 So let's talk about, I want to talk about this idea of white genocide and I will get to some of your super chat questions in a bit. Let me just cover some of this. I do want to get to the concept of white genocide. I want to get to the concept of white replacement, which even people like Douglas Murray talk about. And I want to also link it to some of its historical roots of where it actually comes from. But the shooter in New Zealand used the concept of white genocide. Now the concept of white genocide itself, that term, it seems like it Hawkins back to a white supremacist in the United States by the name of David Lane. David Lane, I think, made that concept or coined that concept back in the maybe 70s or 80s. He was put in jail for the murder of a Jewish radio host in 1984 and he wrote something called the White Genocide Manifesto while he was in prison. So I guess he wrote it in the 1980s. And in that manifesto he used 14 words, 14 words that you can also find in the manifesto of the Christchurch shooter. Quote, we must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children, our people being white, future for white children. So this is a racist. I remind you what I and Rand called racism. Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. And you know what I and Rand thought of collectivism. These 14 new words are truly disgusting. The idea that we must secure the existence of white people and the future of white children. Why? The only thing we must secure is the existence of individuals in the future of individual children. Indeed, that is the job of government. The idea of defining white children as white is racist. The idea of differentiating white children from other children is racist. It's disgusting. It's beneath civilization. So the whole framing of issues is white versus black, of white versus brown, of white versus anybody who cares what the color of your skin is. It's irrelevant to the character, to your personal character. It's irrelevant to culture. It is irrelevant to civilization. Quote, Rand on culture. She says, just as there is no such thing as a collective or racial mind, so there is no such thing as a collective or racial achievement. They're only individual minds and individual achievements. And a culture is not the anonymous product of undifferentiated masses, but the sum of the intellectual achievement of individual men. So there is no such thing as white culture. There is no such thing as white civilization. There is no such thing as a white people. There is no such thing as a white anything. Race is insignificant to anything to the extent that it even actually exists. It's who is, somebody says, rather than killing, why don't we have more children? Who's we? Who's we? Don't put me in that category. I don't want to view. So this idea of white genocide is an idea that whites are being replaced in the countries of their origin or the countries of their, where they live or where they are majorities. Now they use the term genocide, even the Joe genocide. What is genocide? Genocide actually involves murder on a mass scale. It's a term to describe violence against members of a national ethnic racial or religious group with the intent to destroy the entire group. Again, it's a term used to describe violence against members of a national ethnic racial or religious group with the intent to destroy the entire group. And yet, what is the violence here? The violence we are told by those who argue for white genocide. The first time I came across white genocide, it was used in the context of supposed violence against whites with the idea that whites were trying to be exterminated. And this was a, the term was being used with regard to South Africa. That's the first time I came across it. Although, as I said, it's been used since the 1980s. Not to refer to violence, but to refer to actual immigration to, what do you call it, to mixed marriages, to those places where, you know, people who are not white were entering in, were coming in and diluting the whiteness of the area of the nation. In South Africa, it was referred to in terms of violence. But even there, of course, it was massively exaggerated. It turned out that the stereo was just untrue. You know, I know quite a bit about South Africa. I still have family there. Both my parents were born in South Africa. I visited South Africa many times. And, you know, I talked to people in South Africa. And I talked to, I interviewed somebody from South Africa here on the show, an objectivist for South Africa. While there were a lot of white farmers being killed in South Africa, there were also black farmers being killed in South Africa. There was just, there's just a massive amount of violence in South Africa. Almost most of that violence, a predominant majority of that violence, was black against black violence. So even the claim of white genocide with regard to South Africa was a mindless exaggeration motivated by racist, a racist agenda. South Africa has real problems and South African government is about to, is in the process of destroying their country completely, right? Destroying their country completely. But, you know, the claims of genocide were just unfounded when they were made. Now, genocide is applicable not just to violence, we are told, but to acts of immigration, part of the problem of having Latinos, South Americans, Central Americans, Mexicans immigrate into this country is the fear that there will be fewer whites here. Again, watch that, I can't remember the guy's name, but watch that interview I did about immigration with this commentator who claimed that America needed to be a white nation and that immigration was going to destroy its whiteness, its whiteness. So all of these, all of this, this agenda is centered on the idea that New Zealand, Australia, America, most of these white supremacist groups, by the way, have now given up on Europe. So Europe doesn't count anymore, though I'll get to Europe in a little while. Now, it was in the Gavin McGinnis interview. It was a different interview, much more recent interview. The host was black. But this issue of genocide is now applicable to any kind of so-called dilution of the whiteness of a particular country. And as I said, Europe, they've given up on, Jesse Lee Pearson was the interviewer. They've given up on Europe because Europe is now so-called non-white. But their last hope, their last hope of bastion of whiteness is the United States of America, Australia and New Zealand. And this is why it happened in New Zealand. It's to awaken the white people to the threat of brown people entering their countries and making them less white. And this idea is, you know, is again, is horrific. It's disgusting. And it's interesting because it's not a new idea. I found this article, I found this article interesting, that links this idea of white genocide back to the early part of the 20th century in the United States. Whoops, you guys are asking super chat questions at a pace I can't really address, so I'll get to it, I promise. And in those days, in the early part of the 20th century, the idea was white, it was called white extinction or white suicide, white suicide. And the threat, the threat identified at that time was not from Hispanics, it wasn't from Muslims, it wasn't indeed from even Asians. The threat identified during the early part of the 20th century in the United States, the threat of white suicide in the United States, the precursor of the term white genocide, was, you know, coined by a number of the eugenicists at the time. Primarily there was a guy called Madison Grant, who wrote a 1916 book called The Passing of the Great Race. And he was not concerned in those days about immigration from Latin America, immigration from Asia, immigration from Africa, or immigration of Muslims. He was concerned by immigration from Southern Europe and by immigration from Eastern Europe and in particular Jewish immigration. And the race he identified as the superior race, the race that had created Western civilization, the race that had created America in his view, he called the Nordic race ultimately to be taken up by Hitler as the Aryan race. And he wrote extensively about this in the early part of the 20th century, in the teens and in the 20s. And he, you know, genocide was a term that didn't exist back in those days. But he considered this. His fear was that all these Italians and all these Poles and all these Jews were coming to the United States and assimilating. And that's what scared him, was the idea that these people would integrate into American society and despoil its whiteness, its Nordicness. I mean, the whole idea was that the real enemy and this you hear so much in the anti-immigration debate. The real enemy was not so much an armed enemy. The real enemy was immigration. I mean, Richard Spencer echoes this. He writes, Richard Spencer, the racist American nationalist, white nationalist. One possible outcome of the ongoing demographic transformation he writes is a thoroughly mis-genetic and thus homogeneous and assimilated nation, which would have little resemblance to the white America that came before it. In other words, what he's really afraid of is the assimilation mixed marriages between the so-called racists. I mean, Grant wrote, I'll just quote you, because this could be from today. This is in the 1916. These immigrants adopt the language of the Native American. They wear his clothes. They steal his name. And they're beginning to take his women. But they seldom adopt his religion. This is he's talking about Jews or understand his ideals. And while he is being elbowed out of his own home, the American looks calmly abroad and urges on others the suicidal ethics which are exterminating his own race. Or he writes, we Americans must realize that the altruistic ideals which have controlled our social development during the past century and the Maudlin sentimentalism that has made America quote an asylum for the oppressed are sweeping the nation towards a racial abyss. If the melting pot is allowed to boil without control and we continue to follow a national motto and deliberately blind ourselves to all distinctions of race, creed, or color, quote, sorry, the type of Native American or colonial descent will become an extinct as the Athenians of the Age of Percules and the Vikings of the Age of Rola. So in other words, the real problem is that they come here and they actually assimilate. The real problem is they come here and they actually integrate. They are much more dangerous than if they stay distinct, if they stay separate. And what you're seeing now among white nationalists is this idea of a balkanization of America. Let's create a white state in America and a brown state in America and a black state in America. Let's break up America by tribe. Now this is disgusting and horrific and all of those of you who support it in any way are emotionist racists and this is why I take on such a fervid pro-immigration stand, a pro-assimilation stand because I see in the margins, but in the growing margins, I see a real racist element growing in American society and growing in the West. You see this in the language too of somebody like Douglas Murray. Douglas Murray I'll be debating next week in Rotterdam where he talks about Muslims replacing Europeans. Now in other words, brown people replacing white people. Now there is a real threat to western civilization being replaced or undercut by Islam, by Islamic culture, by Islamic, I don't even want to call it civilization because it is none, by a certain barbarism. But the threat is not a brown people. The threat is not the Muslims. The threat is, and I've said this often, the threat is we who start classifying our own achievements, start classifying our own culture, start classifying our own civilization in terms of collectivistic tribal elements. If the West resorts to tribalism in its attempt to so-called defend civilization, then civilization indeed is unequivocally lost. Western civilization is not about the tribe of the West. It's not about a white tribe. It's not about a Christian tribe. It's indeed about the rejection of Christianity. It's indeed about the rejection of tribalism and the rejection of racism. Fascism, communism and all forms of collectivism and tribalism and religion are enemies of western civilization. All religions are enemies of western civilization because western civilization is founded on two concepts, two ideas, two ideas that reject collectivism, that reject tribalism, that reject racism, that reject faith explicitly. Western civilization is the idea of reason as man's means of knowledge, reason as man's basic means of survival, reason as man's tool to know the world, his only tool to access knowledge and individualism, the idea of the sanctity of the individual, the idea that only the individual matters, the tribes don't matter, the collectives don't matter, though what matters is the individual, that only the individual can reason, only the individual can discover truth, only the individual can know, only the individual can live. In politics, the only entity that matters is the individual and the role of the state is to protect that individual, to protect his ability to reason, to think and to act on those thoughts, to pursue his rational values. That's the West. That's what the Enlightenment gave us. That's what we inherited from the Greeks and developed. That's what created the greatest country in human history, the United States of America. But that, those ideas are what led to the success of Western Europe. Those ideas are what led to the success of Australia and New Zealand. Those ideas are what led to human flourishing, to wealth creation and to success of the so-called Western world. That is what Western civilization is and it has nothing to do with the color of anybody's skin. It has nothing to do with the religiosity. Indeed, to the extent that we still hold on to religion is to that extent that we betray those values of Western civilization. The threat to Western civilization today is not Islam. The threat to Western civilization is within. It is the racial politics of left and right. It's the collectivism of identity politics and white supremacists. Two sides of the same racist, anti-Western, anti-civilization, anti-enlightenment coin. We're not being replaced by some external enemy. We're being undercut. We're being subverted. We're being destroyed by collectivism and emotionalism. Faith-based ideas from within. From the left and from the right. And by the way, one of the reasons that I reject that I am from the right, one of the reasons that I reject that objectivism is on the right, is how do you deal with the fact that everybody, everybody, identifies racism, identifies white supremacists, identifies the shooter in New Zealand as a rightist, as somebody from the right. I'm gonna, what am I gonna go on and say, no, no, no, he's the left. I'm really the right. Really? Anybody gonna buy that? Give up on the left-right spectrum. Or acknowledge the existing right-left spectrum, the one that everybody accepts and accepts that we don't belong there. That we don't belong there.