Woes: Hello! And welcome to the fourth night of Millenniyule 2021. I’ll just tell you what’s coming up tonight. In two hours I will have on Hildebrand Szillard, from the Edgelord Investor. And then Jim Goad. And finally Dangerfield.

But first it is Ed Dutton, aka, The Jolly Heretic! Now before we get into that I’ll just mention that I’m not sure about my internet connection tonight. It seems to be okay so far. But you never know. So if I do go offline Ed, you just hold the Fort, and I’ll be back in a few minutes.

The other thing is I should mention that the you can donate in various ways. There is crypto, there is Bitcoin lightning, there is the T-shirt that you can buy, the Millenniyule 2021. And there is the NFT. These are various things that you can do to support me, because Millenniyule is a lot of work. So if you’d like to give something back there are multiple ways you can do that.

Now The Jolly Heretic! I should mention first that the last time Ed and I spoke I was still on YouTube. I still had a YouTube channel, three YouTube channels. And the way that I got banned from YouTube is that they chose one of my videos on each of my three channels. And they chose one video to give a strike to. And that was it, three strikes. So all in like within one minute, I think it all took place in. And that was it! I was banned from the platform.

And the video that they chose on my main channel to give a strike to was Ed’s previous appearance on Millennial in 2020, in which he spoke about witches and modern feminists. And I liked that discussion, and perhaps unwisely, had left it up on YouTube. Perhaps I should have taken it down? I don’t know. But I didn’t think there was anything bad in it. But that was nonetheless the video that YouTube chose to strike me with. But I’m just mentioning that as a note of irony. I don’t hold it against, …

The Jolly Heretic: You can’t talk about feminism now on YouTube! That’s now a banned topic! So I’ve taken down all videos on that it’s a banned, it’s an illegal topic now, feminism, transsexuality is illegal. But then there are videos that are up where I also discuss the same book, and they’re up. So I think it was just you.

Woes: Oh, of course, it was just, …

The Jolly Heretic: Yeah, they were looking for something. And that’s what it was.

Woes: Yeah, anyway it was just a pretext for getting rid of me. And they got rid of Way of the World on the very same day. So obviously that wasn’t a coincidence. So I’m not angry with you in any way. I don’t want you to think that but anyway, welcome back to Millennial. And what kind of year have you had, briefly.

The Jolly Heretic: Well, I didn’t think you were angry with me. And I think you would have sounded even less angry if you’d had the voice that you had when we first started speaking! Which was this kind of high-pitched, …

Woes: Chipmunk thing! Because my Mike was in the wrong setting.

The Jolly Heretic: So yeah, I think we should have just left it. I shouldn’t have told you about. It would have been a hilarious chat that nobody could possibly object to. It would have subtracted evilness and Right-wingness from your statements. And you would have been able to get away with anything you wanted!

Yeah, what have I done this year? Well, I’ve been working on a number of books. And one of them will come out next summer. And a number of books, a number of manuscripts actually, a number of papers on various things. I’ve learnt to drive a motor car, like a big boy! So yeah, I now have a driving licence. So that’s the big news this year.

So I can now drive a motor car.

Woes: Congratulations!

The Jolly Heretic: I ordered from Germany some driving gloves, some sort of string and leather driving gloves cwith the hole in the back of the hand area. I think it’s very important, it gives one’s driving a certain degree of gravitas! [Woes laughing] I don’t think you can get in a crash, and become sort of impulsive, or flippant in your driving, if you’re wearing driving gloves! It’s a formal thing. And you have to take it very seriously. So yep. So I’ve been enjoying motoring around for the last couple of months.

And yeah, usual thing really, various books, various papers.

And, of course, I’m as, you know, I like the darts. And today is the start of the 2022 William Hill World Darts Championship at the Alley Pally. So I’m looking forward to seeing how that goes.

Yourself?

Woes: Oh, it’s been all right. This year has been quite an eye-opener for me. Well, not quite as much as last year was. I think with BLM, the US election. And, of course, Covid. But perhaps you and I, we might disagree about Covid. What is your position about the whole thing, the Covid lockdowns, the vaccines, and all that?

[05:14]

The Jolly Heretic: I think it’s a fascinating rehearsal for the collapse of civilization, which – I’ve been talking about in various books of mine – is occurring. I mean, the idea is that a civilization is going into its Winter, once it can’t do things it used to be able to do. The decline of per capita innovation, not good. But that’s happening once you’re in the Autumn.

But in the winter you can’t do things you used to be able to do. Like Concord going down, or not going back to the moon. So let’s date the Winter of Civilization as being entered sometime in the summer of 2000. I forget what the date was. Where, was it July when Concord crashed? Let’s date that as the start. So we’re well into it!

And so what you would expect, is these utterly decadent, individualistic, values where you don’t look at the good of the group. The good of the group is that if you have something like this, then you let it pass through the group. Herd immunity.

And that’s what they were first up for doing, “herd immunity” that was the right thing to do! But no! The problem is that once you get this collapse in Darwinian selection pressures. And you get the runaway individualism, you get a tipping point of individualistic types, that would have been selected out on the previous conditions. And you get runaway individualism. And then:

“Oh no! We can’t have that! No we have to shut down society in order to ensure that people don’t get ill!”

So you end up then with this fascinating thing of trying to shut down society for the sake of a tiny number of people that are gonna succumb to this.

And then what do you do? Well, you have to come up with some sort of way of reassuring them. So you come up with this jab! Which doesn’t really work, it works, but not very well! And so it works for about 12 weeks. And then you have to get another one, and another one, and another one! And then presumably that’s what it will just be like forever!

Woes: That seems to be the case. I mean, are you saying that they originally had the right idea, which was just to let herd immunity develop, …

The Jolly Heretic: That’s what they should have done. That’s always happened before whenever we’ve had, … You had flu outbreaks in winter of 68. The country didn’t shut down. But that’s because people had these, a lot of people had these monumentalist values, whereby they felt there was something greater than life. And so they didn’t fear death as much. A lot of people had suffered in childhood in serious poverty back then. And so they were used to adversity. And they could cope with bad things happening to them. The level of, I guess I would call it the sort of mutation in the population, leading to people being paranoid and neurotic, was lower.

And the runaway individualism where people are utterly selfish and concerned about themselves, was less. And people have been pushed along the adaptive evolutionary path of life, resulting in them being happier and more mentally stable, and whatever.

And all those all those things, since, let’s say the 60s, have been massively undermined. So you just have these individualistic, selfish, mentally unstable, frightened, people. And so then, of course, they react with horror to herd immunity! They say it’s eugenics!

Woes: Yeah, but, …

The Jolly Heretic: Which it is.

Woes: But I don’t remember people reacting with horror to herd immunity. I remember the public being sort of relieved that it wasn’t a serious threat. And then the establishment, or the government’s tone completely changed and they decided to go into lockdown and introduce the masks. And so on.

So are you saying that they made that decision for reasons of civilizational decline? Or, …

The Jolly Heretic: My memory is that originally they said they would try and gain herd immunity. There was a backlash against this:

“Oh! What are you going to do, let granny die?”

And what you get in a situation of civilizational declension have is that you get a fall in the martial values that have built up the society. And so why is it that Rome at an early stage fought off the Carthaginians, you know, fought off all the people that were trying to destroy it:

“No way were people that were outside of the city of Rome going to get Roman citizenship! No way!”

That’s early Rome. And then late Rome:

“Oh, then just let everybody, including Germans, have Roman citizenship!”

Why do these things change? Because you go from being highly group oriented, high in positive and negative ethnocentrism, high in religiousness, high in the sense that your group and your life has eternal meaningc and all this! To reaching a tipping point of individualists, of basically mutated people, that wouldn’t have survived outside of luxury.

And then that tips the society over once they reach about 20% into a more individualistic society. And then it’s just as you get runaway group orientation when it’s group oriented, so you get people purity signaling, and all that sort of thing. You get the opposite. You get individualism signaling.

And we have runaway individualism. So you move from feminism, to multiculturalism, to homosexuality! You see all these things towards the end of Rome, exactly the same! Tolerance, homosexuality, women not veiling, and women’s rights, immigration, and whatever. You see all these things! Exactly the same. Even religions that are death cults and argue that life has no meaning and you shouldn’t have children for the good of the evil god, or whatever. All that gnosticism, exactly the same.

And that’s what we have. This extreme individualism, which means that we are so concerned about a few people dying, that the good of the group can’t be first.

[10:39]

Woes: Yeah. But I don’t know. I just don’t see it that way. I think that people have actually taken to putting the group first. What would you say to the idea that the national governments, at least in the case of Britain, … I remember Boris Johnson going for herd immunity time and all that. They had the right idea initially, and then other powers came in, the Bill Gates Foundation, Melinda Gates, the World Economic Forum. Other powers, globalist powers, came in and said:

“No. Do this instead. And that will enable a massive power grab!”

The Jolly Heretic: I don’t know if, … Yeah, I think that the Conservative government had the right idea. That the Conservative government is in office, but not really in power.

Woes: I would agree.

The Jolly Heretic: It’s Leftists, and business which is infested by woke types, or whatever, that’s actually the power in the land. So when they proposed the reasonably sensible policy of herd immunity, then there was this huge – and which Sweden did as well – then in both cases, there was this huge kickback. And then eventually there was this movement that shouldn’t be herd immunity. There should be this social distancing, shut down the economy, and try and stop it that way.

So there was an initial sensible reaction, which is interesting. There was an almost like pushed into an instinctive mode, as as were, when some weird, strange thing happens, and we have to cope with it. The initial instincts of conservative type people, of people that would have been the genetic norm under Darwinian conditions, are sensible and right.

But then very quickly what kicked in was the maladaptive, individualistic, anti-group, selfish, short-term, instincts of the Left, and of money, and whatever. And the result was this ridiculous process which is going to elongate something that could have swept through the society in a year and been gone, to something that will just go on, and on, and on! And then once it starts, we can’t, we’re not clever enough! That’s the point! That’s the thing that’s really salient about it.

So what intelligence means, is that you can solve difficult novel problems! This is a difficult novel problem! If our society had an average IQ that was 15 points, up 20 points higher than it is now, like in 1880, then I’m fairly confident that somebody would be able to come up with a vaccine for this Corona, that would work! That would work one-off, and would not have side effects on anybody, and would just work. And that would be the end of it!

But the problem is we’re not clever enough! We’re not clever enough. And we don’t have the ruthlessness. You’re going to get people moaning about testing on animals, moaning about side effects, whatever.

So the result is that we can’t cope with it. We can’t cope with it. We’re just about coping with it through a societal declension, shutting down everything, and whatever. And a sort of authoritarian State, which compels people, …

In Finland at the moment, for example, you have to have a vaccine passport to do almost anything! You have to have a vaccine passport to go to the pub! You have to have a vaccine passport to go to a cafe! You have to have a vaccine passport to go swimming! If you don’t have a vaccine passport, you can’t go, … You go to shops. But you can’t go to any sort of anything fun! You can’t do it.

I was in the [word unclear] bar, the other day. And you have to show them your vaccine passport. There’s this security guard, okay? So I showed him my vaccine passport, like that. And he said:

“Okay!”

And I went:

“Heil Hitler!”

Like that [gesturing]. And I thought that was a perfectly reasonable thing to do. But the person that I was with criticized me for this. Said:

“That was a bit rude!”

I said:

“How is it rude? This is the kind of thing they would do in Nazi Germany. This is the kind of person that would carry that out in Nazi Germany! What is wrong with me saying hell Hitler to him?”

I did like this “Heil Hitler!” [gesturing]. He didn’t even have the politeness to do it back! [Woes laughs] He just said, you know, … He just asked for ID. Unbelievable! So yeah, it’s an appalling, ….

[15:01]

Woes: [words unclear]

The Jolly Heretic: I don’t know if he understood it. He was a security guard, Finnish security guard, doesn’t speak anything other than Finnish. But I mean, it was, … Yeah, it was absolutely ludicrous, … It’s a ludicrous and appalling situation. That you have basically 20% of people here, who cannot go to pubs, who cannot go to restaurants, who cannot spend their money, essentially, which is bad for the economy. It’s preposterous!

And so, that’s the thing, that’s the result. If you think about stupid, people that are stupid, then they can’t be trusted to intuitively do things. Because they’ll do things wrong. So they have to follow rules.

There’s a negative correlation between how conscientious you are, how rule following you are, how clever you are. Because clever people realize, once they get older, that they can coast along on their brains. They need to follow the rules. They can break the rules. That’s what geniuses do! They break the rules! Come up with amazing original things!

But people are a bit thick [lol], they have to follow the rules. And that’s what ends up being imposed in this situation. And it’ll just go on forever! It will just go on, and on, and on, like this! I guess, until we run out of money!

And when we seriously run out of money, when we can’t afford, because all that we can do, this is just based around excess! Massive excess! We have a massive excess of resources! So as we produce less resources, we won’t be able to do it. And then that’ll be the end of any proposal of lockdown.

Woes: Well, it seems to me that it’s not, … I mean, there is obviously the “midwit problem”. And I think the midwits delight in the whole Covid stuff, because they can get a snatch of some medical factoid, and think, and then repeat that, and think that they’re clever. And by doing so they can look down on the thickos, who can’t repeat that kind of language at all.

But I also think this is a problem with highly intelligent people as well. Because they love to grapple with complex ideas, and thus get mesmerized by them. I mean, I know intelligent people who make the Covid stuff make sense in their heads. They find ways to paper over the cracks and the contradictions. So to me, this is, …

[17:16]

The Jolly Heretic: I mean, it depends. Yeah. The midwit. People define this term midwit differently. The way I define it is you’re kind of 115 IQ sort of person.

It’s an Adam Rutherford type. And such a person has the intelligence to notice what the dominant set of values is, the intelligence to understand what the dominant set of values, is and the ability, via intelligence, to force himself through effortful control to believe those dominant set of values, and to come up with superficially plausible ways i.e., fallacious arguments. But if they’re presented with enough linguistic skill, they might sound convincing. Things like:

“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

Doesn’t that sound clever! Doesn’t that sound clever! But think about what it’s actually saying! It is actually saying that:

“I will never be convinced by any argument that you’re saying!”

If you use the word “extraordinary”, you’re immediately saying that the claim for which you are demanding evidence, is ridiculous! And that the evidence would be fantastical! So you’re basically saying:

“I do not, and will not, accept your claim, because it doesn’t fit with the way I see the world.”

But that you dress it up with this phrase, this appalling phrase, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. Or:

“Correlation doesn’t equal causation.”

That’s another one they come out with! Correlation doesn’t equal causation. No it doesn’t! But it usually does!

Woes: Yes.

The Jolly Heretic: And if it doesn’t, then there’s probably a bloody good reason for that! Which you’ll have to come up with. But they’ll just say:

“Oh! Correlation doesn’t equal causation!”

Woes: Well, it’s an equivalent of saying:

“Stereotypes usually exist for a reason. And cliches usually exist for a reason.”

But yeah, the midwit will delight in saying:

“Well the plural of anecdote, is not data.”

That kind of stuff. So it is a silly thing that these people do.

But with Covid, it seems to me that another equally likely explanation for all of this, and the public’s leaping onto this bandwagon, is their own need for religiosity, or their need for something to believe in, and something to serve, something to give themselves to.

And, of course, Covid gives them loads of things like that! The rituals the, and, of course, the apostates, the sinners, the believers, the high priests in terms of the doctors and scientists. What would you say?

The Jolly Heretic: Yeah, I would agree with you. I think we’ve talked about this last year a little bit. But it’s a religious, … “Black Lives Matter” was a religious revival. And Qanon, equally can be seen as a religious revival that manifests at times of extreme stress. It can be seen as a kind of post-traumatic stress disorder, reaction, to a period of stress and change.

[20:02]

And so if you are relatively high in neuroticism basically, in feeling negative feelings strongly, then those kinds of people are prone to revivalism. They are prone to being inculcated. They are prone to wanting an ordered, structured, world.

And they are prone to also other things that correlate with this sort of thing. Narcissism is one way of dealing with it. So thinking that you’re the best. That’s a way of coping. Borderline personality, that you want a very, very strong sense of who you are and that you’re better than other people. Superior in some way, although there’s a deep hole inside of you that’s not filled, with lacking love. And all of this sort of thing.

And Machiavellianism, like wanting power, if you’re deeply insecure. Then, if you get power over something, or someone, then that can make you less insecure. And so you can see that the Left wing reaction to this, if you are high in neuroticism, you fear social ostracism, you deeply, deeply, want power and status, because you hate other people having power over you.

So the extreme reaction to that can be an extreme, and over conformity, to this Covid narrative. And that’s what I think is what you see with many, many people! So you signal what a good moral person you are by wearing masks, and whatever. Now there are some people that are of that bent.

But it’s so extreme! Like their neuroticism is so extreme, and their hatred, and fear, of anyone that’s in power is so extreme, that despite being Left-wing, they will be overwhelmed by their by their jealousy of anyone that has power, their hatred of anyone that has power! Their individualism.

So they will be anti-vax of the Left! And that’s people like Piers Corbyn. And those kinds of people that are of the Left. Even though that are dissident.

And then on the Right, you’ve got the people that, I don’t know, I suppose higher neuroticism. But if you add psychopathic personality to that, which is that you like danger! And that you like being different. And this makes you very untrusting, very low in trust of authorities. And so forth. And also if you add to that certain low intelligence, which will be associated with being low in trust, then that would seem to predict also being a dissident of the far-Right.

And there’s some papers that have been published this year that indicate that. People on the far Left, it’s Machiavellianism and narcissism. People on the far-Right, psychopathic personality. Neuroticism highest on the Left. But also on the extreme Right there’s a certain degree of neuroticism.

But that’s overall. I mean, in general, basically people that are more Right-wing and less neurotic than people that are Left-wing, overall.

And so yeah. So you end up with these two movements. I mean, on the one hand you justify it yourself by saying:

“Oh god! The scientists know best! Trust the science!”

Which is insane! And even that is just the kind of midwit, …

Woes: Yeah.

The Jolly Heretic: Inherent insight, never trust the science! Never! Ever! Ever, on anything, trust the science! And that’s why these genius type people like Hans Isan, [sp] and whatever, were prepared to poke around with weird stuff. Like whether astrology was true. Because they’re open-minded! That’s the essence of being a good scientist.

And then the other extremes you say these vaccines are untested, well, of course, they’re untested! For them to be properly tested you’d need about 40 years, for a proper longitudinal test. What do you want them to do, if they’re following a vaccine policy? Wait 40 years? Locked down for 40 years!

Woes: Well. I mean, I think it would all be different if the virus were actually a real threat cs.

The Jolly Heretic: Exactly! And it’s not!

Woes: The death rate is 0.4 percent.

The Jolly Heretic: They say:

“Oh, we’re concerned that if we let it rip, if we just go for herd immunity.”

I don’t know how we’ve got onto this, because we haven’t planned to talk about this. But anyway! If we go for herd immunity, then overwhelm the NHS, and nobody’ll be able to get operations, and lots of people will die. And that’s another thing as well, with neuroticism, in understanding the reaction of some portions of it. People that are neurotic are also neurotic about their health. So they’re gonna believe they’re going to get ill.

Woes: Yeah. But that exact thing has happened with the course that we’ve taken. People aren’t getting cancer treatments and scanning, testing for cancer. And because the hospitals are busy with Covid, apparently. So I mean, I’ve seen stories people saying:

“My brother died. He was neglected by the NHS, because they weren’t doing routine scans, routine testing. And as a result his cancer went terminal. And he’s now dead!”

This is a phenomenon that seems to have become fairly common over the course of Covid. And that’s because we did go the extreme!

[25:12]

The Jolly Heretic: Indeed, indeed! I can’t think of any case of someone that they have presented as having died of Covid, who is healthy!

Woes: That is another thing!

The Jolly Heretic: They presented this person the other day, a few weeks ago, I was reading in the newspaper. Some chap from Wales, or something. And they said:

“Oh, he died of Covid. And only he’d had the jabs! He died of Covid. He had no underlying health problems!”

No underlying health problems, either. He was a fucking obese! That’s why he died of Covid! There’s nothing to do with it. Maybe he’d have died if he had the jabs? As indeed people have done. They’ve had both jabs.

There was someone today I read about in the paper. He had both sets of jabs, and he died. So it’s a weak protection. It’s a ritual, it’s like a religious ritual, like an amulet! Like you hold it in your hand:

“Oh, the Covid pass! The magical Covid pass.”

Which means that:

“Oh you’re gonna be fine!”

No you’re not! And I think that it’s a way of allaying, what we’re being confronted, as a declining society. Which is a problem that we probably could have solved with the technology we have now, if we were confronted with it 30 years ago. But no! Now our average IQ is lower!

We promote people not, because they’re intelligent, but, because they’re women! Or, because they’re ethnic minorities, or whatever. We have an over-educated society, and thus people that go up through the university system other than, because they’re highly intelligent. We can’t discuss certain things which creates a general atmosphere which is totally inimicable to being able to solve problems correctly.

But most importantly of all we’ve lost, we’re losing, whatever, 1.5 points per decade. Which has a huge impact to the right tail, [of the IQ bell curve] which has a huge impact among the very clever people who are needed to solve these kinds of problems. And that’s what we’re confronted with. And what I think will eventually happen.

And if I move it on to plugging my book, which I have, The Past is a Future Country — The Coming Conservative Demographic Revolution. How these things unravel is that the intelligence of the society goes down, and down, and down, and down! You stop passing on useful knowledge, which would allow you to survive a collapse. So you don’t pass on things like, …

Now, we have in Britain, this shortage of truck drivers! You’ve got all these people with degrees in sociology from crap polytechnics, or whatever. But we don’t have enough people to drive trucks, to keep the supply lines going.

And eventually you become so stupid that you can’t solve some unpredictable problem. Plus confidence is lost. Plus the supply lines can’t be kept going. And the result of that is collapse, into a simpler way of life.

Now when that collapse happened with Rome into a simpler way of life, they hadn’t industrialized yet. So the population was far less dysgenic, and far more people knew useful knowledge. So when the Romans withdrew from Britain in about 410, there was a massive economic collapse.

Because all of these people whose jobs have been based around the presence of Romans. You know, making their swords, and making their armour cand building their palaces, and making their mosaics, and all this stuff, all went! And so you had the total collapse of the economy, and people just retreated into the countryside – it wasn’t a very populated country then, remember – into the countryside and just returned to farming. Cannibalized the cities for useful resources, and the cities just fell into disrepair. People that couldn’t find a way of surviving would die. And people would pass on useful knowledge like fishing, and hunting, and farming.

Now, they’re not even teaching kids joined up writing in Finnish schools! I wouldn’t be at all surprised if soon they didn’t teach them to write!

And so when the collapse happens no one will have any useful knowledge, and all it would take would be, … I mean, for example, Carrington Event. In 1859 there was this huge solar flare which knocked out the which knocked out the electricity system that existed at the time. And that was just telegraphs and stuff. And it resulted in aurora borealis as far south as northern Africa. And the telegraph systems caught fire. The operators were burned. Things like this happened. But really not much electricity going on in 1859.

Now if that happened now, if that happened now, a solar flare that happened now, it would knock out the electricity system for months. And the result would be the complete collapse of society. A problem we couldn’t solve.

And that’s why I think that this Covid, it’s a foreshadowing. It’s the history of the West if a novelist was writing it. They would foreshadow the end with this. This is is a hint of what it will be like when something’s like this is happening.

[30:00]

Woes: Yeah. You seem to think that basically this is fundamentally a symptom of the decline in IQ, the decline in civilization, and the decline in religiosity. I don’t see it that way. I think those things have enabled it, to have helped that along. But I think the fundamental cause here, the fundamental driver, is globalist power! Power at a higher level making this happen.

The Jolly Heretic: Does it have to be, … But Woes, my dear fellow, does it have to be either/or?

Woes: No! Not at all. I don’t really know if we even have a disagreement here. I’m just saying I would say that is the fundamental thing. And these other aspects. I mean, as I say, the decline in religiosity, certainly! But that needing people is clearly still there. Otherwise they wouldn’t have been out on their balconies rattling their pots and pans for the NHS last year.

The Jolly Heretic: I think that’s a good point. You could see it as a symbiotic relationship. So you get, as this decline happens, we go from fifty percent child mortality to one percent child mortality. We run a situation where we’re enormously group selected, highly selected to be group oriented. And so everything that we’re selected for, intelligence, group orientation, mental health, physical health, religiousness, that all is bundled together.

And so with the collapse of these half Darwinian selection pressures from 50% down to one percent, you’re going to get a huge buildup in the mutant people, in these spiteful mutants, that come up in mutation, in the population. Now in that we were so group oriented – there’ll be deviation either way from the optimum – but what you would expect overall is for these people that were the deviation, these people that would have that would have died of scarlet fever, have been around 200 years ago. But now they’ve survived, and lived, and they’re running things. They would be more individualistic.

So then you get a society that has got this growing, growing, level of individualism. But it’s still being suppressed by the structures that have been built up by the group oriented society, that suppresses individualism, that suppresses selfish people, that suppresses free riders, and whatever! That suppresses them, keeps them down to an optimum small number.

You could argue that geniuses are individualists. They tend to be selfish people. An optimum small number of individualistic people is permitted. But it is this optimum.

With the collapse of group selection and the build up of this mutation, eventually they become such a large number of some selfish people that they can’t be held back. And so a tipping point is reached, and the floodgates are breached by this tsunami of spiteful mutation which then tips the society over, and people start to migrate towards the winning team. And so that this happened in the 60s.

And so people start to become more individualistic. Once that happens, then you start signaling individualism, you get runaway individualism into the clown world that we have now, into the Kali Yuga. Now once that happens then not only is individualism not being suppressed by the society, it’s being promoted!

And what could happen there, is very, very nasty people, very, very individualistic selfish, people, will be able to ascend to positions of influence in a way they couldn’t possibly have done in the past. Because they would be held back by these group selected structures. And then those people will think to themselves:

“Right. Well how can I cement my power? I’ve got all this money and wealth? How can I ensure that people don’t rebel against me, and my interests?”

Well I can do everything I can deliberately! So these things will be happening unconsciously anyway, because your individualism [word unclear]. So building ugly buildings unconsciously as a means of:

“Oh! I’m so much more interesting than these people that built beautiful buildings!”

But then you could deliberately do it, just to make people sad! Make people feel crap! Make people feel less likely to rebel! Like deliberate, thought through, policies. Which are a reflection of this growing individualism, but also causing it more. Because then people feel unhappy, if they feel unhappy they don’t bother socializing, and they become more individualistic, more selfish, more atomized.

And so you could see that the two things, there could be a symbiotic relationship between what people like to call the “evil elites”, and this kind of thing occurring. I mean, we know that you get conspiracies to help out appalling individualists in positions of power.

Jimmy Savile is an example of this. Loads of people knew what he was doing. He was spreading negative social epistasis. He was statutory raping girls. Very possibly having sex with corpses. And people turned a blind eye to it, because it’s just:

“Jimmy, being Jimmy.”

And he had connections with the Royal Family. And with high levels of politics and, and whatever.

And now you have this Epstein thing where clearly you have all of these high-level people who are all associated with this, I mean, just this sick, highly individualist, psychopath, basically. Who could be argued to be using the influence he has in the same way that, …

I mean, if you look historically like, 16, 15th century people in positions of power thought to themselves:

“Oh my god! If they start questioning Catholicism have we’re screwed!”

So Catholicism was it was being questioned by a natural process anyway of people becoming more intelligent, and more religious. You have a backlash against it. But then you also have people who are a rival elite, if you like time thinking:

“Oh! This could be a way to undo this rival elite, and for us to be the elite! We could virtue signal our way into the elite. Let’s promote Protestantism, and promote chaos, and promote war in the German states, and all this. So we can get into the elite! We can be elite and topple the other elite!”

And that’s exactly what happened. And so this “woke” process, it could be a way of you’ve got rival elites, we’ve had this over-promotion effect, whereby there’s too many elites, people wanting elite positions.

And so one way you could get the elite position, and keep an elite position, would be by introducing measures to control and cower the population. So I don’t see the two things as contradictory, really.

Woes: Yes. The only contradiction that I would say is that while there may well be rising individualism among the elites, or among high capable individuals like Bill Gates, and whatever. Among the population it seems to be the from what I’ve seen, my way of interpreting it, is that there’s its lowering individualism. And they’re actually becoming more collectivistic!

The Jolly Heretic: Yeah! I mean, that’s what the within this book that I’ve got coming out next year with my colleague JA Rayna Hills, [sp] Esquire, The Past is a Future Country – the Coming Conservative Demographic Revolution. We look at this and we plot the data and who’s breeding, and who’s breeding by how much. And yeah, that’s exactly right! What you’re seeing is a coming apart.

So basically who breeds? It’s first of all stupid people! Stupid people breed. Second of all, people with low impulse control. They’re impulsive, so they breed. Thirdly, certain kinds of narcissists. The kind of people that will sort of game the system and think:

“Oh, I’ll have as many kids as possible, because I get a free council house, or whatever.”

They breed. Fourthly, specifically like the criminal underclass. That’s the only group that has above replacement fertility. Families where both parents are on welfare, and they’re involved in crime. That’s the only segment of society. So you’ve basically got then what you would call “R” strategists. People that are stupid, and impulsive, and nasty. They breed.

But then, on the other hand, if you control for intelligence, then what predicts breeding? First of all agreeableness. So people that are kind and nice, they breed, because they want to have babies and love them, and whatever. And they’re very high in a desire to nurture. People that are extremely religious, and also people that are extremely conservative, they breed.

And the heritability of these traits is quite high. In the case of fundamentalism have its about point seven, genetic. In the case of conservative’s, point eight, genetic. And then there’s people that are like low in mental instability, they breed.

So you’ve basically got this coming apart, this carving out of the extremes. Whereby on the one hand it’s the extremely stupid, impulsive, underclass, people they breed. And on the other hand it’s the extremely conservative, religious, sort of what we call “K” oriented, nurturing people, they breed.

And it’s the people in the middle, the rest, that that don’t breed! So what you would predict that would happen eventually, will be a well, first of all, because intelligence is going down, there will be a collapse of society. There will be a declension.

The second thing that what tends to happen, when you get this collapse, you see it in Rome, is the breakup of society. So with multiculturalism, people don’t trust each other. So the societies break up into smaller polities, the breakup of the United States.

Thirdly what you tend to see is a sort of Neo-Byzantium. So what we’re thinking is that the intelligent, religious, conservative, people will escape the chaos and hell surrounding them, and create like little neo-Byzantiums. It’ll hold out some civilization. And this happened last time. I mean, Byzantium was exactly like this. In 1075, 300 ships full of Anglo-Saxon notables left England to go to Byzantium which they then did. Fled the chaos of Dark Ages England to Byzantium.

[40:05]

And so they will attract intelligent people from all over the place. And they will be the kind of holdouts of civilization surrounded by, basically Third World. I mean, even if you control for race, even just among White people, Third World chaos.

So that’s kind of what’s happening. You can see it as a kind of zombie apocalypse, in which we are the sort of band of brothers who are surrounded by just these mindless zombies that want to destroy us and destroy themselves. And we try to maintain civilization in the face of it. And that is what we would predict would occur.

I mean, by the end of the century, the IQ of Western countries, on current trends, will be 85. We’ll be back down to the level that we were about 1100. And by then you would predict that it would have just split up. Part of the United States, I’m sure will break up. I mean, I’ve spoken to Americans that will think it will break up in the next 10 years. Maybe it’s already breaking up. People hate each other and they’re coming apart into separate groups that are genetically similar to each other. They’re creating new sub nations. And I think this is going to carry on.

This is what happens in the Dark Ages. It’s exactly what happened with Romans! Exactly the same! I mean if you think about in the year 410, England, apart from a few small areas in East Anglia that held out, England was a united country! It was one England, one polity that was had a Roman governor.

If you move forward a couple of hundred years it’s divided up into numerous little kingdoms. And that’s what happens to the breakup of civilization. Now admittedly they were all chaotic and crap. And the more intelligent people that were English tended to leave those and make their way either to Byzantium, or to Moorish Spain. Because that’s where the intellectual stuff was happening.

So that’s what we would think. Perhaps Eastern Europe, or parts of Eastern Europe, will be where these has resisted this, where these things will be.

And we should see “wokeness” really as a crucible of evolution. The crucible of evolution used to be child mortality and warfare, it’s now “wokefare”. Wokeness inculcates you with maladaptive ways of thinking. Such that you think that life is pointless, such that you feel depressed, such that you have an evolutionary mismatch.

And if you’re intelligent, then you’re more sensitive to the environment. That’s been shown. Intelligent people are more sensitive. Because the more environmentally sensitive you are then the more subtle signals you will pick up, and the better you will be able to solve problems. The more subtle you’ll think if you’re more sensitive to what you perceive. You’re more sensitive to the environment.

So intelligent people then are easily led into an evolutionary mismatch, where they don’t want to have children, which is what happened in Rome. And therefore IQ goes down. What we have here is a this wokeness which inculcates people with maladaptive ways of thinking with anti-natalism, and whatever.

And if you are genetically resistant to that, because you’re genetically religious, or conservative, or whatever, then you will have life. And everybody else will be selected out. So it’s the new crucible of evolution, as I see it, wokeness.

If you can resist as a boy being inculcated to think that you should have your genitals cut off, if you can utterly resist that, then you’ve got the Right genes.

Woes: Could you list the various ways in which wokness is dysgenic, I’ve forgotten the phrase that you just used. Just like 30 seconds, …

The Jolly Heretic: Crucible of evolution, I said.

Woes: No. Before that. That it creates decline. It creates a sort of culture of death.

[43:54]

The Jolly Heretic: Well, first of all, it promotes an evolutionary mismatch. So we have these five moral foundations; of obedience to authority; of sanctity and purity versus disgust and, you know, chaos; and loyalty to the group – those are the group oriented foundations.

And then you have the individualizing foundations of; harm avoidance; and of equality. And we have both sets of them. Because we are a group, we are a pack animal. So we have to be loyal to our group. And we are under selection pressure against other groups, but also to attain status within the group at least until quite recently, to get children basically, you have to have relatively high status. And therefore you’re very status concerned, individually concerned. And those two traits, equality, and harm avoidance, means that, yeah, you don’t get killed, you’re all right if you promote that.

And “equality” means if you bring others down to your level then you have proportionately more. And one thing that’s found is that people that are neurotic, people that are sort of low self-esteem, mentally unstable, are physically weak, they will use those values. They will promote equality and harm avoidance, because it makes them, … It’s a way of playing for status, because we all sympathize with them, but seeming nice. So that’s why when women play for status they’ll go on about equality, or harm avoidance. But when men, who are physically tougher, play for status, they’ll be more bombastic. So those are the five moral foundations. We’re meant to have a balance between the five of them. That’s what’s natural.

[45:29]

And that’s what’s found with conservatives. They’re equally concerned about all five of these foundations. Whereas people that are Left-wing, people that are liberal, are individualist. They’re concerned only about the individualizing foundations. And they’re not really concerned at all about the group-oriented foundations but we, the Right, will cede power to them, because there’s this asymmetrical sort of sympathy. Where the Right can sympathize with the Left’s concern. Because the Right are also concerned about harm avoidance and equality. But the Left do not sympathize with the rights concerns. So that we will always cede ground to the Left. So it’ll always be unless you put in a stop to it. There’ll always be a march Leftwards. Until it creates such a strong evolutionary mismatch, and so many people are unhappy. And it creates just such chaos that then there is a Right-wing backlash.

And often the form that that backlash will take is people that are sort of, I don’t know, what you might say far-Right. And they will be high in the group oriented foundations, low in the individualizing foundations. So that’s another mismatch. And then you get another backlash. And that seems to be the sort of swing of history.

And so what wokeness does is it creates a mismatch, an evolutionary mismatch, where it’s too low in group oriented values. And it creates runaway individualism. That’s the first thing.

Secondly, what does that do? That creates runaway individualism. So we’re surrounded by, we feel a strong sense of disgust all the time! Look at the buildings. Look at ugly fat people in advertisements for soap. Girls with Down syndrome on advertisements for glasses. It’s inducing disgustingness!

And these feelings make us feel depressed, and unhappy. And this is associated with feeling that life is just pointless, basically, and not wanting to have children! It’s been found that anti-natalism is associated basically with this kind of mismatch. Basically it’s mediated by depression, and neuroticism, and it makes you not want to have children.

So it creates a depressed, unhappy, people who know something’s wrong and the more sensitive ones just give up on breeding. And so in that sense wokeness is a death cult! It A), literally promotes anti-natalism like as a dogma. You have this runaway individualism to a point where you say:

“Oh we’re on climate strike! We’re deliberately not having children for the sake of the climate.”

B), it’s much worse with women, of course, because women are more socially conformist, women are more indoctrinatable, women are adapted to a Patriarchy. Take the Patriarchy away, they’re not used to making decisions for themselves, so they make maladaptive decisions. And so it’s particularly bad for them, climate strike and all that.

But then more broadly it just creates this mismatch. And then it pushes people along a path of life which is maladaptive. So for sexuality to go right, everything has to go right. We’re highly environmentally sensitive, everything has to go right! Push children along the wrong path of life and the sexuality will go awry. And this is also happening.

And so in all of these ways, both directly and indirectly, it’s a “womb sterilizing” cult!

But the result of that, is who’s resistant to it? And who’s resistant to it is going to be the people that are genetically highly prone, even in the face of all that, even in the face of all that, to want to have children. To want to look out for the good of their group. So they will be like, almost like they won’t be environmentally sensitive. They’ll be environmentally insensitive!

Which is why it will promote stupid people, because stupid people tend to be environmentally insensitive! So they don’t tend to get inculcated with the ideology, but it will also promote people that are just like genetically religious. As I’ve called them, the “pre-industrial norm”. And so you end up going back to that.

Now the problem there is that what you’ll end up with then, as all the woke people die out, is the people that will be left will be these conservative religious people that want to have loads of kids! And they’ll have loads of kids. And then they’ll be stupid people. And they’ll have loads of kids. And so you’ll get a population spike far too large to be sustained!

Woes: Also a very bifurcated society.

The Jolly Heretic: Yeah. A broken up, bifurcated society, where everyone hates each other, with a massive population far too high to get enough food, because people too stupid to get enough food. And then you get big time collapse, of like 90 percent of the population collapsing.

[50:08]

Woes: Bloody hell! So what would you say in terms of giving people hope for the future? Because everything you’ve just said is really depressing, …

[THE FOLLOWING NEEDS improving. You don’y even need to listen to the audio. just copy a paragraph and make any obvious corrections and leave the result in the comment section. I will then make those corrections in the post.]

REMAINDER OF TRANSCRIPT IN PROGRESS

[89:26]

Transcript in Need of Correction

Help out by volunteering a small amount of your time to make it happen.

Leave a comment!

————

Millennial Woes has created many things. And this is your chance to own one of them! A unique piece of work hand crafted by the vile vlogger, to commemorate Millennial 2021.

Millenniyule 2021 commemoration

A hundred hours of highly skilled labour went into producing this animated vector graphic, which can be magnified to any size.

In the iconic Millennial Woes font, it glistens and responds to your touch. And at the centre of it all, a figure representative of 2021, the White Stag!

Symbolizing endurance, discovery, and rejuvenation!

This one-of-a-kind creation is up for sale as an NFT. Follow the link below. And it can be yours forever! This is your only chance!

[90:29]

Millenniyule 2021 – 60 – Mark Collett

Woes: Hello. And welcome back to Millenniyule 2021. My apologies for the delay. There were technical problems. My computer is really acting up tonight. There’s nothing I can do about it.

I’m here now for the final stream of tonight. And this is with Stephen from Radical Liberation, a YouTube channel. And he’s also on Odysee. Should I address you as RadLib, or Radical Liberation, or Stephen?

RadLib: It seems like when I’m on the internet in our circles, people call me RadLib. And I’m fine with that. So that’ll work.

Woes: All right. So could you introduce yourself to the audience please.

RadLib: Yeah. So I have a lot of things [chuckling] to share. And it’ll probably just take the whole time we have yeah.

Woes: I should just say beforehand, that I have described you as a “recovering libertarian”. I don’t know if that’s accurate, or not. If whether you were a libertarian, or whether you are recovering [laughing].

RadLib: Well actually that was cs.

Woes: You can take it away!

RadLib: I’ll touch on that first. So I think some people have read into the name “Radical Liberation” more than they should. It might be interesting to folks to know that I chose the name “Radical Liberation” before I knew anything about Libertarianism. So I actually chose that a long time ago. And it might be better to put the emphasis on the word “radical” [chuckling].

Woes: Yeah. I think I get your meaning.

RadLib: Yeah. So it really I chose the name originally coming from a spiritual point of view. The verse that comes to mind is:

“So if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed!”

So when I was thinking about Radical Liberation, it didn’t even have to do with politics, originally.

Woes: Right. Okay.

RadLib: So having said that, I did get more, and more, interested in what I’d call the classical liberal libertarian tradition which I see as very old. When I think about this tradition, I don’t think about the libertarian party, shall we say. [chuckling] So I was never a Leftist, or what people call a “modal libertarian”, or a “walbert”.

I’m actually a second generation Right-winger, I guess you could say. My dad campaigned for Barry Goldwater.

Woes: Oh! In the 60s!

RadLib: Yeah, right.

Woes: The late 60s.

RadLib: And he’s passed now, a couple years ago. But, and I didn’t have a chance to ask him. But I remember him telling a story about him being at a meeting of a certain organization that starts with the same letter acronym, or it’s initials are the same letter three times [KKK]! And I never did find out why he was at that meeting.

But anyway [chuckling] he just told it as a funny story, because he had a lot of great funny stories. My father gave up politics for the ministry. And specifically, and I’ll talk about this more later, he became a missionary to the jews.

He was trained by the fellow who went on, Moishe Rosen, who went on to found, Jews for Jesus. So my world growing up was, in part, what we call “messianic jews”. Jewish people who had come to believe in Jesus, but retained their jewish identity. So that is an interesting, I think, background to be right to be talking to nationalists. And so forth.

Woes: Right! And so was your father jewish?

RadLib: No! My family’s not jewish. In fact, hopefully this isn’t sucking up to you as a Scottish person. But the name “Carson”, near as I can tell, traces to “Kirkebree”?

Woes: Okay, yes. It would be pronounced, probably “Cardberry”.

RadLib: Oh, I’m sorry am I getting the wrong. I was told as “Kirkebree”. That’s right in the south.

Woes: All right, okay. I’ve not heard of it. But I will be, …

RadLib: Oh you don’t know, yeah.

Woes: Oh Carpe?

RadLib: Kirkbridge. Okay, sorry.

Woes: Yeah, okay yeah.

RadLib: Yeah, anyway. So Carson is a Scottish name. And then on my mother’s side we have McFarland, back there somewhere. So I’ve got some Scottish in there. So anyway, yeah, I’m, you know, English and Scottish. And that sort of thing by ancestry. No! No! My father was a missionary to the jews. He wasn’t himself jewish.

Woes: So what does that mean:

“A missionary to the jews?”

RadLib: Well, Saint Paul was a missionary to the jews, right. And then to the gentiles.

Woes: Yeah. But I mean this is something that is perhaps more familiar to American viewers than to British viewers. I think it would be fair to say that jews are a more prominent part of American society, at every level, than they are in Britain. I think British people know very little about the jews, or judaism. Whereas I think Americans are just naturally more familiar with them. So could you describe what it means to be a missionary to the jews?

[05:08]

RadLib: Yeah. So it means that Christian missionaries, you know, go to Africa. And so on and so forth. Right? He was a missionary to jews.

Woes: So does that mean that he was trying to convert them to Christianity?

RadLib: Yes.

Woes: All right. Okay. So I wonder. Because the phrasing could mean that they he was serving them, because there is the thing about American Evangelist Christians who see themselves as subservient to the jews.

RadLib: Right. Yeah. You could say that I grew up in “Christian zionism Central”, from that point of view, in terms of reflexive support for Israel. And so forth. And in fact, by the way, getting into Libertarianism is one of the things that sort of red pilled me on Israel. Which was quite interesting for me, coming from my background.

Woes: Yeah, indeed!

RadLib: Yeah. So I learnt about the story of Israel and Palestine from the Journal of Libertarian Studies. Very important paper in the 70s. Where it showed how much of the land was owned right before the state of Israel became a thing. How much was owned by jews, and how much was not. And it’s quite a shocking graphic if you’ve grown up on zionist propaganda [chuckling]!

Woes: Oh yeah, I think I can imagine that. The landmark the areas owned by jews is massively grown ever since it was in 1945?

RadLib:1948, or something like that.

Woes: Yeah, it’s quite incredible.

RadLib: Yeah. So, real quick before I leave off on sort of the Right wing background, so to speak. I guess it’s no surprise given that background, that I was attracted to the Mises Institute, which has kind of been my ideological home for decades now. Where they’re known for their economics.

But people who know them as, you know, libertarians, or something don’t realize how deep they are into revisionist history. They wouldn’t know that, …

Well I first learnt about the Southern Poverty Law Center, because I heard that the Mises Institute was put on their Hate Map, or whatever.

Woes: It’s amazing how many people hear about the SPLC in the first place, because it picks a fight with them.

RadLib: Yeah! Right! And, in fact, I want to mention just a slight, not personal connection, but sort of one of the reasons that you are on my mental map is, because I watched your speech about Hope Not Hate. And since I had that little bit of background on the SPLC, I was really pleased with your speech on Hope Not Hate. Which I think it’s fair to say I don’t want to be too prejudicial and throw everybody in a bucket. But it seems to me that Hope Not Hate, Anti-Defamation League, SPLC, Southern Poverty Law Center, they’re of a breed, I think.

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: Yes.

Woes: I mean, I don’t think it’s as absolute as it is in the case of the SPLC and the ADL. But, yes undoubtedly there’s a large tribal influence on Hope Not Hate. Yes.

RadLib: Well they operate in a similar way, I guess what I’m saying.

Woes: Oh yes! Absolutely they do!

RadLib: The smearing and the, …

Woes: Yeah, their main function is to demonize people, to smear, to sabotage. They’re a disgraceful organization!

RadLib: Right. And if I can just take an opportunity to mention it. I think it’s on Odysee now, Woes, that your speech on Hope Not Hate?

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: Yeah! If you have not seen his speech on Hope Not Hate. And you don’t know much about Hope Not Hate, or you’ve just seen them being mean in the papers to your friends, or something, I really recommend taking the time to watch his speeches. Really excellent! Well researched! I think you had help on it, right?

Woes: Yeah, it was a bit of a group effort. I mean, I wrote it, but other people helped me out with research, and editing, and filming. So that was quite a unique project, because I tend to do everything myself. But with that I decided to branch out and see what could be achieved by involving other people. And I’m really proud of the resulting video.

RadLib: It’s outstanding! And it can help people understand who might think, you know. The only reason you wouldn’t like Hope Not Hate, or ADL, or SPLC, is like, because you’re a Nazi, or something! I think by the time you finish watching Woes of speech, you would be cured of any such thinking!

[10:02]

Woes: I hope so!

RadLib: They’re just terrible! They’re just terrible, and they should be stopped, you know!

Woes: Yeah. Thank you for saying that, because that was the purpose of the speech. It was to give people who might otherwise think that Hope Not Hate is quite an innocent, and benign organization, an insight into how nasty, and cruel, and dishonest, an organization it actually is!

RadLib: Exactly!

Woes: That was the purpose. Because they spend all their time demonizing and attacking other people. So I thought:

“Well they can have some of their own damn medicine back!”

RadLib: Yeah, exactly! Right. Except yours was probably a lot more fair to them than they are to us! [chuckling]

Woes: I would say so! Yeah. Their ability to twist things to create a certain impression is quite remarkable. But then again that could also be said of journalists in general.

RadLib: Right. Yeah. And they feed this stuff to the journalists, right. And the journalists basically just duplicate what ADL, SPLC, Hope Not Hate, … They do their little reports, the journalists just echo it. And then Silicon Valley kicks us off everything. That’s how it works. But anyway. So other things about me. I’ll do these real fast. And we’ll come back to some things.

So I have eight children. A lot of people know that about me, with my lovely wife. We had them fast! People think that it’s the number of children. No it’s not. It’s the velocity! It’s the births per year rate. That’s what makes it challenging. And we had eight children in 11 years. So it was quite the journey. And we’re still on it. Our youngest are six-year-old twins. Red-headed twins, by the way, speaking again to that Scottish ancestry perhaps [chuckling]!

Woes: I’ve [chuckling] got to say it’s a very impressive achievement. And I congratulate you.

RadLib: Yeah, thank you. Well it’s a joy and a blessing. I’m so glad about them. And that’s part of the reason I mentioned that I have eight children is, because I’m thrilled! I mean, I didn’t know if I’d ever get married, you know. Now here I am with eight children.

Anyway, another interesting thing is that I worked with black children from the inner city in North St Louis – I’m in the St Louis area – for 10 years through a ministry of my church. My mother worked with children from that sort of ghetto area for 24 years. So that’s an interesting background.

Furthermore, on the African-American front, I was the last student of a local blues jazz musician named Pop Sport [sp]. And his daughter, in fact, gave me his keyboard when he died. So that’s kind of interesting.

Woes: I mean, obviously the arena of race relations is a massive one. Especially in the American context. Is there anything, I mean, how would you say that that shaped to your world view? Obviously try to keep it fairly concise. But you can speak for as long as you want really.

RadLib: Yeah, well you’ve heard of Thomas Sowell, I’m sure.

Woes: Oh yes.

RadLib: Yeah, well while I’m doing this ministry with these children, and learning about their life experience in the north St Louis. And the reason we were working in this neighbourhood in particular is because I think that area had the highest murder rate in the city. So it’s a place that clearly needed some help.

Woes: Yeah. Just let me interject with a film reference. Because people expect that off me. And I don’t want to let them down. I know that escape from New York was filmed in East St Louis. I don’t know if there’s any connection here in terms of their proximity. Because there had been a huge fire five years before. I think in 1976 that just devastated whole blocks of the city of east Louis. So it looked like a post-apocalyptic cityscape [chuckling]!

RadLib: I did not know this! I didn’t know that myself! Did not know that’s where they filmed. But I’m glad you brought that up, because I can share a little story from that ministry. One of our pastors was teaching on Psalm 23. And he got to the part where it talks about the “Valley of the shadow of death”. And he said:

“So what do you guys think ‘the valley of the shadow of death’ means?”

And one of the young black men from North St Louis raised his hand and said:

“East St Louis.”

So that gives you [chuckling] an idea! I always work in a rough area and those people think East St Louis is rough! So you could always go deeper [laughing]. But anyway, I guess I would say that at the same time as I was doing this ministry I was also reading all this stuff, like Thomas Sowell.

And so that gave me some perspective on what I was learning through my students, and their families, and everything, what I was seeing. And then he was describing sort of how it got to be the way it was. So I don’t know what influence it had on me exactly. Except to say that for me political economy which is sort of my area that I’m published in, and that I do my show in.

Political economy is not a dry lifeless thing. It’s these things that the State does. They have body counts, you know. They have people living in misery, whose grandfathers, and great-grandfathers, were not living in misery. All of us now. But back then it was sort of more the ghetto that seem to be really feeling the impacts of a lot of these things.

[15:46]

So yeah. So when I think about these government programs that I view as having been at least part of the problem of what’s going on in the inner city, I’m thinking about people I know. I have a goddaughter who’s in the inner city. One of my students named my wife and I, god parents to her. So to me it’s very human all of this.

Woes: Yeah. And I think it’s not unusual actually for people who end up with certain views about things. Views about race. And so on. To have had personal experience. One of the cliches that the likes of the SPLC will throw around, is that only ignorant people with little experience of diversity, are against diversity!

RadLib: Right.

Woes: And where. I think that’s often the polar opposite of the truth. Where it’s people who have never experienced it that think it must be wonderful.

RadLib: Right. Have sort of a fantasy, … Yeah, Sowell talks about this sort of thing. We’re being subjected to the fantasies of Left-wing, social Democrats, or whatever.

Woes: And university students who think that all black people are like their black fellow student on a humanities degree. When, of course, that is not what diversity means for the [chuckling] vast majority of people!

RadLib: Right. Now having said that, by the way, that was what I did then. In recent times we’ve moved to an area that is basically where the St Louis black middle class lives. Not exactly our street, but sort of our surrounding area is all the black middle class.

And, of course, as you might expect, they’re quite different from the culture you hear about in rap songs [chuckling]. And it seems to me they’re almost invisible. I’m sure in America you hardly know that there’s this massive black middle class who aren’t going around shooting things up, you know.

Woes: I don’t know, maybe you listen to different rap music from what I do! [laughing]

RadLib: Actually, Academic Agent, I rely on him on rap music! My last rap music was back in the, before it was called rap, it was called hip-hop.

Woes: Oh yes!

RadLib: Early 80s. White Lines would be a song from that era?

Woes: Yes!

RadLib: That’s more my era [chuckling]

Woes: Yeah. Who did that? I’ve forgotten who did that song? I don’t know all I remember is:

“Down in the village. So you might think it’s silly. You can’t tell the men from the women sometimes.”

Woes: Yeah. I know this! I know the song. I know it quite well. But I can’t remember who did it.

RadLib: And they were just like screaming at us in the chat, I’m sure.

Woes: Yeah, it’s yeah. I know the one. And yeah, of course, it’s an amusing era. But anyway, that’s another thing.

RadLib: Yeah, I was born in 1969, by the way. So I’m a little older than most people take me to be, looking at me.

Woes: Yes. Okay. All right.

RadLib: So I guess a couple other things tying into sort of moving towards the political stuff that we tend to talk about here. My research area actually is “demicide”. That is the fancy academic term for mass murder by states. So would include genocide. But also, you know, killing the commies killing the Kulaks, right. That would be democide, even if it doesn’t count as genocide for some reason. I don’t know why it wouldn’t. They were all basically Christian Ukrainians.

But anyway. So I’m actually published. I have an article in the peer-reviewed journal on that topic. And that remains – I haven’t been digging deep into it lately. But it remains a topic I plan to return to. And I spent a lot of time researching when I was young.

I have one of our South African YouTuber friends, has been asking me to come on, and apply some of my analysis to their situation. Because it’s starting to look a little worrisome for the Boers in South Africa.

Woes: Yes, indeed.

RadLib: Yeah, and I’m concerned, based on what I know, which isn’t enough.

[20:00]

Bringing us to the dissident Right, I guess it’s worth mentioning. And it’s gonna sound like I’m trying to big myself up. But there’s a reason I’m bringing this up. I did predict 9/11. And I wouldn’t have even remembered I did it, except that while it was happening, and we where the work cafeteria watching planes go into the towers, a co-worker came by and leaned down and said:

“You said something like this would happen.”

And because he said that. And you remember 9/11. It’s like:

“Where were you when JFK was shot?”

Right? It’s that kind of day. I remember him saying that. And so I know that I actually, more, or less, predicted it. And that sort of brings me here.

I had a Chapter One, of my sort of political interests which was writing for LewRockwell.com. Do about that Woes?

Woes: Yes. And I actually have another person who wrote for lewrrockwell.com, is going to be appearing. I don’t know how to pronounce her name, “Britti” cs.

RadLib: Yes. Yeah Brittany.

Woes: Yeah.

RadLib: Brittany’s appearing, because she’s my friend.

Woes: Oh, of course! Yes, she mentioned she knew you. I’d forgotten that.

RadLib: That’s right. She saw that I was doing it and she thought she’d try to sign on. So thanks for having her. She’s great.

Woes: Okay.

RadLib: Yeah. But anyway. So yeah, my first sort of bout of being involved with politics was with the Mises Institute with lewrockwell.com. I didn’t write for antiwar.com, but considered myself a friend of Justin Raimondos at Anti-war. I did write about the invasion, against the invasion of Iraq. And so forth. At that time. It’s all still there on lourockwell.com, articles by me. And a few really good ones by my wife.

And so how did I predict 9/11? And that’ll bring me to sort of my second round.

Woes: That was going to be my first question, yeah:

“How did you predict it?”

[22:00]

RadLib: Right. Well again, maybe this is a US, UK, difference here, or US and outside of US. But Americans really don’t know what’s going on in the rest of the world, generally [chuckling]. And I defend my fellow Americans in this way. Having visited Europe several times. The scale is just so different.

I mean, I remember going to London and seeing the City of London, and learning that it was one square mile! Like everything you’d ever heard of it is like in that one square mile, you know, Big Ben, Parliament. It’s all in one square mile. And it’s just mind-boggling for an American! Because we are on such a vast scale!

I drive to Chicago – it’s about four and a half to five hours – every year to bring my eight-year-old to visit my best friend and his eight-year-old. And every year they come and they visit me. And this is, to us, this is like driving down the street, right. In England you drive five hours. And it’s like you’re going across the Sahara, or something, right?

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: So the scale is just totally, … Let me just say this. Because I think this actually came, … Did this come up in a previous Millenniyule? I was saying to someone the other day, … Oh yes! It was a private thing. Yeah, I was saying to someone the other day, that it’s easy for the people in Britain and elsewhere to castigate Americans for not knowing about the rest of the world. But in truth America is a massive world into itself.

Woes: Yeak!

Woes: It’s a very complex beast, thousands of different pockets, thousands of different bits within it, that one could know about, or hear about and, you know, cities, states, forests, deserts, rivers, mountain ranges, towns, universities. All of these different things that people could have heard of and they’ll know somebody who’s going there, the next year. They’ll know someone who was there five years ago. They might go this year. And America is huge!

And it has all these different climates, and all different terrains. So it’s actually quite a lot to ask of someone to know about all of that, and to know about the rest of the world, as well!

RadLib: You got me exactly right. Yeah. So I was born in south Florida. I was born outside of Miami. And I regularly went to visit my grandparents. And my cousins. Drove there. It’s, I think, 17-hour drive. Now if you drive for 17 hours on the Continent, I mean, where would this get you? From Belgium to Italy? To the bottom of Italy? I don’t know [Woes laughing]. You’d cover a lot of territory, right? Yeah, just to give you the idea of scale.

So yeah, I sort of defend my fellow Americans in that regard. Having said that, because of my interest in anti-imperialism, the anti-war, libertarian anti-war stance, antiwar.com, Lew Rockwell.com, I knew what the US Empire was up to. And so what happened was I was actually feeling something, because I was reading about what was happening, the sanctions on Iraq, for example, that were happening prior to 9/11. And Madeleine Albright saying that:

“500,000 children dying from the sanctions was worth it.”

That’s something that many Americans didn’t even know she said that. But my understanding is that her words rang through the Muslim world, or the Arab world, at least. And you can imagine how that made people feel.

So I was aware of what was happening. And so that’s how I essentially predicted 9/11. I could just feel the anger rising. And I could feel it. In fact, by the way, I wasn’t the only one. A good friend of mine was actually working in the financial district in Manhattan. The very place where 9/11 happened. He felt something coming too, and moved to Australia before 9/11. He had been there earlier in 2001, I think. So I wasn’t the only one who could see it coming.

So anyway, I say all that to explain sort of Chapter Two for me. Which is that we had all these children very fast. I kind of dropped away from being involved in politics and stuff. Because we were just having baby after baby. And then just a couple years ago we started to get a little sip of air above the water! We’re not above the water yet. But we’re starting to get breaths from just dealing with babies all the time.

And I thought about getting involved, and engaged in political stuff again. And I thought, you know, I think I might give this YouTube thing a try. I really like the community I see. This is going back a couple years before everyone got kicked off, right?

Woes: Yeah, I was thinking like, “a lamb to the slaughter”.

RadLib: Yeah, exactly! [chuckling] But I really liked that people were talking to each other at least back then. Across sort of labels and political divides.

Woes: It was wonderful! It was great it!

RadLib: Yeah, it was healthy, it seemed to me. There was healthy dialogue going on. And that’s why they stopped it [chuckling]!

[27:14]

Woes: Yeah. I think it’s exactly the case. I think that there was a nice sense that we can talk without the teacher listening in and telling us what we should be saying to each other! And what we’d feel about each other.

RadLib: And who should talk to who.

Woes: Exactly!

RadLib: You didn’t feel like these artificial barriers of:

“Well I’m not allowed to talk to them, because I’m Right and they’re Left, or whatever it is.”

Woes: Exactly, exactly! And one of the most bizarre episodes in my YouTube career was a stream that I did with an antifa professor, Mike Isaacson. Which was [laughing], I mean, we didn’t agree on anything! We didn’t find any common ground. But it was quite it was very strange indeed.

RadLib: Yeah, but you talked.

Woes: Yeah.

RadLib: Right. So anyway, I decided to get back into the game and try a YouTube channel. And with the help of Academic Agent, who’s been a real friend to me, I was able to start to build an audience and everything. And so I’m sort of working on that now. Radical Liberation on YouTube. Check it out.

Woes: That was how I discovered you in the first place. It was from your appearances on his stream.

RadLib: Right. But I was feeling something again, like I did before 9/11. You know, I mentioned that rising anger I felt. And this time though I was feeling it from, I guess we’d call it the dissident Right. And so cs.

Woes: And what was that anger generated by?

RadLib: Well I didn’t know. That’s part of the reason I just started paying attention. Listening to Morgoth, and etc, you know, who I feel like I’ve become friends with by now. But trying to hear what people were concerned about. And I learnt some things. I didn’t know anything about the whole grooming gang mess.

Woes: I remember trying to tell an American about it on Facebook when it came out, you know, back late 2014. And he simply wouldn’t believe me. Because, I mean, I even showed him news articles. He said:

“Oh no! This must be exaggerated! It can’t be real. This is going to be shock stories. It’s just too outrageous! It’s too ridiculous! No society would allow this to happen. No government, no police force, you’re telling me racist horror stories!”

RadLib: Right.

Woes: Just wouldn’t believe it, because it is so incredible and awesome!

RadLib: Yeah. And I have a problem with people using language in weaselly ways. Like the US military talks about “collateral damage”, right? When they’ve slaughtered an innocent family! So I have trouble with that term “grooming gang”. Even as I bring up the term it makes me wince! I prefer mass ethnic rape. Which is a pretty blunt way to put it. But I think it’s accurate.

[30:11]

Woes: Yeah. I mean, if we’re talking about the mass rape, grooming, of White girls by Pakistani Muslims, then, of course, there’s an ethnic dimension to that! Whether it’s intended, or not! Whether it’s conscious, or not. Although, of course, it is, because how could you not be conscious of it?

RadLib: We’ve heard the testimony from the young ladies saying what was said to them.

Woes: Yes. Exactly. So, of course, it’s, … And this is one thing that I always struggled with White people, British people, they would say:

“Why does it matter? You only care about this, because they’re Pakistanis. It doesn’t make any difference, that they’re brown instead of White.”

And I said:

“No it does, because it’s a racial divide. It’s an ethnic insult, as much as it’s an assault on those individual girls, it’s also a group violation.”

And as everyone would understand that perfectly well if the perpetrators were White. So and I’m not going to go, … And imagine if the races were reversed. But it is true that everyone would! There’d be no mystery about why the race matters then.

RadLib: Right. So perhaps you can see coming from my interests in mass murder by States, right. Where I was focused on a group being targeted, right? Like the Kulaks being targeted by Stalin.

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: In the Holodomor, as they now call it. And, by the way, I wrote a poem about it and showed it to a survivor of that. And she said she put it up on her wall. Which was probably the best moment of my life. [chuckling]

But anyway so, you know, I’m thinking about groups being victimized by states. I’m looking for these patterns where the State sort of disarms the victim group in various ways. Makes them defenseless. And then either State functionaries themselves, or even sometimes just other people are allowed to sort of be predators on the victim group.

So this is a pattern in my head right. And then I get interested in like but you know why are these distant people so upset. And I learn about the mass ethnic crimes, the so-called grooming gangs. And I’m like:

“Oh okay.”

And so for me I’m not coming at this necessarily as like I’m a White guy, you know? It’s more that I’m a scholar of mass murder by States, or mass victimization by States, if you will. And here’s another case of it. And then having said all that the fact that say my own daughters could be subject to this kind of thing, well it brings some personal angle to it right?

Woes: Of course.

RadLib: Yes!

Woes: And this is actually something that I think is missing, or missed by a lot of middle-class people in Britain. They think well this would never happen to my daughters, because we don’t live in an area. So I don’t need to think about this. And I can even actively deny it. Which is obviously a disgusting attitude!

RadLib: Yeah, right. And so why shouldn’t I just as I have written about and advocated for various victim groups who have been targets, why shouldn’t I be an advocate for lower class White girls, or whatever, or Kyle Rittenhouse right, or whoever it is. For some reason for some people the fact that the victims are White means that it’s okay. Or you shouldn’t talk about it, or something. And I just that just goes right over my head. I just don’t get that.

Woes: Well, it’s yeah, of course, and I suspect that a hundred years ago those same people would have had a completely different attitude. I think this is to do with the conditioning that specifically White people have been targeted with since then. Over the last 80 years, or. So as such, the end result being that the worst thing they could be is “racist”, but also caring about their own race, or even recognizing their own race, is a racist thing to do!

RadLib: Right.

Woes: It’s like an abusive partner can psychologically conditioning his partner, his victim, so that she will just accept any abuse from him whatsoever! Again, it’s evil!

[35:00]

RadLib: Yeah. And I don’t accept it. So another personal angle to bring in here that connects to all this is that I’ve always been part of a radical fringe, my whole life! See that’s what I said. Because that’s the radical part of Radical Liberation right?

Woes: Yes I see, because it’s interesting, because you come across as very, if you don’t mind me saying so, well balanced [chuckling]! You don’t come across as the kind of person who tends to be into radical politics, or fringe politics. You seem I wouldn’t say conventional exactly, but not mad, or anything.

RadLib: Right. Well I try not to be. I’m a lot less mad than I once was that’s for sure! A lot less insane than I once was! But no, no, that, yeah, that’s right. For me this is normal. So like I said my father was a missionary to the jews in an area that was very jewish. I went to a both a high school and a university that were 40% jewish. I was passing out tracts when I was eight years old on the street, you know, doing street activism, right?

Woes: What? Oh tracts!

RadLib: Gospel. Reaching out to people with the gospel right. And I was being persecuted in high school for talking to jews about Jesus.

So for me being out of the mainstream is just normal, whether from the point of view of being part of Christianity I was part of which is, by the way, totally orthodox in its beliefs. It’s just most Christians don’t reach out to jews. And we did. And that was considered edgy, you know. Whether it’s part of that, or whether being a libertarian anarchist, or as I’m very tempted to change to on my Twitter profile, a “medieval anarchist”, is probably better for these circles for people to understand where I’m coming from.

But anyway, or whether as an anarchist, or now hanging out with dissident Right folks, to me being on a bit of the fringe, though not crazy [chuckling] has been my whole life.

In fact Woes, when I was young I was worried that I was part of like a cult, or something for some reason. Maybe somebody teased me at school. I don’t know. And so I went to my mom and I said:

“Mom are we fanatics?”

And she said, I thought this was very useful, she said:

“No. A fanatic is someone who has like the one thing and they can’t talk about anything else.”

They’re, you know, “monomaniacal” is the word I would use now. That’s what she described. She said:

“We’re zealots! We’re zealous for the gospel.!”

And so I’ve always liked that. The fanatics are the ones who as Frodi has been talking about, kind of ruin it for all of us! [chuckling] Right?

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: When he was saying:

“We just need some normal people!”

Anyway. So it’s the fanatics who ruin it for the rest of us. But to be zealous for justice. Like in the case of this mass ethnic rape stuff. To be zealous for justice in that. I don’t think there’s anything wrong, or weird, or crazy about that it’s only the natural godly response to something so horrifying.

Woes: To be honest I think that our opponents on the Left are zealous, but also furthermore the situation in the world today is so perverse that those who are not zealous. Those who are in the centre and milk toast, I think are rather mistaken. I think they’re rather deluded!

RadLib: Yeah.

Woes: I think if you see the way the world is today how could you not be zealous about something, in some kind of new direction, or even just the need for a radical new direction. As has been said about certain centrist YouTubers, their ideas are not radical, they’re not nearly radical enough! They don’t even recognize the scope and gravity of the problem!

RadLib: Right.

Woes: So going back to 95, or 2005, is not enough! We need a deep rethinking of our society and the way we live.

RadLib: Right. Radical means to the root, right?

Woes: Indeed!

RadLib: Yeah. That’s more where I’m coming from. We’ve got big problems! Now how is it that people don’t see them? And how is it that I do? Well one other thing to share about myself is that in high school, when I was say 15, I decided to stop reading the news. And I never went back.

[40:00]

So I actually don’t consume like CNN, and NPR, which is sort of the equivalent of the BBC news in the UK. And haven’t for well, what would that be 35 years now. And as Jacques Ellul talks about in Propaganda, to keep people going with the current sort of line of the day, you have to be constantly peppering them with the propaganda. And if they unplug from that propaganda it doesn’t take too long for them to notice:

“Wait a second! You were saying like the opposite just like a month ago!”

Right?

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: So you have to stay plugged in to be able to kind of keep believing whatever it is they’re feeding us five minutes ago.

Woes: Yeah. Because the sheer volume of stuff that’s coming in, it’s too much for your minds to marshal. And therefore you can’t detect the contradictions.

Obviously we’ve seen this recently with Covid, where the numbers change by the day. The implications of those numbers changed by the day. It’s just quite incredible. I think people are kept in a sort of hamster wheel. And, of course, this is where the jokey cliche about the Amish comes in:

“Why aren’t the Amish affected by Covid? Because they don’t have TV!”

And I don’t know if that’s true, or not. But we can certainly imagine how it could be true.

RadLib: Right well certainly they wouldn’t have the climate of fear that is a constant push of the media. And not to get back into the PhilosophiCat thing, but, you know, AA ’s [Academic Agent] been talking about that. And I would say this that, right now it’s Covid and lockdown. I could see them changing to something else.

Because I’ve been watching this for decades now. I could see them changing to something else within a month, or a year. But what would remain constant? Fear! That is the running theme that I see through the weapons of mass destruction campaign from the neocons, right? To get the invasion of Iraq, etc., etc, etc!

Whatever it is, there is some bogeyman of the day. There is something you’re supposed to be afraid of and the media the lackey media as I like to call them, their function is to make sure that whatever it is you’re supposed to be afraid of, they are hitting you with that 24-7 until you submit and you submit to the fear.

Woes: See I think there are two versions of this that have gone on simultaneously with the “War on Terror”, or the “War Against Terror”, [it’s really a “War OF Terror”] I always forget that the acronym is TWAT. There was firstly there’s the fear of Islam and fundamentalist Islam. But then there’s also the fear of being “racist” as a result of fearing fundamentalist Islam! So they get you worried about fundamentals Islam. But then also worried about being racist!

RadLib: Yes! They get you coming and going!

Woes: Yeah! Kept on this constant oscillation between one thing and the other. Which is obviously quite dementing!

With Covid, obviously this is the perfect thing for them to use as a vehicle for fear. And this is one thing I wanted to say. That this is a cliche of, … And I’ve said this on my own. And I know that you listen to the Gram broadcast that I do.

In one of those I pointed this out. That it’s a cliche that governments rule, and tyrants, rule by fear! They rule by getting the populace to be afraid of something. An enemy that everyone can hate. But that’s exactly what’s happened now! In the most obvious way!

RadLib: [words unclear] before you.

Woes: Exactly! In the most obvious and crass way! Yeah they’ve got a population really very frightened. And people who believe in it all, must have had a terrible two years. I mean, I don’t know how many people there still are who really believe in it all.

RadLib: Right.

Woes: But, at this point, maybe that number is diminishing. But certainly throughout 2020, I think a large percentage of the British public were literally living in fear throughout that year.

RadLib: Back on TV, or the media consumption issue I just wanted to share something from Lew Rockwell. The founder of the Mises Institute. Someone came to him and was talking about how they’re just to use our lingo now, “Black Pilled”. This is before anyone said that kind of thing. But that’s what they were expressing. They were just so down. And he said:

“Do you watch TV?”

He said:

“Well yeah.”

And he said:

“Why don’t you try stopping?”

And it was interesting his reasoning for this is slightly different than why I stopped. I had my TV shot, by the way.

[45:01]

Woes: What? Shot with a gun?

RadLib: Yeah. I’m an American Woes, you know! That’s how we do things. Anyway, yeah, I kept it on display. It was one of those big old style cabinet TVs, like from the 50s, or something, and I had it on display, because it sort of had a nice webbing [?]

Woes: Oh yeah!

RadLib: So I had it on display in my apartment. This was before I got married. Of course, there’s no shot TVs, with my wife around.

So his reasoning on the TV is, he said:

“With such a big world with billions of people, there’s always something bad going on, something crass going on. Well, what the TV seems to do is find those things and shove them in your face, so that it feels like that is what life is.”

Right?

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: Or we might say these days what life is being afraid. He was talking more about just crass behaviour being shoved in your face all the time, and things like this. He said:

“You know, turn off the TV. And talk to your neighbours. And be in like real life. And you’ll find that a lot of people are just living their life. And they’re not what gets depicted on the television.”

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: I remember a friend from south India, from Kerala. He came to the United States. And he called back to his family. And he said:

“There were two things that shocked him.”

Based on the perception of America he had from the media, I guess. He said:

“Number one, people aren’t shooting each other in the streets! Number two, there’s churches on every corner and on Sunday they’re packed!”

He had no idea that America was like a Christian, you know, had a bunch of Christians in it.

Woes: Yes, yes. I can imagine, I can imagine. I think that again a lot of Europeans have this notion of everyone’s just walking around with a gun. And any minor disagreement in a shop will result in a standoff. Obviously that’s ridiculous [laughing]!

RadLib: Right. Hey quick shill for my channel! We did a show on The Not So Wild Wild West, because even the so-called Wild West wasn’t even like that. That is just a Hollywood invention. They lie about everything!

Woes: Well. [laughing] And, of course, that era of Hollywood, the wild west genre, that’s from a Hollywood that was much more sympathetic to White America than the Hollywood well even the 90s, let alone the 2020s!

RadLib: Right! I mean, back then the wild west was violent, depicted as violent. But it wasn’t necessarily depicted as racist, right. Now, they’re gonna add, …

Woes: Or transphobic! [Laughter] Well. Yeah. I mean, there are obviously lots of questions that arise from your life story. One thing I would ask about 9/11 is, because you didn’t say how you predicted it. You said there were you felt anger.

RadLib: Yeah, when I think back it really was, and I’m amazed to say this, because I was emotionally shut down most of my life until recently. But I was like being emotionally “attuned” is the term. When you start to feel what other people are feeling. That’s what was effectively happening. I think back. And that’s really how I saw it coming is I could just feel the anger rising. And I just felt like, if I was feeling what they were feeling, I might really do something big!

Woes: Right. Yeah I’ve remembered what it was that I wanted to ask you sorry, because you did explain that. It was that, do you think America in the 90s had become, or by the end of the 90s. Do you think it had become too arrogant a superpower?

RadLib: Well again, I go back to Americans just really being parochial in a sense if you can consider a country as big as the United States being parochial. I regularly use the term the “US Empire”.

And part of the reason I use the term is because I think it’s, right? But the other reason is, because I say it, because I know there’s some Americans it’s going to get them to think, because we don’t talk about the US Empire within the US.

Woes: Yeah.

RadLib: And they literally don’t know what the American government is up to outside the borders of the United States, as a general thing.

[50:00]

Woes: Yeah. There’s a separation between the entity of the empire and the entity of the nation which births that empire. I think it was the same in Britain. I mean, a lot of people most ordinary people in Britain would never experience the Empire, you know, during the 19th century. They would obviously know of it and including by name, unlike modern Americans, but it wouldn’t be a part of their daily lives. It would be a fact of their existence, but not a part of their daily life. The nation is one thing, the Empire is another thing.

RadLib: Yep. I wouldn’t describe Americans as “in denial” about the Empire. Because that would imply that really deep down they know. And they’re just denying it. No.

Woes: Yeah.

RadLib: They just don’t know.

Woes: Yeah. I wasn’t trying to imply that. I think with America you’ve got this situation where their interests aren’t even part of the empire, they’re part of the Empire’s activities.

Whereas with Britain you could say well it’s helping us with trade, it’s helping us with getting this resource. And we are exporting our culture to the rest of the world in some sense. We’re also learning a great deal from the rest of the world and bringing that knowledge back to Britain. None of that really applies with America does it?

RadLib: Right. Justin Raimondo passed now, unfortunately, from antiwar.com. He would always say:

“The American Empire, where everything goes out and nothing comes in!”

[Laughter]. In other words, I’m agreeing with you. You know, people don’t feel like:

“Wow! I’m so glad that the American Empire’s there, because XYZ.”

They wouldn’t know how to finish that sentence. Because they just don’t even think about it. And they wouldn’t know what it would be doing for them except “defending our freedoms” , or “you’ve got to fight them there, else they’ll be here”. Vague slogans that if you ask them:

“What are you talking about?”

They wouldn’t even be able to get past the slogan, you know?

Woes: Yes. Yes. It’s something that they’ve heard. Of course, that thing about defending our freedom. And I remember George W Bush saying that in the aftermath of 9/11. That:

“They’re attacking us, because they hate our freedoms!”

And, of course, that’s ironic, because it was drivel anyway. But it’s ironic to think of it now 20 years later, because well we’re not as free as we were then. Our freedoms have all have all been curtailed in those 20 years. Such that I can imagine some camel riding tribesmen in cave in Afghanistan thinking of what the modern Western citizen and thinking:

“Why did they put up with that? Why did they put up with that life that they have over there, with their kid being raised with gay indoctrination at school!”

I mean, I can easily imagine them thinking that they are actually more free than us, at this point. And I’m not saying this to just be sort of clever clever. I think there is an element of truth to that.

RadLib: Yeah. Yeah, well I’m gonna have to stick it out, because I haven’t heard from the lord very much. But one time I did, very clearlyc is my church was a church that sent a lot of missionaries out. And so forth. All over the world. And so some missionary was giving a presentation. And so I prayed. And I was like:

“God, is this being a missionary? I’m open to doing it if that’s what I’m supposed to do.”

And he said:

“No.”

And my feeling from that was not just that, like it wasn’t a feeling of like:

“Oh good! I don’t have to be a missionary.”

It was more like:

“No. I’m calling you to stay in the US, and it might not be fun!”

[chuckling] And that was 40 years ago that I felt that. I think it makes more sense now that that feeling I had back then that being called to stay here and not to leave, might be a grim mission. It might not have made much sense to me at the time I just felt it.

But now it makes a lot more sense. If we keep going the way we’re going then staying in the US, you know! It’s going to be a hard go!

Woes: Yes, indeed. And I think that’s, … See it’s interesting, because in late 2018, I think it was, I had a particular YouTuber on Millennial. I wouldn’t name who it was. Because I don’t want to, … Well it doesn’t really matter who it was. And he said:

“Yes we need to organize a protest around Parliament, in Westminster, in London, and put our demands to them.”

And I said to him:

“But what are our demands?”

And this is pre-Covid, pre-everything, pre-lockdown, all this. And I said:

“But what are our demands?”

And he didn’t know. And I didn’t know! We just knew that there was some cause for discontent, or there was something was emerging, so something was about to emerge! Our society has taken some kind of turning. There was an atmosphere of discontent. But it was not yet manifest. It was not yet directed.

[55:10]

And then, of course, Covid came a year later a year and a half later. And suddenly it makes sense why there was this atmosphere of discontent in 2018, and 19. Which a lot of people didn’t pick up on. I did pick up in it. I did not predict Covid! I absolutely I’m not going to clean credit for that!

RadLib: Yeah, none of us.

Woes: None of us did! But there was a sense of a vacuum, like we were between eras. And I actually was planning on, … I remember one of those many videos that I planned during my hiatus, and never made. One of them was called Between Two Paradigms, or Between Paradigms. And it was about that. It was making this point that nothing seems to be happening. We seem to be at the eye of a storm, and nothing is happening. But there is a sense of danger and impending, …

And another video that I planned was The Widening Gyre, which was a reference to the, I think it’s Keats poem. I can’t remember who wrote it, now. But there was that sense of things, like anything could be about to happen.

RadLib: Yeah.

Woes: And yeah, that’s now come to pass. But the point I was making was at the time, we didn’t know why we felt this discontent. Apart from all the usual complaints about the modern world, you know, LGBT, mass immigration, multiculturalism, feminism.

But that wasn’t quite the point. It was more a sense of a direct threat to liberty. A direct threat to the individual that. But, as I say, it hadn’t manifest yet. So it was interesting at that point we didn’t know what the complaint actually was. But now it’s become much more obvious. Right in your face, you know.

RadLib: Yeah. And I don’t necessarily have to believe that it was all a grand four dimensional plan, right? But it does seem like a lot of things start to fall in place. That you look back and you go:

“Ah! Okay!”

This is like a culmination of things that had been developing.

Woes: Yes. And it took us by surprise but the very perceptive person could have perhaps predicted it.

RadLib: Yeah. Right. Well libertarians did in a way. So I would say that working the medieval anarchist angle here. I really think we’re maybe, not in the end stages, but part of what we’re seeing culmination of goes quite a ways back.

Which is that the era that I would look back to as Christendom, you know, as sort of the birthplace of the things that we celebrate about the West, you know, art and science and universities. And all these things that, before they were totally pozzed, were amazing, right.

There was a shift from the medieval situation which was a lot of small polities, city-states, bishoprics. A favourite of mine is Salzburg Austria. It was a bishopric. It was a seat of a bishop and basically that city was a little political entity right. And there are places like this all over Europe. You see maps from back then they’re just little quilts, patchwork quilts.

But over the last several hundred years there was just more, and more, consolidation, with localities being crushed in favour of a more, and more, centralized organization.

For some reason the Bretons are on my mind. Oh! I know why! Someone was sharing us, Semigogue was sharing us a song from the Bretons praising the coming of an English Lord to help them fight against the French.

There were all these peoples, ethnic groups I guess we could say. European ethnicities that had identity, that had their own language in many cases.

And they all started to get ground down over the last several hundred years in favour of more uniform identities that were going across larger, and larger geographic areas.

Woes: Yes. Amalgamation.

RadLib: Amalgamation, consolidation, centralization, whatever you want to call it. But the trend is away from the local, away from a smaller, more humble, more human, community to something that is more abstract, harder to get your hand around. Harder to feel like you’re participating in any meaningful way. Like:

“What do I have to do with what the US government does?”

Even as a politically interested person, I just feel like a dot, compared to what’s going on with the US government. I don’t feel I have any sway over the fate of my community.

[60:21]

Woes: Yes. And this cannot be a healthy situation.

RadLib: It doesn’t seem right [chuckling]!

Woes: For an intelligent men to feel that they have no agency, no influence on their own society. I can understand, you know, this might sound bad. I can understand an unintelligent prole, a dumpling, not having influence. Fine! I don’t want the village idiot having a vote.

But when but when decent, and intelligent, and sensible, men feel that they even are just meaningless subjects of globalist powers, powers that they cannot see, that they cannot negotiate with that they cannot even comprehend, that must be a deeply unhealthy situation! And one that is bound to create all sorts of dysfunction.

RadLib: Right. And for a while there it seemed like the nation state was sort of a terminus. Well sure, you know, all these local identities were crushed in the in favour of France, or the United States, or the United Kingdom, or whatever. But then it stops, right?

Well as Morgoth has been pointing out lately. No! It’s not stopping, because now government, like national government, is being replaced with “governance”! International NGO style governance.

Woes: Yes. My previous guest Mark Malone went into this distinction. Yeah very good stuff. And, of course, Morgoth’s own video I think probably the best video he’s done this year was about The Whale and the, … Oh god I can’t remember, …

RadLib: The Elephant and the Whale?

Woes: Yeah! Yes that’s it. The Elephant and the Whale. That was a very good characterization of the dynamics of power.

RadLib: Right. So you see why you see why I’m bringing it up, because I’m talking about an arc that’s been going on for several hundred years. And I’m saying that it’s continuing. We’re watching before our eyes it go into another stage where it seemed to stabilize at the nation state, in say the 20th century. Because remember Italy and Germany, for example, were not even consolidated until the 19th century. That’s really quite recent, right.

Woes: Yeah, I think it was 1870 for Germany, I can’t remember.

RadLib: Exactly. So, you know, we just had about a hundred years, or so, of the nation state being like a somewhat stable point. And we’re already going to the next stage now. Which is this web of international governance where you just have no idea who’s in charge anymore! It’s really murky! I mean, maybe it’s Klaus Schwab? I don’t know. But it’s like people like him, or something.

Woes: Yeah. I would imagine it is people like him. But yeah, that’s another issue altogether. Either way it’s people who would never listen to you and me. It’s people that they wouldn’t watch our YouTube channels. I mean, that they wouldn’t take us seriously as people. It’s individuals who are operating at a very different level.

And I’m fine with the concept of people at a high level in society who are observing society from a different height. Fine! But that has to be moderated with sanity. And I don’t think that Klaus Schwab’s thinking.

RadLib: Yeah, so something you’ll see if you follow me on Twitter is that I regularly talk about the insane centre. The insane mainstream. And I’m playing off of, shoot? Mills? The scholar anyway. He talked about “crackpot realism”. T Wright Mills. That’s it. Crackpot realism. And Murray Rothbard brought this up in regards to the Cold Warriors who would game out, how we could win a nuclear war with Russia. Which was famously lampooned in Dr Stranglove.

What he was lampooning there was absolutely real! I’ve met one of these people. And they’re just insane! But they sound very scholarly, you know, they’re like you said, thinking on a high level. The world is like this chess board.

Woes: Yes.

RadLib: But they’re nuts!

Woes: Yeah. Because the world might be a chessboard to them, but each of the pieces is meaningless. It’s just a mathematical factor.

RadLib: Yes! Yes! Yeah, it feels inhuman the way they relate to the rest of the world. They see us as pawns to be played, as opposed to fellow men, you know, fellow persons.

Woes: Yes, exactly. I think this is one of the prerequisites for a healthy society, that the elite have to have some kind of connection, sorry, they have to feel even if they don’t have a real connection, they have to feel a connection, with the rest of the citizenry!

Because otherwise you end up with this exact situation that we have now. Where I don’t believe that Bill Gates gives a toss about me, or my culture, or my city, or my people, anything whatsoever about me! So why should I trust him?

RadLib: Yeah. I mean, on a simple scale, you know, someone loses their small business, because of the lockdown right. They don’t have customers, because customers aren’t literally allowed to come to their place of business. And they lose their small business. And it’s what they poured their money and their time into building.

Woes: Yes. Their life. It could be their life’s work.

RadLib: And we think have we ever felt compassion from the Fauchies?

Woes: Indeed!

RadLib: About these sorts of things? I don’t think so.

Woes: Which is especially galling! Because I think that this has all happened unnecessarily! I think that the whole Covid thing, it didn’t need to go into lockdown. So those small businesses, family businesses, inherited family businesses going back generations in many cases, didn’t need to shut down! We have lost all of these things! These fruits of human labour without any good reason! It did not need to happen!

I mean, I know business I’ve seen, like in my own hometown, in my home city, in the city where I live now, that have disappeared! And they’ll never come back, you know, that’s it! But meantime Amazon have got richer!

RadLib: Yeah.

Woes: And all these other tech companies have got have got welfare. So there’s this awful sense that it all happened without good reason. But also, as you say, the sense that the people responsible don’t even feel, well guilty. I mean, they feel nothing! Bill Gates seems to be having a whale of a time! All of them are, … Well [laughing] no pun intended!

And also the politicians. And this is another part of it. People like Justin Trudeau, that awful Jacinda Ardern.

RadLib: Yeah, I know who you mean.

Woes: And the awful politicians in Australia. Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, these horrendous people! Again in Germany and Sweden, all of them, they seem to despise the publics to whom they communicate on the TV and in their speeches! There doesn’t seem to be any actual, genuine, concern. I mean, when they’re saying:

“We have to do this, because of this threat.”

They don’t actually seem concerned! This is one of the reasons why it’s a bit of a, I won’t use an impolite word. But it’s a bit of a confusing thing. That they’re saying this, while not even sounding concerned. Where you’d think if it were a real pandemic, in a real emergency, they would sound scared! And yet they don’t!

RadLib: Right. And they party while they’re supposedly so afraid.

Woes: Well, exactly!

RadLib: Perfect give away!

Woes: Yeah, exactly! And you can’t help thinking of the communist, the cliche that the Bolsheviks were having banquets, while the peasants were starving! And just dying out from starvation. The Politburo, and so on, the high up Commissars, were just having a great time. It’s this sort of brazen corruption!

RadLib: You think of that moment from the 2016 election. I remember my wife was really struck by it when Hillary Clinton did the basket of deplorables line. And my wife said:

“It’s over!”

She said that she’s gonna lose. I mean, you can’t just call the voters “deplorables”, and win an election, you know.

But anyway, you know, I hadn’t thought about it till now. I always thought about that as revealing about Hillary Clinton. But I think she was really revealing about her whole sort of set, you know, her whole class. And Obama had a similar thing. What do he say:

“Those ignorant people with their guns and their Bibles.”

Or something like that. Which describes, by the way, like all the Christians I know in the country. [Woes laughing loudly] And I know a lot of them! So I mean, they’re expressing contempt not for some narrow, niche, fringe, radical, group. They’re expressing contempt for basically the people of their country.

[70:18]

Woes: And certainly the backbone of their country. The people who do the boring jobs that no one hears about, because they’re not glamorous.

And this is what I was saying earlier, a healthy society requires an elite that have some kind of connection, or feel a connection, a warmth towards the common folk. Because otherwise you’re going to have this kind of thing.

You’re going to have them decreeing that your five-year-old daughter can’t see her granny at Christmas. And there’s no one to complain to! And if you don’t like it, tough! You’re selfish, and evil, actually for complaining about it! Oh god! I don’t want to fed bust on my own channel!

RadLib: Right, exactly! So, you know, Hayek wrote The Road to Serfdom. There’s a chapter of it that I recommend to everyone. Chapter 10. It’s called Why the Worst Get on Top. And he describes why in the social Democratic system. Like we all live under now, you’re not going to get the honest people in positions of powerful political leadership. You’re going to get people who are liars, and corrupt. And he explains exactly why. It’s really worth reading.

Even having read that all that time ago I don’t know that I was prepared for what I see, for example, with Vice President Kamala Harris. I think she’s a psychopath. I mean, she’s not just like cs.

Woes: , … Another psychopath [laughing]!

RadLib: She’s not just a person who’s a little bit corrupt, or something. Like she’s not normal like she tries to be normal, and it gives you that uncanny valley experience.

Woes: Yeah, that’s the feeling I have with Hillary Clinton.

RadLib: Yeah, it’s like stop smiling please! You’re creeping me out!

Woes: Yes. Exactly! The crazy eyes as well and that over friendliness. Yeah, you see this with Kamala for sure. But you see it with a lot of them. I mean, just again, … But yes, I know what you mean.

I think that there are undoubtedly democracy seems to make this very possible. I suspect, and, of course, sociopaths psychopaths are always going to be attracted to power centres. That makes sense. But I suspect that in a monarchy, or an aristocracy it’s much harder for them to get a foothold. And there will, because, well I don’t really need to go into that as a tangent. I think that democracy just gives them a thousand Avenues by which to, well, lie.

RadLib: Right.

Woes: And to curry favour and to gain on undue power.

RadLib: I’m assuming you’re doing this so that you can segue so beautifully into another show for my channel! So a recent series we did was on Democracy versus Monarchy.

Woes: Oh!

RadLib: And we drew on Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn and Hans Hermann Hoppe, who famously criticized democracy. And I actually had the pleasure of meeting Kuehnelt right near the end of his life, which was amazing! It was like getting a little taste of the 19th century, or something. 19th century century Austria. I could feel that, how do I put it nicely? We’re all lesser men than he was [chuckling]! He came from a civilization that’s been destroyed, you know.

But anyway. And in this series we very carefully go through his critique of democracy. First of all. And then he says:

“Well okay, you could say that all this stuff is true of democracy. Let’s say you agree with me so far. But you could still say it’s the worst system, except for all the others.”

Or some crap like that, right? He says.:

“So let’s compare it to some other system. And how about one that we have a lot of experience with?”

And so he talks about monarchy, because, of course, we had monarchy and Christendom for hundreds and hundreds of years. So we have plenty of track record to look at. And yes, indeed like Hoppe. Hoppe was influenced by him. He concludes that monarchy is a superior system to democracy. Worth noting that I, like Hoppe, like Kuehnelt-Leddihn, we’re all anarchists.

So we don’t think monarchy is the best system of all possible systems, just better than democracy. At least you have, for example, going to the psychopathic aspect, you have the personal responsibility, right.

If the King’s screwing you over, that jerk is the one screwing you over, right? Whereas now, especially as we go from government to governance, you just have the sense that like the amorphous blob is screwing you over! And you’re not exactly even sure who to blame for it.

[75:33]

Woes: Well, you got no idea who to blame for it!

RadLib: Yeah!

Woes: None! And I use the analogy of, … And I know that I’ve had this reputation for being obsessed with my own Twitter ban. I’m not anymore! It was three years ago. I’m very much over it! Don’t worry!

RadLib: You’re on stage seven of the stages of grief [Laughter]!

Woes: Maybe five and a half. [chuckling] But yeah, I am over it. It’s just that this particular analogy I think is useful. And it was that when I appealed to Twitter, the email that I got back was signed “Twitter”. It wasn’t signed with the name of an individual employee. And I see that as a portend of how governance will be. Where you’re just up against the machine. And you’ve got no idea what goes on behind the curtain. None whatsoever!

Just like we’ve got no idea how YouTube, what the hell goes on at YouTube? Who makes the decisions? By what Protocols do they make decisions? Who was responsible for what? No one, you and I, will never know that! It’s impossible to track. And indeed I wouldn’t be surprised if they just delete the evidence of decision making processes after it’s done. So that no one will ever know.

RadLib: Right.

Woes: So it’s all quite Kafka-esque.

RadLib: I was going to say. So Kafka ends up being the dystopian author that got it right, yeah?

Woes: Yeah! [laughing] Well, it is the old venn diagram with Brave New World, 1984, Soylent Green [laughing], …

RadLib: And Kafka.

Woes: Yeah.

RadLib: But yeah, that sense of bad things are happening to me, bad things are happening in my community, bad things are happening to my children. And I don’t even know where to start, to do something about it, right?

Woes: Yeah. Well, I think that’s perhaps what we’re here to try to identify.

RadLib: Yeah. So let me turn from the negative to the positive, and just talk about what we’ve done.

Woes: All right, just before you start. I didn’t mean within the scope of this particular stream. I just mean that what we do in general is that we’re obviously identifying the problems. But hopefully beyond that, we’re also going to identify a way forward. But anyway yeah.

RadLib: So I just thought I’d make some comments, personal comments. And I’m not the sort to say:

“I’ve done it this way. And so everybody else should!”

I just thought it can’t hurt to just describe a little bit of what we’ve done. And not only, because it hopefully is interesting. But also, because we try to provide resources on my channel to support it. And we’re going to be providing more.

So my wife is a trained therapist, a marriage and family therapist. She was in private practice until two weeks before our first child was born. And then she stopped, to be home with the children, and homeschool them. And so she’s given birth in some cases, home births, to all these babies, and is schooling them, and has been schooling them all this time.

Because in our case we had so many children we ended up moving to a property with four and a half acres. Where we have chickens, and ducks, and quail, and goats, and a pony on the way, any day now.

So we are able to create a little island of our own here. And where we’re not worried about say, school shootings! I’m just amazed everybody still sends their kids to government schools after all these school shootings. But anyway, do what you gotta do!

But we’re not subject to the latest round of propaganda that they’re giving the kids. I’ve even heard, I think this was in the US, right? Where they were saying:

“Hey! If you let us vaccinate you, then we’ll give you pizza!”

Or something, like going around the parent’s back and vaccinating children.

Woes: Yeah, it’s unbelievable! It’s the kind of thing that in the same society, you know, somebody would be in prison for a very long time for that.

RadLib: Yeah, exactly! Right. Just amazing! And so my wife and I were in agreement of, you know, independently had made this conclusion before we got married, that we would want to homeschool our children, if we had any. So I think that helps us unplug a bit. We don’t do broadcast television. We do have, … What do you call it? Cable cutter type solutions, where you can dial up a movie you want to watch and watch it. But we don’t have just a TV channel going.

[80:25]