Selling Off a High-Trust System: Live w/ Karl Dahl

And I very honestly will say I'll let you know three minutes before we go, because you know, that's that's how professional podcasters work, right.

you hit a certain point. But also, there's really no incentive anymore to play by the rules of the system, right. Everyone knows it's a rigged game, and so only stupid people play by the rules. And this is something that I think we are likely to encounter here. Some economic data has come out that the unemployment rate for new college graduates basically people two years out of school, is

apocalyptically bad. We're sitting well north of ten percent. The number of college graduates who have secured employment by the time they leave has cretered to twenty two don't quote me on that percent somewhere in the twenties. Not very good and so effectively what we're doing. And the problem with this is we're disincentivizing playing by the rules, disincentivizing

doing what you're supposed to do. I read an article, let me see if I can pull up who wrote it in the American Conservative talking about why young men are radicalized rad Radicalization of gen Z by Eddie Laurel.

The American Mind is where they wrote. And to me, he repeats the kind of things you often have heard, you know, Oh, you know, these people grew up sort of haranged by you know, social justice activists, you know, constantly told that they are the problem, that they they are what's wrong with society, and that's produced a reaction. And look, man, that's very true. But I think another part of it, and this is something that's come up in recent conversations about gen Zu. Nikki Haley's son appeared

on Tucker and did Yeoman's work. There is this feeling that when you've done everything right by the book, done everything that you were supposed to do, when older people, conservative people tell you this is how you establish yourself in society, and it doesn't work. You were effectively punished for doing that. You're going to create a large jumpmber of people who basically just say, screw it. Why would I play by the rules of the game. It's individually rational, right, Okay, well,

why does this matter? Surely if everyone is just acting in their own self interest, that will produce the best system one. Not entirely true, but let's remember the fact that there are a great number of things in society that depend on a gentleman's agreement, that depend on everyone sort of doing what they're supposed to by anyone actually checking. Right, A high trust system one where you assume everyone is

acting as they should. And really, when we talk about, you know, the nineteen fifties, when older people talk about their idealized youth, what they're really idealizing is a high trust system exactly. Laphorisms about people saying, oh, you could hitchhike anywhere you know any random adult, would you know, bring your runaway son home? Was that true? Largely speaking? Yes, the kind of like horrible bend Tomite liberals will say things like, well, actually crime is down, it was much

more dangerous in the fifties. One, I'd be curious to see how you got that data.

in a high trust society depend on that. And once that's gone, once the penalty for effectively doing what you're supposed to becomes higher than you're striking out on your own, you're going to lose access to any number of nice, pleasant things about living in a normal society. I noticed this particularly when talking to boomers and silent generation types, you know, many of whom grew up in what do you consider now idyllic, monocultural, conservative, quote unquote societies, and

they don't understand why young people are so discontented. They don't understand why young people simply can't fall back on the same kind of like social network that they did. And a large part of that is because people are not on the same page. People do not trust the first person they encounter, because, let's be honest, even on a political level, let alone you know, a cultural one, that social cohesion is gone, that social trust is gone.

This is something you see particularly poignant in the UK, extremely high trust society, extremely say monocultural but homogenized society. So every time you see these kind of outrage stories about new arrivals going into a park and clubbing ornamental geese to death and eating them, that's that's kind of an example of what we're talking about, right, Something that was public common good soon to be everyone's sort of but there were no guards around it, there were no

fence around it. It was just there and everyone was sort of on the same page. But when someone who comes out and said it doesn't share that common assumption, that is a resource to be exploited, that is something to be taken. And look, that's a silly example. I think the world is poorer for you know, fewer ornamental swans and geese in public park. But you know, there's no direct correlation between having nice water fowl and having

a good society. But I don't know if you followed this, Carl the the sort of ongoing welfare scandal out of Minnesota. Have you have you caught this?

human politics. It's what we do. Obviously, you would like to minimize it or at least channel in a productive direction.

perspective a generous description of the man. But regardless, the context of that is this massive welfare scandal in Minnesota, particularly surrounding the Somali community. Effectively, it seems as if, according to best estimates, every one of the eighty thousand Somalis has basically defrauded the state government out of roughly twenty thousand dollars. Not to say that literary minimum, but if you take the average of how much was defrauded by the number of people, it comes out to around

twenty thousand ahead. So look at that, right, That is, relatively speaking, a high trust system. Many of these had to do with, you know, grants for children with autism, for early disability, early learning stuff, and completely setting aside if government programs are a good thing, talk about that late. Nonetheless, this is a high trust system where we didn't really expect anyone to protect and that every single kid they

had was autistic so they could get gifts. Like sure, someone might do that, but the system was not designed with that low level of social trust, that understanding that yeah, sure maybe you need welfare, but you shouldn't use it too much. It's shameful it's not a desirable thing to do. Now, Look, was this system set up in such a way to

allow that one hundred percent? Was at least according to whistleblowers from the Minnesota DHS Twitter account, was this deliberately done by that administration as a form of patriots one hundred percent? But that is another one of these systems we see breaking down under different sort of cultural conceptions of what is appropriate at what you can do. And I think a large part of this comes down to ownership. Right, do you feel that you are a partial owner of

your town, your city, where you live. Do you feel like, well, if someone else is taking advantage of that, it's taking away from my thing, something I care about. And one of the big problems both obviously with immigration, but also in this kind of rootlessness we see promoted by Ben Shapiro, for example, who said you don't have the right to grow up or to live where you grow up, move to where you can find a better job. You're responding to discontented youth.

Smith's Toys, Apple Green and many more. With no ordering fees on purchase and easy activation, ME to You gift cards are the safe and secure choice find us online at me too you, dot Ie, me to You supporting Irish We tell for the twelve.

of someone else, that's the best we can get. Basically, let yourself get screwed. And so it's completely rational on an individual level to say, well, fair enough, I am not going to engage. I do not care about this system. I'm acting in my own self interest. You see a lot of you know, effective people who in another era would be doing something productive moving into other less productive industries. For instance, like if you can't make money anywhere else,

move to social media. We've seen a huge explosion of that because that's a place where you can make money let alone, right like the crypto space or anywhere else where these kind of like scammy, unproductive quote unquote you know ways to accrue wealth are but also right, I think we were going to see the rise of the same sort of culture we see in places like Italy, where you see a desire to cheat cheat on taxes, cheat on recording your income, because again it is rational

to do so you're being punished for doing the right thing. And it doesn't just apply to economics, right, that same instinct that says, well, even if no one is going to catch me, I should do the right thing. That is, I owe society that once you lose that, it's well and truly gone. And I think that when we look at the rising radicalism on the left and the right, it's effectively that people do not have a stake in society anymore. It has been given to other people. It

has been taken away that birthright. And when I say birth right, I don't mean some lavish inheritance. I mean simply having a country. Being able to sort of have a stake in society is effectively a luxury. It's for rich people. And well, look, most people aren't rich. And so when most people do not feel an attachment to where they live, when most people do not feel an

attachment to the system as it, it's no shock. And it's particularly you do troubling when you see conservatives you kind of mouthing bromides about you know, patriotism and the free market, because all of those depended on people caring about the system. You are patriotic because it is yours, Yeah, exactly not yours. If anyone is an American, well why would I sign up? Why would I do anything more than the bare minimum to get ahead? You saw this

in education as well. You know I've mentioned it multiple times. I was in college during COVID, and that exact attitude of well, I'll just cheat to get ahead because there's no real reason. They're not teaching me anything anyway, and all I need is a number, All I need is a degree, and then I'll be done. That attitude was rampant because it was it was completely rational. Now, when I say rational, I don't mean good. I don't mean

everyone should think like that or act like that. But it's entirely reasonable, right, people acting in their own self interest. And another thing to mention is when we talk about a high trust, it is like many things dependent on a long chain of sort of lifetime additions to a society, right, a long chain of people who left things better than they found them. You see this in Chesterton, Right, Rome was not men. Men did not love Rome because she

was beautiful. She was beautiful because men loved her right. Over the course of hundreds of years, you know, dozens of generations, people sacrificed their immediate kind of short term gain for the sake of a society, for the sake of a culture, for the sake of a town, even their own family. But once that's broken, once you have broken that chain, it is very, very difficult to get back. And to me, that's what I find so frustrating about this.

You know, focus on your kind of short term economic gain idea that the GDP, the stock market, as we've heard from Trump, is the most relevant or most relevant metric, rather when we're talking about a society, because now it's not. And what we're seeing now is a sacrifice of a high trust society for a momentarily rich society. And look, man like, I understand it. You know, you can't crash the economy overnight and produce a number of bad results. But at the same time, it is no wonder that

the Conservatives are floundering right now. It seems very likely that the Republicans will get shellacked in the midterms, shell Act in twenty twenty eight because they have offered rising generation almost nothing, nothing at all. And look, this matters more than just the kind of you know, soft and squishy things I've talked about, Right, this matters more than just the sort of tragedy of the common stuff, because again, when we look at the polling, this is kind of interesting. Right,

Liberals are very, very worried about right wing violence. See the same thing among conservatives, And we could say the Conservatives have a pretty good point, right. You know, their guy got shot in the ear, their number one sort of public promoter got brutally assassinated. Then a number of these kind of like low level terror attacks fomenting, and again that is the consequences for losing. It made that

very clear. Paul Godfrey, in a very good essay for The Blaze came out on the twentieth I don't remember the exact name, makes exactly this point. The narrative coming out is that the reason why Democrats are winning is because they're focused on affordability. I don't think Paul Gottfreech says that's not true. What is true is that Republicans are losing because of affordability. Yes, because Trump has basically made himself synonymous with the system, synonymous with the government,

synonymous with big business. That so many people were unsatisfied with during the Biden years, So that is why the Republicans are losing so well. How are the Democrats gaining support among their own audience? Effectively murderous rage basically saying we are going to persecute these people to the end of the year. And look, when your liberal aunt says that, does she literally mean she is going to kill Elon Musk? No,

she doesn't. But the unhinged is kind of farther out in the sort of people we've seen involved in these terror attacks, the kind of furries and bizarre sex pests. They're acting on it, right, They genuinely believe that, you know, this is a fascist coup and to save democracy, to

avert transgenocide, we need to gun these people down. And again, a large part of that is you've created this this den of disaffected people who have nothing at stake, have no way to index with the system at all, and have, to be honest, nothing to lose. And so when we look at this kind of rapid flip flop between one party and the other, it's easy to say, you know, to kind of get deep into the details about you know, XYZ demographic, But I think for a large portion of

large number of people. It really comes down to that feeling of having no way to index, having no way to sort of involve themselves in the process as it exists, and so this sort of radicalism is an entirely predictable result. I'll throw it back to you, Carl, and then we can dig into this article that I want to read a little bit. But yeah, so that's sort of my

thoughts there. And what's especially frustrating is that I think for many of us, we saw Trump two as an opportunity, right, as an opportunity to actually avert something very nasty, because it seems, as it look the the problem with Trump one was simply a lack of organization, a lack of desire, and we solved that. We seemingly, you got the plant,

and what happened. Nothing happened. Literally, nothing happened. Okay, sure, we got some wins on immigration, which is fine, but the immediate pitvot to well, we got rid of you know, illegal immigrants, so now we can let in you know, six hundred thousand Chinese students, you know, seven hundred thousand, h one b's, you know, hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people, all while offering, you know, young people, the fig leaf of we'll take a fifty year mortgage that

is going to one sort of accelerate this process of becoming a low trust society, becoming a society like Brazil, like South Africa, you know, a society where people do not play by the rules, where they see playing by the rule as a sucker's choice, and also increased radicalization. You're going to push people to the fringes. And so to me, this is entirely predictable, and it's especially galling

because the consequences of losing here are dire. Incredibly so if we have seen this sort of murderous rage, the desire to take even someone like Hegseth, who I'm no fan of, but try him for war crimes, you're to throw these people in jail. And so, I don't know. To me, it's proven what we've known for a long time, which is that conservatives in America are not serious. They're not a real political party. They are simply a grifting operation.

And again I'm going to reference this article because it's very, very good, but Godfried made the point that they do not care about the stated goals of being a political party. What they care about is Gibbs, either personally or to their special interests, and that's all that matters. And look, that's a very human reaction. People are corrupt, humans are self serving. But at least I thought that when bodies were dropping, someone would say, hey, man, maybe we ought

to affect this. Apparently not. Apparently not, Carl. And honestly, I feel no sympathy for when these people will will meet the consequences because they had a chance. They saw the crown laying in the gutter, it picked it up, turned it over, dropped it back in the gutter, and said, hey kid, you want a fifty year mortgage.

which is the GOP, which is a part. It's not even a party of beautiful losers, like Sam Francis said, it's they make some of the mouth noises of being beautiful losers, but in general there it's just like you said, it's just a grift. It's it's a bust out operation at this point. And the thing, the important thing is that.

money you have. If you lose and get wiped off the board, you can't even run the scam anymore. So what I did is I posted on the platform, stupidly renamed X as our friend Ziman's referred to it, and basically went through thirty five years of electoral history of the Republican Party in terms of the presidential election results. So I went nineteen ninety two to present, right, and we have George HW. Bush as the incumbent losing to Bill Clinton, and a lot of that was because of

the Gulf War. Right, there were other things as well. The economy wasn't great, Ross pro Ran as a spoiler got just shy of nineteen percent of the vote whatever, huge umbers of disaffected people stayed home. Nineteen ninety six, Bob Dolea lost to Bill Clinton despite having a riled up right wing coming off the tail of a GOP landslide in the nineteen ninety four midterms. Right, he totally ate it because he was uninspiring, utterly conventional, stupid GOP platform.

So here's two GOP elections back to back. But again he barely squeaks by John Kerry with a few percentage points, like two or three percentage points. The economy was doing well ish right before it tanked. Right then. Two thousand and eight, John McCain, you know, Senator blood Feast loses in a landslide to Barack Houssein Obama, who fixes like

bad feelings and racism forever right. It worked out great, huge numbers of disaffected people who said I'm not going to vote for John McCain or Barack Obama stayed home. Twenty twelve, Mitt Romney loses to Barack Hussein Obama despite again a riled upright wing on the tail of GOP landslides and the twenty ten midterms, because Romney sucked he had a stupid GOP platform. Donald Trump descends the Golden escalators.

Any success the GOP has it in this period is coming off reactions to Democrats being in power, and then it gets flubbed at the national level by not only the Congress, who has great rhetoric, but they get in there and they do the usual crap. They don't really fight the way they say they're going to. They take care of the big boys. Screw Americans is always the theme on all these things. Immigration. They use some rhetoric, but they don't actually do anything about what you know,

Democrats are pushing. Democrats are importing not only Democrat voters, but masses that can be used to stuff the ballot boxes by Democrats. Of these uninterested people who aren't actually votevoting. I want to remind you that illegal aliens don't really vote that much. Ballots are stuffed by the Democrat Party machines using these registered voters, these illegally registered voters, or even if they pass laws saying it's legal whatever, they're

not legitimate votes. And then so Trump wins, big whoop, the GOP fights him just as much as the Democratic Party, and everything grinds to a fucking halt. So all the stuff that we need to do this was flight ninety three election scenario, which, as you pointed out, like the plane is going to crash into something very important. At least we can wrestle it away and have it crash in a field and die heroes and save other people. No, can't do that. We got it. We got to keep

the rhetoric, you know, respectable. We got to get invited to the same Washington parties. We have to keep the grift going. I just want to point something out that took place in two thousand and nine through two thousand and eight BC in China called the Chen Sheng and Wu Guang Uprising, and it was the first uprising against the Qin dynasty, and it was led by two generals. They were army officers who were ordered to lead their bands of commoner soldiers north to participate in the defense

of Yuyog. However, they were stopped halfway by flooding from a severe rainstorm. The harsh laws of the Qin dynasty mandated execution for those who showed up late for government jobs, regardless of the nature of the delay or the cause. So instead they rebelled and butchered their superiors, because the penalty would have been the same if they had just walked in and put their heads on the block, if

they had just shown up and said sorry. It is very, very dangerous to spit in the face of your natural allies, who are your descendants, who are your people, to spit in their face, to prefer others, or just so that you can continue your looting operation, because the punishment for them is death. It literally is death. The punishment for your entire society, based on the path that we're on, is death. Like you said, Brazil, Brazil is worse than death.

In Brazil, at the very least, you have legacy racisms is which allow people to create these enclaves where they can actually blow away people who try to break in and attack them in their homes, and you can't really do that in America. The FEDS will come down from helicopters and annihilate you if you try to, you know, basically, reinstitute anything resembling freedom of association. And so continuing on

the path that we're on is death. So if are you know, quote unquote moral superiors are constantly betraying the supposed ideals that they preach to us and the supposed beliefs that they want to shove down our throats, they constantly violate those flagrantly. We know it, and they know it, and they know that we know it. Why would we listen to them, why would we care what they say?

And why would we treat them any differently theoretically than some Chinese generals three thousand years ago when when they were presented with the quandary that they faced.

this is something that we saw, really. It floated often during the Bike administration's response to COVID when they were saying, you know, oh, if you don't you know, if you don't take a treatment, well you can't have a job anymore. Well, all of a sudden, you've basically just said you know, you have You've told a bunch of people that they're in sort of a do or die situation. And I

just want to clarify I am not fed posting. The slightest here not allaying is that you need to create a system where your citizens have buy in, where they have a reason for doing what you want them to do. Because you have a problem with scale, You can't actually force everyone all at once to do something. You need people to sort of self enforce to go by commonly accepted rules because you can't have a policeman everywhere all

at once. Now, a certain dynamic that we see is that you know, in kind of these you know, Banana republics or your African dictatorships, the answer is, well, I don't really care what you do so long as I'm in charge. And maybe that's where we're headed. Maybe we really are kind of speed running the transition to you know, third world shithole. But it's a massive loss of authority. You're no longer a real country anymore. You're kind of

this sort of garrison state. And what's especially galling to me is to watch something like a functional high trust society, you know, where so many things work without direct government intervention first being transitioned into this sort of managerial state where everything is effectively government dictat We've seen this in the economy, right it sort of becomes a command economy, but then again sort of willfully deconstructed into a non

functional sort of third world system blackwater. You call it a third world shithole. I call it Central Maine. Fair enough, man, I guess, or you know, another outpost of Somolia, as I've been rightly informed. But anyway, right, nonetheless, to me, it's incredibly it's incredibly galling, you know, and people often have accused Trump of sort of fishing in the rubicon. You're sticking your toe end maybe maybe not, oh maybe

maybe not. And what's especially irritating to me about that is that the consequences for him personally are going to be dire.

you know, you might be criminally liable basically threatening. Yeah, and when you combine that with you know, the reaction to the you know, I guess semi successful assassination of two National guardsmen in DC.

you know, that sort of stuff. The kind of you know, armed trans armed LGBT movement that you and I have sort of been documenting back and forth for a while. They're doing that while also informing the you know, duly elected leaders of this nation and their supporters, either in government or out, we will try you. Yeah, and the sake of in the case of Hegseeth again, which I can't believe I keep saying this, literally threatening him with war crimes tributals, you know, let alone the kind of

soldiers involved in it. And again it's this sort of the squeeze of basically you're creating a massive group of people who have very little to lose. And that's really dangerous because it's not as if there's even a person to step in and say, okay, well you're my guys, like I will act on your behalf, because the nominal leadership is apparently fully willing to bite the pillow and take it basically say like, yeah, we don't really want to actually do anything that would be too much work,

while the opposition is saying we are coming to get you. Yeah, We're coming for you. And to me, this is incredibly unstable, incredibly unstable, and look man like you and I have particularly radical politics. I get that, but ultimately we both live here. I don't really look forward to what seems to be coming, which is, you know, this kind of explosion of political violence and criminality is very very unpleasant.

I mean, look, we've kind of teased it, and I don't think we'll go through it directly, but you know, you and I were sharing back and forth this article from Wired, which this article is very very cringe. You can find it if you want. It's written by Miniesha Krishnam.

And what I thought was interesting about this is a couple of things. One the kind of broader framing of how these people are positioning themselves, the sort of like backwards victim narrative by which Charlie Kirk being shot by a guy who sleeps with a transwoman is an assault on them personally. Yeah, Okay, I would have thought it was the guy who got shot, but whatever. But also the kind of what we've been talking about, which is

the the expectation and desire for political violence among these people. Carl, I know you and I both have a lot of you know, background on this, but did you want to introduce Carl Cassata just briefly to those who aren't familiar.

them parted ways. Carl kept the YouTube channel which was very large, and so he has enjoyed outsized influence by virtue of having someone else famous grow a YouTube channel for him. Yes, And additionally, in the kind of fallout from this, uh Carl has and depending on who you ask, was either sort of in the area or heavily involved in popularizing a group of shooting matches called Brutality. It would be blank Brutality. They'd be themed and they're sort

of like extreme versions of stage shooting. So whereas it like a USPSA or a DPA match, you'd kind of you know, run around a course, lean around some barriers and shoot paper targets, this is sort of one step up from that, so you know, there'd be a physical component,

you know, a little bit more unpleasant. You might have to you know, kind of combining a shooting match and like a tough mutter event or you know those this sort of like races where there's an endurance component, there's a and they're not particularly serious.

more and more into left wing politics. Yeah right, you know, talking constantly about different instances when you know base minorities have used guns against the KKK, talking about how uh, you know, one of the cooks in Colonel Custer's cavalry regiment was trans all this kind of stuff, and so has been doing particularly events where these are marketed to the LGBTQ community, which means it is the exact same crop of autistic men, just in dresses that would be

in a normal shooting competition anyway. So this order from Wired goes in to sort of talk to, you know, the left wing Second Amendment community, like what do they think? And it's not a very good article. It's sort of fumbled multiple times because first, you know, this was written during the you know, the Kirk assassination, so that takes

up a large portion of it. But also because you know, this person who I can't tell their gender from their name, Star Wars name basically went to this event and then there was you know, dry grass caught on fire, so they had to call it. You know, it just wasn't wasn't safe due to weather conditions or whatever. So it was really kind of a pointless article. And it's not a very good article. I'm not saying you should read it.

But what it is interesting for is to kind of get a view into the trantiss aries right the armed transgender lunatics. There's a number of different groups associated with it, the SRA, Socialist Rifle Association, the John Brown Gun Club, others. But what's interesting to me is the language with which they are speaking. And Carl, I'll throw it to you because I've been talking too much. How would you describe the information from.

the language is glowing. We can tell by the name, you know, if this isn't if the author isn't a trannissary who's transracial, which is something that happens a lot where they give themselves names from far away lands to you know, further de white assize themselves, which is what this is all about. I'm one of the good ones. I'm not a bad white. It's it's this glowing language

preparing the battle space. And again this is wired. Wired is a libertarian slash techie left right, and it's saying that this is to the two A is for everyone. You know, YadA, YadA, YadA. They're preparing the battle space so that you can be shot by one of these lunatic Trannis series. That's the whole point of all this, that this is normal, and it's also there's this other element to it. And I always go back to like Spanish Civil War, you know, as a topic, just because

it's my wheelhouse at this point in life. But it's also illustrative, which is that the when you look at Spain, there was the kind of normal, normal leftists who aren't like bloodthirsty who are like I just want these outcomes and I want the government to be like this, and I don't want the bad things to happen. And they were instantly shoved to the side by the lunatics. Because in when bullets are flying both ways, people who are actually going to be firing them are the ones who

climb to the top. So insane anarchists.

real victims of this. Podcasters are the really the point of society is to predict a podcaster, but you soldiers, government agents, politicians, and at the same time kind of whitewashing both the same sort of lunatics who are in the process of waging kind of a low level domestic terror campaign, whitewashing them and also giving them time to say like, oh, we expect there to be sort of an analogous situation to the years of lead. That's what we think is coming. And of course it's all cast

in victim narrative casts. Oh Tucker is going to get me. Oh, you know, Laura Loomer is going to get me, which is, to be fair, something I would be terrified of. That woman looks like a escape science experiment, so reasonable fear in that one instance. But nonetheless, that is what is being seated, the idea that you know, these sort of figures are doing a good and laudable thing, and.

kits with the trans flag and M four on it. Okay, well that's a slightly edgier version of the you know, the stiletto image something you see elsewhere. But also you'll have something as similar as like basically and let me get the exact quote here. Yes, so it's a picture of a skull with a knife through it. Death to all who stand in the way of freedom for queer people. Several things. One leftist meme, stereotype, undef it's way too many words to put on a piece of political propaganda.

It's it's like this long, you can't read the text. But also, uh, what do you think that means? Bud? Yeah, literally, just after talking about the assassination of Kirk, it's like, oh yeah, death to people who stand in the way of queer liberation. And earlier they mentioned, of course, the stats that not only was neither assassin related to the trans community. We know that that is false. Just look at the relationship that Tyler Robinson was in. Sorry, the

was Tyler Robinson the Kirk shooter? I was get the mixed up.

that Isn't that funny? Isn't that laughable? It's like, well, I mean, I can respect the poetic irony here, but also man like, you do realize what's happening, You do realize what this results in, like just rampant political assassination. And again, while this is just being whitewashed, it's genuinely

I don't want to say scary. I'm not quaking in my boots, but to me, the prognosis is very clear that the nominal right in America has made it clear that they are not a serious political force, that they are abandoning their hope for the future. They are abandoning any sort of possibility of forming a coalition going forward. They just discarded that as an option. They do not care.

They're creating a circumstance for increased political radicalization on both sides, while their enemies are not only stoking the flames of radicalization but making it clear we are coming for you, we are going to get you. And so in my mind, this has just really put a nail in the coffin of the conservative movement right. Clearly, they are not a

real political party. And we all knew this, right and I understand that people have been you know, posting the fel for it again, you know, posting the you know, you're an idiot forever trying a couple of things. One,

Pessimists are right, Optimists make money. You got to take a swing every once in a while, right, especially when you were presented with a series of we would say, in the virgin community, not twenties, right, the crazy once, you know, incredibly uncommon windfall, Like, oh great, wow, our guy has this iconic image, you know, survive in the assassination. Let's see what we can do with that. Oh he's doing things, saying things that would actually produce meaningful results. Oh,

he's got guys behind him. Oh not only that, you know, we have this dramatic political assassination. So look, it was sort of a perfect storm of can we reform this within the system? Everything went right that should have gone right, and what happened nothing. This is not a real political part.

It's not a real political movements. A group of losers, A group of losers who are much more interested in their gibs right where that is personally or to their you know, clients across the ocean, than they are actually one preserving or representing any sort of country whatsoever, or seemingly securing their own existence, avoiding jail time, not being

shot by insane sexual degenerates. It's baffling, like genuinely baffling, you know, It's sort of like people are sort of shocked when they learned that, you know, there are some animals that are quite literally too stupid to save themselves, right like if you, you know, turn a sheep over and sand. I don't know if it's true or not. I've heard it repeated. It just can't get up. It'll starve to death. It is so unsuited for that situation, will die. And to me, that is what the Republican

Party is. A genuine genetic dead end, an animal the dodo, literally too stupid to live outside of the exact environment for which it was born. And yeah, I have no sympathy for these people at all.

behind this piece being put out. You mentioned Reddit, who was the most powerful moderator on Reddit, Like, it's basically completely proven at this point, just laying Maxwell, It's true. It's weird, Yeah, Maxwell Hill, it.

get there, to get their gibbs. The other side of it are the the raving Zionists who think that they're that they're a complicent, that this can be done, that they can wrestle back the party UH into their total control while keeping it relevant. And the most important thing

to understand there is that they can't. That they will just be a not only a party of losers, but they will lose so badly that it will have been a totally wasted investment on the part of the let's say, advocates for the most specialist Middle Eastern democracy ever and only Middle Eastern democracy, right, so it's it can be this great. So they they wrestle back ownership of the party and none of the stuff ever comes out again, right like the geob let's say, the GOP becomes totally

cut them again. Well, there goes any relevance in elections ever again, like totally gone. And they've already, like I've pointed out, they've already been so outed as this like controlled opposition party for so long that the only thing that got them victory again after years, you know, of straight losing, you know, with thirty five years of only partial success, was Donald Trump, who came in with a totally different platform that people actually wanted, where all these

disaffected regular Americans supported him. And yes, there are all these other people who came in to the coalition. You know, there's all the people who are like the left left me or you know, the you know, the based Florida Cubans who both poor Donald Trump, Donald Trump and you

know and all that. Yeah, sure, but his real base is white Americans who stopped voting and so all the people who's tummy's hurt by, you know, the stuff that needs to be done so that we don't get shot in the back of the head and thrown into my graves or just like raped for the rest of time

and your grandchildren raped for the rest of time. The only thing that you can do is resist that with state power, lawfully enforcing existing laws and getting rid of the people that are enabling the stuff or doing this stuff, which I still feel like we're going to see a decent amount of that, Like there's a lot of wheels that are in motion at this point where again it's not going to be everything, of course not, but these

small chunks where we're going to see this improvement. And then what that'll allow us to do is to use that in our rhetoric or to orient our own lives.

runs Resmusen recommend it. It's really fascinating because he basically offers the same analysis you and I have, talking about the problems facing younger voters and the massive issue that this creates for the Republican Party, and he recounts meeting with the President to tell him about this, and it's interesting, he basically said. The only person who even kind of

gets that is JD. Van's interesting if you combine this with the analysis that Stormy and I kind of came up with, you know, as regards the kind of woke right smear right it seems to be directed at Vance, who knows. Again, not the biggest fan of him personally, but it's interesting how many people I hate are interested

and get getting rid of him anyway. But to get back to it, one of the things he talks about, because he is a Polster, is some really interesting findings among particularly younger voters, which his younger conservatives are extremely comfortable with one basically a dictator. Effectively, he floated this, He's like, how comfortable would you be with an unaccountable AI running the system? Okay, which we understand what that actually needs right, just unaccountable authority, you know, a top

down directive. And the demographic that supports this the most by a large margin. It's like, I think it's like plus twenty years plus thirty it's a significant amount. Is conservatives under forty interesting other things that conservative under forties talk about is apparently, according to him, very comfortable discarding the kind of shibboleths of you know, liberal economics, right, nationalizing industry, you know, banning things like AI. Basically you know,

which is I guess deeply ironic given other findings. But we've got to understand that the question isn't necessarily what's important here, it's what it reveals, uh, basically saying those people have broken from libertarian economics. And he puts forth the argument effectively that you know, when when people are all freaked out about you know, people you know, voting for universal basic income or this kind of attitude of whatever, I don't care, just let me afford a house, let

me afford healthcare, whatever that is, just fix it. His argument is that that is effectively the same thing on both the right and the left that Mamdani voters are likely And we understand that, you know, there's multiple different parties supporting Mumdani, but a large portion of it was these kind of you know, young progressive white people, is effectively a desire to solve it. Right, this has become a Gordian knot, and there's this massive pent up desire

for solutions. And what's so aggravating, and I've said that phrase one hundred times of this episode has got stuck in my brain for whatever reason, is that that the offering in some semblance of solutions does not require breaking

the Republican Party, does not require breaking the system. It is technically possible to reform this, but anyone in charge seems so unwilling to do anything other than enrich themselves in the short term at their own let's not even say long term, medium term detriment, like what three years, It's not that long of a time frame before consequence has become real. It was on one hand sort of black pilling, right that this movement people in charge but

are completely and totally incompetent. But also interesting from the perspective of like, oh like, there are a large number of very discontented people who are okay with relatively radical solutions, right, who are okay with kind of discarding you know, the rule of law like that was one of the other things, like when he asked young people, Uh, he asked young people basically like, well, how would you feel about, you know,

throwing judges in jail? How would you feel about, you know, deporting people like you know Hamdani or people like Johanomar realize PNG. Yeah, but those again were the highest rates of support. These people are interested in something you know, radical,

because I think it's important to say. I think when this this era is written about, people will not view current sort of economic woes as particularly separate from eight that this is largely the same crisis and has been sort of a slow boiling crisis the whole time, with kind of different punctuations, And to me, I see that as being accurate. The system majorly broke thirteen years ago, and we haven't really found a way to fix it.

There were some band aids with certain things that Obama did, you know, certain things that Trump did, but it's not working. It's really not working, and that is going to become a massive liability for someone and it doesn't necessarily have to be the Republican Party. But they seemingly are are setting up for it, Max Pain. It was episode six eighty eight of that podcast. The guy's name is Mark Mitchell, so check that out. I thought it was pretty interesting.

But Carl, we are fast coming up on time. If anyone wants to send their questions or comments via super chat, will be happy to address them. But before we do that, I'll let you respond to that, Carl.

talking about this stuff very in very practical terms. Even twenty years ago, there was a lot of talk about economic populism and pitchforks being on the horizon in a lot of a lot of environments, and I think, you know, it's been interesting to see how it's played out and how honest people are being about it. You know, it gets it gets very party in party political oriented. To use a Thomisism conjugation, but people just don't know what

to do or what to think. And I think a lot of people are realizing, you know, what they're dealing with at this point in time. But again, you know, the the key point being is the power players are stuck in the mud, and it becomes impossible to address it honestly, Like you can't talk honestly about politics anymore. Like the totally normal thing that happened in twenty twenty and took place basically until like through some point in twenty I want to say, some point after October seven,

twenty twenty three. Right, everything was totally normal and was a perfect expression, the perfect platonic expression of our democracy. And now all these people have been reacting to it as they kind of scramble for their own for their

own interests and benefit. And the ones who are being honest about it and are able to speak openly and candidly about it are doing much better and they have a path to the future, and the ones that are suppressing it have no future and are throwing away the future of our country and our society and like quite

possibly humanity at this point. I mean, I think long term, you know, we're gonna we're gonna win, but they're endangering they're endangering humanity by by supporting the path that the march to Brazil, the Brazilification of everything, and uh, fortunately a lot of people are starting to speak out, even though like the big players are generally pretending, you know, that everything is the house that is on fire as they sit at the table a dog and a hat say this is fine.

It slightly abbreviated. That's basically his argument. I think it will be interesting to see the jockeying for the last scraps of relevance from kind of conservative bank. I think they have fully and totally lost the base and they

are going to get shellacked going forward. But nonetheless, characters like Lindsay and a few others seem to be sort of auditioning for you know, roles as kind of the you know, the captain of the Titanic right, looking for a role as a gatekeeper of you know, ever diminishing sort of intellectual playground. I think that will continue, I think, and this is something that Stormy and I put forward.

But my guess is the way that this is going to be spun is we have lost in twenty twenty eight or we have lost in twenty twenty six because of our radical wink. And what we really need to do is refocus on being what we always were, which is a war mongering party of corporate horrors. Yeah, and that's the real core Republican message. And if you disagree with that, you're the reason we lost. So we need to cancel. We need to get you out. Chronicles Magazine

Paul godfre each piece which dropped yesterday. It was called Preparation for a Purge.

bearing responsibility? One super chat? Has no one told you your cries are all invain I'm not sure I kept the reference, but I do under I guess sympathize with the message behind it. But uh, Carl Man, we've gone over so this is unusually rant filled for me. I barely let you talk at all. That's podcasting. But uh, where can people find you?

that podcast. I will listen to that. But he's also been on a tear on X and is he's a very good poster on X. So people should give Mark Mitchell a follow after they buy book. But thanks Jay, great talking to you well.