The Pete Quiñones Show - Reading Ivan Ilyin's 'On Resistance to Evil by Force' w/ Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson - Pt. 24

Episode Date: August 8, 2026

53 MinutesPG-13Dr. Matthew Raphael Johnson is a researcher, writer, and former professor of history and political science, specializing in Russian history and political ideology.Pete and Dr. Johnson continue a reading and commentary of Ivan Ilyin's 1925 book, "On Resistance to Evil by Force."Tolstoy's "What is a Jew?"The Lies of Leftism: Ivan Ilyin, Atheism and the Death of Reason in the East and West by Dr. Matthew Raphael JohnsonDr Johnson's PatreonDr Johnson's CashApp - $Raphael71RusJournal.orgTHE ORTHODOX NATIONALISTDr. Johnson's Radio Albion PageDr. Johnson's Books on AmazonJohnson's Law in Action: Venezuela and the Foreign Policy of Mass PresumptionDr. Johnson's Pogroms ArticleThe Orthodox Nationalist: Karl Marx “On the Jewish Question” (1844)Article: Karl Marx’s Theses on the Jews and the Necessity of Free Trade: Zur Judenfrage (1844) by Matthew Raphael JohnsonPete 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 Picanuano Show.com. You 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 P.cena 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 our reading of Unresistance to Evil by Force by Ivan Eileen. This is episode number 24. Dr. Johnson, how are you doing today?

You know, I've been translating up to chapter 20. I don't get headaches anymore, which is a very good thing. But my God, it's hard. But I had something else to say. I was watching, I know you're a fan. You've watched it before. Breaking Bad. I watched the series for like the fourth time.

And I came to the scene where Nacho led in the mercenaries to kill Lalo. I'm saying to myself, what the hell is wrong with these guys? Six guys? This is a fortress, an unknown fortress, with heavily armed guards there. Could be even worse as far as they. And he sends six guys. How intelligent can this guy be? This is the most idiotic thing I could imagine.

And it really bugged me. I don't know why I didn't notice it before. Six guys for a heavily armed fortress. Of course, they're all going to be killed. Awful. It wasn't thought through. Yeah, I haven't watched that. I got that out.

I needed to get that out. I know there's a lot of fans out there. I needed to get it out, which is a stupid thing. I don't mind plot holes. I mean, my life has plot holes. But that's something that just,

that's how you know he didn't work for Chilean intelligence or anything like that. He would never, no one would ever make that kind of mistake. All righty. Here we go. I'm going to finish up, uh, finish up this chapter today.

And we're off to the races. Each of these states in the presence of genuine evil and true vision can be and is a spiritually healthy and vitally expedient reaction to villainous manifestations and actions. So the task of a person striving for a spiritually faithful life will not consist in unconditionally avoiding these states, but in not allowing them within oneself without sufficient grounds, in spiritually mastering them.

and not allowing them to cloud the clarity of spiritual vision and always keeping them within the ancestral bosom of fundamental benevolence and always preserving within oneself the capacity to restore the fullness of love. The highest and purest dispassion is freedom from evil and personal passions from the passions of a spiritually not objectified godless self. What he's getting at to here. First of all, the states he's making reference to are in the previous paragraph. And the states are how to deal with a villain or a criminal. You start off with disapproval over minor things, lack of sympathy, grief, reprimand, and then condemnation, protest, annunciation, mental coercion, the infliction of mental suffering, indignation,

and then physical coercion, disgust, disrespect, suppression, ruthlessness. And finally, if everything else fails, the capital punishment. And he kind of has a timeline there, sort of. I don't think it's a perfect, you know, one, two, three, four. But you definitely get the picture of what you go through when you're dealing with, that's not really talking about external enemy. I'm talking about, say, a criminal domestic.

but what he's getting at here is very important and it's going to be an ongoing theme that in the legitimate fight against evil the fight itself can bring out the worst in people you may have evil people on your side that might use the fight against evil solely as a way to justify their own sociopathy. You might even be affected by that. You know, we've said this before. You can't go through this without being affected, whether they're police or soldiers.

You can't go through this without being affected. How much, you know, that depends, but, and keeping your cool, keeping your spiritual vision, even in the thick of it of the battle. That's asking a lot. That's asking a lot. And even the best of us can fall, you know, using the fact that we're combating evil as a way to just bring out the worse in ourselves. You know, inflicting pain because we enjoy being in charge, rather doing it for the sake of fighting evil and bringing out the good.

So that's what he's getting at, and he'll get at it quite often. And it's a very important point to make. It is not indifference nor lack of will, nor inaction. The highest and purest dispassion knows its ups and downs, its storms, thunder, and eruptions. But their source is not the animal and man, but the spirit's vision and its presence. These storms and thunders then reveal not evil nor malice, nor the weakness of man, but it strengthened goodness, and it is not their presence that damages the essence of the spirit, while their absence would be spiritually unnatural.

If a Christian ever doubted this, they would only need to recall the thunders that divinely thundered over the Pharisees and scribes, over the merchants in the temple, over Jerusalem slaughtering its prophets, and over those who seduce minors. It is enough to perceive in these thunders just once the very power of love that teaches us to do good to our enemies, forgive offenses and joyfully give away our possessions for the idealization of sentimental weakness to begin to fade in the soul this this tends to be this could be used in either case either you know fighting external enemies uh external enemies within our borders as well as domestic enemies trying to remain this i mean you know hatred makes a lot of sense if it's under reasons control and if it has a legitimate object.

Now, I'm not sure it's slaughtering its profits. Well, that was done. That was done by an evil sect. That was done by the worst in the Old Testament. He's not justifying that. It's just an example. The rest of it, though, what Christ did to the money changers in the temple. What he said to the Pharisees and scribes,

and scribes, at the time, you know, would be like us, you know, using very foul language. And, you know, seducing minors. It would seduce is probably not the right word, but that is the Russian here. These are examples of the fact that, with the exception of the prophets, that physical and verbal violence, verbal violence with quotes, is certainly justified because christ didn't and it makes sense and it's according to reason and it's the last one you know pedophilia um rightfully brings out just such utter hatred in normal people that would be tough to to keep under control we all know what happens to them in prison

we all know that sometimes guards let's certain guys know guess who's who's coming in, maybe they'll leave their cell door open, something like that, when everyone else is locked, as these guys are coming back. You know, they do things like that. But at least outwardly, they have to show a certain level of dispassion. They're professionals. You know, there's no way a policeman could ever remain the same man through 30 years dealing with the lowest in humanity.

but you really only know someone and I think this is kind of what he's getting at here only when they've been through the lowest of the low that's what reveals as he says here his strength in goodness if they refuse to do any if they refuse to act that would be unnatural is what he's saying there's nothing in Christianity that would that would suggest

what Tolstoy is talking about Tolstoy is kind of going to slowly drop out here. I think he's made his point with Tolstoy many times. And the only problem that we have, we have to make, there's differences between dealing with evil within ourselves, dealing with evil in a public arena, internally, domestically, dealing with evil that's coming over our borders.

Those are at least three very different. ways of fighting evil. Now, within ourselves, you wouldn't use force. You would use, you know, trying to coerce yourself. They have a lot in common, but sometimes, and it's my only problem so far with the book, sometimes I'm not sure which one of those he's referring to. Now, why he includes, these are all justified things. You know, slaughter of the prophets, obviously that's bad. Cursing out the Pharisees and scribes, that's good. Beating the merchants in the temple, that was good. And then, of course, as long as

as prophets was bad, seducing minors was bad. So now, what makes it make sense is that Christ specifically mentioned those things. We know the Old Testament is always going, should be a part of the Bible, even though I think there's a movement to get rid of it.

He did mention to these Pharisees, your fathers killed the prophets that God sent to you. And of course, you also mentioned, you know, and to my little ones, and then you get better, better you never be born. So even Christ was almost losing it when it came to his human side when it came to hurting, hurting children. So that's what makes it all a unified sentence there.

So, you know, but none of these, of course, are our personal, enemies. None of them are. These are all insults against God, insults in crimes that I know as Catholics say, cry out to heaven for vengeance. At one great and terrible moment in history, an act of divine love in the guise of wrath and scourge drove the blasphemous mob from the temple. This act was, and will be the greatest prototype in justification for all spiritually and objectively grounded manifestations of love in the form of rejection. With it before their mind's eye, all prophets, rulers, judges, educators, and warriors

can calmly face the possible judgment coming from them from weak-willed sentimentality and the possible classification of them as God-sacrificing haters. Their task is to affirm the strength of spiritual benevolence and the clarity of spiritual vision, as well as to remember the joyless difficulty of the struggle they wage. My favorite part about the, when he whips, he really hurt them, I could only assume. When he made that whip, the Bible tells us he was very careful about it.

He knew what he was doing, and I probably had done it before. You know, he put his weapon together very well. And, you know, I've been in debates with Tolstoyan types, and they say, well, it was only the one time. I say, what difference does that make? The Bible is a fairly short, you know, so the New Testament's only, I'm sorry, gospel is only four books. You know, how many times it has to be repeated for it to be justified? It's something that he did that was a populace measure. You know, John the best John the Baptist kind of stuff.

And it certainly justifies the use of physical violence. no doubt that there were discussions before that went nowhere, as Christ already knew. And in fashioning his weapon and beating the crap out of him, you imagine us walking into, you know, church, you know, these evil people there, you have a whip, and you just start whipping them. But people would turn around and, you know, it would be great. I've never done it personally. But this was something, so they were usurers. there were loan sharks more or less and you're doing this in the temple and i think at that point it had become so normal that no one thought anything of it and when he you know brought in his weapon

and just beat them i'm hoping i'm hoping that they never you know before it was destroyed they never came back they may have i mean he was educated there at the temple i remember that was this was a humongous um very large set of institutions It wasn't just like our parishes. But that's the former, and it's love. It was a love for his father, why he did that, as well as an example to us. And of course, because he's God and man,

he had a purely clear spiritual vision. Of course, if we were to do that, I think we would be so angry that maybe our vision wouldn't be so clear. I've confronted people in a parish in the vestibule before. Even that got a lot of attention. I didn't beat anybody. But that's a common argument. The Los Angeles say, it's only one time.

You know, he clearly had done it before. He knew exactly what he was doing when he was making this, this essentially cat nine tails. And it's, yeah, it's going to be one of my favorite parts of the four gospels. For negative love is joyless and tormenting for man. It demands of him a feat and a severe feat at that. It demands strength, endurance, and steadfastness. It demands enormous exertions of will. Fidelity to the onerous responsibilities one is assumed.

selflessness and constant spiritual activity and self-pureification. Since this rejection or negative love rests not on personal calculations and passions, but on the genuine experience of evil and the spiritual necessity responding to it, it does not yield to arbitrary extinguishing or transformation into positive love, no matter how much a weary or exhausted soul may plead for it. Misunderstanding of this struggle and its burden and the morally crooked judgment of lazy, timid, sensitive and hypocritical people complete the joylessness of this feat, under whose burden noble and refined souls have always found courage and in so doing, have never doubted the

righteousness of their cause. Thus, the beginning of the spirit modifies the appearance of love in the form of its manifestation. So negative love is something along the lines of tough love. when I confronted, it was a priest actually, I confront it in vestibule, I won't say where. He was not the pastor. He was a guest. And the pastor was very upset with me. And I had it out with him. Ten minutes later, in front of him, he apologized to me, saying I overreacted.

In other words, yeah, you were right to confront this guy. He's saying absolutely heretical things in front of people. as a clergyman. So, but I could say to some extent I had the love of the truth in my, that was the primary reason I was doing it. I didn't want to do it.

Who wants to make a scene like that? You know, I had never done anything like that before. I knew what I was talking about. He was, some people know this story who are listening right now, but um but it's it's you know using negative at negative love in the sense that it's it's love that's not shown in the way it's normally shown um and the opposite of that would be what he

says you know lazy timid sensitive and hypocritical people now sensitive is is i i probably i want i should go back and look at that term um i think i probably it should have been if i remember right it may have been weak his sensitive is not bad in of itself um but hypocritical lazy timid uh and these are the people who who have you know who would never um love the truth so much that they would do something uh like that in its service looking at me like i was crazy even though i was justified in the end um these are the same people who would never, who don't, you know, really care. If I was in the, if I saw someone doing that and I knew the reason why, I probably

I would join in, but I fully, I would fully understand where this is coming from. You know, I didn't do it during liturgy or anything. You know, I did it afterward. So, and yes, but when you're doing this full time, I guess I do do this full time. You know, strength, endurance, instead, fastness without it affecting you in such a way that you become like them. I'm not even talking about that your beliefs change, but you, you know, sometimes you forget that that sort of thing is the very last resort.

And we're talking about now more abstractly, you know, physical violence being the absolute last resort after everything else has been done. This is why I'm certain that in the temple, Christ didn't just show up and start whipping these guys. I have the feeling he had confronted them many times and nothing changed. And so he just, that was now finally, you know, he couldn't do it anymore. Couldn't, he whipped them out. No question. He was condemned by these lazy, timid, you know, hypocritical people.

You know, it is a burden, as he says here. It is difficult. No one wants to do this. But for those of us who are dedicated to the truth, and I think I am, although we always make mistakes and we always allow external, internal forces to affect us, hopefully not for long. And we're all sinful people, and sometimes we screw up and all that. but that there is a certain joy in it. Those of us who've never doubted the righteousness of my cause, I've never done the righteousness of my cause.

I've read the other side in depth. I know the other side extremely well. Some of these writers are better than others. So I always thought that debating somebody, when you keep your cool, that is an act of love. It's absolutely an act of love. And I wouldn't even say negative. It's just another manifestation of what love truly is.

It is precisely through this influence of the spirit on the primitive, naive, direct, and blind power of love that it acquires higher abilities and higher tasks. And as a result of this, its entire attitude towards evil is affirmed on the following grounds. For love to be able to effectively resist evil, it must be spiritually understood, limited, and must be. modified. But once understood and modified, it is the initial and supreme basis of the entire struggle waged by man against evil. The whole problem of resistance to evil is resolved by this basic principle. The struggle is waged precisely by love, but by spiritualized love. Now, if you remember, he's been through this. This is a very informal list. On the following ground, he doesn't, you know, one, two, three. This is actually in the original

here. He's done this before, but now he's using this as far more detailed and summarizes a lot of what he said up into that point, up to this point. This means that the rule, resist evil, not out of love, is fundamentally rejected in all its possible interpretations and implementations. Any act that grows from another source either does not combat evil but multiplies it, or fights not evil, but it's individual superficial symptoms. Consequently, one must condemn both non-loving, non-resistance. When someone tries to sober up evildoers with generosity and compliance, driven, however, not by love, but for example, by rational calculation or cowardness, or cowardly weakness of will. One must also condemn non-loving coercion, when someone fights

evildoers out of malice, revenge, hunger, greed, or the less for power. Both can be psychologically understood. Both can be relatively harmful and relatively useful in terms of overall energy conservation. But there will be no real resistance to evil in either case. Yeah, I forgot about that. I should have gone back and looked at that again, energy conservation. But it is true that, you know, fanatics really you're the only ones who get anything done. People on your side who are driven by revenge, you know, hunger, breed, the lust for power, that's okay so long as you're going to be kept under control.

Because let's say during the Russian Civil War, you know, you need guys like that. You want a few lunatics on your side just when you're fighting the Red Army. but they can't be allowed to just run wild. They have to be brought under control. That's why he says they're relatively harmful and can also be psychologically understood. Consequently, there remains only one universal rule. Resist evil out of love, giving all that is yours where it is needed, out of love, coercing and suppressing where necessary,

out of love, persuading, and out of love, punishing, and out of love, giving nothing of yours if this property, if it isn't yours, for example, if it is also gods, a shrine, a church, a homeland, or their material embodiment, and all their manifestations, giving and not giving, pleading, and punishing. This love will be neither indifference nor self-sufficient sensitivity, nor timid indulgence, nor weak-willed pity, nor complicity. When I was in college at the University of Hartford, I distinctly remember the day, I knew I was going to go to grad school.

I said to myself, and it was such a, you know, I was watching people just repeat slogans. Usually left the slogans, of course, it's university. Not necessarily because they even agreed with them, because this is what the smart people are saying. Even a few people on our side, just, you know, spouting. So they don't really understand. Of course, I was only, I was just a young guy myself. But I made a decision. I made a promise to myself.

that I was simply going to follow the truth wherever it takes me, even if it's inconvenient, and God knows it's been very inconvenient, even if it hurts, not just about outside, but about myself, too. That's a rough life. I'm starting to realize very few people can do it. I left grad school obsessed with going over these texts

day after day after day for God knows how many years than going out into the world and realizing that the truth is not really a motivating force for most people. I was kind of naive, but that was an extremely, it was almost a crushing realization that the truth wasn't the issue. It was more self-interest,

what makes me look smart, what makes me conform, you know, virtue signaling, that kind of thing. But I remember that day. I remember where I was. And I said to myself, I'm not going to be like them. I'm not going to be like them.

I'm going to follow the truth wherever it goes. And that's how I ended up, you know, everything from the Holocaust, the Third Reich, everything. You know, that's certainly not in our interest to believe that. We only believe that because it's absolutely true. true our views on those things. And it came from that, you know, if I, and sometimes I say to myself, let's say you had a tenured position at a university.

What would I have done? Well, I'd be in cognitive dissonance because I couldn't talk like this there, even with tenure. I'd have to, I'd have to go along to get along. It would be completely and utterly hypocritical. Or, or I would simply, you know, um, Like the handful of right-wingers in academia, you know, they give the right-wing reason to despise the third right. Because they were homosexual or that they were occultists or some non-their. Or financed by Western capital, which is absolutely garbage, all that stuff.

You know, creating reasons like that to reject all the inconvenient stuff. That's probably what I would have done. but that's also, you know, I would have lived, I would have been living a line. And this is not sour grapes. A little bit of sour grapes, but I know that I am simply freer than most people. And the question is, how many of these academics really do believe the stuff that they spout? I've said it to a few of them, you know, friends of mine later on, and I said, you know, if you were a plumber rather than an academic, you wouldn't be saying this stuff. So the concept of love would have been completely squashed.

I would have been an utter hypocrite. I would have been frightened that one day I'm going to slip. That's no way to live. So I realized that there was no way I can do it. And I'm very pleased with that today. Thanks to you and your listeners and everybody else. I know I've made an impact, but I couldn't have done that. in the academy.

Now there's a big difference between an academic and a scholar. I am a scholar, not an academic. Academics almost like journalists. It's a terrible term anymore. But of course, I simply couldn't have been devoted to the truth. Love would have been completely squashed the entire time. And beyond that,

he's also saying here, when it comes to defending something belonging to God, shrine, church, your own nation, that those attacking and destroying those are not your personal enemies. Therefore, violence is going to be used against them. And so the rule is you resist evil. You resist evil out of love for the good, out of love for all the people that it perverts, out of love for all the people that it destroys what it can do when it's adopted by a population

we know what it can do falsehoods I mean the typical typical educated American lives in an utter bubble although I think that may be changing very recently but generally speaking they live in a bubble everything they believe is wrong you typical norming American but I don't do this because I you know it's like you know you you don't do this because you

despise them you do it because maybe one day some of those people will come to the truth and we'll just take the consequences you know it's a lot to ask but it's still very possible resistance to evil is created by love but not towards the animality of man and not towards his Philistine's soulfulness, but to its spirit, that is, a love that can love both the soul of man and his entire earthly being, but only to the extent of their spiritual satisfaction, for a consciously and unconsciously perceived man and measures him by the sacredly spiritual standards of conscience, dignity, honor, sincerity, patriotism, and righteousness before God, and therefore invariably turns this negative face towards everything shameless, humiliating,

dishonest, false, treacherous, and abominable. In the struggle against evil, such a state is love with a clear-sighted spirit and a world-accepting will, and therefore it sees God's work in the world, and actively and creatively sends it forth with its power. You don't want to turn your struggle against evil into sin. You know, we're Christian men. I'm a Christian because I think it's true because it stands to reason. There is no blind faith here. Anyone who believes that anyone's expected to believe blindly is absurd. You know, our theologians coming back to the very beginning. I love getting into a debate with an atheist who makes an argument that was dealt with in the third century AD. you know it's been over and over and over and over again it's such nonsense nonsense

um here what do we love you know dignity under sincerity nationalism righteousness it's opposite of course shameless humiliating dishonest false treacherous it's the latter people that need to be converted by varying means and some of us are in the business of doing just that And you do it. And then, you know, physical violence, of course, actually for governments, all the straight up to execution is the final very last thing. That's how you know that there's a certain legitimacy to it. Those of us who've been forced to use physical violence in the past, when everything else

fails, then you have to take out physical action. But that would only be the case if it was out of law. love. If it was out of anything else, you'd use physical violence right away. And we've come across this before. States do this. Individuals do this. So, you know, what he's bringing, that's what he's really bringing out here. That's the standard. And today, these standards are extremely difficult, especially when it's done the same time as righteousness before God. We're not allowed to turn our backs to evil. We simply aren't allowed to. Therefore, what it loves its object is, above all, the one work of God on earth, and in relation to it, love is whole. Furthermore, its object is the

divine, embodied in an earthly shrine, and in relation to it, love takes on the appearance of protective reverence. Further, it is the divine spiritual principle in an oppressed neighbor, and in relation to him, love takes on the appearance of benevolent compassion. And finally, it is the spiritual principle perishing in the wicked. And in relation to him, love reveals the appearance of pure but stern benevolence. Sturne benevolence. That's an excellent way to put it. And I went back and forth on how to state that, but that's precisely it. And, you know, somebody, let's say your neighbor, let's say literally your neighbor, comes to your door. saying, you know, my wife and my husband has got, has lost it. I need to come in here for a while.

And if this person then follows her or him into your house, well, you may have to then take that next step. That would be stern benevolence. It'll be fully justified. Now, he uses a phrase oppressed neighbor. For the oppressed, you know, so long as there, you know, so long as they're, you being oppressed for for the proper reason not not it's not their own fault it's benevolent compassion uh but stern benevolence uh for those let's say in our personal life who are causing that we're causing that evil the person were to follow you you know come over you know let me add them you know you have to take action right there at that point so it's it's a very important paragraph. This is why the entire doctrine that active, offensive resistance to evil against

the evil-doer is contrary to love falls short as a harmful moral prejudice. Like every other true form of resistance to evil, coercion or suppression, this is the work of love itself. If love rejects anything, it is not coercion as such, nor physical coercion, nor suppression, but malevolence in the struggle against evil, that is, malevolent coercion and malevolent suppression, but active, offensive resistance to evil against the evil-doer desires not evil for others, but good for the evil-doer himself. And therefore, it can and must be the work of conquering love. That's another great phrase, conquering love. Usually those two words aren't used together. There is still, I think there's still the prejudice that love refers to,

outside of its sexual connotation that it refers to indulgence. I love somebody, so I'm never going to criticize them. You know, certainly physical violence is absolutely the very opposite of love. And that's simply not true. Physical violence, under very specific conditions,

can be a manifestation of love. It can be a necessary manifestation of love. And there are those that say, and Elian, in this very book has gone back and forth on the issue. You know, can physical violence bring out the best in the person who is being hit? You know,

being suppressed, so to speak. And it's very possible. We say sometimes, we say to people, that guy needs his ass kick. What do we mean by that? We mean that maybe if that were to happen,

he would be shocked into realizing that he's doing the wrong thing. and make changes in his life. That would be an example of conquering love. There's plenty of a pacifist out there who say, well, that would be impossible. No one's ever been made better by violence. Yes, yes, they have. You know, when you're much younger,

I have professors and others just reamming out for doing the wrong thing, and many times they were right. And it's one of the reasons I'd never want to be young again. But it was necessary. it's done so that and it was done and I was shocked by this and I go back

and then I had to realize that I was wrong and I had to refigure things but they didn't punch me out but in some cases we have plenty of people especially in this dying society where violence is the only thing that they understand they understand that in El Salvador which is why that policy is working there

this is why the Biden administration condemned it to the point they put sanctions on the country states of emergency remove basic some some habeas corpus principles and stuff like that but that's

it is a state of emergency it was so in the sentence if love rejects anything it's not core it's not violence there's nothing you know there's nothing anti-love about violence in and of itself

nor suppression the only thing it rejects, of course, is its opposite. Malveillance, especially in the struggle against evil. Sometimes we could use those people. Sometimes we can't. And I love how he makes use of the word twice offensive. We're not reactionaries. These are, these are, we are, not in the sense that we're taking offense to something,

but offensive in the sense that we are preempting something. We're on the offense, not on the defense. That's what he means by that. But it is a moral prejudice that people still have. And I think, legally speaking, it's quantitatively, physical violence gets privileged above everything else. You could torture somebody. A wife could torture her husband for 30 years and nothing could ever happen to the wife. That same poor man slaps for once and he's in handcuffs.

and she goes around crying, oh my God, I can't believe he hit me. The concept of torturing that guy, that's so abstract, we'll probably take him hours to explain it all, but all she has to do is say, I was hit once. Things like bruises and broken bones,

those are easier to show. But the effects of daily humiliation, that kind of thing, that's far more difficult to show. And so physical, violence gets, gets singled out. And I think the legal system, you know, we think we have this, even the stand your ground doctrine, I'm not going off track here, but I don't care. You'll be in court for years. I was just reading about Bernie Gitt. Remember Bernie Gets in 84?

Of course, I remember Bernie Gets. We were just a bunch of us were just talking about him the other day. Yeah, we just talked about him. I was reading more about him recently. And the reactions to him, He had very few allies. Despite the obviousness, some of those guys actually went out to rob some more after they, after they, you know, the guy that were he didn't kill him all, court. And, you know, he was just, he was in, he lives in, he's still alive. He lives in utter poverty today. Legitimate self-defense will land you in court for, probably maybe for decades. So even there, you know, and I know that policemen, white policemen in black areas are being,

are not pulling out their weapons. They'd rather be hit and beaten up instead. And I'm seeing more and more examples of that coming through because they're terrified of being on the nightly news and they're being protests and everything else because then everything will be rigged after that. So, but there has to be this kind of stoic mentality. God is in charge. In this case, I got to do what is right, and it doesn't matter what happens. So even basic self-defense in this country, even if it's obvious, you will be in court for decades. And there's still the chance that you're going to be convicted of murder. even with the stand-your-ground law

and depending on who depending on the race, depending on how the media is depicting this, whatever it is, it's a terrifying concept. And I guarantee you that there are people who would rather be robbed than shoot someone officially a non-white who's invaded their home.

I know that there are people like that. And maybe for good reason. Because even though it would be the right thing to shoot them, they know how that's going to look in the regime's eyes. And they're going to be considered evil just as Bernie Gets was considered evil. Bernie Gets today lives in voluntary poverty. I don't know if you know this, but one of them was paralyzed. Wait a minute. Not wait a minute, excuse me um the families of those who were killed yeah that's it suit him in civil court and one of them i don't think he killed them all i think you did wound one um really really wound

him uh and he got a judgment for 40 million dollars against him so no matter how justified you might be even though he was very popular in new york city at the time you know they could just go to civil court and yeah they you know it failed in criminal court but they just went to civil court and he could never make any money again he lives in squalor today as it's as i as i read so it's very hard to get anything from uh that's the that's the cost

of doing the right thing in a dying society um so uh What Elin is talking about here almost assumes a relatively healthy society. Germany was falling fast, you know, at the time. The Soviet Union was at work trying to destroy what had been a more or less healthy society. We're dealing with something very different here. I'll never forget James Fields. I remember this I could hardly see I'd been hurt so badly at Charlottesville.

I was watching TV and I was holding my eyes open. like this because I couldn't see otherwise. And I saw the initial news reports about James Field. I was watching them, trying to tear his car apart, trying to tear his windshield out and everything else. They didn't get the message as to, I don't even think they knew that she died. She was not killed. And a guy pointed a rifle out of him.

One of you found out later on. It didn't matter. and if I threatened to burn the town down unless this guy got what three life sentences or whatever the hell it was a huge amount of time even though everything was on video so even video isn't going to save you in a dying society those people shouldn't even been out there was a total ban on protest at that point they're the ones who removed the the street blocking you know all the all the gates blocking blocking the street. He hit him in such a slow speed that his airbags didn't even go on. He didn't, he wasn't trying to hurt anybody. It was very obvious. And yet Charlottesville, they were well aware what would happen if they came out with the wrong verdict. And if you guys could help him in any way, if there's anyone who needs help, it's him. Because the man has done nothing wrong as far as I'm concern.

And he was just a normal guy, he's a normal kid trying to get home, and now he's going to spend the rest of his life from prison. And that could be any one of us at any time, depending on who's the so-called victim. And that's very relevant here. We were the ones. We were there for the truth, loving our people, the people who built this country. these communists, these anarchists, they were there for destruction. It's very clear who the signs were.

And it was when I first saw the news report, you know, barely could watch it. They didn't get the memo yet. It was fairly objective at that point. They didn't even see any kind of violence. They never said he smashed into them. He never did no such thing. Only later on when they built the story, did they come up with that? than he was arrested that day and the poor kiddy was in tears and everything and you could

help him there in Virginia in any way you can would be a very good idea because the last I've heard he's not doing well obviously none of us would be doing well in his position so um so even in this dying society self-defense basic self not just necessarily the fight against evil an offensive fight against evil, as she says. But basic self-defense, that's not going to, that's not going to, it's not going to help. Even if that guy did use his car as a weapon, he was a rifle was pointed at him.

You know, he didn't, but, you know, it's clear right on video they were trying to get into the car. But none of that, all that was squashed. You could even have stuff on video and have it not work. But, you know, Compared to today, Ilin is talking about a relatively healthy society. The virtue you have to have now, even do the basic right thing, is so extraordinary that it's, you know, you almost understand why. You know, for people who are just ignorant and don't know the truth and don't care, there are days where I envy them.

because knowing the truth and acting on it is is um leads to a very very very difficult life i'm sorry i know i went off this topic but you but you know how i got there all righty let's uh let's wrap this up start a new chapter uh next episode as i do at the end of every episode i will remind everybody to go over to the show notes and go over to the descriptions on the video donate to Dr. Johnson's work and yeah that's it we'll be back in a few days I appreciate it thank you dr. Johnson appreciate you all right ma'am