes out. I was like:

 

“There’s no Viking spirit here. Everyone is so sweet and pleasant. You know, where’s the Viking?”

 

And then you go out and then it gets to 11, 12 o’clock at night and you see the Viking come out. Everyone’s just absolutely sloshed! And there’s people keeled over, vomiting everywhere and passed out on trains.

 

And I thought that was kind of funny and endearing, actually. Yeah, but Scandinavian countries, very eugenic, a lot of good looking people, and they are very friendly and sweet. But I did find the Swedes, I like Swedes, but I did find the Swedes to be, they’re friendly, like, they’re very nice, but I don’t know, I find it hard to, like, connect with a lot of them because, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Is it because they don’t understand sarcasm?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, they don’t have, they don’t really banter like we do.

 

Whereas, like, when I was in England and Ireland, oh, I didn’t go to Ireland, but when I met Irish people in Europe or when I was in Britain or Scotland and I met people, you know, it was I had instant rapport, …

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah, because that’s where we come from. That’s, like, genetic, right?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, yeah. And I felt like in, even though the people look like us in Scandinavia, they don’t have that aspect to their personality. Like, they’re very, you know, straight down the line, and I just found that a little bit I’m not gonna say uncomfortable. I wasn’t uncomfortable, but it’s just a little bit harder to connect with people when they don’t have that quality that we have. They’re almost, like, too nice. I don’t know how else to say it’s not a bad thing! You could say they’re more pure, maybe in a certain sense. It’s a noble thing. But you know, as an Anglo, I kind of like hearing, …

 

Blair Cottrell: People like, just, … There’s something about being an Australian where unless you’re actually hitting your friends with some hard truths and being a little bit abrasive with them, they don’t really trust you. If you’re too nice in Australia, it’s suspicious. You got to be a little bit harsh down here to be trusted and understood. Maybe it’s the criminal element in our stock. I don’t know what that is exactly, but it definitely comes from England, [chuckling] because the English are much the same.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, but, I mean, like I said, I do like them as a people. Going there was a good experience because it made me care more, not that I didn’t care before, but made me care more about a little bit of insight. Care more about their politics and their people and so on, and keep an eye on I got to meet some activists when I was there in the Nordic Resistance Movement. They were very good people.

 

And, no, I’m grateful for that experience. I definitely kind of see, you know, after the Anglo-sphere the Nordic countries and the Germans and like, the Dutch and so on, I see them as they’re the most closest to us racially and culturally. And so I have a very big soft spot for all those countries and those people groups.

 

But, yeah, in terms of, there’s nothing really beats Australians to hang out with, because when you’re an Australian, that’s just who your people are. But so Australia itself, it’s a beautiful place, but it can be a little bit boring. But I just kind of I just wish there was Australians everywhere. Like, if there was an Australian pub in any foreign city, like, kind of like how there’s an Irish pub everywhere, which is, I guess, kind of close, but if there was an Australian pub in any of these, I’d be going straight there. And I really appreciate, when I got back after going to Europe for a year and I came back to Australia, I didn’t realise how much I appreciated Australian banter and friendship [chuckling] until I came back, because, yeah, no one really kind of gets me, like, Aussies.

 

So I think traveling only makes you appreciate home more in a lot of ways.

 

Blair Cottrell: Yeah. I’ve heard from a lot of my friends that you find Aussies when you’re overseas too. I think I’ve mentioned this before, like, even though you’re in England or somewhere in Europe, you can easily kind of hone in on your own accent. Like, you tend to find other Australian tourists really easily.

 

But I’ve got to go eat dinner soon. So did you want to go through the Superchats? Are you keen to fire off on that?

 

Joel Davis: Yeah. There’s a few others here. Let’s have a look.

 

Blair Cottrell: I might just leave you to do them, man, because I’m super hungry and I’ve I’ve been pretty active, …

 

Joel Davis: Only a couple left because we read out a few other ones. It says here, I think this is from Cozy Clips:

 

“In 2010, a White liberal woman and Malcolm X scholar went to Haiti on a humanitarian work. She was raped and afterwards wrote an article blaming the White Patriarchy for it. No saving these women!”

 

Yeah, I remember reading that. And, yeah, obviously that’s a lost case. You know, it’s the point where like, a White Leftist, like, are they even White anymore? They’re basically they’ve become spiritual traitors and they’re so defective that they might as well not even consider them White, particularly someone that far gone.

 

Same reason why I wouldn’t consider a race mixer of White, or there’s really much point even being too concerned with homosexuals. I think either that are White because it’s like that’s just like a line of death. Like, there’s not perpetuation of the Aryan blood through that person. So they might as well be, like, black or brown as far as I’m concerned. Skinhead Friend said:

 

“Any thoughts on abortion being a eugenic necessary evil? Do we want the type of women who would even consider killing their babies to reproduce?”

 

If there’s an argument, do you want to answer that? Blair or, …

 

Blair Cottrell: I have a certain sympathy for people who, as you described earlier, homosexuals and in this case, women who are geared towards aborting their babies, because I think they’re a lot of the time victims of bad influence rather than inherently bad themselves. And so it actually makes me more vengeful against hostile subversive influence, which leads members of our race to make these decisions and do these things with their lives.

 

So that’s the way I look at it. It just reinforces what I discussed earlier in the stream, the necessity to inoculate our national community against this kind of influence that leads people to do these things or to behave in this manner.

 

So we’ve got to stop being so receptive to hostile ideas and understand what’s subversive, identify it, ban it, make it illegal, and jail people who are spreading it. You know it’s got to be that way for a while. I think, to actually reverse the damage that’s being done. It’s got to be like, literally full fascist dictatorship. This is the enemy, down with them sort of thing.

 

So until that becomes legal policy in Australia, you’re still going to get women going to abortion clinics for no real reason other than they want to travel or they just don’t feel like having a baby. You’re still going to get people turning gay and turning their children transgender with sterilisation, drugs, et cetera, et cetera, until the root cause of this issue is addressed, which actually isn’t the people themselves, but the way people are being influenced. Until that’s addressed, it’s going to continue.

 

Joel Davis: Well, the argument, the woke eugenic argument is that it actually, the fault is actually in the people, that some people have a resistance to the current culture. Like, they can exist, …

 

Blair Cottrell: I don’t think, … I understand the argument. I just don’t think enough people have the resistance. People need to be protected. That’s the point.

 

Joel Davis: Yeah, I think there’s a certain balance between these two tendencies, like a happy medium.

 

But I think the eugenics side of the argument does make, has some points in its favour. Like, for instance, women who get abortions, they are more likely to have narcissistic traits and other kind of psychological illnesses that would predispose them to being worse mothers.

 

So that you have a woman who’s, like, a total piece of shit and she kills her baby because she’s a piece of shit, it’s like, okay, like, that’s obviously an immoral thing and heinous thing, but it’s almost like, well, what are the genes that are going to be going into that baby? And what kind of nurturing environment are they going to be raised in if the baby’s kept alive? Like, is that baby just going to now be some defective? Like, if we keep that baby alive, are they going to be raised properly? Are they going to have good genes? Are they going to end up becoming a good functional member of the race? I mean, that’s an open question.

 

So I think the eugenicists have, like, points in their favour, but then at the same time. Yeah. I don’t think you can just allow these ideas to run rampant in your society. You know, some people, just because people are conformists, it doesn’t mean that that’s bad. Like, in a society, a lot of people are predisposed to conformity because for most of history, society wasn’t run by our racial enemies and wasn’t run by totally insane freaks like it is now. And so under those conditions, respecting authority and just conforming to the society around you and just going along with the culture would have been mostly good because we had a mostly good and healthy culture. And so those people are kind of victims of this larger process.

 

As I said earlier, talking about democracy, a lot of people aren’t cut out for thinking about politics in a very abstract way and thinking about the collective well being of the race or the nation in a very kind of Zoomed out way. They’re kind of optimized for just they’re kind of interpersonal relationships. And so a lot of those people aren’t necessarily, like, defective. They’re just kind of victims of a lack of good leadership.

 

So this points in Blair’s favour as well. I think you have to kind of balance both of these considerations, as I said.

 

But I think that’s basically it for the Superchats. So we’ll end the stream there. I hope you guys enjoyed the show this weekend. We’ll be back next week as always. And yeah, thanks, everyone who sent Superchats. Appreciate you supporting the show, and we’ll catch you all next week.

 

And also, if you’re watching on Rumble, I noticed we get way more views than their subscribers. I think that’s because a lot of people haven’t made Rumble accounts. They just kind of watch the stream sj make a Rumble account! Subscribe, like the streams! It helps boost them in the algorithm.

 

And then you can also leave comments. Yeah, just make a Rumble account.

 

And anyway, I also want to say, actually, as well, clip the show, post it on Twitter and post it on TikTok. I got to keep saying it because I want to keep reinforcing it. You got a spare bit of time, you’ve got a Twitter account, or you can make a TikTok account, make some choice clips of the show where you think there’s a couple minutes where one of us was cooking on something and it was a good clip and go spread it around. That’s how the show, one of the main ways we get new viewers to the show or the show grows, our influence grows.

 

So it’s kind of up to you, the audience, to help extend the influence of the show. There isn’t really much else like this in Australia. What we do, offering the perspective that we offer, that gets any, at least nothing that really gets much views or gets much attention. So help spread the show. We’re under so much censorship, we’ve been banned off YouTube. Now between Blair and I’ve got three YouTube channels banned. You know, obviously, Blair and Tom are banned from Twitter. Yeah, we’re fighting an uphill battle. We kind of can’t think about going on something like Facebook or Instagram. We just instantly get wiped out. I know Blair and Tom got wiped out from Facebook back in the day when that was still more of a relevant platform.

 

So the way in which we can get around censorship is by having a group effort to push our clips and push our influence around the censors. They can’t ban everyone. They can ban the key central nodes in the system, but they can’t ban all of you guys. So some of you get banned, but they can’t ban everyone at once.

 

So that’s a key strategic adaptation we have to make to make sure that our propaganda keeps spreading and promulgating online despite the censorship. So help out, participate, be an active node that advances.

 

And also, when you see other people do this, give them a, like, give them a retweet. Like I’ve been showing this guy, he made a Twitter account recently, it’s quite good, called the White Australia Policy. Go follow the White Australia Policy on Twitter. Great Twitter account. He clips the show and there’s a few other guys that clip the show.

 

And if you clip the show, like, send it to me if you want, like. And I can spread it around a little bit. Don’t just put a clip up. You got a Twitter account with 50 followers or something, and you put a clip up and it gets almost no views. You know, you got to post it in the replies, post it in the replies of my tweets, post it in the replies of other, you know, anti-immigration accounts or Australian nationalist accounts on Twitter, or even in the replies of our political enemies if it’s making some counterpoint to what they’re saying. Yeah, just get it out there!

 

[1:58:20]

 

 

 

END

top

 

 

 

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

 

Rumble Comments

top

(Comments as of 7/30/2024 = 53)

Seppl88
5 hours ago
Altruism for racial outsiders is contributing to our demise. Race should be above all. You guys are on the right page.
0 likes

Seppl88
5 hours ago
Women in general lack an understanding of social realities and are prone to WOKEness. Giving women education past high school is detrimental to our race.
0 likes

MiamiBadGuy
15 hours ago
Trump is not “inevitable.”
0 likes

theunbeholden
21 hours ago
What organisation is Blair behind? I remember some group being mentioned before but I can’t remember it right now.
0 likes

masklophobix
1 day ago
God is beautiful so in their rebellion against God they must destroy anything that is beautiful, including themselves. Atheism has destroyed us.
1 like

blobgnarley
1 day ago
Joel looks like the Anglo bin Laden with that beard
1 like

Sceptaginoth
1 day ago
Theres no such thing as an aura you hippy
1 like

Sceptaginoth
1 day ago
channel the sol brah
0 likes

GovMarioPalmieri
2 days ago
I like the asocial tendencies of Swedes.
0 likes

Irishman2023
2 days ago
I think you have hit the nail on the head with the spatial awareness thing. Also with the dumbing down of society. Subscribed! Good work guys.
0 likes

FreedomFighter8888888888
2 days ago
Hertchfield in Berlin, a jew is the father of transgenderism, Elon is saying he wants to destroy the woke mind virus, wokeism is jewish. He needs to destroy the leftist jews who killed his son.
1 like

› Show 1 reply
Vicki88888888
2 days ago
Rumble is using BS algorithms to censor certain words like the N word. Arabs and N have F all respect especially towards WHITE WOMEN.
-1 likes

ADC789
2 days ago
Joel is getting more than 10k views
on Rumble. That means he is getting watched by more Aussies than the Olympic in fucking Paris.
0 likes

Sinagoglies
3 days ago
It was religious war between the British JudeoMasonic govt and Catholic Ireland. England genocided almost half of Ireland – forced starvation exporting food sources etc calling it a potato famine. The Eureka Stockade was quite international but dominated by the Irish and the leader was Peter Lalor – an Irish Catholic. Some even called it an Irish rebellion. I know Joel has tried to claim it as purely Anglo recently. Britain a Masonic Protestant wealth cult built to support the “jews spreading liberalism, faggotry and heathenry. You guys are looking more like anti Western civilisation Marxists quoting all these skanky modernists that J$ws promote! Joel even recently backed Jew Karl Marx’s justification of stealing land from Catholic Mexico. Hatred of mankind and self worship of race is a Jewish trait. Hitler did not hate mankind. Japan and Palestine were with the AXIS. You’re all pretty sloppy with historical facts – making it up as you go along. TWO FACED NAPOLEON EMANCIPATED THE JEWS! https://rumble.com/v58df44-when-will-enough-be-enough.html Jews love pagans! https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/barbarians Some Eureka historians have suggested that as well as most of the miners inside the stockade, in the area where the defensive position was established, the miners were overwhelmingly Irish. Even the password used at the Eureka Stockade – Vinegar Hill – was the scene of an 1804 Irish convict uprising in New South Wales.[6] http://www.eurekapedia.org/Ireland https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/castle-hill-rebellion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Eureka_Stockade_defenders A Great Mini Series on Australian convict history including the ship journey based on historical facts. It is very hard to find but I found one site that sold the DVD. Against The Wind TV series 1978 – Irish Rebellion (Vinegar Hill) Australia 1804 – Philip Cunningham’s pledge https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-c90s1IlDw
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Sinagoglies
3 days ago
Irish Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne, Daniel Mannix was anti conscription (as were most Catholics as opposed to Protestants) waking up Aussies as he knew WW1 was a trade war / banker war. “During October 1916, he exploded onto the political stage in Australia, when prime minister William M Hughes tried to introduce conscription by a national plebiscite. Mannix opposed compulsory military service. “I hope and believe that the peace can be secured without conscription in Australia. For conscription is a hateful thing, and almost certain to bring evil in its train,” he said.” “England was the “greatest hypocrite in the world,” he charged. “Ireland has the same grievance against England which the American revolutionaries had, only ten times greater,” he told his summer school audience. “England was your enemy, is your enemy and shall be your enemy for all time.” https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/specialreports/archbishop-daniel-j-mannix-cork-born-cleric-drew-attention-to-irish-situation-943244.html Archbishop Mannix – a tribal icon, controversial prelate? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTt5sYxBbBw There was a Catholic movement in Australia which infiltrated the unions controlled by Communists in the 40’s and 50’s B.A. Santamaria and The Movement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMceNPNZLZk
0 likes

Sinagoglies
3 days ago
Adolf Hitler’s Christian Germany: The Twelve Year Christendom https://www.bitchute.com/video/17SjPY3Z5RDo The history of the yellow star Although this public branding of the Jews is associated with Hitler’s Germany, it predated the Holocaust by centuries. In Europe, it first appeared in 1215, when the Fourth Congress of the Lateran introduced an easily distinguishable dress code for all Jews and Muslims. This took the form of a special head covering, such as a pointy hat, or a garb in the form of pieces of fabric attached to clothes. The aim was to force Jews to convert to Christianity, and the dress law persisted in some places until the eighteenth century. Only the age of the Enlightenment and the spread of liberalism led to the fall of the medieval ghettos, and the Jews to receive equality. https://www.abc.net.au/religion/covid-yellow-star-and-history-of-jewish-persecution/13539606 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Pius_VII#Reinstitution_of_Jewish_Ghetto Reinstitution of Jewish Ghetto[edit] Under Napoleonic rule, the Jewish Roman Ghetto had been abolished and Jews were free to live and move where they would. Following the restoration of Papal rule, Pius VII re-instituted the confinement of Jews to the Ghetto, having the doors closed at nighttime.[14] Pius VII issued an encyclical “Diu satis” in order to advocate a return to the values of the Gospel and universalized the feast of Our Lady of Sorrows for 15 September. He condemned Freemasonry and the movement of the Carbonari in the encyclical Ecclesiam a Jesu Christo in 1821. Pius VII asserted that Freemasons must be excommunicated and it linked them with the Carbonari, an anti-clerical revolutionary group in Italy. All members of the Carbonari were also excommunicated. Pius VII was multilingual and had the ability to speak Italian, French, English and Latin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cum_nimis_absurdum
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
katana17
3 days ago
Transcript of the video is here: [Joel Davis – When Will Enough Be Enough? – Jul 25, 2024 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2024/07/26/joel-davis-when-will-enough-be-enough-jul-25-2024-transcript/ [In this livestream episode Aussie nationalists Joel Davis and Blair Cottrell discuss the following: – The Australian woman gang-raped by five Africans in Paris. – Criticize the lack of response from bystanders in the kebab shop. – Discuss the dangers of naive travel and the “wanderlust” mentality. – Blame boomer parents for encouraging unrealistic travel expectations. – They discuss Elon Musk’s revelation about his son becoming transgender. – They criticize the role of Musk’s ex-wife in the situation. – Express skepticism about transgenderism and its origins. – They discuss Elon Musk’s pro-Israel stance and its implications. – Genetic mutations and their potential link to leftist beliefs. – The importance of choosing a mentally healthy partner for reproduction. – Young nationalists marching in Vienna, Austria. – They compare political climates in different European countries. – The conversation shifts to Australian politics and culture. – The challenges of engaging Australians in politics. – Share their experiences and impressions of traveling to the United States. – The differences between various parts of America. – Their experiences in Scandinavian countries. – Cultural differences between Australians and Scandinavians. – Express appreciation for Australian culture and banter. – The concept of abortion as a potential eugenic tool. – Debate the balance between genetic predisposition and environmental influence. – The need to protect people from harmful cultural influences. – The challenges of conformity in society. – The importance of good leadership in shaping societal values. – Encourage viewers to engage with and share their content. – The challenges of censorship on various platforms. – Strategies for spreading their message despite censorship. ….
0 likes

Delete
GhostDogMan
Supporter
3 days ago
Good Show. Thank you for highlighting the BS of 5 wretched Subsaharans defiling a lively Aussie Lass. Enraging! If this was a Palestinian vs. Israel attack, Israel would have deported or obliterated 50 Africans for revenge. We need to stop their Supremacy
0 likes

PeroErcegovac
3 days ago
You are a racially aware. So are they. Why would they assist an Australian woman? To be honest I am surprised that someone took a swing at the black. On revenge? Yes. But only when one cannot be caught. Hence the Italian saying “revenge is a meal best served cold”. Always be careful when taking revenge, take it, but be very careful.
1 like

BradC1988
3 days ago
If there were no niggys running loose in Paris, that Aussie woman would never have been raped. We need mass deportations now!
1 like

ihatebolshevikscum
3 days ago
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⡀⢐⡂⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣤⣤⣴⣶⣾⣿⣟⣭⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣛⠲⣤⣤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠷⢋⣉⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣅⠛⣿⣿⣷⣦⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⠉⣭⣤⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣜⡛⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣭⡴⢶⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣤⢙⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣠⢶⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣌⠻⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢋⣡⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠷⣆⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣏⠠⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⢉⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⡷⠌⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠌⠙⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣀⠺⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⣃⣤⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠠⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠶⣌⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⣿⣿⡿⠿⡿⠿⣿⣿⣿⡆⢸⣿⣿⡿⣛⣉⣉⣙⣿⣟⣛⣻⣿⣿⣿⡆⣽⣯⣥⣴⣶⣶⣾⣝⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣶⣦⣽⣧⣬⣭⣬⣾⣿⠏⠉⠉⠛⠛⠻⠿⢿⣿⣿⣿⡜⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡋⠑⢦⣍⣋⣙⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣠⢶⣿⣿⣿⠟⣩⡿⠛⠉⠉⢠⣿⣿⣿⣿⢳⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣿⣿⣿⣮⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⣽⣿⣿⣷⡌⢿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠀⠀⢀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⣠⣶⡿⠗⠺⣿⡏⢾⣿⣿⠃⣼⡏⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣿⣿⣿⣷⣬⣝⡛⠛⠿⠿⠿⠛⣛⣛⣭⣴⠎⣿⣿⡿⠁⠀⣰⣿⣿⡄⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⣿⣿⣷⣶⣤⣼⣷⢸⣿⠃⢸⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣄⠹⣦⣤⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣥⣾⡿⠋⠀⠀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣷⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠘⣿⡀⢸⡿⠀⠀⠀⢠⣿⣿⠋⣠⡶⣽⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣶⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠛⠛⠛⠛⠉⠉⢛⡟⠋⠀⠀⣠⡞⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠀ ⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⣿⣿⣤⣿⣿⣾⣷⣤⣤⣶⣿⣿⠇⣸⠏⠀⠀⠙⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠀⠀⠀⢠⣶⣿⣿⣿⠋⠀⣀⣴⡾⠿⣿⣄⠙⣻⢿⣿⠀⡀ ⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⣿⡋⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⢠⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⣴⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣦⣬⡀⢻⣶⣾⣄⣏ ⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣄⣿⣧⠀⢻⣿⣿⠟⣩⣿⣿⣿⡇⣼⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⣿⣿⣿⡿⠟⠛⠛⠛⠉⠻⠿⣿⣧⣤⣄⠀⠀⣿⣿⣿⠇⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⢠⣿⣿⡯⣏ ⠀⣿⣿⣿⡿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⡀⠛⠋⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣿⣤⣴⣿⣿⣶⣤⣴⣿⣿⠟⣡⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⠀⣸⣿⣿⣷⣄⣿⣿⡿⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⣿⣿⣿⡿⣯ ⠀⠙⣟⣅⠘⣿⡛⠻⣿⣿⣷⡄⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⢿⣿⡿⠀⢀ ⣴⣿⣿⣿⣧⠙⢿⣦⣄⡙⠻⠿⣆⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠀⠉⣉⣉⣉⣁⣀⣀⠐⣾⣶⣶⣿⡄⠀⠀ ⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⡧⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⡀⢸⣿⡟⠛⣟⠻⣿⣛⠻⢟⠻⠿⢟⣛⡟⢉⣉⣉⢱⣲⡯⣴⣶⡟⠀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠘⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⣄ ⠀⢻⣿⣿⣿⠇⣿⣿⣿⠿⢿⣿⣿⣧⢠⡇⣿⡔⣿⣗⣿⣿⢶⣿⣿⡷⣿⣿⣿⣾⣿⣿⢸⣿⠇⠟⣛⣅⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⢰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠆⠙⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀ ⠀⢸⣿⣟⣫⡄⠨⣥⣴⣶⣿⣿⣿⣿⢨⡇⣹⡁⣛⡏⠻⠛⠛⣿⣛⠃⢛⣻⣏⣨⣭⣥⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠈⣷⣌⠻⣿⡏⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠛⣫⣤⣶⣦⡀⠉⠉⠉⢛⣿⣿⠚⣇⣿⡇⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⢿⣿⡿⢺⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢸⣿⠇⢛⣩⣡⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠀⠈⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢋⣤⣤⣄⡈⢻⣷⣌⠃⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡆⢰⣿⡿⠋⠁⠀⢹⣾⣧⣌⣛⣘⣛⣃⣘⣛⣃⣘⣛⣫⣬⣭⣥⣴⣶⣿⣟⣵⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢿⣿⣿⡇⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⡿⠿⠟⠛⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⣿⣧⡘⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡇⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠘⠛⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
1 like

› Show 1 reply
kalamazoogroyper
3 days ago
Really great ep boys – love the discussion around the psychology driving political thought and loyalty – also as an Aussie with an American wife I like hearing Joels take on the States and Americans
1 like

Motown88
Supporter
4 days ago
I like the street reporter vibe…
1 like

jamerry1982
4 days ago
Wandering,alone,at 3am,in a foreign country where dozens of similar incidents have occurred in the recent past,but,hey,that’s racist and racism’s much worse than a bunch of dudes raping a lone woman,this is beyond a fucking joke that the liberal media will suppress these stories because,y’know,diversity an that yeah,fucks sake.
2 likes

Sinagoglies
4 days ago
The natural order is hierarchical. Not egalitarian. “Equality” doesn’t exist in nature. http://www.catholiceducation.org/en/culture/art/20-ways-the-lord-of-the-rings-is-both-christian-and-catholic.html The Men Who Caused the French Revolution 1789 http://www.lovethetruth.com/books/pawns/03.htm In the previous chapter evidence was given to prove how a small group of foreign money-lenders, operating through their English agents, remained anonymous while they secured control of that nation’s economy for the modest sum of £1,250,000. Evidence will now be produced to identify some of these International Jewish money-lenders and prove they, or their successors, plotted and planned, and helped finance, the Great French Revolution of 1789, exactly the same way as they had plotted and planned and financed the English Revolution of 1640-1649. In succeeding chapters evidence will be produced to prove that the descendants of these same International Jewish Financiers have been The Secret Power behind every war and revolution from 1789 onwards. Cont… French Revolution = emancipation of J$ws giving equal status to Catholics – a disaster for Europe and the world! https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ajs-review/article/abs/french-revolution-and-the-jews-assessing-the-cultural-impact/6393D65C0AC8AFDE2320075927B15955 The Judeo-Masonic roots of the US founding fathers and the Constitution Freemasonry, hatched in the British Empire following the Enlightenment-Rosicrucian revolutionary overthrow of the Catholic Church in England, is the proxy arm of the international Jewish conspiracy against Christ and His Saints. Throughout the centuries, the Jewish conspirators have struggled to refrain from publicly gloating of their engineering of this proxy movement. Cont…
1 like

‹ Hide 1 reply
Sinagoglies
4 days ago
Jews have entirely created Masonry to corrupt the nations of Christian civilization and to propagate behind this veil the general revolution which is to bring about the domination of Israel. It is simply a tool and a means in the hands of the Jews. In support of this, we can quote the article of Dr. Isaac M. Wise published in the Israelite of America, 3 August, 1866: ‘Masonry is a Jewish institution, whose history, degrees, charges, passwords, and explanations are Jewish from beginning to end.’[I] This conspiracy to “corrupt the nations” was executed under the cover of “Enlightenment” progress and freedom. The Masonic Illuminati slogan is “liberty, fraternity, and equality”, which was shouted from rooftops as revolutionaries raped, pillaged, and murdered their way through France. https://fitzinfo.net/2014/02/26/alex-jones-freemasonry-and-the-cult-of-constitution/
0 likes

Joshua1000
4 days ago
W stream
0 likes

Sinagoglies
4 days ago
Jews were banned from England in 1290 and not allowed back until Oliver Cromwell lifted the ban in 1656. The Rothschild British Empire: Roman Catholic Guy Fawkes The Start Of The Warnings! Father Of Anonymous! How did England deal with a corrupt puritan government/parliament? http://politicalvelcraft.org/anonymous/ ISLAM AND JudeoMasonic PROTESTANT COLLABORATIONS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism_and_Islam Judaizers: https://slife.org/protestantism-and-islam/ Why The Crusades Were Awesome https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aFkoX6g1fE http://self.gutenberg.org/articles/Islam_and_Protestantism HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Following the Turkish conquest of Constantinople in 1453 by Mehmet II and the unification of the Middle Eastunder Selim I, Suleiman the Magnificent, the son of Selim, managed to expand Ottoman rule to Balkans. The Habsburg Empire thus entered into direct conflict with the Ottomans. At the same time the Protestant Reformation was taking place in numerous areas of northern and central Europe, in harsh opposition to Papal authority and the Holy Roman Empire led by Emperor Charles V. This situation led the Protestants to consider various forms of cooperation and rapprochement (religious, commercial, military) with the Muslim world, in opposition to their common Habsburg enemy. EARLY RELIGIOUS ACCOMMODATION (15TH–17TH CENTURIES) During the development of the Reformation, Protestantism and Islam were considered closer to each other than they were to Catholicism: “Islam was seen as closer to Protestantism in banning images from places of worship, in not treating marriage as a sacrament and in rejecting monastic orders”.[1] Relief statues in the Cathedral of Saint Martin, Utrecht, attacked in Reformation iconoclasm in the 16th century. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Revolt#/media/File:UtrechtIconoclasm.jpg
0 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Sinagoglies
4 days ago
Anglo-Turkish piracy Main article: Anglo-Turkish piracy After peace was made with Catholic Spain in 1604, English pirates nevertheless continued to raid Christian shipping in the Mediterranean, this time under the protection of the Muslim rulers of the Barbary States, and often converting to Islam in the process, in what has been described as Anglo-Turkish piracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turco-Calvinism ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism_and_Islam “As part of a propaganda campaign including prints, pamphlets and much else, many Geuzen medals were created as badges of affiliation, using a wide range of symbolism, including that associated with the Ottoman Empire. William I of Orange sought Ottoman assistance against the Spanish king Philip II.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geuzen ttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestantism_and_Islam “From 1608, Samuel Pallache served as an intermediary to discuss an alliance between Morocco and the Low Countries. In 1613, the Moroccan Ambassador Al-Hajari discussed in La Hague with the Dutch Prince Maurice of Orange the possibility of an alliance between the Dutch Republic, the Ottoman Empire, Morocco and the Moriscos, against the common enemy Spain.[40] His book mentions the discussion for a combined offensive on Spain,[41] as well as the religious reasons for the good relations between Islam and Protestantism at the time: Their teachers [Luther and Calvin] warned them [Protestants] against the Pope and the worshippers of Idols; they also told them not to hate the Muslims because they are the sword of God in the world against the idol-worshippers. That is why they side with the Muslims. — Al-Hajari, The Book of the Protector of Religion against the Unbeliever” During the Thirty Years War (1618–1648), the Dutch would strengthen contacts with the Moriscos against Spain.[43] In the 17th century Protestant communities again asked for Ottoman help against the Habsburg Catholics.
0 likes

ProvingNihil
4 days ago
The only thing good about having the internet as kid nowadays, it’s a easier way to extra money, and build internet friendship’s that could turn into real life friendship’s. I do miss going outside riding my bike around town, not caring about a single thing. Being an adult is tough, but there’s absolutely nothing I can do about it. Also what happened with that Australian woman is utterly disgusting, it pisses me off that no one stepped in to help her. That shouldn’t have happened, it’s a real shame that European countries are being graped by these colored scumbags, hell look at their country for example it’s usually a cesspool.
0 likes

ADC789
4 days ago
You think you know Peak Feminism, check this one out. I have a client in her late 40s never married had IVF kid and she has put the kid on heavy antibiotics to kill down his microbiome so his shit doesn’t smell like mens shit is meant to. This boy is going to go through puberty soon, what chance is he?
-1 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Sinagoglies
4 days ago
IVF is extremely evil.
1 like

ProvingNihil
4 days ago
Blairs dropping those big fact BOMBS! 100% agree with you man, I was born in 1990. I remember the day’s as child going outside being a kid, where internet didn’t take over my life, and where it wasn’t a concern. These kid’s nowadays have no idea how bad they have it, man what a great conversation to bring up Blair.
6 likes

MelancholyMonkey
4 days ago
Great stream, as usual. You guys never disappoint. Warm greetings from America!
3 likes

Lueger
4 days ago
1:26:30 Austria, like Germany, was occupied by the bolshevik and Anglo-American agents of international jewry after WWII, but was able to get the occupants to leave in 1955 by pledging never to unify with Germany (irrespective of the democratic will of the population), to be neutral, and to limit their military to only self-defense forces.
1 like

‹ Hide 1 reply
Sinagoglies
3 days ago
“When certain obstructionists become too irritating, label them, after suitable buildups, as fascist or Nazi or anti-Semitic, and use the prestige of antifascist and tolerance organizations to discredit them.” (Communist Party Directive, 1943) Austria defending against Commies/Liberals/globalists/Demoncrazy in 1934 𝐃𝐢𝐞 𝐕𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐥ä𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐞 𝐅𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐭 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ip9iLTjogB8
0 likes

Metalhead86
4 days ago
problem with a lot of women is they bought into this naive notion that they shouldn’t be racist and ignore their instincts, just buying into the bullshit. African rape monkeys and towel head dune coons are out in the streets at 3:00 a.m. in every major city.
10 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Motown88
Supporter
4 days ago
You’d think all those Astronauts & Engineers, Doctors and Scientists would be home in bed at 3am, having a big day at work in the morning and all…
4 likes

Lueger
4 days ago
52:45 HJ ransacked the Institut fuer Sexualwissenschaft (Magnus Hirschfeld) and burned the library in front of the library of the University of Berlin (now the Humboldt Universitaet zu Berlin) along with other jew-communist degenerate “literature.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnus_Hirschfeld Apparently Hirschfeld was a sodomite himself.
5 likes

ballsagna
4 days ago
I was in France in 2012 and it was gorgeous, including Paris – granted I only went to Paris for 2 days and a night (mostly stayed with friends in Lyon / Nice / St Tropez).. & steered clear of all nonwhites. I wouldn’t go back now. My son has been intrigued by Italy since age 2 after seeing a mural at a local restaurant. I always wanted to take him there but after seeing the recent Africanization… I’m wary. These scum are stealing our history and our civilization.
14 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Carnierge
Supporter
3 days ago
The Italian police are more hardcore in dealing with the problem than other continental European nations. But you could still come across the wrong deranged Ugandan at the wrong time and have a very bad day. Overall Italy is still better than France in this regard, for now.
2 likes

vigilantejustice23
4 days ago
I think most women who go along with the tranny stuff for their kids are engaged in pathological altruism. Fathers are more likely to give their kids tough love and tell them something they don’t want to (but need to) hear. Fathers promote discipline. Mothers can be so empathetic that they end up enabling bad behavior (some even are manipulated by their own children.) of course this empathy is necessary for children, but it can be twisted for nefarious purposes. For example – these mothers are told that if they don’t let their kids “transition” they will fall into a deep depression and commit suicide, and it’ll be all their fault. Many of these kids are already engaging in self-harm like cutting, so their mothers are desperate for any fast solution. It’s a very evil way of corrupting a healthy maternal instinct. Most men oppose the tranny stuff not only because they aren’t as easily manipulated, but also because they’re put off by the lack of masculinity/faggotry. Women are generally less contemptuous of weak/feminine men in a SOCIAL context than men are (i.e. they certainly don’t want to sleep with weak men, but they also don’t want to beat them up) Anyway, the point is that I don’t think it’s a mothers “death instinct” generally motivating this stuff – there’s no logical reason to believe white mothers would evolve to develop a “death instinct” although the point made about the biological trash taking itself out is definitely interesting
7 likes

‹ Hide 1 reply
Motown88
Supporter
4 days ago
Public perception of single motherhood has been manipulated to go from shameful to preferrable, slut shaming & fat shaming will get you fired or even wind up in court while race mixing is promoted. And you just nailed all the reasons it is so – to get White Men out of the home.
0 likes

Nickdorshimer
4 days ago
fire
1 like

‹ Hide 1 reply
ADC789
2 days ago

0 likes

AvidFan
4 days ago
“Davis” is English. “Davies” is Welsh.
3 likes

katana17
4 days ago
Last week’s show. [Joel Davis – Trump Inevitable, Blair Censored, Paedo Freaks Destroyed – Jul 19, 2024 – Transcript] https://katana17.com/2024/07/20/joel-davis-trump-inevitable-blair-censored-paedo-freaks-destroyed-jul-19-2024-transcript/
1 like

Delete
BillCarney
4 days ago
Thanks.
2 likes

BREPERR
4 days ago
Never underestimate the govts ability to mind control populations. Women are mentally warped and so are leftist men. That’s what’s driving them agaisnt maternal instinct. Look at birth control and how it makes women go towards more effeminate men who have lower testosterone, and when they get off the pill they are no longer attracted to their bf
15 likes

BREPERR
4 days ago
Please add link or screenshot of Australian official organization warning athletes to not wear national colors in Europe so we can share across social media
9 likes

‹ Hide 2 replies
theunbeholden
21 hours ago
Also check out Gtvflyers.
0 likes

 

 

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

See Also

top

 

 

 

Woes: Dr Edward Dutton. So Ed welcome to Millenniyule!

 

Ed Dutton: Hello. Thank you for having me again. How’s it going?

 

Woes: It’s going quite well so far. As I say we’ve only got one, two, nights left. Well one night after this. So Millenniyule 2020 seems to have been a great success I’m very glad to say. So anyway, what kind of year have you had before we go into the main topic.

 

Ed Dutton: Well, what’s been going on this year? So I was working on, for a lot of the year, on a book, on a number of books. Well, at the end of last year I got onto the radar of Hope Not Hate! That was good fun. So I was in their magazine, whatever. Their thing about YouTube people.

 

Woes: Yeah. Annual State of Hate Report.

 

Ed Dutton: Chucked off PayPal and things like this. And then I carried on with my YouTube channel.

 

And then my colleague Michael Woodley of [word unclear], for various reasons left the YouTube channel halfway through the year. So I had to rebuild it. Which at first I was quite frightened about. And it was a bit of a kick in the nuts really. But I seem to have managed to do that. So I was quite pleased about that. I kept that going and whatever.

 

And then I’ve been working on a number of books. One’s called “Making Sense of Race”, which was published a few weeks ago. And then I’m working on a book at the moment called “Witch is Feminism and the Fall of the West” which looks at how our society is increasingly dominated by literal witches!

 

And then I’m working on a book on the future of civilization have in terms of breeding patterns for political views. And then I’m working on a book about the future Christianity. And then I’ve done various papers on various topics, intelligence, and religion and intelligence, and things like this. And then otherwise there was, …

 

Oh! And I was made professor! I was recognized! I was made full professor of Evolutionary Psychology at Asbiro university in Poland, despite all the evil.

 

Woes: Congratulations on that!

 

Ed Dutton: And then what else has gone on? And then, no. And then, that’s it! And then well, I one thing I got back into the other day with my, … I was couldn’t work out what to buy my son for Christmas. And so I got him a WWF wrestling game for the playstation. And I’d completely forgotten about how brilliant WWF was.

 

And then I found out about all the skullduggery behind the scenes and all this stuff, which I’ve been watching documentaries about that. And then I’ve noticed that the wokeness of wrestling! So now the wrestlers have gone from being big, beefy, guys they were in the early 90s, to people that like:

 

“Oh. I don’t take steroids, because I’m too moral. And I’m a moral woke wrestler!”

 

This is what’s going on now. So even that’s fallen into wokeness. And lots of women wrestlers and stuff like that, as well. So even that’s gone! Even they’ve even taken hold of WWF, which is very sad. So yes, that’s been my year. What about yours?

 

[03:03]

 

Woes: Oh it’s been not quite as productive as your year, from the sounds of it. But yeah, I mean, most people have talked about the BLM have Covid, and lockdown, and the US election. But obviously, you. And I have a different topic that we’re going to discuss. It’s to do with the book that you’ve got coming out next next year, about witches, transsexualism, and feminism.

 

Ed Dutton: Which is in “Witch is Feminism and the Fall of the West”.

 

Woes: And the fall of the West. Okay. So, first of all could you get us into this topic by discussing the archetype, or the figure of the “witch”?

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah. So I got thinking about it, … There was a comment actually that was made by Robin Riley, who I think you interviewed. And it was that comment that inspired it. That she was confronted with these purple-headed dragons, or something, and she said:

 

“Oh, could we start burning witches again?”

 

And I thought:

 

“That’s interesting! What are the kind of people that were witches in pre-modern England?”

 

I mean, the height of the witchcraft was the 17th century. And what were the kind of people that are witches now? What was going on? What’s the dynamic of the witch? What does the witch actually do? What’s her function? Why did they want to kill them? Are we supposed to believe the narrative that they were just unpleasant? They were just picked on, or whatever? Or is there something more to it?

 

And the more you look into it, what you’ve got is a system in evolutionary terms, as I discussed when I was on here last year, you can pass on your genes directly by having children. You can pass them on kin selection by looking after your nephews and nieces. And you can pass them on by elevating your inclusive fitness! That is your group, your extended kinship group, your ethnic group.

 

And once that happens then well certainly with the aristocracy of these two groups fighting, you get into a situation of group selection. Of two groups fighting each other to win out. And then, if you look at the qualities which ensure that you would dominate, that you win in the battle of group selection — and computer modeling has looked at those — these are high positive and negative ethnocentrism. High positive ethnocentrism is internal cooperation. High negative ethnocentrism external violence. So those are the groups that dominate.

 

So what the group is going to be selected to do, is to optimize it’s group fitness by ensuring it’s ethnocentric. How does it do this? Well, one of the things it does is it brings in religion. And religion makes adaptive things i.e., positive and negative ethnocentrism into the will of god. But another thing it needs to do, is it needs to ensure there isn’t much conflict. You need in cooperation.

 

So you can’t have inter-male conflict. Inter-male conflict is a bad thing! Now a lot of societies, weak societies, they’re under weak levels of selection pressure, like in Africa, or whatever. There’s massive inter-male conflict, because there’s polygamy. And so all of the women want to go for the high status males.

 

[06:00]

 

And so you get, in the case of the Bushmen, about 60% of the male population don’t breed! And what those men spend their time doing, is fighting and whatever. And so there’s this very little in the way of cooperation! It’s not good for the group.

 

So you have to reduce inter-male conflict! How do you reduce inter-male conflict? You create patriarchy! And there was a fascinating paper which looked at this. It was in the “Mankind Quarterly”. You create patriarchy. What patriarchy does it means that the male has control over the female. He controls her sexuality. She is controlled, by him whatever means it is. Whether it’s foot binding, or veiling, or whatever. But he controls her sexuality, so she is not independent of him. And that’s patriarchy.

 

And therefore the patriarchy helps to ensure the group is more positively and negatively ethnocentric. And therefore the patriarchy becomes part of the religiousness and becomes the will of god, and is promoted as the will of god. So that’s it! And the witches deviate from this.

 

And if you look at the kind of people that were accused of being witches everywhere — men are a slight exception that we I look at separately in the book. Basically the men that are accused of being witches are anti-social men! So they’re damaging to group selection. Group selection is about cooperation. They’re anti-social men! So they get accused of witchcraft. Deeply unpopular anti-social types.

 

It’s mostly women, because what these women are doing is inadvertently questioning the patriarchy. They do that in a number of ways. One, they work as prostitutes. They work as financially independent women, which is showing other women that they can operate outside the patriarchy, and which is also undermining the system of sexual ethics, and whatever. So prostitutes are accused of being witches.

 

Two, they’re sexually loosely! They have illegitimate children. Things like this. Again, they’re not conforming to the patriarchy. They should never be alone with a man. They’re not conforming to the patriarchy!

 

So thirdly, they are independent women, they’re widows that have money, and are independent, or they’re spinsters and they never marry. And so they operate as independent women.

 

Fourthly, they are anti-social women, who in a context of literal belief in witchcraft do actually believe it. They’re basically operating a separate religion of folk magic, which is therefore a rival to the patriarchal system. And so some of these people would genuinely believe that they were witches. And they would genuinely believe they had magic powers. And they would confess to it, and whatever.

 

And so in all of these ways that you can see that from an evolutionary perspective these witches were people that were undermining the patriarchy. And that’s why at times of intense selection — and that’s what the 16th the 17th century was, it was bloody cold — there was very intense group selection.

 

And so you can see how therefore the group is under harsh selection for religiousness. And it becomes so religious that gradually across the 16th and 17th century they start persecuting witches, particularly in your native Scotland. That was where it was very, very intense.

 

[09:02]

 

James sixth of Scotland, first of England, wrote a book on this, which I quoted extensively in my own book and he said:

 

“Witches are real!”

 

And I agree with him. So this is basically what you have. This is the nature of the witch! It is the person that undermines the patriarchal system. And in a system of harsh group selection it is adaptive to remove those people from the population, because they will spread negative social epistasis. They will spread behavior which undermines the group’s inclusive fitness. And so therefore they had to be removed, or they had to be stopped. And that’s what you get!

 

And you get it more intensely the more harsh the group selection. So it’s much harsher in the north of Europe than in the south of Europe. And so, yeah that’s basically the essence of it.

 

Woes: I can imagine a feminist hearing this and feeling quite vindicated. That witchcraft, the demonizing of certain women, was all an attempt by men to stay in power and maintain their power structure. And you seem to be saying that:

 

“Yes! That’s exactly what it was!”

 

Ed Dutton: Well, there’s slightly more to it than that. So yes, this is the nature of these witches. And so what you have is a society which is adapted towards patriarchy. If you are a female and you are patriarchal, you will signal that you are patriarchal. You will signal that you are religious. This is why one of the reasons why women are more religious than men.

 

Men will want religiousness, because it will be a sign, the woman is saying in order to have sex with me you have to invest! Then the man wants evidence that she’s not going to cuckold him. What is the evidence that she’s not going to cuckold him? It’s conformity to the patriarchal system. What is the evidence that they conform to the patriarchal system? It’s religiousness!

 

So you’re going to have a system where religiousness is going to become selected for, particularly in women, where submission to the patriarchal system is going to become selected for, particularly in women, and women that don’t select for, don’t conform, will not pass on their genes. And so the way that you will get women who don’t conform to the patriarchal system, and who go into prostitution, and illegitimacy, and witchcraft, and all these things that deviate from the patriarchal system, is through mutation. So you’ll get mutant genes!

 

Woes: Spiteful mutants!

 

Ed Dutton: Right! People who are high in mutational load will be born every generation, and they will die, because the child mortality rate in 17th century, 18th century, was 50%. And they will die out to varying degrees, of course, but they will die out.

 

And what you would expect is for these people who deviated mentally from the norm in terms of not being patriarchal and thus being accused of witchcraft for that reason, you’d also expect them to express other maladaptive behavior. Such as being mentally ill. Such as having depression. Such as having schizophrenia. Such as histrionic disorder. Such as being anti-social. Such as all the things that are associated with witches! So you’d expect them to be these ghastly, nasty, psychopathic, women who we are warned in fairy tales that we have to avoid! These nasty women, that live in gingerbread houses and kill you, or whatever.

 

And that’s what these women were! They were at the bottom of society, because and not only that, but, of course, the brain is about 84 percent of the genome. And so if you’ve got mutations of the brain, you’re going to sure as dammit have mutations of the body, because the brain is a massive target for mutation. And so this means that they’re going to be physically ugly! They’re going to have ugly faces, and big noses, and big chins. And they’re going to age quickly, just as the stereotypical witch did!

 

[13:00]

 

And. So if you look in detail those that were targeted, it was women who were spinsters, it was women, … I think I read that it was over half of those that were executed for witchcraft across the 17th century were spinsters, over the age of 50.

 

Woes: So that’s, because they were ugly?

 

Ed Dutton: Exactly! Why would they spinsters. Because they were ugly! Because men don’t want ugly women.

 

Woes: But then the other fifty percent of them must have been sexually promiscuous.

 

Ed Dutton: Widows, prostitutes, those that practiced magic, whatever. But yeah, so generally they were physically unattractive. So you have a situation where under conditions of harsh Darwinian selection, health correlates with intelligence, health correlates with good character, good character intelligence, good genes and they all are co-morbid.

 

And so those that rise to the top in that kind of society, are going to be highly patriarchal. And those that deviate from this, will be at the bottom, because of their personality, because of their low intelligence.

 

And, because of their high mutational load, which will mean that they’ll be more likely to find them being witches. So they were at the bottom of society these people, these anti-feminists. These women who were adapted to a fast life history strategy and ecology. Basically of the pump and dump, of live fast, die young. That’s the kind of people we’re talking about, right? Basically women that were whores, sluts, or wanna be whores, sluts. And that’s who ends up at the bottom of society.

 

Now, once those conditions break down. And that’s what you get in 1800. Once those conditions break down. So we go from 50% child mortality to 1% child mortality today, then you get a huge rise in mutational load across the population. You get more, and more, people who are mentally ill more, who deviate from what we were selected for was to be patriarchal, was to be religious, was to be pro-social personality, and was to be intelligent.

 

And you get more, and more, people that deviate from this. And it’s gonna normally be in a negative direction, because it was so strongly selected for these things. And they are going to be higher in mutational load. And they’re going to be physically ugly, and whatever.

 

But the selection pressure broke down first among the higher classes! They were under weaker selection pressure for longer. What is it that weakens selection pressure? Good housing, access to medicine, wealth basically. And so they have been under weaker selection for longer. And so you’re going to expect higher mutational load.

 

Remember the heritability of socioeconomic status is very high! It’s about 0.7. Higher mutational load among the higher classes. And therefore the witch, the women who are these maladaptive spiteful mutant witches, have moved from the lower classes to the upper classes!

 

And you get these women in those classes who are anti-patriarchal, who advocate male roles for women, who are aggressive, who are anti-religious, who advocate destructive ideologies for the group, who advocate things that just mess the group up and make the group maladaptive, and low and positive and negative ethnocentrism, who advocate the destruction — what is it that causes the reduction into male conflict monogamy? So they advocate the breakdown of monogamy.

 

So you have an increasing system whereby there’s lots of men that can’t get women. And so you have, you know, as we now see. And so they have lesbianicious tendencies. And they are feminists! They call themselves feminists. And they are the modern day witches!

 

And they are also physically ugly! I mean, there’s detailed studies on this that show that feminist identification correlates being ugly! It correlates with having masculine hands! It correlates with all kinds of markers of being [word unclear] and unattractive.

 

So you have basically these witch spinsters of yore, and the witch spinsters now! The social class has changed. But they are both witches. And the difference was that under pre-modern conditions we were adapted to be highly religious and thus skeptical of witches, so we dealt with them! Right? We jailed them, or we hanged them.

 

Now, because of a build-up of mutational load. And also, because of the destruction of the conservative society, and the inculcation of society, the flip of society over to these Leftist values that promotes Leftist ideas, anti-group ideas, as the norm.

 

Once you reach about 20 percent of the society advocating maladaptive things everyone moves over, apart from the genetic cream. Then people are inculcated by these feminists. Normal women are inculcated by these feminists to do maladaptive things. To delay fertility. To not have children, and whatever. And to destroy their own children! To allow their own children to be transsexuals. To what whatever it happens to be.

 

And. So that’s what I think we’ve got. The modern day feminists are literally witches! And when James VI of Scotland said:

 

“Witches are real.”

 

Yeah, they are. And they’re here now, and they’re called feminists!

 

Woes: But he didn’t mean, just for the sake of clarification, when James VI said that, he didn’t mean that witches are real in the sense of supernatural beings, you know, working with potions that alter, you know, affect life in a metaphysical way, did he?

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah! He strongly believed in, he literally believed in witches. And he believed that they tried to kill him when he was trying to get married to his Norwegian wife. And they tried to sink his ship. And that’s how this witch craze in southern Scotland in the 1590s, that’s how that started. And lots and lots of people were killed.

 

[19:15]

 

Woes: But out of interest, do you believe that there is any supernatural element to this? And presumably not.

 

Ed Dutton: No. But I think that what you’re dealing with the same type of people. But, for the reason I laid out, these people have migrated from the lower class, from what was called the lower sort the people at the bottom of society, to the people basically near the top of society, which is where these feminists tend to be.

 

Woes: Yeah. The Champagne socialists.

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah! Yeah! But you’ve got to talk about the really extreme examples, because a champagne socialist might just be some stupid private school girl, like Harriet Harman*, or something that push pushes the society in a maladaptive direction.

 

[Harriet Ruth Harman is a British politician and solicitor who has served as Member of Parliament for Camberwell and Peckham, formerly Peckham, since 1982. A member of the Labour Party, she has served in various Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet positions.]

 

I’m talking about the people who influence her! So the Andrea Dworkin, the Kate Millet! The real battle axe feminists.

 

Now one of the interesting things about. And it’s a parallel, so what we’re thinking is that women are selected to patriarchy. What does that mean? It means that the woman is submissive! It means that the woman is selected to what’s called a slow life history strategy. A woman that’s selected to patriarchy is the kind of woman that is selected to a society where you invest! The man invests in the woman, and the man invests in the children. And the woman invests in the man, and is loyal to the man. And the woman invests and nurtures the children

 

So we’re talking about a mother, rather than a whore, basically. If you think about the deviation from this, is a fast life history strategy. If you’re evolved to an unstable ecology, live fast, die young, you could be wiped out at any minute. And so you don’t bother with nurture and bonding with people, because there might never be any pay off.

 

Woes: R-type and K-type.

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah, R-type individual. That’s right, as we talked about last year. And so those, …

 

Woes: There is actually the expression “fast women” ironically, from decades gone by.

 

Ed Dutton: Right. Yeah, well that’s what we’re talking about. These kinds of women, right? And so they are evolved to an ecology of violence and whatever, where the men don’t invest in them. It’s not patriarchal at all! The men don’t invest in them, they are not invested in. They have to take on some of the male roles. It’s perhaps the polygamy and the man will invest in them for a bit, and then shun them in favor of the new younger, more nubile wife. And so they will have to bring up their children somehow. One of the things they will do, by the way, is alloparent*.

 

[Alloparenting is a term used to classify any form of parental care provided by an individual towards a non-descendant young. Non-descendant refers to any young who is not the direct genetic offspring of the individual, but does not exclude related young such as siblings, or grandchildren].

 

So they’ll get together with other co-wives and like lesbianiciously bring up the children. And it’s been suggested that’s the heritability of sexuality in women is very, very low. It’s 0.2. And it’s been suggested that one of the reasons for this is that women are adapted to this kind of situation, where you have to be able to — you’re going to get dumped, basically. So you have to be able to bring up your children.

 

And so you bond strongly to the point of sex with another woman, and you co-parent your children. Which is what happens to Sanna Marin [born 16 November 1985] who’s the current Prime Minister of Finland [since Dec, 2019]. We have it, by the way, a kind of witch government of Finland! I call them the spice girls. But you, …

 

Woes: Or the spiteful girls! [chuckling]

 

Ed Dutton: Spiteful girls! That’s very good, my Scottish friend in earlier, calls from the “spice girls”. He came up with that one. But the “spiteful girls”, that’s excellent! That’s right, that’s very good! I might have to quote you on that.

 

And so what you have is these women who, because they have to take on some of the masculine roles, because they’re not being looked after, there’s no patriarchy, they’re more masculinized! They’re much more physically and mentally masculinized.

 

Now one of the things that’s interesting in terms of the witch. So you’re [word unclear] and therefore they’re physically ugly and unattractive, which is true stereotypically, and provenly true of these feminists . And, of course, true based on the historical sources of these witches. Masculinized, unattractive, ugly, women. Also faster life history strategy, greater diversity, more ugliness.

 

[23:08]

 

But what’s fascinating is the fantasies they have. So it’s been shown that women feminist identification weakly correlates with having rape fantasies.

 

Now, why would that be the case? Well, because if you’re in a fast life history ecology, the kind of man you want, the kind of man whose genes will be passed on, the kind of man if you have his children your children will survive, will be a violent, domineering kind of kind of guy, because that’s who survives in an unstable ecology. Selection isn’t particular particularly favoring intelligence, or emotions, or character, or whatever. It favors a violent, you know, sort of WWE [World Wrestling Entertainment] wrestler, Chris Benoit type. Well that’s perhaps not a good example, but whatever.

 

Woes: It’s interesting thing that such women also create social discord, so that it is the violent men who will be able to survive that situation.

 

Ed Dutton: That’s a very good point! Precisely. That’s what I want to move on to now. You’re ahead of me here Woes! So it’s like sperm selection. So the man ejaculates with half a billion spermatozoa, and the woman’s immune system, she wants to get pregnant,. But she also does everything she can to kill the sperm! So that only the strongest possible sperm can get through. Only the R-strategy sperm, if you like, can get through. So she violently repels the sperm, like she’s being raped! She fights it off. And ultimately only the strongest man, the strongest sperm, if any of them, can get past her violent defenses. And then that’s the one by which she gets pregnant. Well, that’s how these rape fantasies work.

 

The woman is dominated by, she’s fantasizing about being raped by a fast life history man who can’t keep his hands off her. But ultimately, you know, by doing that, he’s proving ironically, that paradoxically, that he’s the man she wants. And so these fast life history strategy women will tend to have rape fantasies.

 

And feminist identification has been shown to correlate with having, ironically, having rape fantasies. And two of the major feminists, or second wave feminists that you may have heard of, (((Andrea Dworkin))) and Kate Millet, both had intense rape fantasies, and wrote about them.

 

 

In the case of Andrea Dworkin she thought it was real! Obviously it wasn’t. I mean, she was a fat, ugly, hairy, old woman!

 

I’ve got a paper that’s coming out soon on this. If you look at the witches in the 17th century. Right, first of all in England, not Scotland, forget Scotland, that’s different. In England they weren’t subject to torture, other than in the case of Matthew Hopkins, the Witch Finder General, where they were walked and sleep deprived. But put that thing aside. They weren’t subject to torture. They admitted freely to — in many cases it is documented — to being raped, to having sex with the devil!:

 

[26:06]

 

“The devil appeared to me in the form of a black man, and he had sex with me on six consecutive nights; the devil appeared in my chamber and he sucked my breasts until it hurts, and then he had sex with me from behind.”

 

Now what I think these were, were rape fantasies. And I think these are the kind of women who we would expect to have rape fantasies. These fast life history strategy, relatively fast strategy women. And I think that they were having, … There’s no reason, they weren’t tortured, they weren’t induced.

 

And if you go back, the idea of the incubus, is very ancient it’s not some new thing that was created, or something, by the patriarchy to have a go at women, or whatever. It’s very ancient, the idea of the incubus, of women, these night devils. And equally, .

 

Woes: Is that the same as the succubus?

 

Ed Dutton: The succubus is a woman. A succubus is a woman. And now that’s an interesting point as well. Because if you look at the research on BDSM. So people that like, you know, hitting, and whipping, and canning, and stuff like this. Those people are tend to be fast life history strategists. And also the tendency is for the women to like to be hit, which makes sense, and the men to like to hit.

 

Now why does, why is that the case? Well, because we know from the evolution of sex. There’s a very interesting book on this called “A History of Rape”, or something, “A Natural History of Rape”. I can’t remember the author, Palmer and something, or other.

 

And they look at this. Why is sex related to violence? Why do men become more aroused by violent porn than normal porn? They become more aroused by rape porn than normal porn. They ejaculate more when watching rape porn, and violent porn, than normal porn, right?

 

What’s going on? Well what’s happening is that in pre-history men that raped passed on more of their genes, of course! So, how do you pass all genes? Normally within marriage, or whatever. But also by ganging together and going around and gang raping. As you see with these Muslim immigrants, whatever, that are right at the bottom of society. That’s how you do it. And so therefore it would make sense that a man would be sexually aroused by violence. It would make sense that the two would go together, because it was the men that were, …

 

Woes: Yeah. I have heard that the parts of the brain in men that process violence and process sex are overlapping. I don’t know if that’s a physical thing, or just functional correlation.

 

Ed Dutton: Equally with women, you’re gonna get the same sort of thing. The women that would in a sense be aroused by violence, would get the more violent man. And that would be the man with the better gene quality in a fast life history strategy ecology, or the women that would just give in and would not be killed, or whatever.

 

So there was an advantage to being aroused by violence. And this would be higher among fast life history strategy people. And so you can see where these relationships come from. And then that you can again further understand the relationship between fast life history strategy, non-patriarchal types, and this rape fantasies, and whatever. So I think that’s what you’re dealing with.

 

And I think that basically this irony that these women who are these feminists, and whatever, go on about how:

 

“I’m an independent woman!”

 

And they ultimately, probably, want to be hit, and smacked, and beaten up! And that’s what they want.

 

[29:39]

 

Woes: There does seem to be a correlate. I mean, you hear about this. A correlation between women who hate men, and women who want to be beaten up by men. And rape fantasies, and so on.

 

Just for the sake of clarification, because some people are saying in the live chat that they don’t have rape fantasy, they don’t like violent porn. For the record, [chuckling] I certainly don’t like it.

 

Ed Dutton: Hang on! Wait a minute. We are a broadly nationalist show yeah?

 

Woes: Yeah.

 

Ed Dutton: So people who are going to watch are going to be highly group selected and patriarchal. So why would they like rape fantasies and violent porn?

 

Woes: I see. I just wondered, because you were saying it’s part of our makeup from, ..

 

Ed Dutton: It is part of our makeup. But you’re going to get group and individual variation in the extent of it. And what I would expect is that the kind of people that were religious, or were patriarchal, or who would have survived under harsh Darwinian conditions that I’m talking about, they would be less inclined towards this stuff, than the mutants, than the feminists, than the witches, than whatever. So that’s it!

 

So if I was on this show and there were a lot of Leftists watching. And they were perfectly honest, I think they would perhaps say:

 

“Yeah, I bloody well like this kind of stuff!”

 

The other thing I was going to say though, that you mentioned with the succubus, was that the relationship is in general that when it comes to BDSM the men like to be the dominant partner and the woman the submissive.

 

But there is crossover. And so you do get some, particularly men, that like to be the submissive. Why? Well, because if the woman could dominate them, then there’s a sense in which it’s like she’s a fast history strategy woman. Her genes would survive, good to get her pregnant.

 

Woes: Right.

 

Ed Dutton: So you can see some crossover. But in general, not. So basically that’s it.

 

So the rise of feminism then on that level is extremely bad for society! It’s the rise of anti-ethnocentrism. It elevates into male conflict, and it makes the society less group selected. And those that are advocating it are in that sense paralleling modern witches.

 

The second problem then is another element of a society that dominates, that wins in the battle of group selection, is ingenuity, is intelligence, is genius. And what the genius is outlier high IQ combined with, … By the way, you said there’s a chat. I can’t see the chat! Where is this chat that you’ll see? I can’t see any chat in the comments.

 

Woes: Oh, hold up. All right, yes, because Stream Yard doesn’t show that. Hold on a second I’ll show you where it is. I’ll send this to you on Telegram so you can, ..

 

Ed Dutton: All right. What’s that on then? Oh yes. All right.

 

So the other way that you win in the battle of group selection is genius. So even though the Japanese and the Chinese are more ethnocentric than us, they have a smaller gene pool than us, and they produce fewer per capita geniuses. They have fewer outliers, they produce fewer geniuses.

 

And so what is the genius? The geniuses outlier high intelligence plus moderately psychopathic traits. That’s what the genius is. And so that means that he can come up with the original idea and he thinks outside the box, low conscientiousness, and he doesn’t care about offending people, which new ideas almost always do! You know, I had a chap on my show and he’s disputing dark matter. And there’s so much wrapped up in that he’s like an outcast in physics, just disputing dark matter.

 

[33:09]

 

So women are a problem then! The promotion of women in academia then becomes, and in life in general, becomes a problem, because there’s less female genius. And one of the things that you have to do is you have to nurture geniuses. They’re often these kind of impractical types, they need someone to do their laundry for them, or do their cooking for them, or whatever.

 

And so the universities were a place that nurtured genius. They would allow these people to get there and just get on with it! It was about finding out the truth! Indeed these universities were founded originally on religious lines. We’re here to discover the nature of god’s creation, and lies, therefore blasphemy!

 

Now it’s been suggested by Simon Baron Cohen that you have an extreme male brain, which is basically autistic and focused on systematizing, and therefore essentially low in agreeableness and low in conscientiousness. And sort of quite the high testosterone they inter-correlate. That’s the male brain. High in systematizing, but blind to empathy.

 

And the female brain is very high in empathy, but system blind. So what the female is concerned about is not truth! It’s not systematic, you know, understanding the world. There are things that are more important than truth! Like everyone getting along, and being happy, and feeling validated, and all that.

 

Woes: Yes, of course.

 

Ed Dutton: But it is inimicable to what the genius does, which is the search for truth! And so if you have a society where women are allowed into higher education, then eventually you’re going to get the distinction between the genius who’s going to be outlier intelligent, but socially awkward, and, you know, crap to work with, and whatever. And the “head girl” type! The type who runs Finland. The straight A’s pupil at school, who’s very reasonably intelligent, but not outlier intelligent. And who’s very conscientious, and very hard at work, …

 

Woes: Very conformist!

 

Ed Dutton: Socially skilled, and conformist, absolutely conformist! Women are higher in conformism than men. Much higher conformism than men! Because they’re higher in agreeableness and higher in conscientiousness. And so who’s going to get the job, if you’re put up with a genius and someone like that? Well, obviously it’s going to be the woman that’s going to get the job, who would you like to work with?

 

And so, then original ideas, and originality, and new ideas, and whatever goes! And the whole spirit of academia that it’s to do with coming up with original ideas, and challenging convention, and whatever, you know, come what may, is suppressed, in favor of the new model of university as a kind of nursery school. Where everyone’s a winner, and everyone has to be happy, and whatever.

 

And eventually once the women make up about 20 of an organization, it starts to tip towards them and their values start to take over. And so the values of academia which is the pursuit of the truth no matter what, which is the genius strategy, that where you find out things, that goes!

 

And so you have a society dominated by women and all these things that would have happened, you know, things that, … We’ll think of all the inventions that have come about. Rockets! If people think we’ll have died in the attempt to get to the moon. All of this wouldn’t happen, because you have women in charge and women are averse to these things and they want everyone, …

 

[36:25]

 

Woes: Yeah, absolutely! And so modern academia is a very conformist space which specializes in enforcing a consensus! And adopting it. I mean, I did a video just for the sake of plugging here, I did a video back at the very start, 2014, called “How Feminism Killed the Space Age”. And it was basically making this point. That once you have women in charge of things there is going to be less innovation. And there’s going to be less, because women are less interested in things that aren’t immediately useful. I think that men have an ability to get, …

 

And they also have something called I would call “random curiosity”. I did a video with that title as well. Where I was making that point. That men can be fascinated by things which are not immediately relevant, or useful! But which end up being extremely relevant and useful. And I think that difference alone means that an academia dominated by women is going to be much less intellectually curious. Which is exactly what we see now!

 

[37:26]

 

Ed Dutton: Precisely! So that’s downstream of the destruction of patriarchy. And what that does to ethnocentrism. That’s the next problem.

 

Now the next problem then is that a lot of these women are, of course, adapted to patriarchy — most women are adapted to some extent to patriarchy — undermine the patriarchy and undermine the religious system. And what you get is this free-for-all that we now have. What they promote, these feminists, is not just feminism, but it’s this broader undermining of the traditional system a and what that does is it undermines group selectiveness, …

 

Woes: Just before you continue, there’s one thing that just occurred to me that I think (((Germane Greer))) actually said that:

 

“If women had been in charge all along, we would still be living in caves.”

 

I think that there’s a quote from Germane Greer about this. Let me just see if I can find it. But it’s basically backing up what you and I are saying here. Let me see if I can see it. Yeah, I don’t know, I can’t find it now. But anyway I’m pretty sure that even Germane Greer is on our side on this.

 

Ed Dutton: I wouldn’t be at all surprised. And by the way, she has this fast life history strategy background. She was beaten up by her parents, and things. She confesses to this.

 

So the downwind of that then, the next thing you get is the general Leftism of these feminists. So it’s undermining patriarchy. It’s undermining traditional values, promoting things like anti-natalism, and whatever. Being a feminist, as with the witches of yore, being a feminist and being a left-wing woman, of course, is associated with being mentally ill.

 

Why? Because it’s a reflection of general mutational load. And also having high levels of depression tends to be associated with being individualistic, and self-interested, and just everything’s bad! Everything’s awful! And having just a negative view of the world. And then the next thing that becomes. The problem is that it creates this arms race of virtue signaling. Where you have to move on to the next group, and the next group, and the next group.

 

And under normal conditions women are more religious than men. And they’re adapted to patriarchy, and they’re more religious than men. And this makes them more Right-wing and more conservative than men.

 

If you undermine the religiosity, if you undermine the patriarchy, which directs the women, because the women remember are evolved to be directed, they are evolved to not make decisions for themselves, but to make their fathers make decisions, or their husbands make the decisions. Then, of course, they become completely maladaptive. More so than men. And this is what you see.

 

So once the religiousness collapses and the religion itself stops being a protective force. They are more religious than men, but it becomes this left-wing deracinated religion of just pathological altruism! Of generalized altruism which means they’re highly in favor of immigration and stuff like that. And they make these very maladaptive decisions, which involve lots and lots of not having any children, and things like this.

 

Furthermore it may be the case that women are literally selected to be less ethnocentric than men, because under prehistoric conditions, it would be the women that would be abducted and taken away by other tribes, and raped by them, and whatever. And so if they could be less ethnocentric then they would be more likely to survive.

 

That may also be why women are better at learning languages than men, perhaps.

 

[40:52]

 

Woes: And then they’re also more social. I mean, they need language in a more immediate ways than, …

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah. And then the next thing is the issue of transsexuality. Which I think is absolutely fascinating! So you then move on to the next minority group, you know, this constant empathy, this constant desire, this female desire to constantly help the unfortunate, and help the marginalized and whatever.

 

And then you end up with the issue of transsexuality. Now I think that it associates with this sort of stuff in the sense that it’s like. I mean, it’s kind of demonic! It’s basically telling us that, … It says in the Bible:

 

“The devil is the father of lies.”

 

And it’s basically telling us that “lies are truth” and “truth is lies”. The purpose is to make us in a situation where there’s no structure, there’s no order! In religious terms:

 

“God decides what you are. God is the source of ultimate truth. And god says you’re a man. God says you’re a woman. Jesus says I am the way the truth and the light. God is truth. There is objective truth. God is truth! And the only person who is his own truth is God!”

 

And what these transsexuals are saying is:

 

“If I say I am something then I am that!”

 

And in that sense they are saying:

 

“I am God!”

 

And so that you could argue that like the devil, they are literally a fallen angel that is challenging God! And I look at this in the book, and it’s worse than that! If you look at these things about titles. Who is it that we give a special pronoun to? It’s god! God gets a capital “H”. Who is it that demands their own pronouns? And to have different say what my pronoun is? Transsexuals! And who is it that says to you:

 

“Look, this is how I have to be addressed! I have to be addressed like this. And if you cheek me I will banish you!”

 

The monarch! Who is it that asserts:

 

“Oh, I have to be addressed in this way. And that’s what you have to do! And I want sanctions if you don’t!”

 

Transsexuals! So it strikes me that there is something kind of demonic about this. To humiliate people, and to just grind them into the dirt and say:

 

“There’s no meaning! There’s no nothing! There’s nothing! It’s this is just hell! There’s no meaning! There’s no logic! There’s no nothing! There’s nothing! It’s just about power! It’s about power! And you bow down to me! Bow down to me! And if I say I’m a man, I’m a man! If I say a woman, I’m a woman! And it’s power!”

 

And that’s either saying you’re god, or it’s something demonic, as far as I can see. I don’t literally believe in these. I’m saying that’s how you can interpret it.

 

[43:55]

 

Woes: Yeah. And it does say, … I think Roger Scrutton might have made this point as well. That when he saw Leftists rioting in 1968 in Paris, it was as if they were wanting to be “God”. They wanted to take control of, to have power over everything. He made some vague point in that direction which I’m completely misquoting it, but that was the broad point that he was making.

 

And apparently it was Camille Paglia who said that about, … It wasn’t Germane Greer, by the way, earlier on. People are correcting me.

 

Ed Dutton: Oh I see.

 

Woes: Yeah, go on.

 

Ed Dutton: No, I was just going to say that what you have, it’s quite interesting this, what you have with these transsexuals, if you want to understand what’s going on. Transexuality is strongly associated with autism.

 

And it’s also strongly associated with being masculinized. I did a paper on this recently. It’s one of the only papers that’s got like an immediate complaint, demanding, saying it should never have passed peer review. And it should never have been published. And that was published by the journal. And that was written, of course, by a trans-woman. A trans-women academic.

 

And what they are saying is all of these markers of being masculinized, associated with being a trans-woman. So trans-women, that’s male to female transsexuals, are more masculinized, psychologically and physically, than the average man. Now this is fascinating!

 

Now what that means, autism is an expression — of which is low empathy, high systematizing, whatever — is an expression of being of masculinization! So people that are high in autistic traits tend to be more masculine. So that’s consistent with that.

 

Now what you get with autism, is you get a limited sense of self! So the sense of who you are, a sense of having:

 

“This is me. And this is who I am. And this is my place in the world.”

 

Doesn’t develop properly. And it doesn’t develop properly, because autistics don’t pick up on social cues very well. And they’re easily overwhelmed by stimuli. And so they feel that they’re in a world of sort of chaos, and that they’re not in control of things. And so they feel almost separate from themselves. Almost like they’re watching their lives pan out. And they have no control over it. Which is why some autistic people will refer to themselves in the third person, and things like this.

 

And so, that’s what that that then is associated with what’s called borderline personality disorder. Which is when you have a fundamental lack of self and your world is chaos. And there’s this void at the heart of you. And you deal with that, …

 

[46:32]

 

Woes: And this is usually women who have borderline disorder, …

 

Ed Dutton: That is more likely to be women. And you deal with this — it’s also present in men — and you deal with this by creating a separate sort of personality, or something like a black and White clear sense of structure that gives gives life meaning and whatever. But that can be unstable and sometimes that will break down and you’ll flip to the opposite, the exact opposite of it.

 

You see that in religious converts. And you see that in even in the Alt-Right. People that go from being far Left, being far Right, to being Christian fundamentalists, to being whatever. You see people like this.

 

Now one thing that’s parallel, that’s very similar to borderline personality, is perhaps an example of it, is narcissistic personality. And this is much more common among men.

 

Woes: Yeah.

 

Ed Dutton: Because the way you deal with your chaos and your void at the heart of your life, is to create a very, very, you know, superior sense of self. You decide that you’re better than others, and whatever.

 

But you also need to have this, others need to tell you that’s the case, others need to worship you, and whatever so that you’re reassured that you are, in fact, brilliant! And when they fail to do that, indeed when they do something which questions your sense of self, or questions the dogmas which you believe in and, because you believe in them you’re brilliant, and whatever, … When those are questioned by them, this can trigger narcissistic rage!

 

Because you can realize that this will undermine everything, and you will be confronted with the hell and the nothing that you are! And so you can see that you’ve got these two things. Narcissism, which goes together with a limited sense of self, which goes together with borderline personality.

 

So another thing that’s associated with autism is sexual fetishes! Autistics, and masculine men in general, are focused on things! So a man will say:

 

“I’m a breast man!”

 

Or:

 

“I’m an ass man!”

 

And what a fetish is, is that taken to a kind of extremes. You could only get it up if there’s a nice pair of tits, or whatever! And these fetishes can then become things that are associated with sexual things, that aren’t actually sexual. Like, I don’t know, people that want to like leather [?], or something like that. And these are more common among autistics.

 

Now, this all comes together in the trans sexual according to the research by Blanchard. Because the transsexual is a narcissist! Transsexuals are high narcissism. And the transsexual fetish is that he is sexually aroused by the idea of himself as a woman!

 

[49:22]

 

Woes: Oh my god! This is like in Silence of the Lambs!:

 

“Would you fuck me? I’d fuck me! I’d fuck me hard!”

 

Buffalo Bill.

 

Ed Dutton: Right! Well, that’s what we’re talking about. They are sexually aroused by the idea of themselves as women! There’s a small minority where, yeah, it is true, they are intersexual, or whatever. But in general that’s what we’re talking about. They’re sexually aroused by the idea of themselves as a woman.

 

And why would that be the case? Well, because they’re narcissistic. And so what you would expect then, if they’re narcissistic, is they would demand that society accepts them as women. And they would demand! And they would get narcissistic rage and go bonkers, if people question them, which they do! They’d be very aggressive, because they’re very masculinized, and indeed they’re narcissistic.

 

And I think we shouldn’t even call them these, … What do we call them? Transgender, … We should just call them “trans-narcissists”! That’s what they are.

 

And so what is the devil? What is the narcissist? The narcissist is the person that thinks he’s god. And so that’s what these people kind of think they are.

 

And so I think it’s extremely dangerous! These people are seriously mentally ill! They are a danger to society. They’re narcissists, they’re capable of narcissistic rage and all that entails. And the idea that they should be given equal rights, or something, is insane!

 

Woes: Mmm.

 

Ed Dutton: And this I also look at in the book. That this feminism, this witchcraft, just takes us down to the bowels of hell.

 

Woes: Well, indeed! There is a dizzying array of personality disorders that one can encounter in life. And I think that a lot of us, … I certainly wasn’t familiar with it until maybe a couple of years ago. And yeah, they are very dangerous and destructive people.

 

I think it would be useful if you were to talk about, … You know, you were saying earlier about witches being anti-social, causing problems in the community, and so on. Could you go into some examples, or just detail about that? What would it be that they were doing?

 

Let me just preface this. Women are capable of social degree of social intelligence that I think often completely eludes men. And so they can do things, they can set things up, that really take men by surprise! I think women are very good at that. And so there are all sorts of subtle small things that could be set up by malicious women which then have devastating effects for the community.

 

Would you like to talk about this?

 

[51:52]

 

Ed Dutton: So in the book I look at examples from the 17th century, which was the height of the witch craze. And so it’s things like:

 

“Oh. Yeah, she put a spell on my cow and the cow died.”

 

Probably she poisoned the cow. So nasty things like this. Babies! Killing babies was a big thing that they were often accused of killing other people’s babies. And so it may have been that kind of behavior. You know, you get these nurses, what was her name, this case recently? There were case in the early 90s of a nurse killing babies and whatever.

 

Woes: Yeah.

 

Ed Dutton: And there’s that. And you have them just cursing people, and with a society that believed in the power of the curse, they believed in the power of the curse! People believed this:

 

“And they told me, now I curse you! I hope you’re infertile!”

 

And whatever. So they engaged in what you would call the “nocebo effect”. It’s the opposite of the “placebo effect”. And it can be extremely powerful! If you believe in the nocebo effect, then it can make you infertile if you really believe it. And these people did believe it. They believed in the power of the witch’s curse. And people would identify as witches, they’d be known as witches, and they cursed people.

 

Woes: That’s the power of suggestion.

 

Ed Dutton: So exactly. I mean, there was a case of a known witch. A little girl, she was about 16 years old, and she was walking past — this is about 1610 — and she was in a Pendle, in Yorkshire, Lancastershire is it? And she was walking past this guy called John Laws. And she asked him to give her some pins. And he wouldn’t give her any pins — which we used to hold clothes together — so she cursed him! And he immediately fell down and had a stroke. And then she admitted. She felt really guilty at what she’d done, and she admitted:

 

“I cursed him, and I did this!”

 

And they hanged her. And so, that’s the kind of thing they would engage in. Deeply anti-social, nasty behavior, which for people at the time, was very serious! And was taken very, very seriously, and had, as far as they could see, serious consequences. So that’s what we’re talking about.

 

And what do these feminists do now? They engaged anti-social behavior. They sit behind keyboards telling you I hope your children get killed in a car accident! You know, they smash up public, …

 

Woes: Yeah. And another thing that feminists do, and you see this in public life now, is they specialize in destroying men’s character!

 

Ed Dutton: Oh yeah! That judge that Trump appointed. Some Scottish, Irishy sounding name. And the moment he was appointed.

 

Woes: Kavanaugh!

 

Ed Dutton: Kavanaugh, right. And all of these women, some of them were ugly, frankly, who had dated him in the past, suddenly came forward after 30 years, or 40 years:

 

“Oh! He raped me! Touched me up!”

 

And you had this hysteria of all these women, one after the other, coming forward. Because this person had dumped them basically, or refused to have sex with them, or something. And so they had borne a grudge, as women do, for a very, very, very long time! And they had seen this person get into a position of power and success. And the resentment that they felt, they wanted to bring him down.

 

And these would, perhaps, be the kind of women that would have rape fantasies. That would have fantasies that he raped them. And that would deal with the feeling of humiliation of being scorned, by concocting this! I mean, we know that the nature of memory is such that it’s highly inaccurate. And you will tend to literally alter your memories to make you seem good at any given time.

 

And so you can see how one way you would do that is, if you get dumped by a girl and you alter the memory to:

 

“Oh well it was a mutual thing, or whatever.”

 

And you might genuinely believe that. And you can see how fast life history strategy women would have rape fantasies and things. And if it made them feel better that they had those, they would genuinely believe it happened:

 

“Yeah, I wasn’t dumped by this guy, because I’m ghastly. He dumped me but it was good that he dumped me, because he raped me.”

 

And all of this came out! And none of the allegations went to court, because they were for sure, they were all false. And so you get this in the wake of divorces, as well. I mean, women can concoct all kinds of things:

 

“He hit me!”

 

You know. And it turns out that she’s exaggerating, or whatever. And so, yeah, I think that’s the damage that some, a lot of modern feminists do. That’s why it’s so dangerous to have this idea in British courts, they should automatically be taken seriously. Automatically. No! I would say quite opposite!

 

Woes: Believe women, and so on. Yeah, it is very dangerous! I mean, obviously men are capable of all sorts of crimes, of course, they are. And they’re also capable of deluding themselves. But I think that women seem to have, especially when encouraged by society, women have an ability to believe whatever is necessary. Now obviously I’m not saying all women do this, or whatever. I just think it seems to be something that’s more, …

 

Ed Dutton: If you think about the kind of person that is high in empathy. We talk about multiculturalism and it being inconsistent. Of course, it’s inconsistent to say:

 

“Race is a social construct.”

 

And then to say:

 

“Oh! We need more black people to donate their organs, because black people are dying, because there’s no black donor organs.”

 

Well that shows that racism isn’t a social construct, clearly. That shows it maps onto something very important indeed. And they could hold together this, they’re like the Queen of Hearts from Alice. They can hold together two contradictory things! It doesn’t matter to them! Because there’s things that are more important. There’s power! Power is more important! So they can engage in practical nihilism. And they can:

 

“Oh yeah! Oh, when it’s race! Oh well there’s no clear borders!”

 

And whatever. Where’s anything else there is. Or when it’s race there’s no clear borders when I’m arguing with a racist. But when I want money, then:

 

“Yeah, race exists, it’s very real!”

 

Woes: Of course!

 

Ed Dutton: You can’t be racial! That’s a complete contradiction. But they don’t care about that, because what they care about is power, or empathy! That’s the other thing, you know, you give someone a logical reasonable argument, and the response of an extreme female type woman who traditionally would perhaps be quite patriarchal, would be:

 

“Oh, that’s just so mean! It’s so mean!”

 

Yeah, but it’s true. And it’s true! Woes is Scottish.:

 

“Yeah, but it’s so mean to say he’s Scottish! Scottish isn’t generous. It’s so mean to say he’s Scottish!”

 

Or whatever.:

 

“And the Scottish are run by Wee Jimmy Krankie*. And so, that’s fine! It’s fine.”

 

[*The Krankies are a Scottish comedy duo who enjoyed success as a cabaret act in the 1970s and on television in the 1980s. The joke is that SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon looks like Wee Jimmy Krankie – the pantomime, red-capped schoolboy figure played by the Glasgow comic Janette Tough — a female absurdly pretending to be male.]

 

And so you see what I mean? So that’s why it’s so dangerous in terms of academia, in terms of science, in terms of what I’m interested in, to allow women to overwhelm academia. I’m not saying there shouldn’t be any women in academia. But when they started it at Oxford they brought in women, and it was found that it interfered with the ability to have harsh academic disputation. And then they reduced the numbers. And they said there could only be one woman to every seven men. Because they took the view that it wasn’t working. And eventually, of course, they overturned that and they brought them in.

 

I remember talking to an academic, a British academic, who working in Finland. And they have a thing here called a “Phd defense”. Now, it’s meant to be a formality. And you’ve got them having a party arranged in the next room, I think called “karanka”, and whatever. But as far as he was concerned the thesis that he was presented with, was not very good. And it was the first time he’d done one of these. You’re meant to have an opponent. And the idea is the opponent, you know, pulls apart your thesis and you defend it.

 

Now that’s what happens in a British, … Well, if you’ve ever had a Phd viva*, it’s private though. But you’ve got your internal, I had one. You’ve got your internal examiner, your external examiner. And their purpose is to rip your thesis apart! And your purpose is to defend it.

 

[*The PhD viva examination, or thesis defence, represents the culmination of the PhD examination process, and how you perform at it can determine whether or not you are successful overall.].

 

And this is being criticized increasingly because, of course, you end up with, if a girl has presented a thesis that only just passes, or whatever, or it’s not very good, then they’ll end up in tears! Because the people are being mean. And this is what happened at this defense.

 

The guy was expecting — he’d never done it before — he was expecting an academic disputation. It was a female Phd student and he basically just pulled it apart. And she was almost crying! And he couldn’t believe it! And people said to him afterwards:

 

“I think you were maybe a little bit too much, too harsh.”

 

And he’s like:

 

“What do you mean, a little bit too harsh? I was presenting her with the problems with her thesis. And I was asking for her response. What do you mean?”

 

Woes: And, of course, if it was a person who was committed to the truth no matter what, they wouldn’t really care about their own, they would separate their own feelings from the matter at hand, from the mission, as it were.

 

[61:10]

 

Ed Dutton: That’s right! But a lot of women I think like Jill Biden, or whatever they don’t get PhDs as a means of knowing more about the nature of the world. They get PhDs, because it’s a tick on the good girl picture on the fridge. [Woes laughs]

 

Woes: All right. Somebody makes the comment — this is when we were talking about society, stability, women, witches, and so on — and someone said:

 

“So it’s all women’s fault then?”

 

What would you say about that?

 

Ed Dutton: No. Maybe you could argue that it’s men’s fault for not standing up against this nonsense. And a lot of the spiteful mutants that have undermined the patriarchy and have undermined the traditional system have been men! So it’s not “all” women’s fault. No. But I’m just showing you the parallel is very, very clear, as far as I can see, between the witches of yore and the feminists now.

 

Woes: Okay. We have some Superchats:

 

“We’d love to know Ed’s thoughts on Gnosticism. Would it be a preferable Christian alternative for us well?”

 

Ed Dutton: Well, in the early church, so Gnosticism was this sort of esoteric belief system where you sort of gain greater knowledge through your own esoteric belief, you get closer to Christ. And I think that in the early church they were very unhappy about Gnosticism, because it was so subjective and whatever. And so it would break down into all kinds of infighting and things like this. And so then eventually the Gnostics were sort of wiped out. They were considered an element that, as it were, didn’t help in the matter of group selection.

 

So I’m not sure, … I was writing about Gnosticism quite recently. I’m just trying to find the document. Here it is. So I’m just trying to remember what it was they were unhappy about with Gnosticism. But they had these various Gnostic sects, but they didn’t get the balance right.

 

So one of the things was that they were extremely sort of generally pro-social, rather than ethnocentric. And so that was potentially a problem. Or they believed in all kinds of weird stuff which meant, which wasn’t in line with the broader church. And so that meant there was splitting and disagreement. And so that was a problem.

 

For example, Marcion — the blasphemous heretic Marcion — preached that the jewish god had created the world, but that a higher god had sent Jesus to the world. And there were some of them that believed that the Sethians, that Seth in Genesis was the receiver of crucial revelations and was kind of a divine savior.

 

The Ophites believed that Jesus instructed them to worship the serpent from Genesis, because he was the genuine source of knowledge. And so a lot of these things weren’t even particularly Christian at all. They involve sexual rituals and stuff like that.

 

So, no. I’m not sure that there would be a great deal of future. A lot of these Gnostic sects were not particularly ethnocentric. And I think that was why they got rid of them in the end. They weren’t ethnocentric enough!

 

They were promoting a “brotherhood of man” to a greater extent. And so they were selected out! There was basically an evolutionary battle of different ideas that were expressed in religious terms. And it was the Gnostic ones that were selected out. So I suppose not then.

 

[64:32]

 

Woes: All rights another Superchat. I don’t know what this is referring to, but he says:

 

“Ed, I had a fat Norwegian Forest Cat that lived to be 18.”

 

I’m not sure if this is a reference, …

 

Ed Dutton: He’s referring to my cat, Margaret the cat.

 

Woes: Oh yeah and he says:

 

“How is Margaret doing?”

 

Ed Dutton: I’ll just see if Margaret’s around. Just a minute.

 

Woes: Okay!

 

Ed Dutton: She’s been she’s been great, because the kids have been in northern Lapland, at a place called Keviarde [sp] for the last few days. And so they haven’t been here to stress Margaret out! And so she’s been a completely different cat. I mean, she’s been sociable. She’s been upstairs with us and just like not the anti-social cow that she normally is! And she’s been spayed, which I believe extends their life expectancy. And she’s 12, she’s 13, I think it is now. She’s 13. So yeah, so I think she could live quite a lot. She’s a moggy, but to the extent that she’s anything, she does look a bit like a Norwegian Forest Cat, that is true.

 

Woes: All right they look very nice and fluffy, and cuddly.

 

Ed Dutton: Very fluffy very, very furry! Very luxurious looking!

 

Woes: Okay [chuckling]. All right:

 

“Hi Ed! Why are the Ulster Scots so fiercely loyalist and pro-Britain, while Scots in Scotland seem to be slowly edging in the direction of abolishing the union, Great Britain? Why are people who are so similar ethnically beginning to diverge so drastically in their political expressions?”

 

Ed Dutton: So I think that there’s two reasons.

 

One is that it’s just the basic political reason, that the Ulster Scots are Protestant. And therefore they see themselves they are different from the Catholics religiously. And they are different from the Catholics ethnically, genetically.

 

And so they want to remain, obviously that it’s a choice between being part of a Catholic — and they’re deeply committed religious people — and that it’s a choice between being part of a Catholic Ireland, or a religious Catholic Ireland, or historically it was, and a choice of being part of Britain. And so it would be humiliation for them to be part of Ireland. And so therefore they are very, very pro, being part of Britain.

 

Secondly I think you’ve got to understand that the Ulster Scots are not representative of the Scots. Any more than the English people of Virginia, or the English people of Massachusetts are representative of the English. These immigrants tend to be more religious. And immigration is correlated with religiousness. They were very religious people they are under group selection more harshly, because of violence, or whatever in Ulster. So they’re highly, highly, highly, highly religious! They’re a fundamentalist community. And therefore they tend to be very conservative against change, and whatever. And therefore you would expect them to want to stay part of Britain.

 

Whereas the Scots, they’ve not been subject to that. So they’re going to be the religiousness and traditionalism and whatever is going to be less of an issue. And the nationalism element as well is going to be higher.

 

What is it that’s holding, used to hold things together? What held nations together? Group selection, the threat of destruction. Well that’s gone. There’s no Russia. There’s not gonna be a nuclear war. That’s under check. So we’d expect things to fall apart. We’d expect the European Union to fall apart. We’d expect Britain to fall apart.

 

Britain came together, because of war with other European countries, and stayed together, because there was something in it for the Scots. The Scots were dominant in the Empire. They were hugely overrepresented in the Empire, and indeed in geniuses, in British geniuses. I mean, pretty much a tiny population. I suspect they were more intelligent than us until quite recently, because they were under harsh Darwinian selection pressures. They were better at killing their witches, and so on. So they had every reason to be part of the union.

 

Whereas then you have this moving apart. And so therefore you have this rise in Scottish nationalism which has happened in Scotland. Their sense of national identity becomes wrapped up in their religiousness in a way:

 

“We’re better than the British, because we’re more left-wing!”

 

And that’s kind of what their Scottish nationalism is:

 

“We’re better than the English, because we’re more the sanats [?]. Because we’re more woke than them. Even though we can afford to be more woke, because we’re like 98% White!”

 

And so, that’s why those are the reasons why I think there’s a difference.

 

And also you should remember that the Ulster Scots and Scots diverged a very long time ago. I mean, we’re talking the 1600s here, early 1700s at the latest. And the people that emigrate they’re always more conservative.

 

The Afrikaans are more, even the language is more conservative. I suspect that the way the northern Irish speak is probably how the Scots spoke in the 1600s. And it’s just been preserved. Like we know that the way that the Cornish spoke in the 1600s is the way Virginians speak now. And the way that the Dutch spoke in the 1600s is the way Afrikaans speak now.

 

I mean, they like your “I”. The Scots people saying “aye” for “yes”. That’s a very old word. It’s died out in England. There’s some people say in Scotland. In Northern Ireland they love it! They can’t get enough of it! “Ayeee” all the time! And so on. So I think that’s my answer.

 

[70:01]

 

Woes: All right. Thank you. Okay. So Mr Dutton, Professor Dutton:

 

“Is removing female equality that was established into Western law in 1920 for most Anglo nations, the Right solution for a nationalist and traditionalist to aim to achieve? Removing female equality that was established in law in 1920?”

 

Ed Dutton: Who asked this?

 

Woes: Someone who’s constantly asking questions about women. [laughing] He says he’s not a MGTOW! But yeah:

 

“It’s time to grow and learn.”

 

Ed Dutton: I don’t see what, I don’t know what he’s talking about. Female equality was put into law in 1920? I’d dispute that. What do you mean?

 

I mean, in England, for example, women were allowed to become priests in 1992. Women weren’t allowed to engage in boxing until the late 90s. Women couldn’t be bishops in England until relatively recently.

 

Woes: I think he meant, I think he means a more legal level.

 

Ed Dutton: Does he mean, in America women got the Right to vote in 1920. Is that what he means?

 

Woes: I’m guessing, so yeah.

 

Ed Dutton: Right. So interestingly there was a very interesting book by a chap called Simon Webb, who I interviewed on my channel, and he showed that these women that wanted the vote, when the women’s social and political union broke down, a lot of them joined the British Union of Fascists.

 

So they were attracted to these, … Again this is what we talked about earlier, borderline personality disorder. They were just attracted to these extreme things. And Emmeline Pankhurst argued at a trial that 80 percent of English men had syphilis, and would go mad! And in order to save the English race from destruction women had to be allowed to take over England!

 

Anyway, that aside, what the vote for women initially brought about was greater conservatism, because in that time we lived in a conservative society, women were more religious than men. And so women were more inclined to vote for Right-wing parties than men.

 

And this flipped in the generation born in the 50s, and 60s, because this is when the religious society broke down. If you want to think a year it was probably 1963.

 

“Sex came rather late for me in 1963.”

 

Somewhere between the end of the Chatterly ban*, the Beatles first LP, and Kennedy, and all that.

 

[In 1960 Lady Chatterley’s Lover sold out all over England. Penguin’s first run of the controversial novel by DH Lawrence — a total of 200,000 copies — sold out on the first day of publication. The sexually explicit novel was published in Italy in 1928 and in Paris the following year. It was banned in the UK].

 

And so then women start to become more liberal than men. And now women are more inclined to vote for the Left than men.

 

So yeah! If you want to restore order then there has to be less female influence.

 

[72:42]

 

I mean, the damage! Think about the damage to children, as well. When I was at school, at my infant school, it was a hundred percent female. Okay, that’s fair enough. What kind of man would want to work at infant school other than a nonce? But at my junior school it was only two male teachers. And at my secondary school, okay that was probably majority male. But this is decreasingly the case.

 

Now about 60% even of secondary school teachers of women. And so it’s turning schools into female spaces! Where you have these different values like harm avoidance and equality. That’s female values. And male values, authority, and structure, and loyalty, and things like that. And that means you aspire for something. And it means that you see life as a struggle, which it is.

 

And so I think women dominating education doesn’t prepare people for life! And you just get these people that aren’t properly brought up.

 

I mean, I had a paper published recently on corporal punishment. We found that controlling for other factors like genetics, and whatever, corporal punishment has positive outcomes. But the feminization of education means it’s gone, no punishment anymore. And so you have a generation now that has no corporal punishment at school, no fear at school basically. Like we had in the 80s.

 

And so, yeah. I think the influence is ultimately too much, it’s too strong, it’s destroying academia, it’s destroying education. You’re getting boys that aren’t being taught with boys. That are being taught it’s bad to be a boy! You shouldn’t be a boy. So they’re going to become depressed, and maladapted, and developed sub-optimally.

 

And the only people that are going to be resistant to this barrage of maladaptive, environmental, pressure are those that are strongly genetically resistant to it, i.e., the remnant normal population! That would have survived, that would have been around in the 1600s, or whatever, before Darwinian conditions broke down. I think that’s what quite a few of us are! We’re the remnant normal population.

 

And so what I suspect is going to happen is that eventually all those people that aren’t the remnant normal population will die out. They’ll just won’t pass on their genes. And what you’ll be left with — and the data is consistent with this — is the people that we now call the “far-Right”, that’s who’s breeding, that’s what predicts breeding. A hundred years from now that’s what will be left, or less than a hundred years from now. And so things will change radically.

 

But yeah, the one way you could check it would be the abolition of higher education for women. That’s one thing that’s been suggested, or the limiting of it, or something like that. I mean, like this thing Jill Biden with a Phd, you know, education, it just undermines the value of it, because it becomes “woman’s work”. It’s like being a secretary.

 

Woes: Yeah, okay. Somebody’s asked:

 

“You explained earlier about the psychology of people who have rape fantasies. Do you have any insight into the increasing prevalence of incest porn in society?”

 

Fucking hell!

 

[76:00]

 

Ed Dutton: There’s been a couple of books on this. So there was one called “A Billion Wicked Thoughts”. And there was one that I did a video on. I can’t remember what it is, what the video was. It was quite recently I did a video that drew upon this book.

 

Yeah, what I would suspect is that what you get if you have no Darwinian, very, very limited Darwinian selection pressure, so lots of mutants, who will have maladaptive sexual desires that would have been selected out under harsh Darwinian conditions.

 

And so people who would want to bang their brother, or something, that those kind of people would be selected out. And people did. I mean, Egyptian royalty, ancient Egyptian royalty used to used to have sex with their siblings. They would be selected out, because of the consequences of that in terms of dysgenics. And so you would expect therefore this to spread.

 

Secondly at the environmental level you would traditionally have had a conservative religious system, which would make all this taboo, to the point of unthinkable! But now that is gone. And so you have free access to pornography, and free access to like increasingly aberrant taboo, or formally taboo practices. And so once you’ve moved away from “vanilla”, and once you’ve gone, … You can see how if you’re particularly into porn:

 

“Let’s go on to the next revolting thing! And the next revolting!”

 

And eventually you need some, … And there was research on this as well. That a lot of the zoomer generation that have had access to porn all their lives, they can’t get it up to the “vanilla” porn.

 

Woes: Yes. That has to get ever more extreme.

 

Ed Dutton: They’re immune to that. It has to be extreme! Whereas if you go back to Victorian times people could get up, if there was a bare ankle! Because they were so unused to nudity. And this is actually quite important. If you think that we have evolved basically, we Westerners, to a society where people are covered up. And so when nudity is something, … Not perhaps Finns. I mean, they’re into sauna and stuff.

 

But we British perhaps, to a society where people are covered up. And so you would expect us to be easily aroused by nudity. Now people that are fast like history strategists, of course, they’re involved with society doing any aberrant stuff. And so they would need more, and more, extreme things. Nudity’s not good enough in these fast life history societies. Women walk around naked, who cares with nudity. So you need more, and more, and more! And you eventually end up with more, and more, sick stuff. And incest porn would potentially be one.

 

I mean, it should also be noted there’s something called the “Westermark Effect”. Finnish anthropologist Edward Westermark. And he found that, … Kibbutz’s have shown this. That if people are separated at birth, you know, let’s say twins, a brother and a sister, or father and a daughter, and they’re not raised together in early life, then they will meet later and be deeply sexually attracted to each other. Because we tend to be sexually attracted to genetic similarity.

 

And so if someone’s 50% the same as you, and you haven’t been brought up with them in early life. And then you meet them later, then you’ll be very attracted to them. And this is a serious problem.

 

So yeah, that’s how I would explain the rise of incest porn. And there’s things that are much more. I mean, there’s sex with animals.

 

Woes: Yeah. On that note, I remember reading about two people who met and they very attracted each other. And then it turned out that they were both from sperm donors, and they had the same father. So they were half siblings.

 

[79:48]

 

Ed Dutton: And that would make sense. Because the sweet spot is third cousin. There’s research from Iceland. Of course, there’s only three hundred thousand people there. So everyone’s related. And the sweet spot in terms of fertility and not getting divorced, is third cousin. So the person you should marry is your third cousin, or equivalent.

 

So that is to say 1.5 percent above the baseline of the society, in terms of how related you are. And that seems that’s what slow life strategists do, because you select people that are similar to you. Because if you’re similar to each other you’re going to get on better, and you’re going to indirectly pass on more of your genes and whatever.

 

And so people who are slower life strategists do tend to be attracted to people that are more genetically similar to themselves. And that’s true. But in extremis you could see if they didn’t know they’re brother and sister, you could see, of course, they’re gonna be attracted, because they’re 50% the same.

 

Woes: Right. Okay, …

 

Ed Dutton: What?

 

Woes: Just the questions! All right:

 

“Why do some relatively inbred groups have high IQ? Icelanders and Ashkenazi jews, for example.”

 

Ed Dutton: Well in the case of the Ashkenazi jews it can be argued that, … So there’s two ways of understanding this. You have inbreeding depression, which is that if you have a child with someone that’s very similar to you, then there’ll be double doses of harmful genes. And so, that’s bad.

 

But there’s also out-breeding depression, which is that if you have sex someone that’s very dissimilar to you, then genes which haven’t combined, alleles that haven’t combined for a very long time, will combine, which in polygenic traits will have unpredictable results. So that’s bad!

 

But you could also have inbreeding vigor! Which is that if you inbreed then it will elevate positive traits. And you could have out-breeding vigor. And so there’s no reason why it can’t be the case. If you’re a highly intelligent subgroup and you want to make, …

 

This is what you see with the Indian caste system — inbreeding vigor. So they make sure that someone is relatively similar then, whom they marry, and they keep the highest castes highly intelligent, and whatever. That’s what they’re doing. Inbreeding vigor!

 

If they didn’t do it, then the men would just go for stupid, but pretty women. And the women might go for, you know, well off butch idiots. What’s that wrestler called? John Cena. People like him.

 

So that’s the problem. So you can be positive. And that’s what you have with the Ashkenazi jews. The Ashkenazi jews were pushed into a situation where they could only engage in certain professions [I don’t think this is substantially true. See Andrew Joyce on this.]. And this meant that if you couldn’t, if you weren’t intelligent enough to engage in that profession, then you would you couldn’t really marry out.

 

And so you just die out, and not pass on your genes. And so this heavily selected for intelligence. And it meant that if you marry other Ashkenazi jews, rather than who is of your family, or similar to you, you know, then you’re ensuring as an intelligent person you’re marrying someone else that’s intelligent. And so you get inbreeding vigor!

 

The flip side of it can be, of course, certain genetic disorders, being prevalent among them. And interestingly there was a theory by Henry Harpending, and somebody else, that some of those Tay Sachs, and some of these jewish disorders, are actually correlated with intelligence. So if you have, you know, one of the alleles, one of the mutant alleles, then you are very, very clever. If you have two then you get Tay Sachs. So the inbreeding vigour continues, and it stays in the population.

 

As for the Icelandic, I would say, you have must remember that until relatively recently cousin marriage was quite high. Parts of Sicily, and whatever, used to have in the 60s even very high levels of cousin marriage. So marrying people that are quite similar to you, … I mean, in Finland, for example, … In England we’re all 12th cousins. So we English are all related if you go back about 500 years, or 400 years.

 

In Finland you’ve only got to go back about 250 years, 300 years, everyone’s related. So even in Finland you’ve got people that are, perhaps without knowing it, marrying their third cousins, and stuff like this. And with the Icelandic, it’s just an extension of that. They were under very harsh levels of selection. And so you would expect very high levels of intelligence to be selected for. And that’s what’s happened.

 

So it is a problem though. There is actually an a in Iceland where you can type in the name of this boy, or girl, you want to go out with. And you can see how related you are. Because they’re all at least, they’re all like no less than fifth cousins. They’re all highly related.

 

Woes: Right.

 

Ed Dutton: And most people they marry their third cousin.

 

Woes: All right. Somebody asks:

 

“What mating strategy should Incels adopt?”

 

And that’s from someone calling himself Patrick Bateman! [laughing]

 

Ed Dutton: So it depends. I get the impression that what Incels are, are failed fast life history strategists. So they want to have lots of sex and be promiscuous, and stuff like that, and not commit. That’s what they want to do, and they can’t. Because in a situation where women are liberated and where women have power and control, then the women will just go for the alpha males. And the beta males, the women that are sluts, I mean, will just go for the alpha males, and the beta males won’t get much of a look in.

 

So what I would suspect the Incels need to do, is to go for the slower life history strategy females and be content with monogamy. And then at least they won’t be celibate. But I don’t think that’s what they want. I think that, I get the impression they want to compete to be alpha males. So that’s, that.

 

Woes: So it’s kind of all, or nothing for them.

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah.

 

Woes: Perhaps. Okay, someone asks:

 

“Ed, you previously mentioned the Irish score higher in extroversion. Which European ethnic group scores highest in introversion?”

 

[86:01]

 

Ed Dutton: It’s very hard to have exact measures of this. Because if you give somebody a personality test and they will compare themselves to people they know. And so you end up with this insane situation where if you compare international averages on personality tests Nigerians are higher in conscientiousness than the like Japanese. Which is insane!

 

So you can’t use personality tests. You can use them within a nation. But you can’t use them between nations. So based on proxies it’s, as far as I can see, it’s the Finns. The Finns are the lowest in extroversion, based on various proxies.

 

Woes: Well, they’re famously unsocial, aren’t they? There’s a sort of national joke about that. They like to keep to themselves.

 

Ed Dutton: Yeah! A pissed [drunk] Finn behaves kind of like, you and me are behaving now.

 

Woes: All right! [chuckling] Okay! All right. So in a related to that, the same person asks are there any measurable trait differences between Eastern and Western Europeans?

 

Ed Dutton: Well, if we regard the Finns as Eastern Europeans, then yes. They are lower in extroversion. There is a so-called J-curve of alcoholism which goes across north down, through Eastern Europe. And they tend to be more, the sort of Urgeric type people, this includes the Hungarians and even people in Slovenia. And they tend to be more prone to suicide. And in contact with alcohol particularly, suicide and depression, and things like this. Latvia, and Estonia, Hungary, Slovenia.

 

So that’s a known difference for some Eastern European groups. That there’s propensity alcoholism, and that it associates with suicidality and depression, and things like that. So that’s a known difference.

 

Woes: All right. Here’s a very good question:

 

“Is it psychologically healthier to be a jack-of-all-trades, or a specialist?”

 

Ed Dutton: Psychologically healthier? So you mean, …

 

Woes: Well, there’s more to that. I should read the whole thing:

 

“How does it affect the dynamic between insectoid European people, and all-rounder non-European people?”

 

I don’t know, let’s concentrate in the first bit:

 

“Is it psychologically healthier to be a jack-of-all-trades, or a specialist?”

 

Ed Dutton: Well, you will tend to have psychological health if you are (a), if you are of high status within your group. This makes people happy and undepressed and whatever, if they feel that they’re reasonably successful. And in Western societies normally the way you become successful is by being a specialist. That’s how you become successful. You specialize and you find a niche.

 

But, on the other hand, those that have a sort of easy attitude to life, that just live for the now and don’t care and are happy anyway, those people won’t tend to work hard, they won’t tend to specialize. And they’ll be quite content to be a generalist, that switches jobs, and they won’t worry.

 

But I think in general people are happier if they have high status, and it is specializing in a Western society that gives you high status. So that’s the first thing. Specializing is more important the more complex the society is. So if it is a complex society like ours, it’s much more important to specialize, and it’ll be much more important for social status that you specialize, that you find a niche.

 

Whereas in more easier societies everyone does the same sort of job, whatever. There’s less of a need to specialize.

 

[90:05]

 

Woes: Okay. So it’s conducive towards social status.

 

Ed Dutton: It’s conducive to a social status to specialize. So people want social status. And so people, and that’s associated with if you’re saying “contentedness”.

 

The other thing that’s associated with contentedness is an “evolutionary match”. So if you’re in an evolutionary mismatch, you know, like an elephant living in a cold place, or whatever. You will be unhappy. And that’s why we’re increasingly unhappy in the West, because we’re in an evolutionary mismatch! We’re not supposed to live like this. We’re meant to live in small communities where we know everybody. And they’re all genetically similar to us. That’s what makes us happy. That’s what we want.

 

Woes: Right!

 

Ed Dutton: And so we’re in an evolutionary mismatch! Immigration, people different, that is an extreme evolutionary mismatch! Being surrounded by ugly buildings is an evolutionary mismatch. Lack of religiosity, evolutionary mismatch.

 

So if you are the kind of person that is sort of fast life history strategist, or whatever, or happy go lucky type, and you’re lazy, or something, your evolutionary match may well be to be a generalist. And you will be unhappy if you are compelled to be a specialist.

 

So it depends on the kind of person you are. Maybe your evolutionary match is to be a generalist. So there’s different dynamics to the question.

 

Woes: Okay. It’s impossible to answer the question really, because it’s depends, it varies from one individual to the next. Okay:

 

“It’s one thing to prove that women are a negative influence when empowered in society, but quite another to offer a solution. Do you have any suggestions about how we can push back female influence?”

 

That is quite another thing indeed. And I don’t think it’s fair to ask the person who diagnoses the problem to also have a solution to it. But Ed is there anything you would want to say about this?

 

Ed Dutton: Well to the extent that you can do anything you need the promotion of a more conservative society. And once that starts to happen then you can more rationally present the evidence, and it is true that women are happier. And they are happier, because it’s an evolutionary mismatch! Remember, that’s what makes you unhappy.

 

The evolutionary match for most women is to be what they’ve always been. That’s what their happiest being. They’re happier, and they show this. If you look at the research by Joanna Williams on this. They show this, even if they get jobs. They want to retire early. They want to have a work life balance. They want to spend ages off work and be with the kids. That’s what they want to do!

 

To the extent they go into jobs, they go into jobs where they’re caring about people, and looking after people, and basically doing the kind of jobs which they always did even when they could work. It’s just that now they’re teaching boys and girls, whereas historically they’d just be teaching girls. And that’s what they do! That’s what they want to do! That’s what makes them happy. And you might get a few, and that’s interesting that when they have a real choice which they do in very feminist type societies like us.

 

Woes: Like Sweden.

 

Ed Dutton: Right! Whereas in Italy, or whatever, where there’s less choice they feel more of pressure, you know, because they need to make money, or something. They may feel more of a pressure to go into the sciences, which they don’t like doing! And they’re not very good at! And they ruin when they do go into it, because they don’t like, …

 

The kind of person that will come up with brilliant and original ideas, is the kind of person that will be autistic, and is therefore the kind of person that will make inappropriate jokes, and offend people, like Alexander Stromio — who I’m gonna have on my show next year — and whatever. And they’ll drive those people out! As they tried to do with him.

 

And so it’s bad for society that women, … We talk about how can we encourage more women to go into STEM subjects. No! How can we encourage women to NOT go into STEM subjects? [Woes chuckles] How can we encourage women to not go into STEM subjects?

 

Woes: Okay:

 

“Which European nation has the optimal level of in-group preference, not too high leading to a backward, or violent society, not too low, where they’ll be taken advantage of by hostile outgroups?”

 

[94:33]

 

Ed Dutton: European, … By the way, I’m perfectly happy with women to be involved in STEM subjects of a certain kind. Probably religious women, actually. Margaret Thatcher went into STEM subject. Highly religious, patriarchal, conservative women go into STEM subjects, and invent ice cream! [Woes smiles]

 

But with regards to that question, probably one of the Eastern European nations. It’s hard to say which, because the Eastern Europe is going the way of Western Europe, very slowly. There’s some evidence there is a backlash as well happening. There’s some very based stuff happening in Poland and Hungary, and whatever. But it is also, I think it will polarize very strongly. I think that’s what’s happening. But it’ll polarize.

 

We are polarizing now in a situation where the Left are culturally in power and the Right are not. And there’s this polarization, and it’s increasingly obvious. And eventually I think it will result in a tip back towards the Right. It may be that the Eastern Europe polarizes with the Right in power, and the Left not. I don’t know what’s going to happen.

 

But one of those kind of countries, probably has the optimum balance, somewhere like, … I would have said Finland 15 years ago. But now Finland has fallen to the “spite girls”. But probably one of those kind of countries, Hungary, or something like that.

 

Woes: Okay.:

 

“Professor Dutton, please consider Dr Andrew Joyce, Dr MacDonald, or Dr Johnson on one of your future shows.”

 

[96:01]

 

Ed Dutton: Well I’ve had Kevin MacDonald on my show twice. I don’t know how many other more times I can, … You’ll find that show on BitChute. Two of them, both those shows BitChute. And who are the others?

 

Woes: Dr Andrew Joyce and Dr Greg Johnson.

 

Ed Dutton: Andrew Joyce and Greg Johnson, right.

 

Woes: Okay. And someone else asks:

 

“Are people from the British isles predisposed to violent behavior? When I’m in mainland Europe, I don’t see half as many fights as I do in England.”

 

Ed Dutton: Possibly. I can think of two things. First of all, we industrialized earlier. And so if we industrialized earlier than anybody else, we’re going to be more dysgenic than everybody else. And also we were reasonably large population anywhere. But we’re more dysgenic.

 

And all of the religious people left, went to America. And so what you’re going to end up with is just the violent scum. And that’s quite possible, actually, that we would be more dysgenic. That’s certainly we were more dysgenic. That’s possible.

 

Secondly that we are a temperance culture. So this is something to do with being in the north, and also coming to farming relatively late by European standards.

 

So once you get farming, then you get the development of alcohol. Once you get the development of alcohol, it’s adaptive to be able to drink alcohol and not get drunk, or not get alcoholic, or whatever. Because then you don’t have to drink the water. And as you get a more complex society the water is going to be dirty and whatever. And so as farming spreads the genes resistant to alcoholism spread.

 

Now farming was founded in the Fertile Crescent ten thousand years ago. And so we’ve had the Spanish, and the Greeks, and the Italians, and the southern Europeans, have had much longer for the genes to spread. So therefore they’re completely resistant to alcohol. They don’t particularly like it. They don’t drink it much. They drink it only with meals. They have very low levels of alcoholism. And when they go out on a Friday night, they get dressed up in nice clothes, and go out on vespers and talk very loudly in cafes! That’s their Friday night.

 

Whereas our Friday night, because we are less resistant to alcohol there is a critical mass of people that are very attracted to alcohol and get drunk, and whatever. And very easily become alcoholics, and whatever. And become violent. And that may well be the reason for the difference.

 

Woes: All right. One last question:

 

“The genetic basis of your claim of today’s pervasiveness of witches is underpinned by the hypothesis that mutations leading to infant mortality also affect pro, or antisocial behavior.”

 

Ed Dutton: Not really.

 

Woes: And he said:

 

“Is there evidence for that?”

 

[99:00]

 

Ed Dutton: Well yeah, there’s evidence that with the collapse of, … That infant mortality is the crucible of evolution. There’s a paper on that called “Infant Mortality”, or something like that. It’s called something like “The Crucible of Evolution”, and looks at this.

 

And so there is certainly evidence of a rise in mutational load. There is evidence that physical mutations are correlated with anti-social mental problems, like schizophrenia, depression, autism, whatever. And violence psychopathology. It correlates with these mutations. So in that sense, yes! There is evidence for that. That physical mutation correlates with mental mutation, and mental mutation in a maladaptive, anti-social, direction.

 

One thing I’d add actually, about transsexuality. Being a transsexual correlates with hereditary deafness! And all kinds of other things as well. Crohn’s disease, asthma, whatever. Now you could put some of these things down to stress of being a transsexual, or something. But I can’t see how you could put deafness down to it. Curvature of the spine.

 

I was at university with this guy, Alex, who then became Drea, and then worked as a prostitute in Brighton and was murdered by a Scottish Sky Television fitter. Who he told he used to be a man. I probably told you that story. But he had some kind of appalling series of problems that they had to like operate on his anus, and things like this. Like all these hereditary mutations. And that would be consistent with narcissism, all these physical problems that correlate with narcissism, with mental problems, that are anti-social.

 

Woes: It’s not the kind of thing you want to hear about while you’re fitting someone’s Sky Television box!

 

Ed Dutton: Well no, he went there — he was a Sky fitter who went there to fit Alex’s box. And then I get the impression that Alex must have said, …

 

He [Sky guy] might even have said something like [putting on a Scottish accent]:

 

“You have very nice breastees, don’t you? Have very nice breasts, they’re very perfect!”

 

And then Alex would have said [in a soft feminine voice]:

 

“Oh. Yeah, they would be really nice, because I was born a man. So they’re fake.”

 

And then he saw red, and strangled him!

 

Woes: Bloody hell! Okay [chuckling]. There’s a very strange story! Okay. So that’s that question. And then we’ve just got the “diamonds” on Dlive. Someone says:

 

“Good to see Dr Dutton on Dlive. Thanks as always.”

 

And someone else said:

 

“Hail Woes! Hail Ed! Hail Scrubs!”

 

I’m not really sure what the term “Scrubs” refers to. But I’ve heard it’s associated with Dangerfield, and so on, so all right.

 

Well, excellent! It’s been very interesting stream. I hope that people have enjoyed it.

 

So would you like to summarize, just before we finish, could you summarize the theory about witches and anti-social behavior and the fall of civilization again? Just so that we can end the stream on a summary of that theory.

 

Ed Dutton: So the summary of the theory is that what witches are, in evolutionary terms, is people who are undermined patriarchy, the patriarchal system in various ways. And that was bad, because at the group selection level patriarchy was associated with maintaining positive and negative ethnocentrism, and maintaining religiousness, which is all associated with winning in the battle of group selection. So that’s what these witches are doing. They’re undermining patriarchy!

 

And that’s what modern day witches do. They undermine patriarchy. And it’s the same. They’re functionally the same. And so we must understand that we are living in a society that is dominated by literal witches! And that is not good!

 

And as I say that the book should be coming out later this year, “Witches, Feminism and the Fall of the West”.

 

Woes: You mean next year, 2021?

 

Ed Dutton: Next year. And yeah, I should plug my channel, shouldn’t I? Jolly Heretic, Online public house, live stream Mondays and Thursdays, seven pm UK time, two pm New York. And various books you can get if you look into it. So yeah, that’s it.

 

Woes: All right! Well excellent! Well, thank you Professor Edward Dutton, The Jolly Heretic, for taking part in Millennial 2020.

 

Ed Dutton: Thank you for having me.

 

Woes: Okay. I’ll be back in 15 minutes with John Bruce Leonard. In the meantime hope you enjoyed this. Thank you to everyone for watching. And I’ll see you later. Bye for now.

 

[103:50]

 

 

END

 

 

 

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

 

See Also:

 

Millennial Woes with Morgoth on Brexit — Jul 2, 2016 — TRANSCRIPT

A Woes By Any Other Name — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes – To Be a Man in 2017 – Speech at Erkenbrand dinner — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes – One Hour from Now – Speech to Erkenbrand — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes’ Millenniyule 2017 No. 66 – Morgoth — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes – The Passion of Jordan Peterson – Speech to Blue Awakening — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes at the Scandza Forum, Copenhagen – Oct 12, 2019 — TRANSCRIPT

Millennial Woes – Millenniyule 2019 – Daughter of Albion – Dec 28, 2019 — Transcript

Millennial Woes – The Strife of Tongues – Nov 30, 2020 — Transcript

 

Millennial Woes – Millenniyule 2020 – John Waters – Dec 22, 2020 — Transcript

Millennial Woes – Millenniyule 2020 – On the Offensive – Dec 15, 2020 — Transcript

Millennial Woes – Millenniyule 2020 – Dangerfield – Dec 21, 2020 — Transcript<

Millennial Woes – Millenniyule 2020 – The Jolly Heretic – Dec 29, 2020 — Transcript

 

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

 

PDF Notes

* Total words = 17,982
* Total images = 6
* Total A4 pages =

 

Click to download a PDF of this post (x.x MB):

(Available later)

 

 

 

Version History

 

Version 7: Mar 11, 2021 — Added See Also image 2 and 4 links.

 

Version 6: Jan 20, 2021 — Added last 23 mins of transcript. Transcript now complete = 104/104 mins.

 

Version 5: Jan 18, 2021 — Added 19 more mins of transcript. Total transcript complete = 80/104 mins.

 

Version 4: Jan 17, 2021 — Added 9 more mins of transcript. Total transcript complete = 61/104 mins.

 

Version 3: Jan 15, 2021 — Added 8 more mins of transcript. Total transcript complete = 52/104 mins.

Version 2: Jan 14, 2021 — Added 9 more mins of transcript. Total transcript complete = 46/104 mins.

 

Version 1: Jan 11, 2021 — Published post. Total transcript complete = 37/104 mins.