This is a revision of a monologue recorded for a YouTube channel, which has since been removed. The first part is a transcript of the spoken, improvised monologue and the second part is the typed revision of the thoughts explored in the first part.
This is going to be a response to a YouTube video by Millennial Woes, titled “The Issue of the Century”. The video itself is fifteen minutes long and I’m not going to provide a transcript, so watch it yourself. The fundamental premise of the video, the main point that he made; his main proposition, is that the events in Rotherham are extremely significant. And I agree. His second point, was that race is the fundamental issue here; the difference between races and ideologies and cultures. And yes, I agree with this. However, I do think it runs deeper than that.
Empires last between two hundred and two hundred and fifty years. I’ll link to the essay to which I’m referring in the description. It’s titled “The Fate of Empires”, and as the essay brilliantly points out, empires last two centuries and half, on average. The British Empire ended in the fifties when we gave away the last of our colonies. Britain willingly committed suicide. We gave away the last of the land that we conquered because there was a cultural shift, a very, very important cultural shift. At the end of the British Empire we didn’t suffer physical conquering; there was no army that came and destroyed London; there wasn’t anywhere that was ransacked; no-one was raped. There wasn’t anything you could find which would be typical of the end of an empire; most other empires end violently, or, harshly, in the best cases; but that didn’t happen to Britain; that didn’t happen to the British Empire. Instead of being physically conquered, we, culturally, were conquered by outside forces. The [cultural conquering of the] U.S. was around the same time, too. I’m not going to go into all this in great detail here.
This trapped us in the final stage of the fate of empires. Again, if you’re confused as to what I’m referring to, read the essay in the description. It’s only twenty-odd pages long, it won’t take you a lifetime. We were stuck in the age of decadence, and we have been stuck in the age of decadence for the better part of half a century. We’ve been in this murky quagmire where things have only got worse. The age of decadence is typically marked by a weakening of religion, and we’ve seen that all over the West; the welfare state, we’ve seen that all over the West; an influx of foreigners, we’ve seen that all over the bloody West; frivolity; pessimism; defensiveness; and especially materialism, again, the West is rampant with materialism. This is caused by too long a period of wealth and power; people become lazy. In the natural world this is a phenomenon known as behavioural sink. I will link to an article on that as well because I’m not going to bore people to death with scientific analysis. But, obviously, humans are a bit more complicated than typical animals, and thus, “our version” of behavioural sink has many more variables, but we do see it. Behavioral sink is the same thing as the fate of empires; albeit with the fate of empires there are more variables and it’s far more complex. Nonetheless, the same things happens in every society; the end of every empire and when behavioural sink kicks in to a population of animals in the wild. Both groups experience depravity and degeneracy, hyper-sexualization. Men become infertile and weak and effeminate, women take the opposite; women become aggressive and hyper-sexualized. Sound familiar? Yeah, scary stuff.
Bringing this “back home”, I propose to Millennial Woes that this runs deeper than just the conflict of two cultures; this is a conflict between an aggressive culture and a decadent culture; one that is on the way out, and one that is growing, unfortunately. Now, is there any way to reverse this? I don’t know, I honestly don’t know. I don’t know if there’s any way to reverse the fate of empires; if there’s any way to overcome it. Logic would tell you that if everyone was educated then we would be able to avoid it, but I don’t think human intelligence can overcome natural law such as behavioural sink. I don’t know. If anyone has anything to add to this discussion, then please feel free to. More people need to know about this stuff, it’s extremely important and bloody interesting.
This was the first non-scripted monologue I recorded, and it shows; especially in my way of speaking; the speed at which I speak, my vocabulary, certain terminology, et cetera. But, nevertheless, it is one of my most popular broadcasts, almost definitely because it has “Millennial Woes” in the title. Intellectually speaking, I move through a lot of rather in-depth, heavy-weight stuff very briefly without going into as much detail as I should have. Generally, I still hold with most of what I said, although I do think a deal of teenage excitement is a little prevalent in the recording and I may have put some things across with too much certainty; a little bit of overconfidence.
I still believe The Fate of Empires is a worthwhile read; in fact I consider it near-essential reading for anyone who is interested in history, politics, sociology, psychology or any subject of human (or more abstract) persuasion. The reading of this essay was my true beginning; an entry-point into politics and philosophy, as it brought a great deal into perspective. The notion that there are wider forces at work in regard to the decline of the West was not something I was committed to prior to reading it. This, along with an awareness of behavioural sink, pretty much ruled out “The Jews did it!”, “The Church did it!”, or “The corporations did it!” and suggested that the truth was in fact more nuanced and more complex than I had previously anticipated. One friend of mine made a response to my video where at one point he outright stated that he did not like the idea of “fate,” that there are some things that are largely out of conscious control of individuals. Issues such as the decline of Western civilization are easy to attribute to the actions of individuals, or groups of individuals; people blame other people because people are often understandable to a certain degree. However, as I alluded to in my video, it seems more likely that there is a much larger force at work; not to say that the actions of individuals are obsolete, but that they are more likely in conjunction with something else; something most likely even above them; something that preexists them and will, later, post-exist them.
The intention of The Fate of Empires is noble. The contents are definitely interesting, especially comparisons of the present world and the ancient, or past; such as this excerpt from Ch. XV, The Age of Affluence (P. 11): “The Arab moralist, Ghazali (1058-1111), complains […] of the lowering of objectives in the declining Arab world of his time. Students, he says, no longer attend college to acquire learning and virtue, but to obtain those qualifications which will enable them to grow rich. The same situation is everywhere evident among us in the West today.”
However, one thing we need to see is a revision of sorts; an expansion of it. I say that as the essay is simply not in-depth enough. It is a short read, and the examples of civilizations abiding by the theories presented in the essay are few in number in comparison to the number of empires that have fallen over the course of human history that we are aware of. The essay counts ten to fifteen empires that have fallen, all of which are from Europe and the Middle-East; which of course, is simply not enough for a serious study. Also, there are obvious and significant exceptions to the theory; for example, one of the greatest civilizations in history, ancient Egypt, lasted some four thousand years divided among several dynasties. Similar examples of civilizations that do not align to the fate of empires include those of South and Central America, many groups in the East and Far East, and countless others. Perhaps the theory can only be attributed to groups who satisfy certain conditions, which then enables something akin to behavioural sink.
I say “something akin” to behavioural sink because this phenomenon is not exactly the same thing as what John Glubb names “the fate of empires”. There are similarities, yes, but to see behavioural sink, we need to look no further than large cities. Behavioral sink, after all, is a consequence of, according to the researcher whose name escapes me, overpopulation. Would it be fair to say that it is overpopulation which is linked with the fate of empires? I think so, especially in the modern context where we have millions of third-world people moving into large Western cities on a purely materialistic basis. From this, then, we might have reason to look into behavioural sink, not purely from the few symptoms it shares with the fate of empires.
As of the moment, I do not have access to the internet to immerse myself in studies about over-population, and it is too cold for me to be bothered to trek into the town library, but to clarify, I will say that, in keeping with the theme of behavioural sink, it is the collective psychology of busy metropolitan cities which is of interest. Not only in the scientific sense, but in the spiritual sense also; after all, like I have said, millions of people being in the same space not for cultural, racial, spiritual or metaphysical reasons, but for nothing short of money and comfort, is of high significance and is unlike anything we have witnessed before in human history, at least on this scale. The resulting culture exemplifies the commonalities of these people, and thus modern, hedonistic, materialistic, consumerist culture is the result: not only in one place, but in every large city of the modern multiracial, multicultural type in the West (and more recently, the Far East).
As I have made clear on multiple occasions, race itself, in a purely biological, scientific sense, is a very messy topic. Not only due to the modern consensus on it, but also because it can quickly spiral into racial purism; physically unattainable and thus mentally a frustrated, violent realm. Millennial Woes himself has referred to neo-Nazi types as “thug[s]”, and I would agree; it is unfortunate that many bright young men fall into this trap, but it is not surprising due to the highly materialistic and scientific world they are surrounded by which in turn influences how they view and judge said world. Millennial Woes’ premise that Rotherham was a largely racial conflict is true. Racial groups develop their own histories; thus genetically-similar communities develop their own cultures confined to them and them alone. Islam is mostly practiced by Middle-Eastern people as it originated in the Middle-East; and the ideology itself (in a true, non-Westernized sense) is rather “old-fashioned” to put it kindly. Miscegenation within the Islamic Middle-East is almost non-existent and other racial groups are rightly shunned as outsiders. This is why the Pakistani Muslim men perpetrated those evil, heinous, despicable acts upon almost exclusively English girls; they are not them; they are the “other”, the “white slags”; “fair game” as non-Muslims of another race.
As I have stated, though, race is not something to be caught up in lightly; in fact most of the time race is involved, it is often in conjunction with culture. In the “04/04/2015 Babblefest” broadcast on my YouTube channel Millennial Woes described race as being the “foundation”; the “blueprint” upon which culture is built. Race and culture often act in conjunction with one another, race being the stable foundation, as Millennial Woes described, where culture is a more free-acting thing which is more subject to change and evolution. In this light, the perpetrators of the Rotherham Scandal were acting upon more than simply race; but the mind-set which came as a result of their Islamic worldview; their culture. This must be kept in mind as, of course, there are Muslims in the world who would rightfully shun the rape and torture of children, no matter their race or culture. Again: race in a strictly biological sense without the pretext of culture or spirituality is a dead-end where the only result is angry young men who shun the world and the rest of mankind. There is a hierarchy, some racial groups are above others; but only with the pretext of culture and spirituality. Without these things, there is nothing but flesh. As this is true, the reverse is also; there can be no culture without race, specifically racial homogeneity. As described: “Racial groups develop their own histories; thus genetically-similar communities develop their own cultures confined to them and them alone.” Can multiracial communities develop sound cultural and spiritual customs in the current conditions? Again, this has been covered: “The resulting culture of course exemplifies the commonalities of these people, and thus modern, hedonistic, materialistic, consumerist culture results: not only in one place, but in every large city of the modern multiracial, multicultural type in the West (and more recently, the Far East).”
Immigrant populations almost never assimilate if they immigrate in large enough numbers; they have no need to, as they can quite easily create their own pockets of their culture within the geographical spaces they move into as the preexisting civilization, namely the Anglosphere (and the West, generally), will not prohibit them from doing so in the present age. Modern egalitarianism and humanitarianism prevent the Western states from exercising their will to exist (the metaphor of “a prison without walls or chains” seems appropriate), and so we see severe cultural fragmentation. So, when several immigrant populations move into a single large Western city, they each maintain their own culture; their metaphysical selves, as in race and culture, and yet, their physical selves change; as in wealth, health and geographical location. Thus, like I have described, only their commonalities come into harmony, and the only commonality of these culturally and spiritually distinct people in this case is the desire for wealth; and thus the desire of security. Of course, security in the purely physical, material sense.
Whilst Millennial Woes is correct on his assertion that race is fundamental, I will stress again that it is a difficult topic to focus wholly on. At the present, we in Britain have a flawed, but functioning society. If this were to, as many of us in the alternative right believe is likely, collapse in some sort of violent fashion, race would again become immensely obvious to most people. It would be the divider between people; between groups fighting to survive and preserve themselves. The only glue holding the current liberal daydream together is the abundance of resources, which are, as I have described, the only commonality between all these different groups. Once the money runs out, many people will most likely awaken from their stupor and rely on the safety of their in-group to sustain themselves. These in-groups will be almost absolutely racially distinct, as race is the fundamental signifier of difference between people; it is prevalent, obvious, and as explained, synonymous with culture. However, that will be then; it is not now. The events in Rotherham and similar cities simply confirms what the racially and culturally aware man already knows; that there still lingers in each human being an understanding of “them” and “us”, whether this a “good” or “bad” thing is irrelevant; what matters is that it is still present, no-matter how much the liberal of today may wish it not to be so. There is the well-known Tolkien quote which clarifies this: “Those who have not swords can still die upon them.”
- The Fate of Empires is a worthwhile read, and I would encourage anyone to read it. However, it is not perfect; much more study is required on the subject.
- Behavioral sink and the fate of empires are not synonymous, but they do share symptoms, such as overpopulation.
- Western “multiculturalism” is a pseudonym for material, consumerist culture with an absence of any concrete spiritual or metaphysical basis.
- The cause of the Rotherham scandal (and similar incidences) is racial tension involving cultural (or religious) pretext. However, race means little without culture, and culture cannot manifest without a racially homogenous “template” of people.
- Millennial Woes was ultimately correct in his judgement, although the general topic should be approached with caution and a great deal of patience.