The Pete Quiñones Show - Episode 1358: Who Are The 'Canadian People'? w/ Dimes of Blood $atellite

Episode Date: April 19, 2026

60 MinutesPG-13Dimes is the host of the Blood Satellite Podcast.Dimes produced another documentary addressing the subject of, "How to Make a Canadian People"How To Make A Canadian PeoplePaving Over The Public: Canadian Immigration Policy in Opposition to Public OpinionBloodSatellite dot caVanguardist JournalGoodSvffer dot comPete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's SubstackPete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

With election time approaching, political ads will be inserted into the episode, along with other ads that, frankly, I'm not going to like and you aren't going to like. So please ignore them, skip by them, whatever you have to do. I don't endorse any of the ads that are inserted, but it is another way for me to generate income. So I appreciate you guys putting up with them. If you don't want to deal with them, go to the Picanuona Show.com. can subscribe through Patreon. You can subscribe through Substack, which is my preferred one. Because with both of those, you get an RSS feed, only Patreon, and only Substack give you an

RSS feed. There's also a link to my website, Gumroad, and SubscribeStar, where you will get the audio files that you can download and listen to, or you can stream in most cases through those locations as well. So if you want to avoid the ads, consider supporting the show, If not, just know none of these ads get any endorsement from me. Skip by them. Do what you need to do. I appreciate all of you. Head on over to Pekignonez Show.com.

You can get the show early and ad free over there. If not, here's a show. I want to welcome everyone back to the Pekignanaz show. Dimes from Blood Satellite returns after a long hiatus. How you doing, Dimes? I'm doing very well. I believe this is the third time. that we've spoken on your show and every single time it's more of an honor so thank you so much for

having me i appreciate that it seems like it's like every two years i think it was like the first time was five years ago then it was two years now we got another two years yeah yeah sorry about that i'm i'm the same way where i'm like i have so many guys that i used to talk to and then i just don't have the time where i'm like i'll get to it at some point and then it's crazy to think how long have you been at this how many years because i heard how long i've been at this the other day and i freaked out july July 2017. Okay.

So I think I've been doing our show for seven years, which is fucking ridiculous if you think about it. You know, but the time goes by. You think, oh, this and that person, I haven't spoken to them in three years. And then I got my, the dopes in my community. If I think about it, I've known these guys for four years. That's ridiculous. You know, it's kind of crazy that people 10 years ago were. saying, well, you know, you're starting a podcast. In 10 years, there won't be any podcasts around.

And then, like, I, an electrician comes out to the house that I've never met before. And he asked what I do. And I say, I have a podcast. He's like, yeah, I've heard your name somewhere. It's like, I mean, this is like, I live in rural Alabama. That is so wild. That must give you the fuel to keep going, too. Like, I heard the other day, someone found our show because they saw someone posted something. on Reddit. How the fuck did we end up on Reddit these days? But it's getting out there. And yeah, I, when you think about it, when people said, you know, but way before I got it at a podcasting, everyone was already telling jokes about how everybody has a podcast. It was like within a year of the

word podcasting coming into existence, it was a lame thing for losers to do. But if you look at the numbers associated to online audio listening because I take a careful look at this stuff. It's one of the only media types that seems to be increasing. And that's music but also podcasts, which is completely counterintuitive because everyone thought that video was going to dominate and it should have by now and it strangely hasn't. For some, like there's more people just listening than maybe ever before. So I don't know. I don't know exactly why that's happening, but it is.

Well, if I meet somebody and they ask me what I do and I say they have a podcast, immediately they pull out a phone, they open up their podcast app and say, oh, what's the name of the show? These people, everyone I meet listens to podcasts. You may not listen to yours or mine, but they are listening to podcasts. So this medium is not going away. It may switch to live streaming more in the future, which is I think that's what may happen where people are going to want maybe a little more visual. but the audio only, I mean, people can listen to it in their car.

They can listen to it when they walk. They can listen to it pretty much anytime. So, you know, and they could download it on and listen to it on a plane if they don't want to get Wi-Fi on a plane. I mean, it's just, it's too easy for people. They ask you like, so I'm like, hey, what podcast do you listen to? They're like, oh, I listen to Good Hang with Amy Poehler and she was talking to Ryan Coogler. What do you like to listen to?

I'm like, I listen to Thomas 777 and Storke. Stormy Waters talking about how Reagan was gay, but only in the mouth. On that note, let's let's let's let's let's let's let's let's let's let's, last time I had you on, you had put out a, um, a video, documentary video on immigration into Canada, the historical phenomenon of immigration and how immigrants got into Canada. And you told me, hey, I have another video and, um, watched it this morning so that I could be fresh. And this is more about.

identity and it's titled How to Make a Canadian People. So, why don't you just jump off? Yeah, so the first video I wrote in partnership with an individual named Jean, who submitted an article to my website, Vanguardist Journal. And I worked with them to edit it and we made the article. Then I decided to turn that into, I call it a short documentary. I don't really know what else to call it, but we invest quite a bit of time and money into making these that I want to call it something other than a video essay um

but that was called paving over the public and it was about the history of mass migration in canada and it's a very interesting history that i'm sure resonates with a lot of people within the western world but in the canadian instance it shows by looking at census data and looking at you know a public opinion records we could see that the canadian people uh since 30 40s 50s were vehemently against mass migration, even mass migration from Canada, Europe, you know, because it wasn't obvious to them why you would want immigration period. You had, you know, you had the Anglos, you had the Quebecois and you had a smattering of the Scottish and the Irish, but why do you want Italians?

Why do we need Greeks, right? Because they had not been propagandized into inherently understanding it to be an economic reason, which doesn't really track anymore, but you need to be propagand. Gandized into that to believe it. So when they say, hey, do you want more Europeans? They're like, why? That's a weird question. But it showed how they kept taking these opinion polls, but then through the machinations

of various politicians and bureaucrats, without just rehashing that documentary, the whole purpose was just to appeal more to the emerging United Nations and position Canada as a leader in, you know, secular humanist democratic values on the world. stage and try and trick mass migration to happen into Canada. And then there was, and this is across multiple prime ministers. It's not just one person, liberal or conservative, the entire bureaucratic system. Some people call it what the managerial elites. They're on the side of bringing in more people.

What's interesting is just a sidebar of this. I didn't mention it at the time. But there's in Canada, there's something called, I believe, the Century Initiative. And I covered this book about this movement in Canada that's existed. since I think even Sir Wilford Laurier, this idea that Canada needs to have a hundred million people. We need a hundred million people to be competitive with the US. And there actually is some sound logic to that. You need a certain population to have enough internal momentum to create your own economy basically and service yourself, right, without just being an economic vassal

of whoever your neighborings. But they have the number 100 million might even be more now. But so there's forces at work and they're pretty open about it saying that we just we got to get to 100 million A to have that ideal economy the self-sustained economy and B to float the tax base that we need just to support all these social services. There's lots of reasons and because they're completely race blind as I'm sure anyone can imagine they're like we don't care who it is just as long as we got warm bodies here. And it's completely economically unsound. It's misguided but that hasn't stopped them before. Long story short, that's what it's about just how they forward this outside of public opinion because what they'll say to you is, well, we voted for it.

Your ancestors, your grandparents must have voted for this. The whole message was nobody voted for this. A lot of people can intuit that. They assume that's true, but it's good just to show the story of how it happened. So then we worked on this sequel. I call it a sequel, perhaps even part of a trilogy, but it's titled How to Make a Canadian people because, you know, one of the things we come back to, or the very first article I had on Van Garst Journal, it's titled The Paradox of Canadian Nationalism, because Canadian nationalism

is different than American nationalism or European nationalism. And it's kind of depends on how you define it, but without getting into the weeds on that, Canada has a very distinct history and a very unique way it approaches what a Canadian is. There's already sort of this assumed bifurcation between English speaking and French speaking. So you got the Anglo and the Franco. I don't even like calling it Franco because that just sounds like something else to me. But if you look at the original Canadian flag known as the Red Ensign, there's a little shield on that. And that shield depicts symbols representing the four foundational ethnicities of Canada.

But there's a recognition that here's the sort of founding stock of Canada, these four ethnicities. And then they eventually created the new newer Canadian flag much later. But the idea is like, what is a Canadian? When you talk about Canadian nationalist, there must be a Canadian nationality. Because the idea of nationalism is by any definition that I've read, and we've done some pretty serious reading on it, a nation is usually just one distinct people. But it's kind of strange to have a Canadian nationalism and a Canadian nationality that is already, at least two, but as many as four separate identities.

Well, how do you square that? And there's a lot of other, I want to figure if I want to get to this now. Okay, I'll just start by saying that we start by looking at the history of Canada in the film. And what Canada is, here's the founding ethnicities, here's the power structure within the country. It's a bit different than America. But there are still dynasties. There's still elites.

There's still powerful families that can be. be targeted to certain geographic areas. And it's asking yourself, here's the big question. If you wanted to trigger an ethnogenesis, how would you do it? If you want to make a new type of Canadian, that isn't just a cluster of these different ethnicities that always seem to be intention. It's very difficult to reconcile the historical conflicts between the French and the English, at least from what I've seen.

I talk to Quebec nationalists all the time. There's not a lot of interest in coming to the table with any sort of proper unification. So it's asking, how do we reconcile that? If I had to make a Canadian a single type of person, what would that, what would the process be? And we can actually replicate this across any nation because, and I know I'm giving you a lot to work with right now, but I'll tell you this. And maybe you can use this as a launch and out point. One thing that I've been talking about recently, we talked about it on the show as well, is that the birth rate decline is hitting every nation on earth, every civilization at least simultaneously. We tend to view it in Western or white terms.

And of course, there's a white birth rate decline, but it's also in India, too. There's good evidence that India has vastly overrepresented its population. China has got a lot of conflicting numbers, but there's cause to believe Japan, South Korea, obviously, but all over the world, South America, they are having serious birth declines. And there's a lot of various reasons that we can maybe get into if you want to go down that road. But suffice to say that there's something of a birth rate decline and there's not one cause for it. It's not just cultural. It's not just economics.

Actually, it is both, but not just. So I think what we're seeing is what we can term a genetic bottleneck or a eugenic bottleneck. There's going to be a lot of people that are going to not even just die, but their bloodlines are going to end. People seem to be electing just to not have kids. But there are some families. There are some people that have more kids now. I think what you're seeing is a collapse of the population. And then once we get to the end of that bottleneck, there will be opportunities once population is

level to basically start again. But to frame this in maybe more familiar terms, you're seeing with, let's say, white liberals unprecedented drive towards their own dispossession and destruction, you know, for a lot of different reasons we can get into. But there seem to be a lot of different races. But let's just use white people as example who are just determined to die, die out eventually. Not all of them. Let's say there's like 20 to 30% that are committed and they tend to be on the right, obviously,

who are committed to having larger families and not only having larger families, but raising those families, people talk about it or like surviving the collapse. It's that too, but there's sort of a sense that you've got to get through something. So I do think that we're in a mass selection event right now and we can start asking questions about, you know, how do we want to survive? Who do we think should survive? And maybe the people that don't probably don't deserve to. That's a tough thing to say.

But if you're on the right, you're probably used to the fact that by simply advocating for your own self-interest, hell, for your own survival, there's a tidal wave of your own kinfolk who will rise up against you and try and get you arrested, persecuted or killed. Not only do they not care about their own survival, they want to take you down for just simply advocating for the survival of. your family, your people, whatever it might be. So what's going to happen to those people? They're going to fucking go away eventually. And so what do we do with the world that's after? Now that's a big scope for a video like this. And so we go back to go back to the root to this.

What is an ethno justice? What constitutes a people? How do you define a people? What scale do you need to have a people? Is it a tribe? Is it a community? Is it a clan? At what point do you become a distinct?

people and what quality and how could you do that maybe even starting now with a community of your own so that was a big long rambling sash so i'm wondering if there's anything i said there he's like some clarification on well when it come okay so let's uh let's do population decline birth rate decline i see three financial is the most obvious one um people just more people come in um things, things get more expensive. There are, there's also, there's a spiritual, there's a spiritual aspect to it too that I think Yaki speaks more about. But there's also a biological aspect that, Stormy talks about this a lot where you have the,

you know, women, especially white women experiencing people. who look historically like their threats to them. And it causes a problem with their system. They don't want to, they either can't get pregnant or they don't want to get pregnant out of a sort of a survival instinct. So do you think it's a combination, it could be a combination of all three? What do you think is the biggest?

Okay, I'll list them. Like, there's that. That's a very interesting one, that stormio lines. Then there is just the proliferation of feminism. And when I say feminism, I don't frame that as a new thing. There's this really great book by, I believe, J.D. Unwin called Sex and Culture. I think maybe Imperial Press had a copy that came out with. But it was written in the 20s, I believe.

And it was a sex study of various tribes around the world, went to Africa, went to South America, went to American Indians and stuff. looked at, it studied rather, how their relationship with sex and sexual rituals and what have you, related to their ascension through, let's say, a ladder of civilization. And he, long or short, he drew a correlation between, you know, how you treat the importance of sex and then how advanced you are. And he contrasted that against their religious beliefs as well. Very great book.

I wasn't expecting it to be as good as it was, but it was. But one thing he pointed out, or at least one thing I took from it, was the conflict between men and women is an ancient tension. And we tend to think that emerged with modernity or ideology or it just supercharged. But if you go back to fucking tribes in Papua New Guinea, there's the same sort of tension between the sexes. And there are, in many instances, these little feminist revolutions that happen. And he describes a few in the book where, you know, the sexes. is kept segregated and then through the scheming of one of the queens who just had her hooks in her weak husband, she managed to vie for more rights to women within that, things like that. So I look at it like, I don't even view it as political. The issue between men and women is an eternal conflict that we sometimes can strategize around. I think we found tactics to reconcile this permanent tension into something that makes sense with,

you know, certain rules and regulations about how we treat each other. We figured it out for quite some time and we've only betrayed that. But that's why I look at just the relationship between men and women is kind of a problem. You must reconcile that never really goes away. It's beyond politics. So that's one. And then there's obviously culture. Then there's like perversion.

And then there's fucking Jewish shit in there. And there's liberalism. Liberalism is a problem. But liberalism is the entire thing. thought tree of liberalism. Do you go back to the scientific revolution? Is the problem science? There's a whole discussion to be had there.

But here's another couple big ones. I'd like to introduce the environmental aspects. And we covered this on the show quite some time ago. There was this great article, and the name escapes me. But it was trying to explain the obesity epidemic. And just let me rewind here. I won't spend too, too long trying to explain this. but it gave four reasons for the obesity epidemic.

It started with the realization that it seems that boomers used to be generally more in shape in the past. You see photos of them at the beaches and they're in shape. But if you know anything about boomers, they're very careless people. If you know anything about boomers, it's not like they were working out, really. There's more gyms now than there has ever been in the past. What did boomers like they love frozen food? They love TV dinners. dinners they loved eating out this is the generation that made fast food you know this is the

generation i loved all that unhealthy shit so why are they so in shape and and in my view more people work out more aggressively now men and women that i know the time of the past and the guys who are in shape they need to work harder to be in shape you see people boomers never tracked their they never calorie counter they never tracked their macros they never had such a they never had apps to schedule it and personal trainers, fucking forget personal trainers, unless you were a serious box or you didn't have one. Point being that there might be something environmental that's leading to the obesity epidemic, at least contributing to it.

And I would correlate that with the decline in childbirths. So I remember three of the four. One is the sheer amount of birth control in the water, which is something everyone's familiar with. The birth control pills, the hormones never leave the water. and that is driving down the testosterone in men and driving down the sperm count because you can chart all these things against each other. Why is testosterone going down? I'm sure you've heard of that. You've read studies. What is causing that is you'll just talk to older guys and say guys are just gay now.

I'm like that doesn't make any fucking sense. But like what is maybe, you know, it's cause and effect. So you got sperm rates falling that that's not called. That's not just porn. Porn's a problem too, by the way. Let's put that to the side of course. course, pornography is a problem, but why would that be driving or killing sperm counts? And just anecdotally, I'll tell you this right now, I've known more young people and more young white couples who are having a harder time having a baby right now, more miscarriages. I've seen some numbers that say miscarriages are up. It depends how you track miscarriages.

So I don't even want to go down that road. Is that the job? It could be that too. It could also be, there's the birth control in the water. It's lithium in the water. There's more lithium in the water than ever before. That's affecting moods and biochemistry as well. What the fuck is the third one?

There's a third thing. The whole point is it's just stuff in the water. And that needs to be, it's not just that. It's all the other stuff plus that. And so when you look at the birth rate decline, it's spiritual. It's economic. Yes, absolutely, because the economic part is largely ignored by people. Some people think you can just be making 20K a year and having 10 kids.

I've known guys who lived like that. There's guys in my community where the dad did the bit. They were dirt floor and 10 siblings and they hated it. And they never want to do that again. I take those people seriously. I listen to the people who actually went through it and not just apprehend these ideas ideologically and say, okay, what's it actually like to not give a fuck how many kids you have and also not have money to pay for it?

That's a very real concern, not just for women but also men. Yes, it's economic. Yes, it's the permanent tension between men and women. It's also environmental. It's also cultural. It's also here's some fucking San Harris type shit. Maybe we're reaching the carrying capacity of the earth. Maybe we can just sense that there's too many people and also things are fucked up.

People, people are more aware. I mean, there's sort of a maybe an evolutionary biology argument you made here, but people are more generally aware at the precarious nature of the world they inhabit to more than they did 700 years ago. There's a lot of little things. So anyway, and then I'd add on top of that, Onlyfans, add all the little sprinkles of Onlyfans, porn, fucking everyone's depressed, everyone's crazy.

There's that too. But once you look at the size and scope of the problem, you realize you can't just fix one thing. You certainly can't vote your way out of this problem. And that's why if you were, to enact policies such as granting families tax breaks or, you know, there's this one plan. It was called the 45K plan, which was, I don't even dislike this plan. It was, I've seen this proposed by some Americans where the government would get,

basically give you $45,000 for every kid you have and capped at 90. So capped at, oh no, wait, you have 40. Yeah, I think it caps in 90. So it'd be like two kids. But the idea would be that if you had two or more kids, whoever is taking care of those kids, ideally the mother, they could count that as a salary. You know what I mean? So that's an economic incentive.

I think you would see an uptick based on that. But it would not be the sea change that you're expecting because I do think the depth of the problem is much deeper. And that's why when discussing this short film, I'm like, let's presume. that there's going to be a population collapse. And maybe people talk civil war. Okay, absent a civil war, I still think we're trending in that direction. And just because the birth rate's declining, I think there's opportunity for some hyper-aware, very driven individuals who can figure out a way to see their genetics to the other side of it.

And you can look at this from a strictly Edward Dutton type perspective. Or, you know, J.F. Garapi is always about this, about how what it comes down to is like your DNA and your genetics trying to propagate themselves however you can. Some people's genetics have just fucking given up are yours. I bet the listeners of the P. Kiona show are not willing to give up yet. And so the idea is if you wanted to basically, if all, if the nations of the world are going to collapse, you might see entire people's entire. tribes disappear, how can you see to the other side of this? How do you form a nation? Because maybe you still need to assume the orientation of a nation just to survive, something that is as of a sufficient size and also internally consistent ethnically or genetically and aligned on the right

values. And my values, I just mean values almost in a computer sense, whereas it's just criteria. You need to align certain criteria. And just to have, so it's bigger than a clan, less than an empire. And you can have nations of various different sizes. But I think people think that they can't ask those questions themselves as an individual or as a small community. But I think you can. I think you will need to going forward. And some of this isn't made as explicit as possible in the documentary because it was made for a mainstream audience. I've heard people say that you can take this video and show it to who? Your boomer aunt, your Gen X uncle. I said, well, that's the reason. You introduce some of these ideas to people who are kind of on the edge of needing to hear it, right?

They might not be ready for the P. Keonez show yet. They should be. P. Keogonis should be making $20 million hosting a show. I don't think he is, but he should be because people aren't ready yet, right? But we're trying to get people who are maybe ready to hear some of these things, jail break them out of their way of thinking, and introduce them into new ways of thinking that are not necessarily negative. You know, we're not trying to sell them on doom. We're trying to sell them on opportunity and a different sort of self-awareness. Again, I gave you a lot to work with there. I apologize.

Well, what it sounds like, in the first part, you talked about ethnogenesis, and I want to We'll move on to that. You can offer people $45,000 a child. But one of the things that you said in the video was that ethnogenesis just cannot be forced. It has to be organic. And I think that that's what it. If people are going to start having kids again at the kind of rate that you're talking about, I mean, maybe a push can be done to like get it going.

but really it seems like it's going to have to be something organic. It's going to have to be something that people just realize on their own. Government programs just don't, you know, advertising government programs just don't work. And the whole idea of like ethnogenesis and is that, you know, you can't force that. You know, importing, importing 60,000 Indians is not, you're not. not expecting an ethnogenesis. You're expecting, you're importing another culture, you're importing basically another country. But when you had people who were coming in, you know, people come in one by one. And I think the terminology, you know, people face to face, that's the way that kind

of thing happens. And, you know, that happened in the United States for a long time until we imported one group in the late 1800s that refuses to fit in anywhere they go. And then, but- Are you talking about Pete, the Irish? Is that what we're talking? It's the Amish. It's always the Amish. But for the most part, you know, the Italians and the Irish, and they came in and they

became Americans. But the, that wasn't something that was, it wasn't something that was like, oh, you're going to come here and you're going to become it just happens on its own but you can't do that when you're when you're getting swarmed with what did biden do in 12 million in four years that's just an invasion it's not organic nothing can happen organically when that when it's being pushed upon you like that yeah yeah absolutely and um there's incident you gave one example there of a group that despite up against all odds they still seem to survive and and be a a thorner aside. But that's an interesting case where it's not even necessarily,

and perhaps it is necessarily counter to the idea that it must be a lot of people that do it. Because, okay, let's put it this way. What could drive a population up? And you had mentioned that it can't really be an economic incentive. And I agree with that. And that's what I was saying before. Like you might see an uptick for the short term. But I always go back to Rome, as we all do. And I know that during the decline and fall of Rome, this was one of the initiatives taken by the center of power, which was they noticed that the birth rates were also declining. So they were granting land and tax breaks. And it didn't rebound like they thought. However, based on census data, what we know is that because they didn't take extremely detailed censuses like we do now.

But they tracked the religious affiliation of the citizens. They could tell that it was Christians who were having the most kids. And it wasn't because they were the most, you know, economically stable people. There was something else going on. And I'm not trying to make necessarily a pro-Christian stance here because we've also covered sort of the decline or the disenchantment of Christian thinking up into modernity. Like what we have now is different. But I guess that's it because what was driving people to have children was something deeper. it was a belief in themselves.

It was a belief in something greater. And I think more than anything, it was hope for the future. Or it was a different way to view suffering. You know, there's a divine sort of suffering. And there's just a different sort of electricity that was imbued in their lives that is lacking now, which isn't to say it can't return. But I don't think that can be found within the Catholic Church or Protestantism as a stands right now. That's kind of a controversial claim. And I don't mean that that applies to everyone,

but I think they kind of get what I'm saying that it's these churches are also fighting for survival, you know, through increased numbers. But it is not that which grants you in most cases that sort of electricity to try and, you know, have a ton of kids. Again, not in all cases, but I think, you know, we're there's something of a crisis of faith right now for a reason. So point being that I really think it comes down to a different view of the future and the university and your place within it. That's what makes people want to replicate themselves. That's what makes people want to exist in the future. See, even when we talk to our guys on this side, they talk about legacy.

What do you mean by legacy, right? I just want to survive in the future. I'm like, well, why do you want to survive? Is that just fear? Are you saying that because you're afraid of death? Is that just it? Or do you have an understanding of legacy? Like, I want to leave a mark and I want to create a genetic line that will make the world a better place.

Something, something deeper, something bigger than yourself. But I find a lot of guys discuss legacy in a very self-serving way. And so it'll be very transitory. You probably won't imparting these values to your children. In fact, your children may rise up against you as is so often the case. So, you know, that's why you look at what do we mean by birth rates? That's a number. That's a number that can correlate to a lot of things. But what you're really talking about is why do you want your people to survive

indefinitely? By the way, who are your people? And everyone's got a different idea of who their people are. Sometimes it's their national ethnicity, maybe it's the French. Sometimes it's white people and sometimes it's with very, very blurry edges of what constitutes white. So there's no real consensus on that. Some people just break it down to the family level. I think that's more manageable. Like it's my family, it's my community. Fuck all these other 21st century definitions of everything else, but that's

what I can control. And so I want to, you know, just slave away and create something that lasts a long time. I want to make something that's bigger than myself. I want to serve something that's bigger than myself. I think that has more, I think that is more capacity to inspire people to have kids and anything else. However, let's not discount. the economic. Like, it's hard to do any of that if you can't afford a fucking house. By the way,

it's hard to do that if you can't afford groceries, by the way. So make no mistake. I'm not saying that everyone should just go into bankruptcy doing it. That's hard for me to propose. I've seen it happen. These people are miserable. That does not make a good marriage. That does not make a good living situation. So the economic is important. And we need to address that separately. But if you were to address that, it might not address this other thing. Yeah, the, um, It really seems like when you look in history where people are down and they're brought back out, you need a visionary. And I don't know how deep into tech, you know, like a founder, like the dreamer,

like the person who comes up with ideas that you haven't thought of before. the person who comes up with a strategy that you haven't thought of before. And sure, we can look through history, and I love history. I mean, my podcast is probably, what, 90% history, but we're looking for ideas. And we're also looking for that person, that person or persons. Normally it's one person who starts this, who jump starts it. It's the visionary, it's the person who can talk about those ideas. is those eternal truths that needs to be embraced again.

Are they going to look exactly like they did 100, 200, 500 years ago? Of course not. We're in a different world. But they have to be able to at least spark in somebody's mind a spark in people's, not even in their minds, but in their beings that if we don't take a sharp turn away from where we're going, it's going to, our destruction, you know, the future is just destruction. And it's that person, I'm not that person. You know, I don't know anyone who is that person.

I know people who. It could be. There might be a lot of, to every lawyer listeners, that could be you. Well, I don't think I'm that. It's usually someone with a whole lot more charisma and a lot less anger. than me who can really inspire the people who have this much anger as I do of that anger is the charisma the people the people who have this much this much anger when they get into leadership they have a tendency to crash out though but that's it's a

man I always liked Joseph de Maestra's view of sovereignty and he tends to deal more in almost like forces as dimensions And he had the city of sovereignty. Sovereignty isn't a status. It is a space that demands to be occupied. You need sovereignty to exist. And it's a seat, a throne that calls to people. There's that old line that greatness knows itself.

I bet there's a lot of people who probably think of themselves as great and are troubled at the fact that the world has not bestowed upon them the status that they deserve. But I do think there's some great people out there who, keep it locked away inside of them because they live in a fallen state and I think maybe that makes them insane. But people will ask like what can what we need as a philosopher king. I'm sure you've heard that before. And you know, I always say that, you know, what times? What's your political affiliation? I'd say, well, I'm a fascist monarchist in the streets and I'm just like an handcap in the sheets. I know unless we could have the perfect monarch, then I'm like, well, then

what do we got? Well, just give me nukes and slaves. I'll settle for that. The idea is that the monarchy, this goes into the courtesy Harvin type stuff, and I'm not a fan of Curtis Yarvin, but he references other thinkers that I believe they're accurate when they say, you know, you really only have, everything is just a monarchy or authoritarianism by another name. It's either a monarchy or an oligopoly. It's one of those two, but even usually within an oligopoly. There's a hidden monarchy as well, or one person in charge. The point being that Demaesre viewed it as it's just something that demands to be filled. And we ask ourselves, well, what can we do to achieve the philosopher king? Almost as if it's democratic. You notice that?

All the anti-democracy people are trying to figure out how to elect the new God king. Well, it's not really going to be up to any of us to put him on the top. He will just be driven there. What you can do is create an environment where that individual can emerge. Like you said, he won't look or sound like who came before. Think of any figure you're thinking of any great man throughout history. He is going to be a man of his time and place. He will be pure context. He will be a man that cannot have lived it any other time.

He will be of that particular moment to such a severe degree that he'll be called towards that seat of sovereignty. And the best that most of us can do is try and give that, give that some room to occur, create an environment for that. But, you know, how does that look like? It kind of looks like what we're doing right now. It looks like us doing our best. But it's not going to be us.

Like, I think that's the guy. Let's support him. Don't worry about it. When the man of that moment emerges, he'll know what the fucking do. It doesn't rely on you. He's not going to need you to basically do what people are doing to trump. It's like if we're not nice to him, he's going to go away. The God King's going to go away.

A real God King wouldn't fucking do that. So anyway, that's a big, long, rambling answer once again, but just to say that everything you said is correct, how can we trigger that? I think the way you trigger it, it's kind of looking at starting with what this video is about, which is breaking down, well, what is a nation? How do you form a nation? How do you start forming these communities? Some people say parallel societies, breakaway societies.

we get into how to start a secret society. What is a cluster of individuals capable of doing? I hope people take away from the message. They can do way more than you would think. You think you need the seat of government power to do anything. No, you don't, not necessarily. You can do a lot and chart a course towards the future, an ideal future, with a relatively small amount of people.

But you need to think generationally. And you need to think practically. And you kind of need to stop thinking so ideologically. And you need to start thinking that within your moment, on the right, we're very backwards facing. And I count myself in that as well. I know you count yourself as that. I think you need to have an understanding of history.

You need that foundation. But at a certain point, you do need to break from some of it just to look to survey your surroundings and say, how do I want to survive? Who do I? Whom? whomst do I want to survive? And again, those questions are not beyond asking yourself right now. You can ask us a big question because you have more power and influence than you might think.

And that's not a populist position either because we're talking about just removing ourselves from democracy entirely here and making this other thing that can exist apart from the civilization around us. Yeah, I think one of the questions I get asked all the time is you, You say you don't believe in democracy. You say that you don't, you know, that you're not, if you don't believe in democracy, why are you doing your podcast? Are you trying to wake people up and everything?

Trying to educate, but also I'm trying to put that, put my voice out there so that that person or persons we're talking about may hear it, may hear this and it may spark something in them because, you know, it's, it's going to have to be someone younger than me. It's going to have to be someone who is a fan, it's going to have to be a family man, I think. I think that's the only way they're going to have to be somebody who can walk the walk, unlike I can. So it, that's just, I'm, I'm looking for that person. And I'm, you know, that's why when people, when people shit on Tucker Carlson for, oh, he doesn't go far enough and everything.

Tucker Carlson's talking to different people than I am. He's talking to people who have a lot more power, who have a lot more resources than I have. And, you know, let him cook, let him talk. And hopefully he's reaching out and that he's talking to that person too. I think we're all just trying to do, trying to find that person that solves this because it's been broken for a long time. And the longer it goes on, it's just going to, it'll get worse. and then you just break apart and you, you know, you break down into smaller groups and that just makes you more vulnerable for the people who still have power and who, you know, want your demise. Yeah. And that's why, you know, breaking down into smaller groups, when we look at national movements and I have this show I do with the Prudentialist, who's a great friend of many called Do You Even Read?

and we covered this book called Transformation of the World. There's a two-parter written by Juergen Oster Hamel. And it was about the 19th century. And the entire, there's a lot of innovations that occurred in the 19th century. I won't go through all of them. But it was really the birth of nationalism, as we know it. And there's a lot of great work out there tracing the roots of nationalism way back to the medieval era. You know, like what is a nation?

It's a group of people with sufficient self-awareness. Yeah, yeah. But it's in the 19th century. You start seeing the emergence of nationalist movements, as we know them. And they didn't become full nationalist projects. That's really the story of the 20th century is the culmination of that. But you start seeing more unification movements. And there's this curious thing you notice is that every nationalist movement seems to need to occur

within the borders of a larger power. He starts seeing nationalist movements happen within countries or within empires or contrasted against a larger power. And it's like they were driven into that. Unification is driven. But the natural state is sort of be broken apart and balkanized, very strongly demarcated, right? But something drives unification.

Oftentimes it's an aggressor. Most of the time it's some larger power that's pressurizing you together. It's the story of the German unification movement. There's all kinds of unification movements you can look at. But I always sound that interesting about what nationalism actually is. And what the natural state, all throughout Europe through most of history was these little city states, but then something drove these national projects. But the same thing with people. It's like the natural state, when we get to that organization collapse scenario, everything is going to shatter. But that's why I'm trying to get people to think ahead. Here's how you can start reforming.

How do you form a people? We mentioned that book by, it's kind of even hack at this point to bring it up, but David Hackett Fisher's Albion Seed, which I'm sure many people have heard of, but I like using that as a basis to say like, here's how he defines a folk. It's all about the four main folkways, British folkways that seeded America, but what was a folk? How do you define that? He broke it down into around 40 characteristics.

you can answer each one of these questions. How do you tell your people? And it's like, well, it's everything from how you dress to your marriage ceremonies to, and here's a couple interesting ones that I always love, your religion ways, but also your magic ways. Because if you're a Christian, it kind of seems odd that you would also believe in magic, but here's the thing you do. I can't tell you how many Christians I know that believe in heaven, but also believe in ghosts. That doesn't make any fucking sense. And they also have all your superstitions, all your cripples. All your cryptids, all the weird shit that you've smuggled in from the home country that exist alongside religion as well.

And we don't seem to think that's incongruent at all. And I don't think so either. That's just how it is. Point being that you can define what makes a people. So if you want to start thinking of yourself as a people say, can we check every single one of these boxes? Some people can. Some people can't.

For example, I did an event this weekend, this past weekend in Toronto called the April. events. I had some great speakers there. Ferryman's Toll, Dr. Ricardo Deshain spoke, Cat Girl Coulac spoke, this guy spoke. And Cat Girl Coolec had a very interesting speech. And he was tackling the same idea about Canadian nationalism. What is Canadian nationalism? What is a Canadian? And he said, well, it only makes sense to start breaking it down provincially, if anything. And so he was making a case for sort of an upper Canada, which means Ontario. What's the Ontario ethnicity? I can tell you what a Texan is. I can tell you what a Californian is, but we don't really have a good sense of what someone from Ontario is. Are they

their own people? It'd probably be easier to define what that is or what an Albertan is than what a Canadian is. And maybe you start with that. And then this thing we call Canada actually, it doesn't really behave like a nation. It behaves like an empire. It behaves, if you'd consider an empire, sort of this loose conglomeration of interior states and peripheries that it's always trying to negotiate inside of. We kind of operate more like an empire, a very loose, not particularly wealthy empire, but we've got just these contained identities. So if we want to become a Canadian, there must be some kind of ethnogenesis that occurs, which I don't think we've achieved yet or do you want to have a Canadian people or do you want to start your own people the same

way everybody did guess what Rome was founded all these countries were founded by a people in situations just like this it came down to families and civilization emerged from them and that might be what's calling to you right now and you can do it your ancestors did it and they didn't have the fucking internet they didn't have the same guns you have if you actually have a lot of a lot of advantages in doing something like this even though the world is uh let's be honest way more hostile towards you and we inhabit a security panopticon that was completely unthinkable to our ancestors yes but there also exist opportunities because there has to otherwise you just fucking die that's the stakes you have the survivor you don't that's really in so many words

is what we were trying to get out with our little movie. Awesome. I know you got to go. So let's leave it right there. Go ahead and plug anything you want, man. Oh, and once again, thank you so much for having me today. It's almost, it's a very big idea and something that I've been, and many of us have been ruminating on for quite some time.

Actually, I can do one more question if you wanted, then we can get going unless you, unless you had to go as well. No, I don't have to go. Well, I didn't have a question lined up. It's weird. Let me think about one more thing about the film. So the way we end up referencing quite a few different books. And that was by design because so much of it was drawn from the Vanguardas Journal, where I

publish all my articles and some other people's articles, but mostly mine. And I thought, let's try and make this appeal to a mainstream audience. Like I said, something you could show your family. And if anyone listens to Blood Satellite, my show, there's none of that. There's none of that type of comedy. There's none of that type of humor, even though I narrate it. But I wanted to show a diversity of thought. And so we're referencing Brooks Adams in their historian that will be familiar to a lot of people, to allow your listeners.

Then there's also, who else, Martin Gurrey, who wrote Revolt of the Public. and then we've got a whole section on Canadian history explaining the power structure and how that's driven by elites and things like that. I reference another couple guys that you might be familiar with Forta Sachs, who's a friend of mine, he helped write some stuff for this and someone else by the name of the Black Horse two Canadian guys who Forteux actually focuses on history and Black Horse. He's mainly about elite theory as it relates to Canada, so I tried to draw from that as well. And where I get to by the end of it, like there's two halves to this.

There's really the historical nationalist part. And then it's like, here's how you can start a nation with your friends. That's a tall order, isn't it? But that's where we can start pulling from, you know, graph theory and network theory and how secret societies operate, like how you can kind of come together in the 21st century and do what our ancestors did in the past and try and live as, I said fully within our 21st century context. You're kind of starting to see it emerge.

You guys started to see and you might get a kick out of this or you might hate it. I don't know. I'm noticing on the right the rise of the Michelin. You seen this? The half Jew. Okay. Yeah, yeah. There's a lot of guys in our space like you're used to like white people over here,

Jews over here. But now there's this synthesis that's happening of these like half white half Jews. who have a very strong sense of self. Like they're trying to distance themselves from Jews and ingratiate themselves with whites, but also retain that core identity that there's still that germ of non-whiteness in them because every time you hear them talk,

they're advocating for their leadership position effectively within white nationalism. But I'm like, that's an interesting thing to happen. You're like a new type of guy that has a stronger awareness and sense of it. itself. Like you're going to start like the idea of a Hispanic individual. That's like a, that's like a new thing, but you can have like Hispanic unity, which is sort of like, I mean, once you get into South American stuff. But like there's these like these experiments.

Dude, I've you ever been in Texas? Yes. So yeah. Yeah. Some of the some of those Mexicans have been some of those Mexicans families have been there before it was Texas. Yeah. Yeah. And that's why like I don't even want to. approach that because that's such a complicated, you know, ethnographic area that I would leave that to someone who knows it a bit better than myself. I'm up here in Canada, right? But like even up here in Canada, the idea of a nation, we've got Aboriginal nations. You guys know them as Indians. We call them something else up here because we also have too many Indians from India, so we need a different word.

You call them not Mexicans? Yeah. No, because I think a lot of us we don't see Mexicans a lot, so we still kind of like Mexicans. There's 10 Mexicans in Canada. So we actually do know them as the people who just serve tacos. It's not a problem here yet. I don't think anybody hates Mexicans. I think they just want them to go home.

Yeah. Yeah. Like I'm also spiritually Mexican. A lot of people don't know that. As a white guy, like if you look at how I choose to dress on a day-to-day basis, I'm very Mexican-coded. I've got like over the weekend I was wearing a pair of cowboy boots, black cowboy boots with embroidered barbed wire and like cow skulls on them.

That's like the most Mexican shit you've ever seen. And I'm wearing like flannel button up and shit. And I'm like I'm a Catholic but I also like the nightmare before Christmas. So why don't we just combine them? You know, they got a very spooky Catholicism in Mexico. I'm like, that's it. It's like Catholicism with more like skeletons and guns. That's my shit.

So yeah, in a lot of ways I am spiritually Mexican. But up here, we have aboriginals and they are effectively nations and there's maybe that tribal ban might only have 10,000 people there, but you're surrounded is what I'm trying to say by examples of what I'm talking about and they might not be exactly what you want to be, but it's more of a process and it's more of a status that you can think of achieving and it's going to be it's going to look different than them is all I'm saying. Gotcha. Yeah, no, makes a lot of sense there. spiritually Mexican, right?

Never going to forget that. One of these days we're going to meet in person and you're going to know what I'm talking about. You're the jangling of the spurs coming up. You got to go down in Texas and do some exploring, man. It's wild. I only went to Austin, which is, I know, like the worst place to go in Texas. But even there, I'm like, I like it here. I get this, I get these people.

Sohanos are wild. They're way more racist than you could ever be. I was in Austin, Texas, and I was just walking the streets. And this place is so Mexican. I thought Austin was supposed to be kind of like the urban hipster place. Even here, there's so many taco places. There's so much Mexican graffiti and shit. So again, I was just, I knew it was kind of like that, but I was just hit by how much it was.

But also, you know, I like the other stuff too. Yeah. All right, man. Plug your stuff. Anything you want. All right. So everyone, check out how to make Canadian people. I'll make sure to link to it. I'll link to it in the show notes. Oh, thank you so much.

That's, it's on YouTube. It's on Rumble. It's on X. It's all over the place. I host a show called Blood Satellite. You go to bloodsatellite.ca to check out, hey, if you like me, you like me, right? You can hear more of me over there. And also vanguardistjournal.com to access some of the writing that inspired this. and then a whole bunch of other stuff. And that's it for now. All right.

I'll make sure to link to all that and links to the past video as well. All right. Thank you once again for having me. I always love coming here. I appreciate it. Thanks, sounds.