I Discuss WORLD WAR with Professor Jiang

and i hope i'm pronouncing that correct you might oh apologies look terrible terrible pronunciation on my part and you might understand him as a uh based jordan peterson yeah you know the the the inheritor it seems of the the throne the man who was in the in the dregs of canada seeing it fall fall from the inside out and he's been posting an awful lot about things like the breakdown of the world order and offering a very fascinating perspective from the other side of the world of somebody who's been on both sides of the world so i was very interested to bring this gentleman on and have a talk with him about the chaos we see in america are we reaching the end of western hegemony the end of the world order that has been there since brenton woods in 1945 and are we about to see a chaotic breakdown and something big happens so

professor thank you very much for coming on what are your thoughts do you think we're in a precarious situation right

now where are things going yeah so thanks so much for inviting me staff i'm a big fan of your channel i've been watching uh many of your um videos um and i've learned quite a great deal so i'm really excited to have a conversation uh with you um yeah so i think we are seeing the end of the um pax americana i think we're seeing um the end of american hegemony and uh what will happen afterwards um it's all up in the air but i personally believe it'll be complete chaos i think we're moving towards a multipolar world i think it'll be very difficult for russia or for china or for any power really to replace um the pacs americana so um the world is headed towards a steep decline so buckle up guys it'll

be fun well there's there's loads of things that we'd love to go into on that because i think it's a fascinating question something been on my mind uh often as well and it is very interesting because of course i've grown up within the context of the western pax americana i the soviet union collapsed so i've never known anything except pax americana the dominance of american culture and it's saturated you know californication has saturated all around the world and and it is something that we've all noticed that there's been a very serious breakdown in legitimacy on top of order and obviously with china which is something i know you say that china has its own problems china certainly is not all rosy -cheeked and glorious and it has very it's very restrictive in some ways but i've noticed china has spent the last half a century sort of saying to itself we're not going to get

too involved with financialization we're not going to do any of this stuff where we build our entire economy on restaurants and usury basically instead we're going to build factories we're going to build manufacturing we're going to stack up this capacity to produce and this has made china go from strength to strength and make it more powerful so it seems like china is rocketing up in stability and in immense and expanding its power but then america we we have people like kirk get assassinated we have this uh breakdown in in civil civil legitimacy breakdown in order and this uh this really difficult time so and yeah how do you see that like you're obviously caught sort of between two ships and i think you've decided you're going to go back to china because it's going to just be more stable for the foreseeable future you lived within canada what do you think about there that's

almost like the case study for the future so give us some thoughts yeah so lots of great questions um yeah so i'm based in beijing um i'm a teacher in beijing and um i've been studying for the past couple years the decline of the pax americana so i think you're absolutely right in that china's avoiding the huge mistakes that china that america has made these past 20 30 years especially with the issue of financialization where wall street um the financial sector has overtaken the entire american economy so it's all speculative right people put their money in the stock market but no one's putting factories no one's actually engaging entrepreneurship and that's a problem in the long term and this is something that china has been excellent at um dealing with so all the money has been put into infrastructure into um r d into science the science scientific developments of china for the past 20

years has been extremely impressive but my argument is this and i think you would sympathize with this argument that power is really about narrative about ideology it's about soft power so you talked about america was able to dominate the world because american culture dominates the world um so the problem with china is it's never been that strong there's a soft power it's never been able to articulate the american dream individualism liberty in a way that america has been able to articulate through its movies through its pop songs through its history and so that's the fundamental weakness of america so even though financially it has been win -win you imagine um china is on much stronger footing than america like like i mean america right now if everyone's in debt right you have 37 20 national debt but then you look at the middle class and the average american all together they have 17 200 in

debt that's about like you know half a million of debt for every american citizen which is just ridiculous um so i agree that america is on the decline i don't know if china will be able to articulate a narrative or an ideology ideology um are we compelling enough to attract the world to uh basically lead the world forward so that's my concern right now i love the state of the world brilliant like and i love that you're

sincere and honest about this because i do think these are fascinating questions i've heard people say it before you you've i think alluded to it as well like this there is a faustian spirit perhaps in the west and this is like a double -edged sword you know because this is like they're gonna like all right we'll go and we'll we'll present a moral world order for the whole world and say this is how things will be done and it's like okay that's interesting but then on the flip side that turns you into a woke insane self -destructive maniac and you're like all right that's not good and the chinese seem more demure they're sort of like look we're not going to get too involved we're going to keep to ourselves and do things right and just run the system properly and this type of thing and so that's a great strength because they avoid the

hysteria but will that be enough for them to stand up and be like right we'll lead the moral order of the world and this is something that's been in my mind an enormous amount because when you go to the origin of the world order when you go to the uh the actually maybe you could say the crisis of immigration and things in the west you see that it happened in the 1960s led by john f kennedy one of the heroes of the west and um his administration and the administration that came after him and they were attempting to create the open american dream the combat the communist marxist dream because the entire world was underneath capitalism which was kind of like post -imperialism and the the marxists were going around the world and they were taking cuba they were taking india they're taking africa and so kennedy comes and he says right what we're going

to do is we're going to say we're a nation of immigrants we're going to liberalize we're going to do us aid which elon musk has recently exposed he created the special forces the navy seals those badasses because he wanted to have penetrated targeted operations instead of grand wars like vietnam and so an awful lot of like the thinking that makes america was set up at that time as an attempt to create a moral world order versus the marxist world order which was another that was a moral world order of equality so i've thought about this a lot i like i love how you bring this up i've really said oh if if america is to waver and it really is it's having a moral crisis like its own people are saying i don't believe in this moral world order where does that go like what falls into its place who's going to stand up is

it going to be russia seems like they want to join in with the west that or i should say at the very least they want they want to reset and but china have such power now at this point that maybe they'll be able to dictate things so what would they dictate so i've said a lot there do you have any thoughts sir yeah so i completely agree with what you said

so um this past on the issue i mean it's being live streamed to us all this atrocity that's happening in palestine it's being live streamed to us right now is almost the perfect opportunity for china to step up and take the the moral high ground and if china would just step up and say listen uh what we think is happening in palestine it's atrocious it goes against what it means to be human um we will do what we can to ensure this atrocity stops but they haven't done that and if you know this perfect opportunity to score like a free goal um if you're not taking this opportunity you'll never take this opportunity again so i think china has made the commitment to not interfere in other nations sovereignty um and you know this has been a consistent policy for the past few decades but as you point out unless you're willing to take the

high moral ground unless you're willing to articulate a vision that unites all humanity unless you're willing to take risks actually you know basically you're not going to become the global leader that china wants to be so um i i think that's it that's a problem that china faces right now very fascinating and i do see that as

well you've spoke about it but it is such a wedge issue i i see america and they they had a lot of problems about that because you know china is like they're completely lacking in like the level of legitimacy and it seems like the palestine thing is shooting them in the foot big time like the trump admin for example i've seen people like fuentes go against the trump admin like he would have been a star of manga if you will and it seems like that's been the wedge issue that's that's really upset him and so it's like it is fascinating to see yeah you lose that moral legitimacy because i come obviously from the nietzschean sphere and we're all like oh morality's are fake it's not real it's not based And then you start to look at the grand scale of things and you start to say, damn, morality does have a serious relationship, the power, the power politics and the very, very high level.

And the world order is related to morality. And if you look at the Cold War, which was the last big multipolar contest, which is very chaotic, there's a lot of civil wars during that period. It was all it was a moral ideological war. It was like Marxism versus this. So so I guess something that's been on my mind a lot because it seems like in the West and this is my Western context, maybe you see things differently, but a lot of us are saying like it's going to break down into nationalism and will be like race wars and stuff like this as people try to reassert the kind of the primal identity. But I also wonder, is there going to be because the Cold War was not like that. It was sort of a moral war. So will that will that be an overarching phenomenon?

Will there be like moral war or like world order contest? And what would that even be? Now, I'm not sure if that's a crazy question, but do you have any thoughts on that and see what might be the default lines of all this? Will it be like AI wars, AI ethics, environmental wars? Will it be is it ethical to do immigration deportations? Is it ethical to or someone will just turn around and be the next America that welcomes everybody in? You don't see China opening up that way, I'd imagine, in something like this. So what do you think?

Yeah, so it's a great question. And I think the situation will be much more fluid, much more dynamic than than we can imagine. So what I mean by that is that right now what we're seeing is a global rebellion. Against the neoliberal establishment order, right, and they'll liberalism would include free markets, open borders, private enterprise, basically the dilution of your ethnic identity. And that very, I think that goes against what it means to be human, because as humans, we strive to be part of the community. And the community itself strives for higher purpose than just making money. So I think that all around the world, there's this massive rebellion. Again, this neoliberal order, maybe started with with Brexit, and then you had the 2016 election of Donald Trump. And this has been cascading for quite a number of years. And now what we're seeing is major protests in the Western world against mass immigration. And I think, you know, these protests are very much legitimate.

I think it's very important to protect the cohesiveness of your community. And so I think that's what we're seeing. So I think that in the beginning, what's happening is you have this massive rebellion against the neoliberal ideology, which has become more than bankrupt, it's become very, very destructive of society. But over time, as you say, this conflict will evolve into possibly race wars. So it's entirely possible in Britain, in France, in these places, you could evolve into a race war. But I think it's very likely that in the next, you know, few months, violence becomes very endemic in Britain, and in France, I'm already seeing happening. But I think this thing will cascade, it will escalate. But at the same time, I also think that you will see resource wars flare up around the world. I think that South Asia, Southeast Asia, water wars will be a huge issue, as geophysical events sort of overwhelm the economy.

I think that the world will be a huge threat to the planet. You will still have conventional wars. There's talk right now that Israel is about to relaunch its airstrikes against Iran. And this will be the second round. And in the second round, a lot of analysts, a lot of experts believe that it will be much more destructive. And it will last a lot longer than 12 days. You could possibly see the deployment of ground troops, America will employ ground troops against Iran. Against Iran. And then you also have NATO versus Russia. So there's rumors that the European Union is about to send troops into Ukraine. Russia has broken through Ukrainian front lines. The Russians fight wars very, very slowly. They're methodical. They use artillery. They're not like the Americans, shock and awe. Americans can finish a war in like a week. But Russians will take years.

But if you look at the situation on the ground in Ukraine, it's pretty hopeless. The rumors are that Ukraine has a lot to do. Ukraine has lost anywhere between one to two million fighting men. Morale has collapsed. Decision rates are skyrocketing. The will to fight has diminished in Ukraine. So I think it's very hard to generalize what this world will look like, what will drive the conflict. But it's fair to say that you will have multiple theaters of war. And you'll see growing chaos around the world. And this could last for a very long time. And once the Pax Americana has fallen, it's very hard to think of another nation that could replace the Pax Americana.

So something obviously on a lot of people's minds is the problem of, is this going to break down into, you could say, low -level chronic civil violence in the West? Because again, China has immense stability. And even Russia, to a large extent, it does have a stable consciousness. It has actually a surprising amount of legitimacy, I'd imagine, although it's riddled with its own problems as well. It's got lots of issues too. But at the same time, you look in the West, and I think just the talk I see across most people is like, no, the West is completely going through a schizophrenic breakdown right now. And there's a very dramatic break between the factional sides. And it reminds me sort of like the Troubles to some extent. Not an expert in the Troubles of Ireland. Like I'm Irish, and that's complicated for me. But in Ireland, there was this instance in the 60s where there was a civil rights march, basically.

And Catholics, they said, we're going to fold the IRA and maybe stop the violent approach. And then they tried a civil approach. And then everybody on the other side, the Protestants, said, no, these guys are just going to do violence anyway. They're just going to put on suits and look good. And so there was fighting. And then the Protestants shot a couple of people. And then boom, it just kicks off into a 30 -year low -level chronic war where there's a weak state. So the kind of British came in and said, right, we'll try to hold down the state authorities. And we'll kind of side with the guys we like. But they were like, we're going to do this. We're going to do this. And they're like holding things down. So there's some modicum of order. But really, there was two essentially terrorist gangs operating on the low level, fighting a ethnic civil war.

And when you look in America, that's kind of what it looks like. You see the state that wants to be sort of centrist and moderate. It doesn't want to be extreme. And these two vitriolic splitting forces that are very existentially fearful, because that's what Northern Ireland was like. Like the Catholics were like, we are occupied. And the Protestants were like, we're going to get erased if these people get power. And so there was this really, really tense thing. And you see it in America. You see it all across the West. It's like, we're like, all right, these people enslaved us in the past. We must get vengeance. And then there is this sense in the right that it's like, all right, these people are trying to replace us and destroy us permanently. And so this looks like it's just building up towards a snapping moment of some sort. And I don't know how you perceive that.

There's also a side of this as well, where nothing ever happens. The nothing ever happens should, should never be contested with. And we live in a much different time with like Pornhub and stuff like this. So maybe it's too depressing. And your experiences in Canada, you would often speak about it this way, that you have a people who have this abundance of resources, but they just don't utilize them. So why should we expect that they will be able to conduct an aggressive war for territory? Like maybe it'll just fold over and accept Netflix and keep going this way. So yeah. What do you see about the strife potential? Yeah. In the West, if you will. And what's, yeah, what's, what's your opinion? Maybe your thoughts on what happened with Kirk recently and things like this.

Yeah. So lots of questions. So I would agree with you that what would happen in the West if there is civil conflict, it will very much resemble the troubles in Ireland. So and there are different signs that the West is headed towards civil war. Sorry, sorry, sorry. Hold on. I'm sorry. Well, I'm going to have to take over. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. I apologize. My, my, my kids have come back from school.

Oh, I thought the Canadians kicked the door down and they were like, all right, this is the end.

Yeah. So yeah. So the first thing I would say is the severity of local polarization in America right now, the left and right refuse to talk to each other. So there's a starting statistic where, you know, if you live in a democratic household, if you're democratic, if you vote democratic, you refuse to marry someone from the other party. And it goes both ways. Wow. It's 80%. I don't know the exact statistic, but it's like 8 % or even higher say that I refuse to marry someone who has a different party affiliation than I do. So the capacity for just civil discourse has completely collapsed in the United States. And we see this with this Charlie Kirk assassination where you have people on the left who are actually cheering for, for this. And this would have never happened 10 years ago. I think, you know, 10 years ago, all of America would have come together like

they did after 9 -11 and they would have condemned what happened to Kirk and say, it's okay to disagree because that's what democracy is about. The right to disagree with other people and violence is never the answer. But the nowadays it's almost as though violence, they believe that violence is the only answer. So, so, so I think there's this power keg, keg underneath America. Yeah. That's about to blow up any time. So that's the first thing I would say. Second thing that I will say is that the elite in the Western world, and you can look at any country like Britain, United States, Canada, they have no legitimacy and authority anymore. First of all, they're very old. I mean, Biden, Trump, I mean, they're around 80 years old and this has never happened in history before. We have like, like, you know, people in their eighties and nineties in charge of, you know, a nation.

So they're sort of out of ideas and they're just like, their concern is just like, like just to live. I mean, like they don't have any new ideas on how to move society forward and they cling onto power. So all these young people who should be coming to power, they don't, they're not given the opportunity and they're, they're really reactive. All they're, all they're concerned about is staying in power. And at the end of the day, I hate to say this. Okay. But political polarization lets them stay in power. And the classic example here is Donald Trump. When Donald Trump won in 2016, it was a bonanza for the democratic party. Right? I mean, like you got these billions of dollars flowing into democratic coffers because everyone was trying to like get rid of Trump, you know, democratic party spent in 2020, $6 billion to get rid of Trump. And most of that money went to consultants.

So this sort of political polarization. This sort of hatred. It's, it's being fanned by the elite in order to make a lot of money. But also because it distracts people from the real problem, which is the elite, the people in charge don't know what they're doing. They should have retired a long time ago and they refuse to give up power and they're extremely corrupt. The amount of corruption right now in the Western world, it is just ridiculous. So that's the second thing I will say. Now, third thing. The second thing I will say is I'm not sure if you know about Peter Turchin and the idea of reproduction, right? That's a huge issue in the Western world where you have like too many people with wealth, with fame, but they don't have any political power. And the only way to guarantee their wealth and their fame is through political power. That's why maybe Elon Musk entered the political sphere, right?

Because even though he's technically the richest man in the world, he doesn't have that much political power. So he needs to be able to translate his wealth into political power. In order to maintain his wealth. And that's why Peter Thiel would also enter the political arena. And what Peter Turchin says is that at this point in history, when you have like too many elites, but not enough political power, it always leads to civil war because different factions will now compete for the doodling pie, for the diminishing of the pie. So I would say like these three major reasons, okay? I mean, local polarization in the United States. The gerontocracy. You have like too many political parties. You have too many old people without any moral authority in power. And then elite overproduction. This is why I'm not optimistic about what's happening in the West. Oh my God. Yeah.

It's brutal. There's like a lot of black pills there. The boomer black pill. I'd love to actually just extrapolate on this because it's something I've been looking to as well. My grandmother recently died and I carried her coffin and I buried her in the ground and everything. There's speeches at the funeral. It's pretty heavy hitting. It's the first time I've ever like put somebody in the ground, that thing. Right. And I was in the nursing home with her in her last couple of days. It took like, you know, she was passing away. So I was going in with her the final hours and stuff like this. Spent about a week with her. And the nursing home was a big red pill because I was obviously there and I was asking questions and seeing what's going on. And obviously I discovered that nursing homes are expensive. Yeah, they are. Nursing homes, they can cost like 10, 15K a month.

And I was talking to some American friends and that can go up to 10K a week in certain places. And then I started to ask, I was like, how do people like, you know, my granny didn't have 10K a month to be slamming on a nursing home. And apparently what happens is they liquidate your assets and then they take the assets to pay for it. And Ireland has a welfare structure. So granny was okay. And because she had no assets, she was just like, you know, the house was inherited by this type of thing. So it was just, it was passed on an old Ireland style thing. Like the wife didn't have anything. So it was actually kind of lucky because then the house got saved for, but she, she was, she, she had that. I was just thinking, I was talking to people, I was like, this is literally like the,

the, the, the boomer gathers all its wealth because they have all the wealth and then they get sick and they, they spend years then in the nursing home and then they absorb like all the, not, I shouldn't say they, cause they're not the active principle here, but all the wealth gets harvested up by these nursing homes as situations and things like this. And then on top of this, all the youth are busy taking care of them. This is something else I thought about, like my grandmother, obviously like Irish grandmother, she had like five children. And so they were all coming in and taking care of her at once. But it was still very tough on my mother. Very tough. She was like doing a lot of it and then it was hard on her, you know? And I noticed then I was kind of thinking, wait a second, like I'm one guy and my sister,

you know, I like this, this is, this is if, if they get sick, it's going to be two people, not five. And there's a lot of people out there who have one kid and some of them even have none. And then all those boomers are going to get sick and go into their nursing home. And then there'll be like one person to take care of it. And so you see this like collapse. It's beginning to happen. And then I was reading at the same time I read replacement migration by the UN, the UN thing from year 2000. And you think like, is this going to be some evil doctrine or plan? Maybe it is. Maybe it's some justification, but you actually read it. And this is literally what Joseph Cheney is talking about. He's saying there's an age bomb coming and it's going to be insane. It's going to be brutal by 2035, 2040, the overweight of the higher class is going to be insane.

I think the boomers. There's going to be more old white people in America by 2040. There's going to be young baby white people. It's going to be unbelievable. And there's a certain aspect of this that is just like outside of everybody's consciousness, how unbelievably difficult it is to stop something like this from happening because it is just permanent. It is just a reality. It's coming. There's no way you can change this unless you like increase the birth rate in one generation by like a factor of five. It is going to be top heavy for the next five, 10 years. And that's going to define our lives. Our lives are going to be defined by the oldest population in history, the highest top heavy population history with all the wealth going into nursing homes, not really letting go of political power. Will the youth dwindle and get smaller and sort of radicalized?

But it's also kind of scary because you say, is anything even going to be possible? Can you even take action in that context? Because I asked Wadif Al -Hist about this and he said, listen, in World War One, the populations were all really young and exploding in size. Israel. Palestine is two of the most fertile young populations in the world right now. And it's like they're able to have wars. Do you think the West can have a war when 25 to 30 percent of the population is over 65? What do you do then? And do you have any thoughts on that? I know that's one narrow thing you said, but I find that really important.

So I completely agree with everything you say, and I will add just a couple of points. The first point is the boomer generation have all the political power in the Western world because first of all, they're the largest demographic. There's more baby boomers than any other demographic in the West. That's the first thing. Second thing is they have all the, as you say, wealth. And the third thing is they're politically active. So because they're the most powerful political faction in the Western world, they can dictate policy. So yeah, I mean, you can see basically all resources being put into taking care of them in their old age. That means a lot of resources are being put into the medical system, but not the education system. Because the boomers don't need universities and schools, right? All that's going into nursing homes, medical care, importing nurses from the third world basically. Yeah. So that's the first point.

Policy will be determined by these baby boomers, and baby boomers are only interested in ensuring that they get their pension, getting decent health care, and living, maintaining their property prices. That's all they care about. That's the first thing I will add. Second thing I would add is... Old people have absolutely no problem sending young people to their deaths in war, right? I mean, we've seen this throughout history. If you go back and you look at the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta, it was basically old people sending young people to die because old people wanted to feel good about themselves. They wanted to maintain the idea of empire. So the West is in a very precarious situation because the West is being run by these baby boomers. These old people. These young people who believe in empire. They want to maintain the idea of empire. When they want to go travel around the world, they want to feel as though we are the empire.

And they're probably happy. They're okay with sending young people, even their grandchildren, to their deaths if it means saving the empire. So I'm not sure if you want to respond to my two points, but yeah.

Well, there's just so much here and it is very brutal. It's one of those things that's just... Yeah. Like it punches you so firmly in the face when you come to understand it because it's like destiny. It's almost like a mandate being given to me because I'm like a young man in the West and I start to realize that the layout of my life, this is going to be the defining aspect. And it's kind of depressing because it's about dealing with age and tiredness and an aging population generally. And as you said, things like the stock market. Things like the housing market. The big complaint in both the left and the right in Ireland, for example, the left say the housing, the right say immigration, but they're in some sense talking about the same phenomenon where there's a lot of... We've got this thing called the asylum millionaires, the asylum pimp kings, the asylum property kings who are like older boomers who want to retire down into Spain.

And they have hotels and the hotels don't run that well. And the government says to them, if you bring in lots of asylum seekers, we'll pay you like a couple of million to do it because they're getting EU grants. Because they want to bring in all these immigrants to keep population numbers up for GDP reasons. So it's all these weird numbers that are leading to this. And so these old guys, they do it. And then all of a sudden you're in your little town in Ireland and there's this huge center getting put up and these busloads of people going in. And it's this tiny little idyllic Irish town and you're walking through it and you're like, what the hell happened? There's a couple of towns around me that I went into recently and I look around and I'm like, this literally changed in five years.

It's actually bizarre. Yeah. And I literally have to go up. I know I've heard about people like this. Other towns literally know the guy who's doing this and they literally have to go up to me and be like, we will ostracize you from everything. We'll make your life hell if you do this. And that's the only way they can stop it because the incentives are so powerful because he gets money, he gets a moral story. You're a good guy helping the poor refugees. And then it's just impossible for the boomer to resist and it's like, get your retirement. And so he goes for it. And that's crafting the very fabric of my future in it. Yeah. And you see the left, they're like, we have no houses. And obviously that's because of things like this, it's the monopolization of property in the boomer class. And then obviously things like population expansion and then the right or the same thing and that we're both affected by the same phenomenon.

But the kind of nature of populism is no one can get clarity on exactly what it is. And the boomers just monopolize and maintain power in this uni party in the center. So it's crazy. It's crazy seeing this.

I will also say that a lot of mental gymnastics that we see. The left and the right, it's because we as humans, we want to cherish the elderly, right? It's the elderly who have ultimate authority in our lives. And this is true throughout nature as well. So we can't bring it to ourselves to say, you know what, if my grandparents died, the world would be a lot better. I mean, no one's going to say that, right? So we're stuck where we are because our grandparents are going to die and they want medical care. They want pensions. They want rising stars. They want market prices. They want rising property values. And so the young people are screwed. And that's, I think, the main dynamic right now, overwhelming the Western world. And that's why I think the Western world is in rapid decline.

Yeah.

And so when you maybe we could go into well, okay. Last thing I'd ask then is, actually, this is a good pivot, because this is I was wanting to get in a little bit into philosophy. Because I know you've got the video on the German will to power. You've read a bit of this stuff. You've talked about Gnosticism. I think we should dive into all of this stuff. So a nice pivot might be that we seem like we're in Pax Americana, the timeline we went in history, World War II. It deviated and it fulfilled English utilitarianism through the American ideals. It's got many benefits, got many good things. And now it seems like we've run to the end game of that. And there's a defining moment coming up. And we don't know what moral world order is going to show up. And maybe an interesting thought experiment is for us to say, well, what would have happened if, for example, in 1918, Germany won instead of the Western powers?

Or maybe Russia won and took over all of Europe in World War II or something like this? So this is something that Nietzsche, for example, speaks about. He says that if he could have his plan for the future, he would like to see Germany ally with Russia, and then Germany form a Eurasian state. Yeah. And that's a principle of the high, he called it the high values against English utilitarianism, which he called the great danger on Earth. So that's a very fascinating thing. There's a different consciousness and an alt timeline you get into there where it's not like Hitler versus Stalin. It's like World War I maybe. There's a unity of Russia and Germany, something like this. Probably never going to happen knowing how much they hated each other. But it's like this type of alt way of looking at things.

So have you come across this stuff? Have you looked at like... You've said, for example, the Germans. They were winning. They were winning all these Nobel prizes, the most educated population possibly in history at the time. Do you have any thoughts about how things could have gone differently at that point? How does that highlight our situation now? Does that kind of show you how you look at each of the dominant powers and which direction it's going to go? And what do you think?

Yeah. So, I mean, you've seen my lectures and you know that I think that German civilization has much more in common with Russian civilization than it does with the Anglo -American civilization. And I agree with Nietzsche. That in many ways, Anglo -American civilization, it really means that the basement of humanity because it's extremely utilitarian. It's process orientated. It's very bureaucratic. So after Germany declined after World War II, we saw a steep decline in cultural production. We no longer have the great philosophers, the great scientists, the great theoreticians that Germany produced in the 19th and 20th century. So I don't think it was positive for the world civilization that ultimately the Anglo -American empire won out. At the same time, we have to understand it was very hard to defeat the Anglo -American empire because of the extreme wealth industry of America. And the Anglo -American empire is dedicated to fracturing the Eurasian continent, right?

Because this goes back to the Mackender thesis. Mackender's thesis. Mackender was a British military strategist who argued that Britain controls the seas. And if Britain is to control the world, it needs to control global trade. And the way to control global trade is to ensure that no Eurasian power emerges in the heartland. And the great fear is that maybe Germany and Russia would get together. And if Germany and Russia got together, they would control the entire Eurasian land mass. And then they have railways. And then you can negate British sea power. Then Britain would collapse because, you know, I mean, Britain is in many ways, it's a house of cards. And once you ignore Britain, then its financial obligations, its debt overwhelms Britain. And a lot of issues you see in Britain today would have happened like 100 years ago. So British foreign policy. Wow. That's an interesting point. Sorry. Go on. Continue. I mean, the Bank of England is a pyramid scheme.

I mean, like we go into the Bank of England, you know, later on. But I mean, I mean, that's what financial financial system is. It's a pyramid scheme. As long as you're able to convince people that you're that you will just grow and grow, then people will invest money into you. Right. And that means controlling the sea routes, sea trade routes around the world. So if Britain lost that, then all these internal contradictions would overwhelm Britain. And it would descend into civil war a long time ago. Right. So why is it that you didn't have these class revolts in Britain that you had everywhere else? Well, I mean, it was because it was able to use its financial system and its empire is to sort of relieve these these structural contradictions. So so yeah, so so Britain was committed to ensuring that the Eurasian continent would always have conflict with each other.

Right. So the main sponsor of the of the. The wars against Napoleon was Britain. I mean, Napoleon made the most effort to reach out to Britain and say, you know, let's talk peace, you know, let's create a trade system. And Britain's like, no, we are going to go and crush you. And Britain was financing all these wars against Napoleon. And I think there are seven coalitions against Napoleon and Britain was financing all of them. Because because the entire British financial system would have collapsed. If. If Napoleon ensured peace in the European continent, if France became the dominant economic power in Europe. So so Britain has always been going around Europe causing all this trouble. I mean, you can go back for the past 20 years and you've got any conflict in the world. And I assure you that the British were involved in some capacity and they're very good at that.

I mean, their intelligence service and my six are very, very clever. They're very. They're very. They're very good at that. So it would have been very hard to imagine a world in which, given the machinations, the manipulation of Britain, Russia and Germany would have come together and would have secured the Eurasian continent. And at the same time, remember that America is watching across the ocean and America would have planned to invade at any point in order to ensure that the European continent would be united. So the Europeans never combined together. The financial interests of America and Britain were very much aligned together. So neither America and Britain would have tolerated a major power emerging in Europe who would have unified the Eurasian continent. And that's why America entered World War One. That's why America entered World War Two. I would make the argument that both of these wars were started by the British. Many people have argued that the British were the ones who started the war.

Many people have argued that communism, Bolshevism, was financed by the Anglo -American Empire because they wanted to undermine the Tsarist regime of Nicholas II. And they succeeded tremendously. And if you just go back and look at the documents of the Bolshevik Revolution, all sides at the time, both the whites and the Bolsheviks, were financed by Wall Street and the City of London. And I mean, it's just power politics, right? I mean, we're not saying it's right or wrong, but I'm saying, given the situation that Britain was in, that it is an island with little resource of its own, then it needs to go and cause all these problems in Europe in order to maintain its control over resources around the world. So just from a game theory perspective, Britain had actually no choice in the matter. If you've been doing this for centuries, then you get very good at that.

And then eventually, if Germany becomes too powerful, then you bring in the Americans as your muscle to maintain your power. And that's the Pax Britannica. And eventually, if it becomes the Pax Britannica, you don't really care, because the Bank of England still controls most of the resources in the world. So I don't think it was that feasible for, eventually, Germany to control the Eurasian continent. At the same time, I have said that Germany in Europe is the best position to take advantage of the collapse of the Pax Britannica. I think in maybe 10, 20 years' time, you will see a realignment of Europe so that Germany and Russia become allies.

Interesting. So that would be in the context of the EU or something like this going forward. Well, actually, before we get into that, I do actually want to talk about, because we're talking to an Irishman here, so we're going to kick the Brits around. I need to get a couple of strikes in. Okay. But your point about the Bank of England is phenomenal, because it is a very fascinating thing to think. And you say it's just raw power politics, like in some sense, they're just doing what is rational for their position. That's a really good point, because if you look at it, they do essentially sit down with the Bank of England and say, so much about the financial system just blows open when you study its history, because you realize it's contextualized entirely upon promises. It's almost like magic. It's not really real. Alchemy. Alchemy. It's literally alchemy. Yes. People think, yeah, people think money is this hard thing, but it's like, no.

The Brits say, we're going to take the labor, the potential work output of the future 100 years of the British labor, and we're going to compress it and pull it back in time. So it's like quantum physics, pull it back in time into this moment. So you take 100 years worth of potential work as a loan and pull it back. And then you get this super loan in the present, which your population will pay off. The bonds, the debt from the Napoleonic Wars was only paid off or was still getting paid off even in 2010, I think, or the early 2000s by the British population. So they consolidated the future and brought it into the present and then used that to fund wars. And the French were noticing this, because the French went broke. The French funded one side of the Civil War. They funded the other.

They funded the Civil War in America, because they wanted the British to lose against the Americans. So the French were throwing money into them. But the French were doing classical economics, like idiots. They were like, oh, well, we'll just use our money for this. And so they went broke. The British then saw this, and then obviously probably nudged the French Revolution to happen. And then there was all this chaos, and then Napoleon is fighting. And Napoleon notices this. He's like, these Brits, they have limitless cash. It's just unbelievable. And so he's continental block. A big part of it is to try strangle Britain in a manufacturing sense, and then on top of this, he would even try to block out the financial system coming out of Britain altogether, this type of thing. So there was this attempt even there to create that Eurasian problem. And then it is very funny, because we can obviously bash Britain all we want, but Napoleon tries to invade Russia and fails.

The unification of Eurasia just fails because of the actual Eurasians themselves. If Napoleon pulled it off, maybe he could have done it diplomatically. It's not necessarily like he had to invade Russia. It's kind of similar with Hitler. You wonder, was there, like Nietzsche was saying, maybe there should have been an alliance going on. And Hitler says, no, we're going to fucking destroy Stalin, and we're going to crush them, because we have to, because we have to be the rulers of this. We can't do this diplomatically. That's stupid. And then obviously you said, for example, England were involved in communism, which many people said they were. But it's clear as day that Ludenburg is a communist. Ludenburg found Lenin and said, this guy would be great. He's like a virus. We'll send him into Russia, and then we'll go into Russia and strangle him ourselves, because he's so dangerous.

So the Germans obviously tilted that chaos, a major factor in that too. So it's like there is this Eurasian chaos going on, and then the Brits are up there on the top, very consolidated, very stable, kind of like what we're seeing in China in the east right now. They're very stable, and they're just like massive piles of cash, and then tilting things, whatever direction they want. So they were very, like the last 250 years, they've been masters of the world. The Anglo race has been masters of the world, and sort of setting the agenda. So that's absolutely true. I see it. But yeah, I guess as you're pointing out, many of the things that are winding out right now are coming from the logical conclusion of all this, the insanity of the financial system. That's right. And then you see it actually breaks down in America and break down in British society.

London is like, what, 30 % British at this point? That is crazy. It's crazy when you think about what that means, these type of things. And yeah, that's a fascinating thing to see. So I don't know, would you like to go into that more? Or would you like to talk about some of the kind of philosophical backgrounds and all of those type of things, like the German idealism that was kind of bubbling, that got swatted out? What do you think?

Yeah. So yeah, maybe we can go more into detail about the Bank of England, because the Bank of England was a revolution, right? Okay. So the Bank of England, as you say, allowed for alchemy. You're able now to go 100 years in the future and just harness future potential, future labor potential, and then just use it for today to finance all these wars against Napoleon. So the Bank of England is really interesting because it marks a revolution in human thought, right? And what made the Bank of England possible were three factors. And I'll go over them, and then we can go more into detail if you want. Okay. So the first factor is the Dutch Republic was tremendously wealthy, because it was able to control the spice trade in the East Indies. I mean, the Dutch East Indies Company was, I think, the most profitable company in world history. And so they're all this profit and this gold.

The problem though is, if you just look at the map, it's very easy to invade, and Spain was invading a lot. So we needed to put all this resource, all this gold into a safe haven. And that safe haven, of course, was England. So you go back to 1688, the Glorious Revolution. Well, the main reason for that is that the British aristocracy aligned themselves with the Dutch Republic, and that was what allowed for the creation of the Bank of England. Okay. So 1688 was the Glorious Revolution, and then 1694 was when the Bank of England was chartered. So that's the first factor. The second factor is the rise of Calvinism and Protestantism. Because never before in human history, and I think people don't really appreciate this, is if you have money, you go spend it, right? If I'm a Viking and I go raid and I capture a lot of gold in

Ireland or France, whatever, I go back home and I organize this huge feast for everyone, because what else would you do with your money? But with the rise of Calvinism and the idea of double -prisonation and justification by faith, you had to justify yourself through wealth accumulation. So now people were really happy to put all their wealth in a bank for generations, and that never really happened in human history before. So that was also an intellectual revolution. The third thing that is really important is the creation of Parliament, right? Because before, if you were a bank, you just let your money to the king, and that was problematic because the king might die, but also the king might not pay you back, and this was a constant problem in European history. But now that Parliament is a sovereign power. If you're a sovereign power in England, then you're lending your money now to the nation state of England.

Oh, wow. Okay. Yeah.

So people now, every one of them is obligated to pay you back. So the Bank of England is this private corporation that's now able to lend to the people for Parliament. The people have actually no say in the matter. Oh, dear. Yeah. Okay. And their children, their grandchildren, their great -grandchildren are stuck with this debt, and they don't even know about this, right? Because the Bank of England is important because the Federal Reserve System, you know, the United States, its model, all the Bank of England, the entire central banking system that we have today was based out of the Bank of England system. But the idea that I, the private bank, can lend people the money, and people don't even know about it, people can never use the money, but the people, the people's children, the grandchildren, the great -grandchildren, they're all stuck with this debt. I mean, it's a great system if you're a private banker, right?

And that's what accounts for the rise of the Bank of England, and that's what just ifies the British Empire.

Well, it does obviously lean into what you said earlier, where is, if you were doing this and it succeeds, in many ways, like the British people have seen an escalating quality of life, so they're not really going to complain for the last 200 years. But it's very interesting, because it's like a crypto pump, you know, like it keeps just going up, going up, going up, and you're like, whoa, this is great. And then now it seems like the bubble is bursting, and everybody's like, wow, England's not England. We're literally... I mean, it's like it's been slowed down and destroyed. It feels like all our institutions are literally like possessions of like a globalist caste who doesn't even care about us. And it's like, what even is happening to this island now? So it's like this total implosion, and it's ruthless as a consequence. And I think that's... It's something I've noticed, because again, we spoke about moral world orders.

Something that I've been looking at, and I should make a video on this, is colonial Spain, because England say that they banned slavery, for example, and again, like as a Nietzschean, you'd say to yourself... Oh, I think slavery is so cucked, that's so not based. You should be like, you know, it should be ruthless ubermensch, this type of thing. But you look at like Spain, colonial Spain, and the second they conquered, they were immediately putting and advocating for rights for the people that they conquered, because of their like strong Catholicism. And they... The Bartholomew de la Casas, I think that's how you pronounce him, he is basically saying like, listen, these people are people, these Native Americans, and even these Africans, we just... We should treat them as divine souls under Christ. And we shouldn't expect... We shouldn't exploit them. And so for that reason, they have some restrictions on slavery, where you have to like buy the slaves.

You can't just steal them and stuff like this. And it leads to these very basic rights that they put into place. And even in Latin America, they basically don't really enslave the populace. Now the conquistadors, they try to do slavery. They try to take... Because they're like, lads, we're after conquering this, we'll do what we want. But the crown is often going against them. And so Spain has this like moral conscience, this attempt to do this. And it actually leads to very interesting things. Where, for example, Haiti and Dominican Republic is on the same island. San Domingo is like split in half. Haiti was a slave state ran by the French and the Dutch. And it is like 97 % African, I think. And completely failed society, constantly imploding. Just like absolute chaos. Because it was this horrible slave hub that they just ran a sugar plantation out of, and then they sent all the slaves into America.

The other side has like something like 13 % African ancestry. And is quite stable. And does an awful lot better because it was the Spanish side where they didn't engage in this. So it's interesting to see this sort of moral restriction. Maybe didn't lead to this flash where you had this awesome, profitable Haiti sugar plantation. But in the long run, it actually remained somewhat stable. And it's kind of similar with England and everything where they did all the genius financial trickery with the Bank of England. And it was incredibly powerful for the last 200 years. And you wonder now, is the crash going to come? And will it be just absolutely brutal? Or will they figure out a new flip? This is something I heard off Peter Ryan, by the way, is that the Trump admin have some very clever people working with them, pointing out that they can get crypto and they can go into like Tether.

They can control Tether and get Tether to buy treasury bonds. So that when people buy into crypto, they're buying US debt because China and everybody is not buying US debt anymore because they're like the financial system is a scam. So there's like maybe a new, these guys are geniuses at this. They've been doing it for hundreds of years. So maybe there'll be like a new flip to the new paradigm or something like that. And we'll see them see them escape this. Maybe that will happen. I don't know. But do you have any thoughts on that?

Yeah, I think you're absolutely right. I think it's really impressive that Britain has been able to maintain its current scheme for as long as it's been able to maintain to do so. And you're absolutely right in that this current scheme has brought tremendous wealth and prosperity to the British people. But we have to remember this current scheme is based on idea. And the idea is that the sun will never set on Britain. It's the idea that Britain is invincible and it's inevitable, that it was the destiny of Britain to eventually conquer the world. It is the will of God, essentially. And this is the fundamental idea. And that's why military power is so important, right? You can't maintain this financial system without the British Navy. But now that Britain doesn't really have a military. And now that. Right. And now that Russia is destroying NATO in Ukraine, now that America is overextended, this idea of the invincibility, the inevitability of the Anglo -American Empire, it's faded.

And so no matter what financial shenanigans you pull off, it's not going to compensate for the fact that no one believes you're invincible anymore.

Sorry to interrupt, but like this is was such a red pill for me as well, where you look at like how the American financial system works right now. And it is better. It's based on it's like it's mental. It's based on trust. So China, China had a huge reserve of American Treasury bonds. And what are they? They're promises. They're basically like you buy a Treasury bond. We'll print money so we don't have to create fake debt. You buy our Treasury bonds and we will pay you back. You'll get you'll get value for this. So the thing is, is that this was considered more valuable or as valuable as gold because everybody believed in America. It was legitimate. Now China started to say, no, fuck you guys. You're printing a lot. A lot of money. We're not interested. We're good enough. So they don't believe the G legitimization happens. And so they start to off get rid of Treasury bonds.

They don't buy as much anymore. They don't buy into the promises and all of a sudden this rapidly destabilizes the American financial system. So it is so fascinating to see how it is just belief. It is like that legitimacy is so critical that political legitimacy is so critical. And like in some sense, yes, it's the ability to assert power. But there's also like the faith that like your country is going to be stable because it's well ran. And that's where things are very interesting. And I see an interesting flip where a lot of my friends are like saying, how do we invest in China? She's like, China is going to be the future. How do we get into this? And it's actually a much more closed market. So it's a bit harder, but this type of thing. So do you have any thoughts on that?

Yeah. So I can agree with you. So I think in the beginning, the Treasury notes, they were promises, right? That's the idea. But what we'll see is that as the empire continues to decline, what will happen is that America will now start to engage. In extortion. That's what these tariffs are about, right? Trump is going to basically go on and say, you know, you want to enter our American market, you need to pay these tariffs. You know, recently, NATO has pledged, I think, 3 % of its GDP to defense spending. That's also extortion, right? Because what America wants to do is get these allies to start buying US weapons systems to continue to finance these bloated US defense contractors who will then, you know, pay off US politicians. So another way of saying this is that as the empire declines, it becomes like a racket. It becomes the mafia. It's a mafia state. And it's only interested in extorting value from its allies.

So I think that's what's going to happen. Like if you just look at US Treasuries, like who owns the most Treasuries in the world? It's Japan. Why? Because you have US bases, military bases in Japan. You don't have US military bases in China. And that's why China can offload its Treasuries. But you will never see Japan offloading its Treasuries. And what we expect is Japan will continue to buy more, buy more and more Treasuries because it's extortion. You have to pay off the mafia, basically.

Yeah. And there's a really fascinating thing I saw when the whole tariff thing was happening, because I speak to some people in like America and they're like, you know, in like big industries like the electric cars and all this, and they were very upset about the tariffs. And I was like asking them why. And they would point out things. But it does. It creates this sense around the world that and there's a there's there's a kind of closing of America happening. And that's actually not good for America. And you're like, well, what's the justification for this? So there's two that I got that are so interesting. Number one is the Bretton Woods concept is that after World War Two, America basically come and they say, listen, we're going to create this financial system that goes over the whole world and everybody can buy into it and we'll lead, but we're not going to be tyrants.

We're not going to be tyrants who leave. So what we'll do is we'll each invest in each other. So they created this sort of distributed web network. And it's like we'll be the ones who mandate good behavior. We're like the shopping mall police. But we're going to do this where it's like open and everybody has a bit of a share in each other. And it's actually very intelligent because he creates this very tight net and international empire that everybody buys into with high legitimacy as a consequence. And this is this is very resistant against communism as a consequence. Right. That's probably why America wins. So if you start doing tariffs, that's closing, it's breaking off those webs and shutting things off. And that actually rises up distrust and like, you know, this type of thing creates conflict. A second one then is that if you look at the history of tariffs in, for example, England, what do you see?

It's so interesting. During the colonial period, during the Duchess Dutch in the Indies and during Britain, they were all fighting each other as nation states trying to get their pot of gold as big as possible. They were tariffing the living fuck out of each other. The British were like tariff and everything that was coming in from from Holland because they were trying to bully them to get money off them. And at this point, all the taxes, there was no tax revenue because they're just tariffing everybody. And then the second Britain beat Napoleon and got mandate to own the entire world. What did they do? They dropped tariffs basically to zero over the course of the 19th century. They become a moral empire. They drop tariffs. They end chud nationalism. They end. This close minded Britain. They end slavery. They begin to work for universal suffrage, democracy, and they begin to essentially create this enlightenment empire to get moral mandate and legitimacy.

They stopped tariffs, open up trade to the world, become the pimp kings that run the trade empire because that's an intelligent thing. Open up the party, invite everybody in and be the guy who collects a couple of cent off every transaction. It's very, very smart. Then what happens in the 19th century? American tariffs are through the roof because they're. Hello. Oh yeah. He's back. He's back. Hello, sir. Hello. Hey. Apologies. Apologies. Let me. That's my fault. That's my fault. Boomer. We.

Yeah. It might have been a good idea to take a break anyway. We're really. Yeah.

Okay. Okay. Let me just get all this. But look, sir, I guess we'll wrap it up and I'll clean this up on the back end to make sure it looks a little bit better. Okay. And yeah, we're still live now. So I don't know. Is there any last thoughts you'd like to wrap up? Let me see if I can just get everything sounded nice and rosy and just try to get audio nice and nice for the people. Could you speak for just one second, please? Sure. Yeah. Hello. How are you? Good flying. I'm not sure if my audio is good, but it's all good. But anyway. All right. So we're talking about all this terrible stuff. The end of the end of the world. I was ranting about the world's financial system. I guess one thing I wanted to ask you before we go into maybe we can close up then is what is so what is your perception of China and its potential?

As we said, you're not sure if they can ascertain a moral mandate where you see them going into strength type thing. You see them projecting a lot of power, making a lot of right moves. Do you see any internal problems with them? I've heard that they have. Their own demographic problems, these type of things. So what do you think?

So the word that we used before at the beginning of the stream was the word Faustian, right? So in Germany, in England, in America, you have this Faustian spirit. You want to change the world. You want to you want to know about the world. You want to implant your identity on the world. And there's this desire to constantly strive and strive. Right. And the whole thing is about changing the world. It's about changing the world without end in the Western world. And that's what what's made Anglo American German civilization so dominant around the world these past 200 years. And in China, you don't have this spirit. China built a wall called the Great Wall. Why? Because it did not want to deal with the world. So China just wants to be left alone, basically. So I. So my prediction is that maybe for the next 10, 20 years. We have a great chance of changing the world.

China will continue to engage the world, but not militarily, not in the way that – China doesn't want to build a global empire. China wants to trade with the world, but it wants to trade with the world in a way that's not confrontational. So it does not want to build a blue -water navy to challenge America. If China were to ever have a blue -water navy, then you would see immediate naval warfare because America will never give up its blue -water dominance. So China will not do that. Now, we know that China has to ship in a capacity for a blue -water navy. I think for every ship that America builds, China can build 230. So China can very quickly have a blue -water navy. But what matters is ideology. What matters is narrativeness. What matters is narrative. What matters is mythology. And China does not have that element in place. China doesn't

have a narrative where the Chinese people dominate the world and the Chinese people become the leaders of humanity. The Americans do. The British do. The Germans do. The Russians do. But not the Chinese. And that's very important if you are to anticipate or predict Chinese behavior over the next 10, 20 years. So I think that China will try to build consensus. I think that China will focus more on building multilateralism. I think that China will focus more on building multilateral organizations like the BRICS in order to replace the Pax Americana because clearly China benefits a lot from globalization and it would not want to see globalization recede from the earth. But if it doesn't work out, then China is not going to take the reins of destiny and control it. China is just going to go back to its borders and turn it around. So I think that what's really important for people to understand is that every nation has its own distinctive identity.

Every nation has its own distinctive mythology, has its own distinctive worldview, and depending on its worldview, we can predict the behavior of that nation. So China is not interested in military confrontation, but Russia is, Germany is, America is because of their worldview. So one suggestion is if you really want to understand the war in Ukraine, you need to study the Third Rome Prophecy. I'm not sure if you know much about the Third Rome Prophecy, but Moscow sees itself as adhering to the Byzantine Empire, and it wants to reconstitute the Byzantine Empire and become the Third Rome. And to do that, it needs to basically defeat Turkey at the end of the day. So we can see this war in Ukraine slowly drift off to Odessa in the Black Sea because then Russia can confront Turkey. But China doesn't have its own eschatology. China doesn't have this sort of mythology.

In fact, I would argue that what people don't understand is that China has not been a real coherent civilization ever since the fall of the Han Dynasty in about 500 CE. What people don't understand is that the Tang Dynasty was actually a foreign dynasty. The Tang Dynasty were these nomadic steppe people who conquered China. And when that happens, then as a foreign conqueror, you want to dilute or negate the existing ethnic mythology because that's a real threat to you. And so ever since the Tang Dynasty for the past 2,000 years, China has been ruled by foreign conquerors. And as a result, we've seen a massive dilution of China's mythology, of the Chinese ethnic identity, of the Chinese cosmology. And without that, then people are not going to venture across their borders. People are not going to explore. One thing that I want to discuss with you is how narratives drove exploration and conquest.

So you look at the Yanaya, which we talked a great deal about, the Proto -Indo -Europeans. Most of Western mythology is derived from that period. But then you have the Vikings and Norse mythology. So I think that without mythology, without a coherent storytelling tradition, you're not going to conquer the world. So I don't see either China or India being global hegemons. I don't think they have the cultural soft power to become cultural hegemons.

It's fascinating. India, by the way, is a dark horse. I think a lot of people don't look at India and realize that India is going from strength to strength in very interesting ways. They are now the largest country in all of human history. As of 2003, they're now bigger than China. And they have a huge population surplus. They're all over Silicon Valley. They're like the way China are very present in the West. The Indians are crazy present, this type of thing. And they're actually starting to generate a lot of hate and hysteria because of it, because they're just everywhere. They're saturating. So it's a fascinating thing to look at because that's there's just raw population dynamics where you have something this big that it's going to have to be a force and this type of thing. So that's interesting. But on your point, and I thought about this a lot as well, like you even look at America, a critical motif was manifest destiny.

You know, like God wants us to reach the West of America. As you said, the Amnaya, they have this sort of like Sky King God going out there. And it's something I wanted to ask you about because you speak a lot about religion and you speak like about Gnosticism. And spirituality. And it's like I don't mean this to be shallow, but I just don't like China. Doesn't seem religious to me. It seems like it's just the perpetual sort of secular state. It doesn't really project. It's not like it's got this highly romantic Christianity or something like this. It doesn't seem like it has that. It has like a philosopher religion, as far as I understand. Yeah. And so I was wondering how that works. Like, is China just not religious? Is that something that's only come since the Great Leap Forward type thing?

And are these just like low resolution stereotypes I've got in my head? Does that kind of play into an overall non -narrative way of looking at the world? Instead, it's just brutally pragmatic. And how should I understand that?

Yeah. So I think China, the best analogy for China is maybe ancient Egypt. It's really a plantation economy, meaning that you have a bureaucracy, which is like the overseers and the people are just considered a resource. That you're exploited. And as a result, you don't want religion in place because religion is an animating force. Religion is inspirational. And so religion has been denuded or eliminated from Chinese civilization for the past 2,000 years. So when you come to China, I mean, it's really the most atheistic country in human history. And you could say it's even anti -religious. I mean, when I have conversations with Chinese about eschatology and religion, they tune out because it's not part of their worldview. And it's very hard. And that's why I think China's soft power doesn't really work because China doesn't have a conception of soft power. The way China does business overseas is it's like we just bribe the elite.

And that's good. We go to Africa. We bribe the elite. They're happy. And China doesn't really understand that as humans, we strive for spiritual fulfillment, for spiritual enlightenment. Because that spirit has power. It has been destroyed in China for the past 2,000 years. And so, I mean, that's good because China is a nation committed to peaceful evolution. I mean, it's like go fight wars. At the same time, without religion, you don't have the creative Faustian spirit of experimentation, exploration, of asking questions, of debate, of openness. And so I think what's really odd is what I don't understand is China is probably happy being subservient to the Anglo -American Empire. In many ways, China is the greatest experiment of the Anglo -American Empire. Because in the 80s, China was this isolated, poor nation. And it was for American technology, for American financing, for American know -how that China was able to build up its manufacturing base.

And even today, this manufacturing base, when Chinese ships go overseas, they're being protected not by Chinese ships, but by American ships. So China in many ways, modern China, it's really an invention of America. It's really, you know, China was always meant to be the manufacturing hub of globalization. And that's why America was probably happy to ship all its factories to China. So I think, you know, this traditional narrative that it's China versus the United States, I think that's incorrect. Yeah, I think China will remain subservient to the United States. What's happening today is that with a new leader, President Xi, he's trying to exert more national sovereignty. You know, because America, I mean, it's become a mafia state. It wants China to buy up more U.S. Treasuries. It wants the Chinese financial system to open up so that Washington can come and create predatory financing, lending and destroy the Chinese economy.

So President Xi has courageously said no. And that's why America is imposing all these sanctions on China, on tariffs, on technology restrictions. But at the end of the day, these two countries, the United States and China, are symbiotic. China needs the U.S. market. The United States needs Chinese cheap labor. Because its consumers are addicted to, you know, U.S. Chinese cheap goods. So I don't think that U.S.-China, this relationship will end up in conflict. And I think my prediction is for next year, possibly earlier, the next six months, you have a major rapprochement between the United States and China.

Interesting. That is something that it's very important to understand that symbiosis. Because like all the boys I know doing like drop shipping, you know, they would be like, you just go. You call up this Chinese guy and he has this massive factory. He shows you videos of it. And then you like set up a little Shopify store. So like this kid was the marketing portal into the American market. And then this guy in China like has this massive productive factory. And that is like, in some sense, the perfect encapsulation for the modern relationship. And it is symbiotic, as you said. And it's crazy to think that, yeah. And like I guess this is also something then you're saying that it's like an atheist society. Because that's so fascinating because it's just hard even for me. A lot of us in the West, we conceptualize the progress of being like, you know, we were pagan barbarians, we became Christians, and then finally we reached atheism.

And it's like a linear progress in our minds. But you're pointing out that like China has been atheist for a long time. And it's just that, yeah, the whole religious concept is just not really. It's kind of an aside. They're like a philosophical race in some sense. And that's like not, they're not, they don't.

I mean, I would go in further and say that China is a materialistic race. I think that, like, yeah. I think this system that Americans created, it's perfect for China. Because that's how China sees the world. It sees the world very materialistically. It sees the world through economics, right? And so in many ways, the United States and China, like, are the best of friends. I mean, certainly in China, if you go talk to a Chinese person and you ask them, like, if you have the opportunity to talk to anyone in the world, would you talk to an American? A German? Or a Russian? Or a Japanese? That person would always pick an American because American soft power is so dominant in China. So let me give you an example, okay, of how brilliant American penetration in China has been. So 1980s, you know, China was still very much a closed society. And at that time, people were buying pirated DVDs.

I'm not sure what you know what DVDs are, right? But they were really cheap. I mean, like, they cost nothing. They cost nothing whatsoever. And these were like pirated American movies. And what would happen is people would, you know, sneak out to a corner shop, you know, and buy these DVDs illegally. Then they go home and then watch these movies. And when they watch these movies, it's very much like many people reading the Bible for the first time. It was a revolution. And these movies were promulgating the brilliant American culture, American liberty, American individuality, American heroism. And that, I mean, like the movies became part of the Chinese historical memory. I mean, it's crazy. But I think that if you talk to an average Chinese person, that person could probably tell you more about American popular culture than he or she can talk about his own, you know, cultural identity.

So the penetration of American culture in China, I mean, it can't be overstated. So I think right now most people in China are like, you know, we want to be friends with America. They want to immigrate to America. They want their kids to study in America. So the soft power conquest of China, I mean, it can't be overstated. And I can't possibly see the Chinese people wanting a war with America.

Fascinating. Fascinating. And then so would you look at, like, for example, the Jews, the Israelites, they are like almost like the antagonist to this because they are like the ultimate mythic religious people, like they offer just enormously profound religious thinking. And it is like incredibly seductive to the West itself. And then you look at Europe and Europe as Europe's become more atheist. I guess it has become a more isolationist, economic, pragmatic, bureaucratic state as we've become more atheist. So it is like it's very true with this motivated mythicism is so critical. And as you said, like Hollywood and the power of projection is enormous. And I see that in Europe, what you're describing in China. I see that all the time in Europe, like Irish. I say, dude, myself, I say, bro, myself. You know, it is the infections that it gets inside of your brain. It's just very, very powerful. So, like, I see what you're saying.

Like, there's there's this you could be as pragmatic as you want, which China is, and they're they're very they're in a very prestigious position because of this. But then there is a there is a there's a side of this as well, where it's like if you don't have that almost like intangible mythic soft power, like you, you almost can't get the full mandate, which is necessary.

Yeah. So I really think soft power mythology, it's important for resilience. OK, so, I mean, the Jews are the most resilient people in the world. I mean, the amount of tribulation they've encountered these past 2000 years is just mind boggling. But they've been able to maintain their cultural identity. They've been able to. They've been able to maintain themselves as a nation. China for the past 2000 years have never really faced like tremendous, tremendous existential crisis. Right. The the very fabric of society has never been threatened. But I think, you know, as we move to an age where there are more wars, where geophysical events become much more common, earthquakes, hurricanes, a mini ice age might appear. And I think China will be less resilient. Than other nations. And that's my concern for China. I think that mythology, religion, it's important for you to strive as a people, for you to be resilient. And that's why, look, look, look, look.

I mean, like in America, who are the two most successful minority groups in America? It's the Jews and the Indians by far. No one else comes close. Right. No one else comes close.

What about the Irish? I don't know. OK. Right. Joking, joking, joking.

Yeah. The Jews and the Indians excel. I mean, they dominate. You go to a college campus. Right. The professors are either Jewish or Indian. And I think it's because these are extremely religious people with a deep sense of their own history. And then it causes them to reflect deeply on who they are. But it also makes them strive to be better people. And unfortunately, that's what's lacking in China today. And so I worry about the fate of my people.

Wow. Fascinating. That's very interesting. Yeah. And like I've I've heard people say, yeah, there's there's like a lot of like like Russia's like this. You talk to Russians and all this and they will say that there is a lot of internal conflict. Like they have some of the highest abortion rates in the world. And like communism has left some very significant scars and like low trust, even though they seem like they're ascendant. In many ways, people say it's not all this cracked up. And so like you would say the same as this as China, like China has internal crises. Maybe like it's I guess what you're saying is that it's a it's a billion people. And in order to give those people a collective coherency, it can't just be brute economics, even though that's critical. And that's a good thing to play right now when everything's hysterical in the economic world. You're sort of saying

there also needs to be like a concept of the people of the myth of our history of where we come from. And that identity is actually very fickle and weak in China. And so you see any significant push on that. Like any threat from outside or maybe chaos from within. And that would make that fickle. And that's something that you hope like I'm assuming you hope China would like address. And that was like it's almost like a revolution in their values type thing, you know?

Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, I think that in Europe, Germany is the most powerful nation and it will be the most powerful nation for the next 50 years. But I think that in East Asia, it's Japan that we're the most powerful nation for the next 50 years, because even though it's a smaller population and has less resources than China. It does have its own uniqueness. It has its own mythology. And I mean, I mean, like, if you just look at Japanese history, it's incredible how the moment they face a threat to the nation, they come together as a people. And they make the changes necessary in order to adapt to the modern world. I mean, it's I mean, it's the amount of coordination, cohesion among the Japanese people. It's just very impressive. And we don't have that in China, unfortunately. Fascinating. Look, China just gets by on inertia and on mass. It's just a huge country.

No one can really conquer it. And there's a billion Chinese people. And Chinese think that, OK, because we're one billion people, we can never really be threatened. But I think that in the next 20 years, you will see major crises erupt both within China and outside China that will threaten its existence.

Interesting. I've heard. Yeah. What if he spoke about that before? He thinks that, like, there's a lot of hidden destabilization because the image we get in the West is that a lot of people blame China for everything. But they mainly say, like, it's this giant monster that's just growing in power and they're like, it's an existential threat. And then, like, a lot of people, dissidents don't take their like whatever. It doesn't seem like that scary. But then, yes, some people say there's actually destabilization presence that that might that's like fault lines that might be dangerous. And it's interesting.

Look, the biggest problem is the demographic demographic crisis, the aging crisis. Right. So similar to us.

Well, OK.

Well, even worse, because in China there's just deep rooted respect for the elderly. And so, I mean, in the West, you'll put the elderly in nursing homes. But in China, the entire family is centered around the elderly. Right. So so you have a more responsibility if you're if you're if the elderly requires it, then you have more responsibility to quit your job. And take care of all the elderly. So so, I mean, just imagine how in like 20, 30 years time when the aging crisis in China really wraps up, no one's going to be working because everyone's going to be taking care of the elderly. And like in China, it's it's considered taboo to not do this. It's taboo to like not take care of the elderly. In fact, the elderly will live with the parents and the grandchildren.

This is fascinating. Because in that replacement migration document from the U.N., Joseph Cheney, who was like leading the team studying this and Joseph Cheney has a load of articles where he's like just talks about this consistently. He says he obviously talks about Europe and he talks about America because he's like, listen, if we if we if there's not some solutions to the aging crisis, we're in trouble. Maybe robots. But it wasn't really a thing back then. He says like immigration is a possibility, but it will be unbelievably destabilizing if it's done. But like it makes sense. Because the alternate is the giant top heavy society comes and then that implodes because if there's no workers to take care of people in nursing homes, everybody dies. All the nursing homes just have people starving. And, you know, the welfare state collapses and then you have your grandmother starving to death. It's like, can you really face that?

Like, how are we going to manage this? And he then says that like and as bad as you think it is in Europe, like Asia is not like he was like South Korea. He pointed out particularly he says China, but like he says, South Korea is like, wow. What is going on? It's crazy.

And statistically, East Asians live longer than Westerners. So it's a huge problem that all East Asian economies are facing. And what I'm saying is that Japan, it's a reason society. So you might have a situation where the elderly chooses to off themselves because they care about the survival of their nation state. They care about survival of their culture. I mean, I mean, I can literally see the Japanese elderly people. Reaching a point where, you know what? I've had a good 80 years and that's enough for me. And so you might have even euthanasia in Japan. And I actually see that happening in maybe ten. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah.

I would never have happened in China.

Never like that's great. That is crazy because I've thought about that. I look at the euthanasia happening in Canada, for example, in Switzerland. Yes. And it's very interesting in the West because it's done for psychological reasons. It's like you're suffering and you're in pain. And we react against that. We're like, that's a death cult, this type of thing. But then I saw that in China, sorry, in Japan and Japan have the euthanasia because they probably have that thing where they used to cut their stomachs open. So it's not as taboo over there. It's like it can actually be framed in an honorable way. And yes, Sudoku. And I saw that they have taught about this aging problem. And I think there's a government incentive where if someone gets euthanasia in Japan or maybe they're talking about doing it, that you get paid money. Basically, your children get money as if to say, like, thank you for bowing out and stop being a liability on the state, on the welfare state.

Here's some money. Thanks for euthanasia, this type of thing.

And it goes back to the heart of religion, where in Japan they have the religious ideology in order to do this. Because what matters is the survival of their race, their people, which in China, it's just economics. So they're going to do this because no matter how much you pay the elderly person, the other person is materialistic. It's like, well, I mean, I'm getting a good pension. I have a lot of property. Why would I end my own life? So unless you can convince people to sacrifice themselves for a greater good, they're not going to do it. And it would be taboo in China to try to get the elderly to commit euthanasia. So China is stuck, whereas Japan, they still have. I'm not saying they're going to do it, but they have that cultural possibility. That does not exist in China. And that's why I think Japan in the long term might be better off than China.

Very interesting. Okay. We're giving the Asians a bit of a kick in around here. So you've said I've seen you've done videos, for example, in Canada. And I found it very pressing because you're talking about the Canadian character and you're essentially describing them as fickle. And I found it prescient because I see that in Ireland. I see that all across Europe, this sort of ambivalence and this just inability to take advantage of the incredible. Potential and possibility. Like you're saying that, like, you know, your dad came from functional poverty out of China into this land that is just endless resources. And you come across hipsters and you're like, what the fuck are these people doing? Like, what is happening here? So what do you see? Like, we can we can glass, we can gas up the West and we can say Faustian man, imaginative religious men, ambitious. But like, we also have our downsides. Like,

what do you see is the character flaws that are screwing us up and going on there?

Yeah. So I went back to Canada, my two boys this summer for two months to visit my to visit my parents. And I'll be honest with you. I think the West is heading towards authoritarianism, possibly even totalitarianism and possibly what? Sorry, totalitarianism. Right. So and the idea here is that and I'll give you an example. So I take my boys to the park every day. I say, like, I want them to run around. I want to get some sunshine in the park. I let them I let them run around. OK, so one of my boys, the younger one, he's four years old. He runs off beyond my eyesight. And he and he runs in a stranger and a stranger as as who's your dad? My kid doesn't speak big, big English. So a crowd forms around him and he faints because, you know, he's four years old. He's being surrounded by all these strangers. He doesn't speak the language.

So he faints. Paramedics are called. The police are called. I go and find my boy and the police start asking me all these questions like, do you know how hot it is outside? Do you are you aware that your son might suffer from heat stroke? And I have this argument with with the police. And it seems as though the police have a certain attitude, like your kid should not be allowed to run around the park. It's not against the law, but you should not be doing this. Yes. OK, yes. They also want to take my kid to the hospital, even though my kid had no problem. So the parents came and they did and they did all the vital signs and all that. And it was fine. And I was hugging him and all that. And it's like, you want to go home because my kid is obviously scared. But they insist on taking him to the hospital.

And I said, listen, if you make me go to the hospital, then I'll go to the hospital. But let me ask you this. Is it my choice when I take my kid to the hospital? And the police officer said, yes, of course, it's your choice. And I said, OK, then I'll take my kid home. And like, oh, actually, first, let us get our supervisor and talk to you. Oh, my God, advisor. And the guy's like literally six, eight. He's he's he's he's African. He's he's black. I don't know what his ethnicity is. And he's black. OK. And he stares me down. He's like six, eight. OK, I'm not a very big guy. I'm like I'm like five, five, eight, five, seven. He's a huge guy. OK. And he's like staring me on and says like and he says, if you do not go then Child Protective Services could come take your child and you will not be allowed to return to China.

And I and I was like shocked by this, like because he's lying to me and I know he's lying to me. That's how Child Protective Services work. But but I'm just like, like, why are you doing this? So I said to him, are you threatening me? He's like, oh, no, I'm not. I'm not threatening you. I'm just telling you the consequences. OK, so we have this back and forth and it goes on for a long time. And like like there's some questions in my head. OK, my first question is, what did I do? Wrong? Exactly. Like like what? Why are the police treating me like this? OK, like the treatment is I'm a criminal. When when, you know, like on all that's happened is I'm a dad. My kid got lost for a few minutes. It was all just a misunderstanding.

Right. But the training is I'm a criminal. But they haven't they have not articulate to me my crime. OK, that's number one. Number two is I don't know what the boundaries are. Like, I don't know what they require of me. Like like why? Why do you want my kid to go to hospital when he's perfectly fine? I mean, I don't understand the logic of this. OK, that's number two. And number three is I feel as though I don't have any rights. Right. I mean, like like like I like I grew up in Canada. I know that like 20 years, 20, 30 years ago, they were not they were not done this. They were like, your kid is fine. Please go home. OK, make sure your kid is safe. Now it's very coercive. And so like that entire incident, it's very reminiscent of the the novel. Like Frank, Frank Kafka, Franz Kafka, the trial. OK, this guy, Joseph Kaye, he's he's been arrested.

He doesn't he does not know what he did wrong. No one will tell him. OK, he does not know why they want they want to put him on trial. No one ever tells him he's got to figure it by himself. But he knows that there's this secret organization in the back. Someone's pulling the strings. OK, and you'll never know who these people are. And like so I felt in Canada, you are in a situation where you've moved from a focus on individual liberty to now more on social coercion, on trying to get you to follow the rules and the way to get you to follow the rules is by not telling them what the rules are for obedience. And I'm like, like, why is this happening? And then and then I recognize that what's happening is that this is what happens when you have a massive growth in bureaucracy.

Right. The bureaucracy needs to justify its existence. But the rule of bureaucracy is don't make mistakes, don't. And the way you make mistakes is by telling people your intentions. So what's happening? So I've experienced this quite a few times in Canada. You're dealing with this nebulous, ambiguous, shadowy bureaucracy. You don't you don't you don't not you never know the rules are. So it's hard for you to negotiate your own individual rights. It's hard for you to assert your own individual agency against bureaucracy because you don't know where you stand. And like, you know, the moment you lie, the moment you lose your temper, the moment you make a mistake, you're going to jail. And that to me is scary. I mean, like, like, I don't know how Canadians get by now. Get by not nowadays, because like if you don't want to make mistakes, you're not allowed to learn. If you're not given agency, then how do you improve as a person?

If you don't improve as a person, then how does a society improve? I mean, if if if individuals are not allowed to be creative, then how does society stay dynamic? And so I see this as a real threat in the Western world where you have this massive expansion of the bureaucratic mindset, not just among the police, but also among other citizens, right, because because I was reported to the police by citizens, so they think it's perfectly legitimate to report anyone who they don't like to the police and and so I mean, like, and I am like, if the belief is that what's happening is a gradual expansion of the bureaucratic state, then the only natural consequence, the only logical conclusion is Canada is going to head towards fascism or authoritarianism. OK, but the sense of individual liberty, the sense of humanity in you, it's going to degrade over time.

And that to me is like what the point what what's the point of society like that? Why does that society exist? What exists for the bureaucrats? I understand that. So if you work for the government, that's great for you. And that's maybe 10, 10 percent of the population works, works as a bureaucrat for the government, but for everyone else, I mean, like slowly they will suck that humanity out of you and turn you into a zombie. And that's what I see happening in Canada very quickly. Next 10, 20 years.

Yeah, look, I've I've thought like this is something that fills me with very bleak feelings, but obviously 2020 was the ultimate example of this. The the safety. The safety domination. And it was very shocking because it was that sort of ambivalence about everything. And there was this sort of implication that like, you know, we're doing this for your safety. But if you don't go along with this, you will lose everything. You know, you will be restricted and put in a hole in this type of thing. And I was it was very paranoid and freaky. And then you obviously have people coming out talking about great resets and stuff like this. And you're like, what exactly is going on? And then the the like my my parents would tell me all the time. They're like, yeah, when we were younger, we'd leave the house at nine a.m. and we come back.

Yeah, yeah. Type thing. Type thing. That was my life growing up.

Yeah. And you think about that. Like, I actually lived very similar. Like, I'm the kind of millennial. So this this thing only showed up in my life when I was like just in early 20s. So I'm a bit of a boomer in that respect. And my youth obviously was like being outside a lot and running around and climbing through ditches and things like this, just things that it's weird for me to think about that. Like, yeah, people kids now they can't leave the house and run around because all the spaces are owned and then on top of this, as you said, there is this very heavy handed. It's weird as pro safety policing. But obviously the streets are all dangerous regardless because there's certain moral boundaries to what they can police. They like they won't go all the way to going El Salvador mode and making the streets actually safe for kids to run around or Dubai, you know, they won't do that.

It's not that type of authoritarianism because that's bad authoritarianism. So instead, it's this sort of a narco tyranny, as they say, as Nietzsche said, you know, there's no willingness to dish out punishment because it doesn't have the will to even like. Hurt those parasites that are there, that are there. And this actually creates this low level paranoia where you're afraid of going outside and then if you do do something, yeah, there's all this like social pressure with it. And I see that I see that and I feel it and it's very scary. And it's it's like, you know, you read the Russian writers, Solzhenitsyn, Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky's Demons is a brilliant novel on this because what is he basically saying is that he was there in 1860s Russia. And you have all these characters like the aristocrats, the minorities, the Jews, the Georgians, the proletariats, everybody, every social

class is all conspiring together in this idea of they're finding these beautiful ideas that they attach themselves to these moral ideas, these moral orders, these religious motifs from the French Revolution, these secular, beautiful ideas of radical egalitarianism. But really, psychologically, what's happening is that there's the demons inside of them, the psychological unconscious that is projecting itself through these. And Dostoevsky gives examples of one of the main characters who's an aristocrat and he obviously has class hate. He just does not like the working class. He does not like the lower classes because they're stupid. And obviously he says that he wants to revolve the world into a egalitarian world order. But in order to do this, he has to create a despotism that puts 90 percent of people down in order to guarantee 10 percent of freedom for the best people, which is just a new aristocracy. It's a new order to suit him. And that's obviously what showed up in Russia as a consequence.

So there's all these. All these all these this nonsense, you know, the deep, deep set lies that are hiding the kind of dark forces within people. And I see that all over the West. I think like twenty twenty was the flash point where it was showing you that like all this talk, there's all this talk is just a constellation of really good looking ideas. And in the second you see what's underneath this, there's monsters waiting.

So so one thing that that really annoys me is this ceremonious hypocrisy in the West. Because as the police are punishing you, they expect you to thank them because the police are virtuous. Right. They're only punishing you for your own good. They're only they're only trying to help you. I mean, like, you know, if they take my child away from me, it's because it's protect my child. Right. That's like so. So you have this absurd situation where the police bureaucrats are doing all these things to punish ordinary people. At the same time, they demand that they still feel virtuous. Because ultimately they're doing it for the betterment of society and for the betterment of the individual. And and that's why, you know, like before I was actually contemplating bringing my three kids back to the West because I wanted, you know, fresh air. I wanted freedom. Well, you don't have either right now because you have these wildfires in Canada, you have fresh air and you don't have any freedom anymore.

So I mean, like like honestly, you have more freedom in China today than you have in Canada. It is just an absurd situation because we go. There's problems in China. At least people know that it is a third state and the police are kind of apologetic for coming to your house and arresting you and all that. Whereas in Canada, people are like, this is all good. They don't think they don't think it's it's bad that people's rights are being deprived, that you no longer have a sense of individual liberty and agency. They often this is for the betterment of society. We're doing this for everyone's good. Right. And you say this goes back to covid when people were being asked to get themselves with something that they don't know where it comes from, they don't know what to do, what it does.

And they expect and you're expected to thank the government for giving you this experimental drug that may or may not cause myocarditis. OK, I mean, it's just a ridiculous situation in the West. I mean, it's become a very Kafka society, I think, you know, the West.

Well, I think it's I think it's deeply psychological. Because the kind of first principle I consistently detect in this is this psychological concept of trauma, where there's this idea that like our religion now is this atheist trauma religion, where there's this notion that if you cause any suffering, you are inducing an evil, you're creating an evil in the world. Whereas like you could argue that the previous two thousand years or ten thousand years was predicated on the idea that suffering is a given. And that you must develop strength in order to deal with the suffering. And there's values that justify the suffering such as freedom. It's worth suffering for freedom. It's worth suffering for autonomy. It's worth suffering even for ideals like great culture. But instead, all of that stuff is this idea that suffering is an inherent evil and to be a causative force of suffering is very, very bad. And so if you're

like, you know, scaring your kid or your kid gets lost or something like this or you you shout at him for running away, you're causing suffering in him. And so therefore, you must. Must be something there must be some type of punishment. And then, of course, you as a male, as an active figure, because as a male, you're the most responsible, active in some sense, the most free. Obviously, you've got the most burdens as well. And because of this, you're the most guilty on first principle because you're the most capable of causing suffering. So it's a very interesting thing, because in some sense, the orientation of our psychology before was that the male's responsibility is to manage this and achieve freedom out of the tragedy of suffering. Now, instead, it's like any induction of suffering, any punishment, any putting down the law is bad, and then if you cause this type of pain or this

type of suffering, well, then we have to come with all this force and punish you for this. And it ends up being like kind of ludicrous and irrational because it turns into safety as it turns into this attempt to coddle everybody, specifically the people who are most frail. And it actually sacrifices the eight, the responsible agents, the active male agents in order to to do this and then ends up actually just hollowing out the society. And you notice idealism drops. This is the thing that's very black pilling about it. You notice that we can't have anything that's high minded and lofty like freedom. We can't suffer for these things. We can't create great art anymore. It's almost the antagonist of the Western mindset. But in some sense, maybe it's the kind of consequence of us not guarding these things properly. And it's going to be it's going to be painful. I like I see what you're talking about all the time.

And I'll give you another detail about the story. OK. And so. I was there for like an hour arguing with police because basically the police is like I said to the police, I know my own son. He's four years old. I came out every day. There's nothing wrong with him. So I'm going to take him home. And then they kept on saying, you're not a doctor. And I'm like, I was like, so this random stranger who has access to some random medical equipment, he's going to know more about my own son than the need of his father who has been with him for like four years. We've been through much suffering. We've been through much tribulation. But a random stranger, just because he has a piece of medical equipment, will know more about my own son than I do. And not only that, but it's absurd for me to believe that as his father, I

know how to take care of him more than I do a police officer or a doctor. That I find frightening, that I find both absurd, humiliating and frightening. And unfortunately, that's just where Western society is going, where the people in charge think they know everything and the people know nothing. So we need to treat the people as sheeple and guide them in the proper manner for their own good, by the way, for their own good, because these people that we're leading are obviously idiots who know nothing.

Like it's again, it comes back to these ideas of moral orders. And again, like a callous, nihilistic Nietzschean, you know, this is something that constantly hits me in the face, because if you don't assert a very clear morality, if you don't idealize and say, listen, freedom or responsibility or reaching towards greatness at the expense of suffering is what we should orientate ourselves around. If you don't assert this stuff, don't assert platonic ideals, don't assert big things you're aiming for, it's very interesting because you fall down then and you're forced to make a morality out of suffering, out of out of trauma, out of these type of things. And you might think that sounds like a good thing. And this is, I think what the police are doing is that they can't legitimize their themselves. They can't legitimize their authority unless they appeal to the common, common moral order. And this is obviously safetyism. So they're

stuck in this thing and they're like obviously unconscious about it where they have to enforce all this stuff, because if they don't, they get reported or a report gets written about it and they get in trouble and they don't want to be accountable because no one wants to take accountability because it's not moral to take accountability, it's moral to protect safetyism. So it's this really difficult downward spiral.

But my concern is that right now it's an absurd, paradoxical situation. And so the only logical extension or the logical outcome is they just move towards authoritarianism. They don't even give you a choice anymore. They're like, screw you. We're taking your kid to the hospital. If you stop us, we'll put you in jail. That, I think, will be the future of Canada in 10, 20 years time.

OK, great. All right. Well, that's a black fill and a half. That's a black fill and a half. Look, I will let you go soon because we're almost at two hours. I know there's a bit of a blank spot in this. And do you have any last thoughts on where you see yourself going with your channel in the future? It seems like you're storming. You've come and you've come from the belly of the beast and told us what's been going on, which is how you're seeing the world. And a lot of people have been like, wow, someone else is seeing it outside perspective. This is good. And so what are you just going to continue to report? Are you very interested in the potential world order clash? Do you see the wars kicking off? What's your thoughts?

Yeah, so I think as a species, we're headed we're heading towards a really tough time. I see wars bring up or breaking out around the world. So my channel, what I'm trying to do is explore these issues by myself. I mean, like, you know, I'm a high school teacher. I don't have access to divine knowledge. I'm just trying to work things out by myself. So it's really a channel about exploration of the topics of the day. So this semester I'm teaching like how power works. I'm interested in how different organizations, how they sort of intersect and how this intersection creates policies in the world. So I'm very much interested in secret societies. I don't think secret societies run the world. I think ideas run the world. So I know we're saying this is you can have the 10 most powerful people in the world get together in a room, OK, to the richest and most powerful.

They have access to nuclear weapons and the people in this room say, you know what? We recognize the failings of our society. Let's work towards a common good. Let's get rid of materialism. Let's bring back peace and prosperity. OK, guess what, guys? A day later, all 10 will be assassinated. OK, that's not that's not how the world works. I mean, I think I think there are some ideas that that have a stranglehold over society. So I think like over the past 20 years, we've moved towards secularism, towards materialism. And I think it's very hard to dislodge these ideas about major convulsions within within the global order. And so so so so that's that's what I think is going to happen. At the same time, I'm trying to develop the theoretical framework, the analytical tool to better understand how these processes take place. And that's why I teach game theory. That's why I teach world history.

I'm trying to look for analogies and look for patterns throughout human history. So, yeah, I mean, I mean, I don't see the world improving, but I'm hoping to use my channel as a way to educate more and more people. And look, I mean, the public response has been overwhelming. I'm I could never in my wildest dreams expect that so many people will be attracted to my teachings. And I'm just hoping to continue my teachings and trying to reach as many people as possible.

Excellent. Well, look, thank you. Thank you very much for putting it out there. It's good to see you again. Again, like, you know, it is amazing to see somebody from such a different perspective come in and see many of these motifs from their own your own way of seeing things and being able to report to us what's going on in China as well. And you do approach this stuff quite honest, which is phenomenal. So this is this is great. So thank you very much. I'm just going to briefly run through the chats. Apologies, guys. I know I dropped this live stream on your very, very last minute and there's been a couple of tech issues, but we'll just see if there's any chat. See if people are asking to talk about China. So we've covered that. And they are asking most of the things they're asking. And yes, guys, this is live. People think this is prerecorded.

No, this is fresh. This is live. This is why it's dropping out. And let me just double check over here. Oh, I lost the previous chat. Yeah, I think we've covered most because a lot of people are asking about talk about Canada, talk about China. So I think that's that's all good. OK, look, we oh, yeah. Have we got questions? Anything popping up? Hello, guys. Double checking. You know, isn't China in decline as well? Yeah. So most of the stuff we covered.

And so I saw a question. That's interesting. The question is, is the world headed towards Pax Judaica?

Yes. Yes. Actually, this is a good maybe I could frame this as well. I've wondered about this because obviously people are like, all right, so Israel is trying to build greater Israel. And are they going to create a moral mandate, which is like the Abrahamic religions all unite and Jerusalem will be the center crown of the world or something like this? I like I personally think it's I don't know. It seems very fickle. Would that be strong enough to take the mandate off America's hegemon? I like it doesn't seem like it right now. It seems like they're actually transforming into the new Germans of the 21st century, like the guilt vector, this type of thing. But what do you think?

I think Pax Judaica is very likely. I think that in the Middle East, it's very unlikely that that Israel will be toppled. I think. I think my prediction is that the United States will go into Iran. And my prediction is that Iran that America will lose this war and be forced out of the Middle East. Once America leaves, it's very easy for Israel to create the Pax Judaica because it doesn't have a peer adversary after America leaves. And I think that Israel will become the dominant power. The same time, what I think will happen and it's happening already is you have this surge in global anti -Semitism. And and I think, you know, one thing that's really important to understand is that Zionism is fueled by anti -Semitism is in the best interest of Israel to promote as much anti -Semitism as possible because it forces Jews to return to Israel to build a greater Israel project.

Without that manpower, without that expertise, it's very hard for Israel to survive in the Middle East. And so I'd be very suspicious of what's happening online, all this like, you know, anti -Semitism. I think I think a lot of it's fueled by Israel itself. I mean, I mean, like I'm just talking about like what is in Israel's best interest. Right. Because because if you look at the collaborations between Nazism and Zionism, there's been quite a few, I mean, like and like and like don't take my word for it, go with Elaine Poppe, who is an Israeli historian who's done tremendous work. Hello. It was few.

Oh, sorry, you cut out for a second there, but I think your point is clear. Just illustrate what you're saying. Herzl, like one of the founding fathers of Israel, literally says the anti -Semites will be our great ally, a tool that we can use in order to convince the Jews to come back and absolutely like there's one question I have is that like a lot like there is a certain a significant faction of Jews opposing Zionism. And I wonder about that because there's like George Soros is the classic one. Bernie Sanders. There's like and these would be the secular. The left wing Jews. And as far as I see it, and I think this is an interesting thing to think about. They are looking at Israel as like blowing their cover. They're like, listen, we live in Pax Judaica. We live in this globalist world order where we have this great reputation.

We're known as the Einstein geniuses, the comedians, the Hollywood guys. We're able to go everywhere we want and like play with stocks and all this. And it's like actually very good for them. They have a great like they had a great century. And then, you know, they're looking at Netanyahu and he's like exterminating the Palestinians. They're like, lads, you're making us look like maniacs. Everyone's going to hate us. And they've actually been proven right in a lot of what they're saying. And so Soros would actively lobby against and against the Jews. And you'd see like Dave Smith, you know, a Jew who's going against them. And this is something Herzl would say. You read Herzl's works for Zionism and he is constantly saying like these globalist international Jews, I hate these guys because they're they're like they lack character, they lack honor, they don't have a nation. And we should become a national people and kill the land

and become. Become a force and prove that we have honored this type of thing. So there's this like fracturing split. So I can understand Israel pushing maybe to try. Yeah, get it's like claim it's a little bit of territory and maybe claim a little empire like this, but it's like this moral world order thing I'm talking about. You know, it seems like the secular Jews with their idea of let's be sort of loved around the world and not not kill any people in Gaza, this will look way better for us. And the Israelis are kind of putting all that good credibility and it's like, does that have the potential to become an imperial project that has moral mandate? Maybe if everything breaks down, it will. But I don't know. They seem more just like a classic nation state that might cause a lot of problems for themselves.

Well, we have to remember that right now Israel is doing what it's doing because it's an eschatological project. It's trying to bring up the end of the world. Right. That's that's that's the objective. Right. It's trying to create the it's trying to it's trying to force a return of the Messiah or. No, I'm sorry for Israel. It's the it's the force, the arrival of the Messiah, which will bring about the messianic age, which will be a thousand years of peace and prosperity. So by destroying the world, you're actually saving it. Right. You're excelling the process of destruction. So so so that's that's like how they think. And if you're interested, I'm not sure if you looked at sometimes Zevi. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, because his influence. OK. I mean, I think like the influence of Zevi is one of the most hidden things about about history. I mean, like I think Zevi is the most important historical figure.

No one's heard of me because you actually looked at looked at the history. Most Jews at the time thought that he was actually the Messiah, that he had come to redeem the Jewish people. And he did. And because what happened was that. Around 1666, that's when he declared himself the Messiah of the Jewish of the Jewish nation, the Jewish nation was facing an existential crisis. Why? Because a lot of them have converted to Christianity. Right. In 1492, this the Spanish crown expelled them from Spain. You could either choose to convert to Christianity or you could choose to go to the Ottoman Empire and a lot went to the Ottoman Empire. But a lot chose to convert to Christianity. And now you have this real crisis in in Judaism because the first commandment, the first law is you should have no other God than me, Yahweh. Right. And now you have all these Jews who are born in the nation of of of Israel.

They are the they are they are the seed of Abraham. But they've become adulterers. They've they've they've they've betrayed the nation. Now, what do you do about them? Right. And this becomes a real deep religious issue that could threaten the very existence of the future of Judaism. And so what Zebedee did was he converted himself, which we deem all those who converted to him before. So he is the Jesus of the Judaic movement. So it's really important that we understand that. But the problem created by this is if the first law of the Ten Commandment is not legitimate, you should have no other God than me. Then why the other laws like legitimate? And so now you. You have a new idea in religion that focuses on faith through transgression, that you show your true faith to God by transgression against the rules of man, because the rules of man are not legitimate.

What is legitimate is faith in God. And you show your faith in God by breaking all the taboos that bring you into conflict with humanity itself. And now this idea becomes the heart and center of the Israel nation. Right. Because it's through breaking the rules of the global order, by destroying neoliberalism, by destroying secularism, that we show our true faith in God. And God will reward us in the end because we made the ultimate sacrifice for God. And that's the ideology driving Israel today. So I think it's really important you understand what's happening in Israel. If you go back in time and look at Zebedee, it's really important to look at Jacob Frank as well, because the Franks are a very powerful faction that helped to found Israel. And guess what, guys? Frank is a lot of them control American finance and American industry and all that.

So, again, I mean, you guys can look more into this, but those linkages do exist.

Yeah, I know there's there's also a secular side of this as well that I think like people underwrite, which is that Sabbath, I love you. Basically presents himself as the Messiah. I think that idea also evolves then into the idea that the Jews themselves have to be their own Messiah, which is where you get Herzl, who is like essentially a secular nationalist. And there's a big spirit of this in the Israelis because the Israeli project, like I see a lot of people say it was a religious thing. A lot of these founders were like secular. They were very secular is maybe a misnomer, but they were very like enlightenment rationalists and they saw themselves as setting up a formal nation. And I think the modern religiosity is actually like only more recent as they've begun to learn how to. They're their authority and their rule. They understand the power of their own religion. They're like, well, we may as well use this.

And so Herzl and yeah, was seeing the like national project is giving salvation to ourselves in some sense. He speaks an awful lot in these terms and presents it this way. And so, like, I think in the way that we might see, then, yes, they're looking at the world order and they're saying, right. If the world order is going to turn, we should try to turn into that and see. Can we see if it needs to break apart for us to emerge as a new force? Of some sort. So I can certainly see that. I can see that phenomenon being very, very present. And it'll be interesting to see how that's going to play out. That's going to be a wild one, to say the least. So it might be wild. But again, I would I don't know how to judge this in that.

Are they in a position of great strength or are they in a position of weakness? Because it seems like the world is turning against them. You're suggesting that they need that. They want that.

And so I think one thing to watch out for is the Al -Aqsaq Mosque. I'm not sure if you know about the red heifers.

Oh, yeah. I know all this stuff.

So if they destroy the Al -Aqsaq Mosque, it sort of tells us that it's an ethical, political mission, that they're here to destroy the world so they can rebuild it with Israel as the chosen nation. That, I think, will happen very quickly. So one thing I've discovered about Zionism is they have a fascination with numbers. Numerology is very important. In Zionist belief. And so I think what's happened is they've already picked a date to destroy the Al -Aqsaq Mosque. And that date is a closely guarded secret. But if some of you know about the Kabbalah and you're really interested in numerology, you might figure out the date when they will do it. Right. Because you look at all the dates, all these recent events. Right. So the assassination of JFK happened on November 22nd, 1963. Right. That's 11 -22. That's 11 -22 -33. These are the three like mystical numbers or divine numbers. And and

yeah, so I think the date already picked out for the destruction of the Al -Aqsaq Mosque. But once that happens, then you know what the future plan is. Right. Like the destruction of the Al -Aqsaq Mosque. It's really to instigate World War Three.

Yeah. And that's the turning of the world order. Like like personally, there's a conflict in my own mind. But I wonder how much of it is religiously motivated because I see people say it's just like the Israelites are all religiously trying to carry out as the end times. I can't pronounce the word apologies. But again, there is like a rational, secular aspect to a lot of them as well. Like they see themselves as a nation state who are actually in some sense just trying to get get the concept of honor. Like and again, I'm coming from Herzl an awful lot here. So I know you might not agree with. This, but like Herzl describes the Jews as the way the anti Semites do. They say, no, we're not honorable. We've been degraded because we've gone around as this people without a land. And there's actually this desire for them to claim honor. They want to be pagans again.

They want to say, like, listen, we can be fighters. We can be people who run a nation like we want the Israelites of the twenty first and twenty second century to be people who approach like you approach the Spartans, they're thinking of themselves in this way. And I think this is really present and it's not like it's not mythologized. This is just like, well, the military state or nothing.

Yeah, let's come on and said this. I mean, like he said that Israel in the future will be the new Sparta. I mean, I don't remember. Yes, yes. You can Google this. I don't remember his exact words, but he did say that that that Israel will be the total Spartan nation of the world, like and what he's saying is we're moving towards continuous war, never ending war, which is what will happen if you destroy the.

Wow. This is five days ago. Netanyahu said Israel will become a super Sparta. Yeah. And more militarized. Well, that's very interesting. Yeah. And like it's that's fascinating. OK, so like what is the I'm trying to think of the psychology there, because, yeah, like you're right. Is this like is this like as I'm saying, is this like a secular urge just to create a honorable military state to kind of fulfill their historical destiny? Or is this a thing where they're actually following along the religious destiny and saying, oh, we need to push the world order and folded and overturn the reality itself in order to fulfill the destiny of the Jewish people or something like this? So regardless, it seems like they're both pointing in the same direction, so maybe that's I mean, like like like I think

Netanyahu who has a messianic calling, he seems he seems himself as a Jewish messiah here to bring in the messianic age.

I believe that that's what you just cut out there briefly.

I think so. Yeah. So I cook it too hard. Sorry. I think Netanyahu sees himself as a Jewish messiah who has a mission from God to build the greater Israel project, but to build a greater Israel project. You need to convince all the Jews in Israel to go to war. And you do that by basically going to war with everyone. Because as a Jew, you have no choice in the matter, right? You can either, you know, not fight and get killed or fight with the other Jews and survive. I mean, so, so, so, so really, I mean, like, I really think that Netanyahu and those religious extremists around him, they're trying to force the hand of God. They're trying to force a final confrontation.

Yeah, yeah. It seems like the case seems like the case. It seems like these are so I guess this is you're just watching. This is like a fulcrum because this is where the American empire comes in, the Middle East comes in, Israel comes in. And then if the world order is to turn, you'd see that will probably be one of the main fulcrums. And that's going to be a very fascinating thing. It's happening in Iran, just below Russia. So we have we have this pivot point that could be pretty big.

Yeah. And the other big fulcrum, as you say, is obviously the Ukraine war. You know, if NATO sends troops to Ukraine, I guarantee you, you have civil war in the West. You know, these these British young people, they're not going to go die in Ukraine for a bureaucracy that is aloof, mysterious, indifferent. And they'd rather fight their own bureaucracy in order to rebuild.

Fascinating. Yeah, I agree. I see this energy within the like, you know, obviously I'm up in up in North Europe and it's like it's brutal, man. It's like I just don't think people want there's no desire to put your foot down for a bureaucracy, as you said, it's brutal and no one's just interested. It's it's very brutal. So I don't know. I don't think I don't think we see. But like I said to you before, I don't know, is there the spirit for even a civil war? This is this is very Blackfield, by the way. So I wonder what's going on on that front. Like, would it just be NATO troops deployed? But it's still more Ukrainian people getting deployed or something like this. I don't know. So we'll we'll have to see. But, Mr. Mr. Professor, I am going to have to wrap it up here. And thank you very much for everything. I'm assuming everybody knows where you can find them.

Do you have any last thoughts, anything you'd like to promote, anything that is coming up soon and then we can we can call it there.

Yeah, I mean, what they say is that this war between Israel and Iran will resume. And I think this time around the war will last much longer. So I would suggest everyone to pay more attention to that.

Excellent. OK, thank you very much. A great channel. Check him out. Stay in touch with the professor and I will talk to you all later. I'm afraid this was my first attempt at streaming one of these lives. So we have a little bit of a blip in the middle. So apologies about this. Maybe I'll pull it. Maybe I'll just leave it up as it is. We'll leave it up naked and and in its final form. We'll see. But hopefully it works. Hopefully it records on YouTube. Maybe like I didn't get the stream right or something like this. But thank you very much for your time. Everybody who is in the chat.