|
SCP#3
A long one today folks, more than two hours. However, we got our teeth stuck in to some fascinating topics, and we couldn’t stop ourselves.
Today’s guest is INRI_07, referred to as Jay, who writes the substack ‘Pacem in Terris’ which you should check out. Jay is ‘America First’ and a Roman Catholic, who subscribes to a ‘realist’ understanding of politics.
We discuss Zionism, postliberalism, the nature of the MAGA movement, the political dynamics around the Trump White House, Wokeism, and whether E-girls should be accepted into the Sensible Centre.
Timestamps
- Introduction – 00:00 – 02:28
- The translation of theory into reality, and why I admire Kevin Roberts so much – 02:29 – 03:20
- Jay is often called overly cynical, but he believes he is subscribing to ‘authentic idealism’, which requires realism – 03:21 – 04:32
- I explain the delicate balance between being overly black-pilled and coping, and why I think Academic Agent and Auron MacIntyre get this balance right – 04:33 – 06:10
- Jay explains his admiration of Auron MacIntyre and Academic Agent, and also likes Nick Fuentes – 06:11 – 07:21
- My love for Roger Ruin’s series on the online right, and his astute analysis of the role Fuentes played in the ‘Optics War’ – 07:22 – 08:36
- Jay acknowledges the ‘love him or hate him’ polarising nature of Fuentes, but says Academic Agent ultimately has a similar worldview – 08:37 – 09:21
- I discuss Academic Agent’s artful dogwhistles about Jews to get past the YouTube censors – 09:22 – 09:55
- Why I think both Academic Agent and Nick Fuentes are too obsessed with Israel, and why I broadly support Israel (though not the double-standard liberal Zionists) – 09:56 – 11:08
- Why Jay nevertheless remains distrustful about the ‘Likud-supporting’ Zionists because of international dynamics – 09:57 – 13:30
- Why I dislike Fuentes’ explicit pro-Palestine stance, as opposed to just neutrality – 13:31 – 14:06
- Why Jay used to agree with me, but changed his stance after reading more – 14:07 – 15:48
- Why I think Zionism, or at least the notion of ‘Jewish Territorialism’, is the best solution to the ‘Jewish Question’. Whilst another territory might have been better, Israel was their first choice, and Israel they now have, so its best if it remains – 15:49 – 17:21
- Jay’s position is ‘America First’, not anti-Israel, but he is suspicious of the Israel lobby – 17:22 – 18:43
- Why I think Israel would have no problem with surrounding Muslim countries, and those countries would be far better off, if they just ended their obsession with Palestine. Why this obsession killed the brief White conservative/Muslim alliance against Wokeness – 18:44 – 20:52
- Jay talks about how historiography can be manipulated – 20:53 – 22:28
- I change the subject towards Political Catholicism, Fuentes vs the ‘triad’ of Patrick Deneen, Sohrab Ahmari, and Adrian Vermule, and whether J.D Vance can lead the movement towards power – 22:29 – 24:18
- Jay acknowledges the historical tension between American and Catholic identity – 24:19 – 25:50
- I talk about how Catholicism ‘picked up the crown from the gutter’ when Mainline Protestantism capitulated to liberalism, and how Thomistic Natural Law is the only way Claremont Institute ‘Orthodox Neoconservatism’ can make sense, in articulating an anti-liberal American nationalism that does not focus on the Old South – 25:50 – 27:17
- Jay talks about Catholic defences of the Founding Fathers – 27:18 – 28:12
- I talk about my paywalled article ‘Why I’ve Abandoned Vitalism’, where I outline that only ethno-nationalism or Christianity are strong enough to defeat Wokeism, and in America, as it highly multi-ethnic, it is only Christianity. If I was to put my money on a radically anti-Woke movement coming to power in the United States, I would guess Political Catholicism – 28:13 – 30:20
- Jay says the postliberal movement has very good ‘branding’, but that ‘branding’ is a lot of what it is – 30:21 – 32:52
- I say that in hindsight Heritage should have kept Project 2025 a little ‘quieter’, even though I understand their reasoning of ‘hiding in plain sight’ like Chris Rufo – 32:53 – 33:40
- Jay talks about the incredible brand of MAGA – 33:41 – 34:46
- I talk about Donald Trump’s role as a ‘coalition frontman’ who binds a disparate alliance together, who otherwise have very little in common. Whilst there are some ‘cringe boomer’ elements around Trump, him choosing J.D. Vance as VP was the best possible outcome for our side – 34:47 – 36:34
- Jay agrees that Political Catholicism is ascendant in amongst American elites, but only as a ‘brand’, and that political institutions and personal relationships have an inherently moderating influence – 36:35 – 38:36
- What does ‘Putting the Woke Away’ actually mean? – 38:37 – 40:23
- Jay talks about how Obama was contained by the establishment – 40:24 – 42:25
- I wonder if MAGA like the 1979 Iranian Revolution against the Shah, with the Postliberal Integralists/Political Catholics, through J.D. Vance as Trump’s heir apparent, able to channel the movement towards its own agenda, like Ruhollah Khomeini did towards Islamism? – 42:26 – 43:30
- Jay is less optimistic than me, because he sees Musk and the ‘PayPal Mafia’ having already hijacked MAGA – 43:31 – 45:15
- Is Elon Musk still a liberal for whom the ‘left left him’, or did the transing of his own son lead to him having a genuine change of heart? Up until the end of last year I thought it was the latter, now I’m unsure. Jay thinks he’s still a liberal – 45:16 – 45:34
- Where does MAGA agree on LGBT ideology? Has there been a backwards step from where we are now, compared to where we were at the very start of the 2020s? Did DeSantis’ loss contribute to a loss of nerve? – 45:35 – 47:05
- Unlike Khomeini, who had a clear ideology he disguised whilst being the frontman of the movement he led, Trump does not have such an ideology, and it will be up to those around him and the person who succeeds him who determines where it goes – 47:06 – 48:00
- Jay compares Trump in 2024 to Trump in 2016, and argues that Big Tech has already ‘sunk their teeth’ into it – 48:01 – 48:59
- I raise the point of Trump in 2016, in some ways, being a rejection of the religious right, and the alt-right was still New Atheist-tinged. Sohrab Ahmari’s ‘Against David French-ism’ being a crucial turning point for a more ‘institutional’ fightback against Wokeism – 49:00 – 50:02
- I explain the undemocratic and destructive nature of the LGBT movement, both LGB and T – 50:03 – 51:02
- Jay almost wrote an article called ‘John Arcto’s Righteous Crusade Against Gay Marriage’ – 51:02 – 51:34
- How I’ve had to be careful on the topic of homosexuality, why my turn towards being a ‘Christianity Supporter’ was because conservative Christians were the only group who understood the true nature of the LGBT movement – 51:35 – 53:00
- Jay talks about the relationship between donors and GOP politicians, and why they are not committed to a ‘cultural counter-revolution’ – 53:01 – 54:11
- The utility of TERF talking points – 54:12 – 55:30
- Jay gives his views on how transgenderism is an electable message – 55:31 – 57:08
- Why I think a Republican winning in 2028 (and 2032) is crucial as to whether Trump’s reforms have sticking power, as I explain in my article ‘Trump Triumphant’ –
- Will the Supreme Court side with Trump, and if they don’t, will Trump ignore the courts? – 58:18 – 59:09
- Me and Jay disagree on the relationship between ideology and power – 59:10 – 01:00:15
- How trans mastectomy images still haunt me, and leads me towards opinions that would get me in trouble. Jay agrees. – 01:00:16 – 01:02:14
- Why the Democrats aren’t backing down on transgenderism, and why I think their refusal to back down on such a crime against humanity should place them outside acceptable discourse – 01:02:15 – 01:03:43
- We again debate the meaning of ‘Putting the Woke Away’ – 01:04:09 – 01:07:10
- We clarify that we have different definitions of ‘Woke’, with me defining much more broadly – 01:07:11 – 01:08:36
- I argue that, if we just take things from the establishment perspective, what we are seeing is ‘one step back’ after the Woke have moved ‘three steps forward’, a repeat of Ronald Reagan’s ‘Reagan Revolution’ in the 1980s, where the excess of the counter-culture was ‘put away’ but really it was a consolidation of most of its victories. Jay agrees. – 01:08:37 – 01:10:09
- LGBT as qualifiedly different from race and gender. Wokeness on LGBT is much newer, whereas Wokeness in regards to race and gender hasn’t substantively changed since the 1960s – 01:10:10 – 01:11:03
- The myth of the ‘colorblind 90s’ – 01:11:04 – 01:11:39
- How racial Wokeness (in its extreme surface-level forms) comes and goes in cycles, whereas LGBT is just linear radicalisation – 01:11:40 – 01:02:19
- The machiavellian, nefarious, conniving nature of the LGBT rights movement. ‘After the Ball’ by Hunter Kirk and James Masden is like the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, except this isn’t a forgery, it’s 100% real – 01:12:20 – 01:13:41
- Conservative surrender on gay marriage – 01:13:42 – 01:14:46
- The ‘Fifth Column’ of ‘Log Cabin Republicans, and homosexual conservatives – 01:14:47 – 01:15:24
- My distinction between private homosexuals (closeted) and ‘political homosexuals’ (open) – 01:15:25 – 01:19:06
- Does a uniparty exist in America? Jay seems to suggest it does, but I think it doesn’t really. ‘The Woke Being Put Away’ is only true, even in its most surface-level expressions, if the Democrats abandon transgenderism – 01:19:07 – 01:21:50
- I argue Democrats seem prepared to compromise on immigration and on reverting to a Zionist stance, but transgenderism they are doubling down on – 01:21:51 – 01:22:46
- Jay concludes his argument where he believes, like Academic Agent, that Wokeism is downstream from power – 01:22:47 – 01:24:03
- How people like me will not forget SJWism/Wokeness. Gamergate was the establishment’s chance, in my view, to discipline what were then known as ‘SJWs’, and they didn’t, it was just getting started. For me, this climbdown is too little, too late – 01:24:04 – 01:24:55
- Why Jay is cautious about putting too much faith in Catholic postliberalism. I argue he is ignoring the significance of Kevin Robert’s transformation of Heritage – 01:24:56 – 01:30:31
- Me and Jay disagree on what counts as ‘power’ Is personnel the most important thing, or is it more powerful elites? What qualifies as a ‘counter-elite’? Is Project 2025 mostly happening, and what isn’t happening will happen under Vance, as I argue? Or is DOGE fundamentally different, as Jay argues? – 01:30:32 – 01:32:56
- Jay doesn’t believe J.D. Vance is a man of conviction. I argue he just understands how the game is played, hence why both Trump and Vance needed to let the states decide on abortion . – 01:32:57 – 01:33:50
- Jay believes the fact Vance has to ‘play the game’ shows the moderating influence of power – 01:33:51 – 01:34:25
- We return to our debate as to whether Project 2025 is mostly happening (and Trump was lying during the election), or whether DOGE is something completely different from Project 2025. How successful has Trump been so far? – 01:34:26 – 01:39:57
- The GOP tax and spending package, and fiscal sustainability – 01:39:58 – 01:42:01
- Will the Supreme Court side with Trump over impoundment? – 01:42:02 – 01:44:25
- Jay talks about media sensationalism, and this is the moment where I call him overly black-pilled (even Curtis Yarvin said ‘I was wrong’). I feel I am in the healthy middle between being black-pilled and coping, Jay naturally thinks he is in the middle – 01:44:26 – 01:48:35
- We again debate whether the personnel lists of the Heritage Foundation count as a ‘counter-elite’. We again debate Project 2025 vs what has happened – 01:48:36 – 01:49:47
- We change the subject to talk about E-Girls, our most recent disagreement on Notes. I think attractive women are far more of a benefit than a hinderance, even if they are responding to incentive structures and are not true believers, whereas Jay thinks they can cause damage to the movement – 01:49:48 – 02:02:54
- Closing – 02:02:55 – 02:03:50
|
