red-ice-interviews-190529-the-dark-enlightenment-neoreaction-and-modernity-pt2

Well, boys and girls, welcome back. Thank you so much for tuning in. We're speaking with Nick Land, one of the leading voices, one of the leading thinkers, really, you could say, within the dark enlightenment or the neo-reactionary movement. He's written a lot on the subject together with, of course, Moldbug, and we're speaking about that and a lot of things, just the errors and the problems, the issues with modernity, with the West, what's happening, the decline, How do we prevent this from just completely taking over, this onset of the rot that had set in at this point? And that's kind of really where I want to begin here in the second segment and talk with Nick more about of what it is that he thinks,

the general ideas both within the dark enlightenment or the near reactionary movement, what some of the proposals are for us to remedy the situation. What do we need to do? What direction do we need to do? How should we begin living our lives? How should we reform both society? But to a large extent, Nick, I must say that there's also, it's not just about the organizational abilities of, let's say, the government or the banking system or what the politicians do. That's the biggest issue in some regards. I'm not saying that there's not a lot of work to do there. But at the same time, I feel that there's also, much of this is also on a personal level. with a kind of empty materialism.

I'm not talking down to capitalism or the free market or anything like that. I know that there's huge advancements and appreciations within those models, within those systems that's given us a lot. And at the same time, it's also been detrimental in some regards, right? So, I mean, it's a give and take situation, but I feel that it's also up to us to kind of drive the cultural narrative of what it is that we want. In a certain extent, I think that that's why many people on the right have focused on, for example, metapolitics. It's trying to seek to drive the narrative that's below, underneath all of these things, so that basically the political system are to become a reflection of what it is that people really need and feel

and all these kinds of things. So let me back up again and just ask, what do you think that we should do to begin to turn this around? Or is it something that's inevitable? Are we on a path which basically it just has to run its course? It's this kind of Spengler view on history that there is rise and fall of civilization. It doesn't matter how much we squirm and try to get out of it. This is just going to happen sooner or later anyway. What's your view? Well, I think just to get it out of the way, I think that the point that you've ended up with there is not to be lightly dismissed. And so, I mean, it definitely, you can tell very persuasive, deeply pessimistic, fatalistic stories about this.

I think we should, I think right now, we should try and take another tack. But it's just to say that, you know, if someone is going to say to me, look, this is just, as you said, this is huge metabolic geohistorical rhythms to this thing. And it's crazy to think that you can break with those. I mean, that's not something I'm going to reject out of hand. I think it's probably a deeply plausible narrative. But I don't think we're necessarily, right from the get-go, stuck in anything so pessimistic as that.

And the theme that I think is, I'd like to sort of propose as crucial to this conversation going forward is something like experimentation. Or to put it maybe more drastically, it's about breaking things up. because I think that if I see a major trap to where the right finds itself right now, I think it is in the notion that, kind of thinking that it's our turn now, you know, our enemies have controlled this whole massively powerful social and administrative machinery.

We'll take it over. we'll do our stuff with it um and everything will be well every everything will be fine and i think that's a very tempting kind of story to tell um but as i say it seems to me like that's a huge trap that if people basically put all of their uh efforts into that kind of uh thinking and directing then you're just going to be in some kind of pendulum model you're not going to be controlling that machinery forever. Even if things like electing Donald Trump would approve as satisfying to people as they were hoping, there's not going to be a Trump regime forever.

Eight years is probably realistically what you're going to expect. And then you probably get an even more dramatic swing in the other direction. So I think unless people start seriously using their political and cultural and resources of every kind into actually carving out a much more robust system of autonomy than we have seen up to this point. To one's ideological opponents, rather than saying, you know, we are going to crush you and reverse everything that you've done and take over everything that you had and do it our way instead.

But instead, the basic orientation, I think, should be to say, look, I would love you to do your thing somewhere else, you know, somewhere apart from me. You know, go for it. Go for it in a way that's purer and more full on and more high burn than anything that you've ever done before. You know, just absolutely take your program to the end of the road. But let us do that thing within a much more disintegrated framework, which means we can see whether it works from outside. We can compare it to other things. We can try alternatives. We've got the whole apparatus of comparison and competition and compartmentalization.

that means that if you, as we expect, screw up royally with your plan, then you screw up royally in some kind of relatively delimited geographical and social space, and you're not pulling everybody into your plan. And I think that this kind of modesty is crucial. And if the right really is on the ascendant, and I think that there's obviously a lot of reason to think that's true, what will break it is hubris. You know, what will break it is if it just tries to become the new universal master. It's got the great story for everyone. It has its own big universal plan.

Everyone should fall in line with that. And then you're just into this ruinous pendulum. Interesting. Right. Right. So, yeah, exactly. We're like riding along the pendulum of the rise and fall of civilization. And we try to maybe control everything, maybe control it too much. Maybe try to, there's two ways to look at this, of course. One is you're talking about the rise of the East. And with that, not only the East, but other parts of the world, also with emerging technologies, of course. everything from transhumanism to robotics to artificial intelligence, cybernetics, automation, and all these kinds of things, we're on one hand entering into new territory, right?

There might be reasons for defensive approaches, for example, that could be understandable. Will some of these other people around the world, some of these other cultures and races, will they have the same temperament and responsibility when it comes to handling these technologies? I don't know. So on one hand, you have the proposal that, well, there needs to be some kind of guiding force, something that oversees this. But on the flip side of that, I feel that, just as you say, that the larger an empire gets, the harder it falls eventually. And the destruction from that is catastrophic as well. And they devour difference in their wake. They ruined the path of centralization, I think has been a path of travesty for many, many people in many countries around the world.

But where do you see that? I mean, do you think that we could somehow return to difference, get away from this homogenization of everything that seems to be going on, at least in the West? I mean, it's just a big movement towards kind of creating a form of a monoculture. It's done in the guise of diversity, of course, in some cases, when it comes to the biological makeup of the people in the West. But on other fronts, when it comes to thought and expression, it's very much a homogenized kind of culture that we're creating, right? Yes. Well, yes, I think that's exactly the issue. And I think there's huge grounds for confidence that there are strong tides in the direction of, to use your word, I think is exactly the word we should be focusing on, real diversity.

And on the macro scale, I think we already, as you say again, we have this diversity now. You can look at China, you can look at the rising East, and you can look at what's happening in the West, and you've already got comparison, you've got competition. If people have bright ideas that aren't permitted in one of those places, just as in Renaissance Europe, you can take them somewhere else and try and get them worked out somewhere else. So there is, I think, in an extremely promising way, there is this fundamental large-scale architecture of real diversity now. You know, it's like the globalist faction with its, you know, as I say, in its parodic form, this kind of Fukuyama notion of this kind of fully westernized, homogenous, global managerial system.

that has gone you know i think everyone knows that you know the rise of china means that has totally gone so the only question then is whether we can generalize from that large-scale structure and and make it much more fine-grained um say look this is this is this is what we we what we want we far from being some unfortunate situation that we just have to accept, what we want is opportunities for, you can put it in economic language, jurisdictional arbitrage. You want a world that is sufficiently fragmented, that people can try radically different things simultaneously.

Right. Then you can see what works and what doesn't work. And I think this is the fundamental argument that is taking place at the moment. I think it's the, if there are, at the end of the day, there are two fundamental camps, particularly like within this sort of Western conversation, because I think China doesn't feel under any pressure to engage in conversations it's not interested in at this stage. um um it's it's this thing about is the is the ideal some uh some integrated global managerial apparatus that can solve these big problems and we can all find some consensus about it we can

all agree we can then come together through some bureaucratic mechanism and solve this problem Or is it, in sharp contrast to that, a much, much more disintegrated model where different peoples and places and regimes of all kinds with much, much more heterogeneity than we have recently seen can try very, very different things? and I think there's no real reason to be pessimistic about the trend I think even though it's

one little iconic element and I think so many people are determined to kind of construe it in a way that avoids people seeing the kind of crucial point at issue here I think this British Brexit decision is absolutely archetypal kind of historical moment. You know, it captures our epoch in its initial phase where Britain is saying, look, you know, the EU, we're not going to try and say what the EU should be doing. You know, let the EU decide whatever it wants and we will do our thing, you know, and then we can see which works best and whatever

and people can migrate back and forth. If people want to be going the EU way, then they can obviously go and take up residency in the EU. And if they don't like what the EU is doing, they can flee the EU. And you end up with a wider menu of options. They're very limited. It's just a binary split, obviously, at this stage. But as a kind of model of the way to proceed, I think it's absolutely crucial. Yeah. Yeah. No, sorry to interrupt. I mean, just look at how nature deals with these issues, right? It's the, in many cases, of course, the genetic diversity that has allowed a,

it's a defense mechanism against changing, you know, changing, how to put it, changing variables in the environment, basically, right? There is a big danger also when you create these monocultures that a change in, let's say, the temperature or the humidity or, you know, downpour or something, that can basically wipe out an entire crop because they've adjusted to a certain set of conditions. What I see right now, still, fortunately to this point, is that we have a big variety to deal with different kind of scenarios. And I guess what I'm talking about is everything from political problems that might arise, or let's even say that war breaks out. Right now in Europe specifically, we have so many different kinds of ways to solve these problems.

We have a different set of people. We have different mindsets, different temperatures, moods, skills, and all these kinds of things. And I think the removal of those would be a travesty. I think it would also lead us into a more dangerous position where we actually, in the end, become more vulnerable to a certain extent. And, you know, I'm not just talking about, let's say, a natural catastrophe. I'm talking about, you know, that would be like an outside variable. But I'm talking about whatever the, I don't know, the globalists decide to do or if China decide to become aggressive or something else happens. But the point is, I think we would do better by having that range and the broad spectrum as opposed to a narrow one where we potentially might be more efficient when it comes to organizing or having a governmental structure or something like that.

It just seems to me, Nick, that these attempts at world domination and empire and all these kinds of things, they never end up lasting. There's always a big downfall that comes in the wake of that. And they also have to devour in their attempt to set these things up. And in that process, they end up destroying this diversity that we're talking about. Yes, definitely. I think there's lots of different aspects to this. I mean, one of them is just pure destruction of information. You know, if you have the globalist model executed to its fullest extent, and then one thing happening everywhere, and, you know, everyone is brought into line and conformity with this thing

and agrees that this is a thing that should be doing and gets on board, and, you know, it's the story that has been pursued, then there is simply no way of knowing how well it's doing. You say, is it going great? Is it going disastrously? You've got nothing to compare it to. There's nothing outside. There's nothing else being tried. All you can do is simply trust them or not. and obviously for the establishment this is a kind of wonderful situation I mean that's a very manageable political problem for them you know if people just simply have this binary choice of saying do we believe that they're doing it right or not then they can kind of mobilize their full apparatus of ideological control

to try and sort of beat public opinion into line and they've been practicing that for well over a century in a quite sort of technical way and they're good at it and they think it's predictable to some extent and they know what kind of resources they've got. Whereas the contrary case where people can say, well, actually, like those guys over there are trying something very, very different and it seems to be going pretty well, you know, and maybe we should look at this very different approach. and I think this second this second sort of way of thinking that is kind of accepting of real diversity, regime diversity and all kinds of cultural and social diversity

is deeply resented by what was an embryonic global establishment that just doesn't think it should be second guessed by people trying different things things that aren't part of their agenda list Yeah, it's true. So what do you think some of the reactions to this that we are going to start to see? We're seeing them already. Of course, you have a rising right right now. And I've mentioned several times about a counterculture. You have different ideas being attempted at trying to kind of pierce the veil of the control that the globalists and the elites, the establishment that have set up.

And certain ways seems to, or certain strategies seem to work and certain things seems to be crumbling on their end, despite maybe, well, you know, the win of the Macron's, of course, like in France that we saw and the unfortunate defeat of, let's say, Wilders or whatever. Although those candidates, the Le Pen's are not maybe ideal or perfect, but whatever, the reflection of something. They're still rising in popularity. They're still getting there. but the other half of this of course is also that the demographics are rapidly changing in Europe that the window to solve things with that ability of voting etc is also closing at the same time because if you have I mean let's face it Nick I mean if we have a well let's not even talk about

a majority let's talk about what 20-30 percent Islamic population in Europe we are looking at a very very different uh scenario and situation i think in a way but what do you think well to be really concrete and focused on on on europe particularly on exactly the the issues that you just raised i think there's a big sea change happening in people's in people's understanding of this situation i think that there's several things that really need to be said one of them is that, as you say, Wilders was defeated in Holland. I forget the name of the Austrian guy who was defeated. Le Pen has been defeated.

But all of these people are defeated on hugely rising waves. I mean, the basic tide behind all of those elections is entirely to the discomfort of the ruling European establishment. You know, there is what they call a populist revolt, a nationalist revolt. I mean, it's an interesting, obviously very interesting what these movements really are. But what is quite clear is that they are surging massively. and they have gone just within a decade basically to being at the absolute out of fringes

joke positions at the fringes of European politics to the alternative the electoral alternative to the regime that is coming I mean the Austrian regime almost went into the hands of this guy I mean, that was very, very close. Le Pen got over a third of French voters for a party that was and probably still is, you know, stigmatized as basically being a kind of crazy fascist political party. Wilders is clearly like massively, massively improved his position as being the basic alternative to the way Holland is being guided and run at the moment.

So the tidal forces here are not at all, there's nothing, there's no comfort to be found, I would have thought, in the EU establishment about the way these things are going. I think it's similar, isn't it, in Sweden, that your Sweden Democrat Party, I mean, it's not going to take power in the next electoral cycle, but it's moved itself in a position. I hope so, obviously. okay yes i'm sorry don't let me don't let me spread uh despair upon you whatever i mean i'm too much of an outsider to say but let's put it put it put more hypothetically even if it is not uh to take power in the next electoral cycle it's the change in its position the change of internal composition of swedish politics has been vast hasn't it i mean you know what previously

was considered an absolutely crazy fringe position in the political spectrum is now kind of a serious political challenge yeah i mean they got in what was 2000 was it nine or something or maybe yeah i think it was like 2009 or 10 i think they just you know got into the position with you know being a uh a feasible player you know on the stage of swedish politics and then in just you know seven eight years they have oh of course again i'm not suggesting that they're perfect or any of this stuff i'm just saying as a reflection of what they represent at least in the mainstream that they have transformed they have adapted to these circumstances and and right now they are poised to become the biggest biggest party that might still not be enough though because what's happening

is that uh much of european politics is turning into these two-block system it's basically a nationalist ruler versus an alliance of all the other parties to keep them out of place right Yes, which in itself is obviously this extremely important development. You know, whether one loves or hates what is happening, something massive is happening here. And it's certainly not, you know, there's this ridiculous series of articles that follow all of these nationalist defeats saying, oh, you know, this is the peaking of the tide, oh, this is the end of populism, you know, we're back to normal. no we're not back to normal i mean normal now is this tide and and so why is this tide happening

i mean part of the reason for that is because i think you know and this is one has to be careful here i mean it's very tempting to slide into a certain conspiratorial thinking about this but i mean there is a certain sort of utopian multicultural democratic model here that you can somehow get uh from position a a sort of traditional ethnic composition of a kind of western society to a fully multiculturalized uh ethnic composition of that society at which point um there is such a large minority uh voting block that you know you're home and dry from a certain

position you know what i mean that there's no possibility of this kind of um of this nativist backlash or whatever however you want to describe that and and i think what people are seeing is that that kind of scenario is is what was profoundly unrealistic um it's not you do not get from you know between a and c on that on that path there is point b you know we're somewhere in point b now And point B is where these sort of minority groups, obviously in Europe, overwhelmingly the issue is tied up with Islamic mass immigration, become sizable enough that they throw the previous kind of set of political alignments completely into chaos and turmoil and overthrow them.

And you end up with this new polarity that we've just been discussing. And this happens long before the point where these immigrant communities are large enough to become the controlling factor in the election. And you see this on a more fine-grained level, let's say, in France. So you look at the geographical areas where Penn did best. They're the areas with the largest immigrant communities. That's right. They're areas where you've got maybe 30%, just seriously really substantial communities of kind of new French or whatever you're going to call them.

And it's precisely in those zones, the ones closest to the finishing line, according to this kind of earlier, from their point of view, highly optimistic multicultural game plan. And those are the areas where the crisis happens. So in a way, sorry to interrupt, I'm going to say this. The attempt to swamp us with foreigners to keep the right out of power is what is going to put the right in power. That's absolutely right. That's absolutely right. They just have the timing wrong. and the more swamping you get the more you get this phenomenon that is overturning the boat as far as they're concerned because somewhere

before the point where there is this final demographic transition to the multicultural utopia you get a full blown nativist electoral revolt that rejects the whole process. And I think that that is what we're seeing. Again, this is completely independent of anyone's feelings about what is good or bad or desirable or undesirable in any of these processes. I think this is just simply a political demographic fact that everyone should be able to coldly stare in the face now. And so if we carry on on this track, on the current track, You know, if the multicultural agenda is pursued in the way it has been pursued, the result of that at point B, before we get to point C, are hardline nationalist regimes taking power in European countries.

This is not what people were expecting. It's obviously what is going to happen. So the window opportunity for the European nationalist parties have by no means closed. It's getting more difficult and difficult as we go. Yes, we might even get dangerously close, but it's by far, by no means over. The more likely scenario seems to be that the next election cycles, let's say, take Le Pen or the National Front, Front National as an example, they would have grown even bigger. And I also think at the same time, check this out as a scenario, if we were to get, let's say, an exclusively Islamic party, coming into power in France, in a weird kind of way, the better it would be

because those votes would then be swept up into the Islamic party and effectively taking them out of the realm of these left-wing socialist parties or something that's in the opposition to the Le Pen, right? It's kind of weird, but it's almost, I mean, I'm not saying, well, the worse it gets, the better it gets. But in a way, it's like the more that they just put pedal to the metal with this thing, the more likely it is that the native population in the European countries will wake up and they will be radicalized to a certain extent to go in this direction because they know it doesn't work, right? It's not viable. Yes. I mean, it seems to me absolutely clear that this is the dynamic taking place.

And it obviously, it kind of defeats my imagination that anyone could seriously have such complacent confidence in the European project that they really do not see this happening. I mean, you know, as we say, there's no sign at all of some peaking or high watermark for this kind of emerging nativist, nationalist European politics. I think we're just, it's very recent that it's been happening with the kind of strength it is. And it's on an extremely, absolutely dizzying upward curve at the moment. And as we approach the kind of multicultural utopia finish line, you know, we absolutely definitely get to this kind of crisis, as far as these guys are concerned, before that happens.

So I find it really hard to doubt that. Yeah. And then, I mean, just a quick follow up point. I think that there would be I would have to preface this by saying that basically, if the European nationalist parties are not strong enough and to a certain extent hard enough in their line of thinking, then, of course, then it doesn't matter at the end. Is it, again, we're back in that place, just to kind of put some doubt back into the picture, that if they are not hardline enough, and if they are not seeking to stop the demographic trends and all this kind of stuff, then yes, then eventually that Muslim minority will eventually become a majority. So something much harder has to be done to make sure that the people who are visitors in our lands, that order is restored and that they get to return to their own territory with their own people,

where they can live happily, right? And be held away from the system of racism and oppression that they're experiencing in the various European countries, right? Well, I have no doubt at all that something breaks. You know, and all the interesting discussions are about how this breaks. I mean, what is not going to happen is that you are going to have anything like a recognizable western democracy with a majority muslim population i mean that is simply not possible so so how what what are the alternatives to that i mean there there is some radical shift in the in the demographic pattern that is being happen that is happening there is

some radical transformation of the political structure so that sort of universal franchise democracy is abolished as the fundamental political mechanism. And, you know, maybe a society under those conditions could host a large foreign population, but it would at least have the security that its regime is not going to be in the hands of the political decisions of that community. Or you get some kind of breakup happening where kind of massively autonomous enclaves start appearing. They sort themselves in various ways and they liberate themselves reciprocally from each other's political decisions and ethnic composition.

And so you would have areas of Muslim self-government and areas that are immunized against Muslim politics. And all of those things, I think, are contenders as kind of big structural options going forward. but I mean just to repeat the one thing that isn't going to happen is the kind of the only permitted public scenario which is that this trend this demographic trend and political trend is just going to carry on and it's all fine and dandy and it's all built into the plan and it will be fine and these

populations of But radically different civilizational composition are just going to adapt themselves and integrate themselves into European political forms. I mean, that's that's it's not going to take place. Yeah. So are you concerned that we'll get also then a tyrannical government to deal with this situation? because let's assume that we have Islamists that are bent on taking over our countries, and frankly, many of them seem quite open about this. I'm not saying it is the majority, but whatever, that's the situation. Many imams and whatever are talking about this. They're talking about the demographics. They are aware that we have lower birth rates to them, etc.

But then I guess what I would insert into that is I frankly don't care if there would be limitations to my freedoms if we ended up in a position where we have a more tyrannical government. From my personal point of view, I think it's more important to me anyway with the fact that the people that I belong to survive the culture and the way of life, then it would be to have a few comforts and freedoms, if you see what I mean. But how do you view that? Well, I mean, descriptively, I think the position that you've just outlined is exactly the attitude that is in the driving seat, you know, to the absolute distress, obviously, of the ruling elites.

I think people will ultimately sacrifice almost everything at the end of the road for some kind of traditional ethnic self-determination. I think that's just the way people will behave, like it or not. I do not think that European populations in the end will tolerate the idea of Islamic government. And there's all kinds of catastrophic possibilities that will result, you know, war and tyranny and resurgent forms of kind of fascist politics or whatever.

I mean, there's plenty of nightmare fuel in this, but whatever is going to happen, you know, it's going to be said or framed by the fact that acceptance of Muslim government is not something that's going to be sellable to any non-Muslim population. But in a case that we're talking about, obviously, European governments. yeah um my big concern or at least one of them i mean i it's not that i have any appetite for various types of tyrannical government but my problem in particular with this is i think that it just dangerously falls into this pendulum structure you know i mean i think it's like

the the notion that you could have a permanent a robust permanent uh tyrannical government of the kind that you're suggesting seems to me the the failure mode of this and that that what is likely in that situation is that there will be just this kind of drastic polarization drastic swing motion huge amounts of conflict and somewhere along the line uh you know whatever whatever powers and and systems of authority and social control have been uh available to one side of that of that pendulum will be available to the other side of the pendulum so yeah um it seems to me that that outcome is while very likely unfortunately is not by any means the optimal one

and it would be far far preferable if it was possible to start having um calm realistic discussions about various kinds of divorce proceedings you know i yeah i think i think the notion that for instance the the very large kind of infused progressive political camp that you do not want to end up ruling those people you you don't want to it might be slightly preferable to be ruling them than to be ruled by of course but it's actually it's not that much preferable you know i mean i think that you're into this dialectics when you do that it's like

this whole kind of master slave reversal thing and and if you if you're ruling them really you're also dependent on them and you're vulnerable to them and the thread is things are going to just turn uh upside down and so what you want is to be free of them um and it seems to me that there are all kinds of deals possible on this i mean if if they have any kind of sincerity on integrity in what they believe at all they should be open to the notion they should think that their ideas are so superior that they're going to lead to kind of really attractive social outcomes and that if they could reciprocally free themselves of all of these kind of obstreperous

reactionary troublemaking traditionalist types or however they they see them that that it would be good for them to do that you know um if they they could get on with with with building their kind of uh ideal society much more easily if they were able to kind of put put all the troublemakers on the outside and there's a lot of common ground to be seized here i think because because partly both sides of this huge civilizational crisis and argument should actually be fairly relaxed about territory you know on both sides of this it's territory isn't the big thing is it i mean you know for for people who want um ethnic preservation of some kind however that's being

conceived however narrowly or widely um but have uh concerns about the sort of the the homogenizing multicultural trend those people it's not about seizing the greatest possible amount of real estate it's just about having um functional enclaves that are large enough to provide for the basis of social survival and and i think it's same on the other on the other side You know, these progressive types, they're highly urban. They don't need a lot of space. You know, they don't need to kind of round up kind of farmers and other difficult constituencies. You know, relatively small, compact geographical areas that they could fully control, have full autonomy, pursue without inhibition these progressive social policies.

That should be fine to them. so yeah so given that neither side there's no reason for either side to have these labens realm type um obsessions where you know you have to sweep your opponents off the map and seize it all for yourself i mean there's just no reason for that um so that seems to me to suggest that there's this big geopolitical deal making space there um and the the main obstacle to it frankly is that both sides hate each other so much that the notion of coming to any kind of agreement is kind of nauseating to them. Right. So if I was recommending one thing, it was really to try and overcome that and to realize that there are these win-win

reciprocal separation deals to be made that everyone should massively benefit from. and they should be absolutely deliriously attractive to both sides and you know if you if people can if people can get out of this this sense of any kind of uh trucking bartering and and deal making with with our with our ideological enemies is is anathema if people can get out of that and say look they they want to do something that we find utterly horrible that's all the more reason why we should give them the space to do that without interference from us and obviously reciprocally do you think the left will come around and realize the problem of what it is

that they've been advocating irrespective of what we do you know no matter how many i don't know protests we engage in how many videos radio shows and talks that we do it seems that most people in these days, despite with the access to the internet and a wide variety of ideas, most people seem to go and seek out the very ideas that confirm their beliefs, right? It's a constant problem and issue that we have. So it actually gets very difficult to have, what do we call it, cross-pollination of ideas between these groups. Even actually having a debate with some of these people is very difficult because they just don't even want to talk with us. They just want to basically, you know, punch us and blow us up or something. I don't know. It just turns very violent. But the initial point was, do you think that they will in due time come to realize that this is and was sustainable?

Or will some of them still continue to defend their position as society spirals slowly, maybe even fast in some regards, out of control? well i don't think i don't think it's likely that there's going to be much productive conversation about about social models and um you know i think there's a couple of things to be said about this i think one is that actually that's not very important you know when people are engaged in divorce proceedings you don't need to come to any agreement about the lifestyle well, either party is going to be engaged in after the divorce. You know, it's just off the, there's really no reason why the right and left should care

what the other side wants to do as long as they're not doing it to them. You know, do it to themselves. I mean, personally, I would be absolutely thrilled to see these absolutely deranged leftist social experiments take place as long as they happen on a sensible scale. You know, you carve out an enclave, ring fence it from kind of interference, as they would see it from outside, or whatever, contamination coming from in, as it would be seen on the other side, and just do your thing absolutely full bore. I mean, I've got no problems with that at all. But isn't there interest to make sure that we can't have any interest?

and they actually want to be in proximity to us, to fight us, right? When you propose these ideas, and I have to if you like this here and there, even someone said, you know, oh my God, the racism of, I think it was, maybe it was America, I can't remember which country was brought up. And then my reply was, well, advocate for us to have our own countries then and you'll never have to live with us again, right? And the reaction was a very violent one and it was one of disgust. And I just couldn't piece that together, right? It seems that they want to be close to us. They want to live with us. They want to tell us what to think, how to act, what to do, behavioral models, speech codes, all this kind of nonsense. That seems to be their deal. Yes. Well, there's a whole bunch of things to this.

I mean, one of them, I think, takes us back to this whole thing about the religious impulse behind it. And, you know, I'm certainly firmly convinced that it is the what we're looking at here is the inheritor of this extreme, zealous, evangelical, ultra Protestantism. And it wants to evangelize. It wants to kind of, you know, make the whole world fall into line with its ideas. it doesn't want obviously to just have this kind of geographical laissez-faire where people try different stuff that just goes against that kind of uh that evangelical universalist uh grain and insofar as that is the dominant the dominating factor in the mentality then you of course we

have problems you know i mean if if if people are saying look we just simply are not going to let you not follow our ideological religious dogma you know you are not going to be allowed the opportunity to try anything else anywhere than what we propose as the right solution for mankind if that is the bottom line then you're talking you're talking war i mean you're talking total full-on social conflict because there's no compromise possible short of that if it's if it's submission or war then we're going to get war um so the only real i think grounds for hope with this and i have seen some um trends in this direction is just that as this resurgent

right process unfolds and you don't have to like it to see the benefit of this i mean you know i have deep problems with with what these uh these particular nationalist forces are wanting to do or their social programs that that to me is irrelevant the point that really matters is they are terrifying and repulsive to the left to the point that the left does finally begin to snap and say, you know, maybe we can't have our global New Jerusalem. Maybe we just have to have our New Jerusalem somewhere more defined. You know, in the American context, you get these things like Calexit.

You get for the first time this kind of secessionist rhetoric coming from left field and people saying those crazy Trump voting red state maniacs are going to screw up all our beautiful social plan, and maybe we just need to separate ourselves from them. Yeah, right. Let's do it. I mean, I, of course, think, yes, that is the single most positive cultural and political development that could possibly happen. And, you know, if anyone anywhere sees or hears someone from left field saying that kind of thing, even if they then follow it up by saying, you know, and of course,

the red state is a subhuman, or of course, a bit further down the line, we're going to have to come back out of our progressive enclave and re-civilize them, or anything else, you know, any of these other addenda that they're going to put on that, forget it, support that to the limit. Support that to the limit because that is the only alternative to a catastrophic war at the end of our you know the end of this long wave of western civilization the only thing that stops that ending in a catastrophic civil war is this kind of willingness for compromise coming out of the the left i think at this stage and obviously sorry just one more thing here you know the reciprocal problem on the

right is just don't get hubristic you know for all up to this time you know of course people on the right have been saying you know you give us a patch of our own you know you get off our backs in some place and of course we'll seize it and that's great and the big danger is that as these right-wing movements become more and more powerful as i as i think is almost inevitable they they begin to take power in in insignificant countries in europe as that happens the danger is that people on the right will say, we can have it all. We don't have to compromise with these people. We can simply boss them around. We can simply tell them what to do. Our time has come now. And I think if that type of attitude spreads,

if just at the point that the left is beginning to say, look, we can separate ways, if just as that is happening, the right is going in the opposite direction and saying, no, you're going to do what we want now, then you know that is a that is the window of opportunity really wasted and lost interesting so that it's not an existential threat to us at the end you think that there's no there's no defensive position that we need to take to i mean i know that that's their argument too i know this isn't back and forth but it's like it feels to me that these are expressions of very very old forces that has dominated the psyche of man for for you know thousands of years if not even millennia of order versus chaos, right? Conservative to an extent versus liberal,

et cetera. These are very, very, very big things, concepts, ideas, or spheres of our makeup that is going to find different methods and outlets to find each other and to fight each other, right? Yes. I think, look, when also you have people locked in a box together, increasingly against their will, then the form of their tribal antagonism becomes more and more purified and radicalized and ideological. and of course and it's quite possible that both sides end up with a crazy unsustainable version of that tribal identity that in the wild you know if they if they were suddenly let out of the box

and each given their own box they would end up quite quickly doing something very different to what they both say they want to do when they're locked in the box together you know when you have to take responsibility for actually running something that works when your major focus is not how do you piss off fight and antagonize the other tribe as effectively as possible but instead how do you actually make things work for yourself you know i think you're likely to see very different very different things happening and a certain kind of detoxification happening really on both sides actually yeah interesting because the radicalization just quickly that you talk about of course that happens actually with the muslim population right they feel to a certain extent they come into our countries they feel out of place they feel this they're

they're in this box and that's why in many regards you might get more radical people from the muslim sense in the west than you do in some of their own countries and and that's going to drive us also also to that position. And in the end, I think that we in our own countries have ultimately more to fight for, kind of in the way that the Vietnamese were fighting for their country against the biggest military power of the day. And they won because they had the moral and emotional upper hand, if you will, right? Yes, for sure. I mean, there's definitely, you know how i would expect the internal politics of the european muslim communities to operate

were they in a situation of substantial autonomy is very different to the way it operates just as you say when when that identity is is locked into this antagonistic relationship to a host population within this democratic system. There's no pressure for people to be realistic when they're just locked into this kind of cage match, death struggle with each other. No one has to propose a set of social policies that would actually work. They only have to be a set of policies that can mobilize their people to fight and to piss off the other side. So, yeah, I agree with you totally on that. Very, very interesting. Yeah, and of course, if you don't leave people a way out, as it were, they will fight to the death, you know.

Yes. You've got to have an exit there to a certain extent. Yeah, it's very interesting times. It's bizarre. It's so bizarre we've gotten to this point. You know, I remember many, many years ago being young in Sweden and growing up under a very different just concept of society. still very much, of course, left and everything, but at least it was a system that at the time was tending to the people and doing what was best for us as an ethnic group. And it just radically changed. It's transformed and it's been done in many regards on the orders of these globalists, outside forces that wanted to unlock the Swedish economy to the world, for example. And then from there, it's been immigration. And from there, it's been destruction of our, you know, ethnic makeup and everything else.

And it's very disheartening. And all I see is destruction. I don't understand how anyone can look at some of these European countries and just not ask themselves, like, has things gotten better with all of this, right? Are we in a better position today than we were 20 or 30 years ago, right? And I just, I don't know how to communicate and talk to these people, you know? Right. Yes. I mean, look, as you know, Sweden is an absolutely fascinating model for everyone outside the country. It's a case study. Yeah, it's a, as I say. Because, I mean, it's just mystifying to foreigners. I mean, like, you look at Britain and France, for instance, Germany is a very separate case because of its peculiar history.

And so they've obviously got these large, now large Muslim enclaves in their societies. But people can at least say, well, look, they had empires. It was all part of the kind of the demographic momentum and turbulence that was taking place because of these kind of imperial histories that the countries had. But then you look at Sweden. Why does Sweden have a Muslim population? I mean, it's utterly mystifying to people. It's so purely driven by this distilled religious zeal, it looks like, from outside. Like, you know, there's absolutely no sort of historical or material drivers for this.

It's purely like some kind of weird religious experiment that the society is performing on itself. So it's absolutely fascinating. I mean, they do make some of these, you know, mental gymnastics and bends like pretzels to find ways to explain this by, I mean, I've even heard arguments where they talk about how Sweden's iron ore were going to make the, it was exported, it was made, helped to make the shackles that, you know, killed slaves and stuff like this. I'm serious. So they find these ways of doing it. But regardless of these idiotic arguments, what it is about at the end of the day, as we can clearly see, is about the destruction of the nation state.

It's about the destruction of the various people, the ethnic people of Europe, because it's happening in all European nations around the Western world where European man has settled and built nations. And it doesn't seem that we're getting this level of mass immigration in other countries, right? I mean, it's just not happening on that scale. So it's just us. It's just at this stage, in a way. I'm not saying that globalists doesn't want to make Japan multicultural eventually. I see articles out of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Foreign Policy Journal constantly writing about, even after Fukushima, either act now is a good time to you know bring immigrants to japan you know you see these weird

arguments so i'm not saying that they don't want it but at this stage it's clearly from the globalist perspective that we are the number one enemy and they see if they can change the demographic makeup they'll be in a better position to achieve whatever it is that they want to right yes i mean i but i think that you go back you know they are running they're trying to run out the clock and the timing just doesn't work for them now. I mean, as you say, these East Asian societies with very, very different demographic policies are arising extremely fast. The attempt to suggest that there's some kind of critical problem in Japan by the fact that it's missed out on, for instance, mass Muslim immigration is just, I think, preposterous to people. I mean, only someone

who wrote economist editorials could possibly believe that um so it's kind of i think the boat has been missed for that and we and we've and we're into this new stage where it's like this is really falling apart fast and it's like unless anything that is not achieved within the next few years is just not going to be achieved all kinds of reversals and and massive changes of direction are possible. And so there is this kind of atmosphere of real desperation, which is only going to intensify in the near future. That is correct. Very, very good. Well, Nick, this has been a great conversation. I've learned a lot, a lot of ideas, bounced back and forth, putting

things in new perspectives and kind of get a better overview, if you will, of the predicaments we're in and the situation we're faced. So it's been great. It's been very, very interesting. Is there anything you'd like to leave us with, whether that's some words of encouragement or something to the audience that makes them, I guess, inspired to work harder to help the transformation that you just described? Well, look, I think there's lots of encouragement to be had. The internet isn't going away. We've only started to see what it has done. It's already thrown the world completely into a new orbit. And obviously in interesting times, there's going to be lots of ugly stuff happening.

But for sure, I think the basic grand narrative that the globalist elite has had this planet on is crashing in flames. Everyone can see that, and that's why there is so much extremely bad temper kicking around right at the moment. That is correct. All right, very good. Ladies and gentlemen, the way to find out more about Nick is writing is to go to xenosystems.net. We'll have that linked up. You can also follow him on, let me back up one step there, outsideness on Twitter. Yes, just argue with me on Twitter is totally cool. And thanks so much, Henrik, for this opportunity. to have a very interesting conversation.

I've enjoyed it a lot. Very good. Thank you so much, Nick. Please stay in touch and great having you here. Thank you again. Okay. Bye-bye. Right. Excellent, folks. Thank you for listening today. Very interesting conversation here with Nick Land. I hope you enjoyed it as much as I did. Some interesting thoughts and ideas discussed in this one for sure. A massive thank you to all the members that are sustaining their membership with us and also to those of you that had signed up recently. deciding to step up to the plate and support us. We cannot thank you enough. I always want to extend a warm and heartfelt thank you to you guys for ensuring that we can continue to bring you all these shows and live shows and videos, episodes and television shows and everything else. We're just beginning. We are kicking off this thing as nothing else

and we need you guys to be there and step up to the plate and sustain your membership to ensure that we can do this and do it in the right way. So thank you so much again for being a member. but we'll be back in just a couple of days until then have a great one stay safe everyone take care of each other and we will talk to you soon Thank you.

I'm sorry.