Radical Agenda S05E069 – Sneak Peek

As some of you know, I have recently launched some side projects with the hope of establishing new revenue streams and bringing in new listeners. Among the ones I can talk about publicly at this time are some new websites, a new marketing push, and the beginnings of a couple of different books.

These have occupied nearly all of my free time lately, with the notable exception being time I’ve spent over the last few days monitoring Andrew Anglin’s recent meltdown at the Daily Stormer, which I suspect is largely staged. This was followed by Hunter Wallace publishing the best collection of evidence against Weev published to date. These prompted me to a significant advancement on one of the book projects, writing upwards of 10,000 words, roughly a third of which I will share with you today in place of a timely oration about the news of the day.

Before I get into that, I’d like to tell you about the new sites, some of which you know about, some of which you do not.

Today I published my first piece at TransgenderismToday.com, the tagline of which is “Documenting the Decline”. I go over some recent headlines about the transgender assault on biology and reality, and some important history of the movement, which I’ll read to you on this episode.

We’ve mentioned BlacksHateFags.com on the show a few times recently. There, I’ve written several posts documenting the fact nearly all the violence against transgender people, so often mentioned by the media and the broader Left, is coming from blacks. Universally glossed over by the media, this fact, if widely exposed, shatters the rainbow coalition of mongrels and degenerates threatening the stability of our country. Moreover, it does so with a catchy name suitable for flier campaigns, and other less conventional forms of advertising, thus standing to attract fresh eyes to this and other messages we must spread to salvage that which we value.

Most recently, I covered a story there about a Jewish homosexual who was accosted by a black man on the subway, which was hilarious, and this too, we’ll discuss today.

I also mentioned SaidTheJew.com recently, and the most recent post there provides something of an addendum to the BHF post on the aforemented Jewish homosexual, which I’ll also go over.

Each site has a certain commonality. They each maintain their own independent email list, which visitors are aggressively encouraged to sign up for. Each has its own Telegram channel and RSS feed as well, likewise marketed. Other audience procurement and engagement channels are in the works for all of them, and we’ll unveil those in due course.

Additionally, each site has the same radio players embedded on ChristopherCantwell.com and RadicalAgenda.com, with the hope of bringing new listeners to this show.

I have registered several other domains, and have a list of many others which I am contemplating. These sort of niche sites, even if they only have a few pieces of compelling content, I think have huge potential, and I will create as many of them as I can come up with ideas for, since the hosting requirements of this production provide me with ample resources to host a nearly infinite number of moderately trafficked additional sites.

We’ll talk a lot more about this in the weeks and months ahead.

Anglin’s meltdown at the Daily Stormer was full of inaccuracies, which were, in my mind, purposefully delivered to provoke a response. It followed on months of such provocations, and he finally got what he was looking for, to some degree. I was watching Twitter discuss the situation, and seeing that some important pieces were missing, I set to work on adding those pieces to one of my book projects.

That project, begins as follows;

Beginning in 2015, my views and the direction of my content began a rather dramatic shift rightward from my prior obsession with radical libertarianism. With immigration the subject of ceaseless heated debate, ignoring racial matters, and their impact on American politics, became an impossible task for honest commentators, amongst which I can most certainly be counted.

After being fired from my broadcast radio gig for racist social media commentary, mild in hindsight, I was invited to be a guest on a podcast called The Daily Shoah, which at the time, I had no idea meant “Daily Holocaust”. Thus began my Alt Right adventure, which would come to ruin my life, by any objective measure.

I am not complaining, mind you. Mine is hardly the most harrowing tale. Better men than I got worse deals out of this, with less hope of recovery. Moreover, the ongoing struggle in which I find myself is a worthy cause, which I consider it an honor to suffer for. Most importantly, this story still has not ended, and I remain confident that my best days are still ahead of me.


During my time with the libertarians, ideological incoherence amongst my peers became a rather troublesome irritant to me. I found myself surrounded by pacifists in an ideological movement supposedly big on self defense. Thus began all manner of philosophical debates about whether it was justifiable to kill a paper clip thief, a mailman, or a cop. Obviously, the answer was yes, in the philosophical context of something known as the “non-aggression principle”, but my peers saw it differently. Determined to win the argument, I persisted quite loudly over an extended duration.

In the course of this I cultivated more enemies than friends, and those enemies twisted the subjects of philosophical discussions into manufactured threats and conspiracies, which were subsequently spewed all over Facebook. The FBI’s Joint Terrorist Task Force took an interest, and in the hopes of getting a wire on one of my associates, went about a rather devious plot.

They busted a local heroin dealer, and offered him a get out of jail free card, if he would set up one of my associates on a buy and bust.

We were not the heroin types, fortunately, but we did have a friend by the name of Rich Paul, who had developed a taste for marijuana, and found selling it more rewarding than paying for it. And so, over the course of several transactions, my friend racked up more than 80 years worth of drug dealing charges at the hands of this death peddler, at which point the feds swooped in, and made him a somewhat similar offer.

All he had to do to avoid a life sentence, was wear a wire into our social gathering, and begin discussing the types of violent scenarios they had caught wind of on Facebook.

Personally, I wish he had just done it. What we were doing was not a crime, it probably would have calmed the nerves of investigators, and the ordeal he went through as a result was not worth the street cred he had obtained by alerting us to the plot. He ended up spending a year in the county jail, after failing to win at trial with a jury nullification defense.

Now of course, those same enemies who had attracted investigators to us, said I was a “Fed” and blamed me for the incarceration of my friend. An opinion, I’ll add, that my friend does not share.

The impact of this accusation was minimal, because that kind of “spot the fed” paranoia ran rampant throughout the libertarian movement, and unlike many of my peers, I was not into drugs, which is the real reason most libertarians fear cops in the first place.


I spell out this now ancient and seemingly unrelated story, to make a few important points which impact the more timely subject matter.

Firstly, I came to the firm opinion that concerns about government infiltrators into political movements were greatly exaggerated. After all, I had been the subject of numerous such accusations, and whatever anybody else says about me, I happen to know for a fact that I’ve never been in the employ of a government agency. What invited the federal government into our lives, albeit the result of some measure of surveillance, were bogus but understandable concerns that we were plotting violently illegal things, and their ticket through the door was the drug dealing, not our politics. The libertarian movement had certainly been infiltrated and subverted, but when the motives of subversives were exposed, they were financed by Left wing groups in the private sector, not government agencies.

I also came to believe (though I turned out to be tragically mistaken) that so long as I obeyed the law, I could say whatever I wanted and not find myself in trouble with the State. After all, I had spent years publicly arguing about the virtues of cop killers, which I figured was about the most extreme thing a person could say. Yet, during the course of all that time, I never suffered so much as an exaggerated traffic citation. My activist friends who got in trouble with the law, did so because they broke the law, not because of their political views or advocacy.

The false sense of security I had developed during that phase of my life, did not serve me well as I discovered the Jewish Question.

Enter The Daily Stormer

I had no conception of the long and sordid history of the White Nationalist movement as I clumsily stumbled upon it. All I knew at the time was that talking about racial matters was edgy, exciting, relevant, and infuriating to the Leftists I despised. So I carried on in my signature bombastic style, associating with anyone who I could have an engaging conversation with, and trying to produce compelling radio absent the benefits or limitations of broadcast airwaves.

One of those engaging conversations took place in January of 2017 with a guy who went by the name of Weev. In hindsight, I should have spotted him for a bad actor from the gate. In the very first moments of his guest appearance on the Radical Agenda, Weev began advocating for the extermination of most of the world’s population. He called Dylann Roof a hero for killing nine people in a black church, and to clarify, he was not waxing philosophical about what might be justifiable in a different social framework. This is by no means the extent of the outrageous things he said in that short talk, but hopefully you get the idea.

I was not used to being out-edged on my own show, and my Marty McFly syndrome kicked in as I strained to take this in stride. In hindsight, what Weev was doing was not edgy at all. Edgy by definition carries the necessary prerequisite of limitations, and riding the edge of those limits in order to produce compelling and thought provoking talk radio. Weev, rather conspicuously, blew right past those limits and entered into a rather different sort of performance.

A listener warned me in the YouTube comments that Weev was Jewish. This was obviously a rather curious trait in a genocidal and seemingly unironic Nazi, but I was not nearly so anti-Semitic then as I am today, and I dismissed the concern as unwarranted paranoia, which seemed in abundance amongst my new social circle.

Much to my detriment.

Shortly after this I had an off air conversation with Andrew Anglin, who lauded what was in hindsight, conspicuously high praise on me for my content and myriad positive qualities of character, which he had supposedly been observing for some time from afar. He had spent the prior weeks organizing a “troll storm” against a Jewess who most certainly deserved it, and worse, by the name of Tanya Gersh.

This troll storm, Anglin explained, was to culminate in an armed Nazi march on Whitefish, Montana, where this oven bait resided.

Unfortunately, Anglin explained, he would not be able to make it to this event he had worked so hard to publicize. He offered me the supposedly high honor of taking his place as the face of the event, which he assured me would be historic, and earn me the fame and fortune I so richly deserved.

I had other plans, and this is one of few times during the course of this story I can honestly say I got lucky. While abundant fame was near at hand, no fortune was to be awarded to us, it turned out. That troll storm ended up the subject of a legal dispute which indebted Mr. Anglin to Mrs. Gersh to the tune of fourteen million dollars, but not before Anglin had syphoned off $150,000 from his readers, for a legal defense he ultimately declined to present.

Send In The Jews

Skipping ahead to July of 2017, I was alerted by some of my associates that a man by the name of Stephen Lemons from the Southern Poverty Law Center was seeking information about me. I confronted Mr. Lemons about his snooping, and said that if he had questions about me, I would be more than happy to answer them myself. We had a lengthy and blunt conversation about my views, and I released the recording of it as Episode 335 of the Radical Agenda.

One who listens to that will note that Lemons repeatedly brought the conversation back to what Weev had said, even though he was supposed to be building a Hatewatch profile on me. He did the same thing in a subsequent interview released as paywall content.

In the style typical of the Southern Poverty Law Center, a careful stitching together of utterances I had made going all the way back to 2010, painted the picture of a terrorist about to blow, conspicuously failing to mention that I was firmly in the corner of the duly elected president, and no more interested in killing police officers, than I was in offing paper clip burglars.

If you think it mere coincidence that this was published only days before the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, then you must not be familiar with the duplicity of Jews.

Onward To Charlottesville

During those months leading up to Charlottesville, I had attended numerous White Nationalist gatherings, all of which had gone off without noteworthy trouble. Other events had descended into violence on account of masked communists who curiously escaped prosecution, but I was firmly convinced this was primarily due to the self defense laws in those cities giving criminals a distinct advantage over the law abiding, and I avoided them for precisely that reason.

Charlottesville proved enlightening.

The movement had been buzzing about this gathering for some time, and I was contemplating attending as a spectator when Augustus Invictus asked me if I would like to speak. Upon inspection, Virginia turned out to be an open carry, castle doctrine, stand your ground state, which reciprocated my New Hampshire issued pistol license, and I thus figured this was as fine a place as any to tell the communists where they could shove their censorious heretical filth.

As I famously told the Colbert Report years prior “I find that when I carry a gun, people are very unlikely to hit me” – another lingering bit of my libertarianism, later forged into fascist resolve by communist brinksmanship.

Even before arriving, it became obvious at some point that this was not like other events I had attended. I could sense something distinctly different about the media coverage. It was billed as the biggest White Supremacist gathering in decades. Every subversive Left wing outfit in the country was talking about it non stop. The tone of it was not merely to vilify us, which was common enough, there was agitated discussion of imminent violence, and violence was the first thing every reporter who interviewed me wanted to talk about.

I frankly presented the fact that violence was undesirable, as it would surely result in deaths given the self defense laws. Conspicuously, only the latter portion of the statement seemed of any interest to the lugenpresse.

In hindsight, the discomforting variance I had detected in the media coverage was that it wasn’t just the sort of ideologically motivated shoddy reporting I had become accustomed to.

It was war propaganda. A subject I’d later come to better understand, as I read Mein Kampf in the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail.

Though this significantly diminished my comfort level, I proceeded secure in the knowledge that the organizers were in close communication with law enforcement, that a permit had been sought for the festivities, and that an attempt to revoke said permit was being fought by our loyal compatriots at the American Civil Liberties Union.

The Plot Thickens

Early in the afternoon of August 11th, the day before the Unite the Right rally was planned, I had arranged a meetup for listeners of the Radical Agenda. To prevent the location of the meeting from becoming known to Antifa terrorists, I published the details of that meeting behind my website’s paywall, but only after disabling new signups. By so doing, only pre-existing paid customers would be able to discover the information.

I had underestimated the determination of our rivals however, as it turns out they were among my paying customers well prior to the event. Shortly after shaking hands with some listeners in the parking lot of a local Walmart, we were confronted by terrorists. They circled us a couple of times, took some pictures, and attempted to instigate a physical altercation with us. However, upon seeing the pistol I had holstered in the small of my back, they thought better of engaging in initiatory violence.

Instead, they called the police. Multiple 911 calls were made, claiming that I drew my weapon, racked the slide, pointed it at these innocent victims, and threatened to kill them over their homosexuality.

Rapidly, police arrived and surrounded us with rifles and shotguns at the ready. They called me over, and informed me of the accusation.

Fortunately, I had my body camera running, and was thus able to confidently offer police definitive proof my accusers had lied. Brandishing a firearm was not among the crimes I was charged with that weekend, in part because of that video, in addition to the fact that the liars who accused me did not see fit to present themselves to law enforcement. Instead of charging me with an offense, officers acted with the utmost courtesy and professionalism, and sent us on our way.

Former Federal Prosecutor Tim Heaphy was hired by the city in the wake of the riots to conduct an independent investigation. His report rightly described this confrontation as “The first hint of trouble” of that weekend, setting the tone for all the troubles to come.

Enter Vice

From there we were off to Macintyre Park where I met with a reporter from Vice News. Part of that interview was used in an Emmy Award winning work of fiction, which I’m sure most people reading this have seen. The full audio of that interview can be listened to here, as Episode 342 of the Radical Agenda.

Camera Caution

Back at my hotel, I downloaded the Walmart footage to my laptop and deleted it from the camera in order to preserve evidence of that early frame up, as well as to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands, should the camera be lost or stolen.

This too, proved wise, as I’ll address shortly.


I was informed during the course of all this that there was to be a planning meeting that evening at Darden Towe park. When the location was discovered by Antifa infiltrators, and published to their websites, threats came in and the meeting was relocated to Macintyre park. Fearing more violence or false accusations, I wore my body camera again to this meeting, prominently displayed on the collar of my shirt, plain for all to see. As I got out of the car and approached the attendees, I made it known that I was recording, to collect evidence if we were ambushed or falsely accused. As was captured on the recording, those in attendance agreed that this was prudent, and raised no objection to the presence of the recording device.

At the meeting, also captured on the recording, we discussed the court case in which we were being represented by the ACLU, as we fought in the courts for the right to hold our permitted demonstration.We discussed coordinating with law enforcement, both for that evening’s torch lit march, and the next day’s planned rally.

Initially, law enforcement was not made aware of the torch march. Upon discovering this I told Jason Kessler that I would not attend unless law enforcement protected us since, still rattled from the earlier false accusation, I knew trouble would be awaiting us in the Gun Free Zone that is the University of Virginia campus.

My prediction was remarkably accurate.

Less accurate was what police told us. Eli Mosely informed us during the meeting that UVA police pledged to keep us separated from our foes, which was also captured on that video. Save for this fact, I’d have never seen the UVA campus, or the inside of the Charlottesville jail.

After the meeting, I went back to my hotel room, downloaded and then deleted the video from my camera. This was a slow process, which had me running late for that evening’s torch march.

It was worth the wait.

As I arrived on the campus, our men were already getting into formation. Torches were lit, men were barking orders, but there was not a cop to be seen. Hostiles were close to us, one asked me a question on camera in a video which would come up in my preliminary hearing. I was frightened. One man said something to the effect of “They are not going to mess with us, there’s too many of us here,” to which I replied “It only takes one bike lock guy to put a man in the hospital”.


I would later come to find myself facing facing felony charges which carried a maximum sentence of 60 years in prison, stemming from the accusation that I deployed pepper spray against non-combatants, during a fight that broke out once our procession reached the Jefferson Memorial on campus. The evidence of my alleged crime, consisted of photo and video of me pepper spraying an actual combatant who never came forth to accuse me, and fighting other combatants with my hands once my pepper spray was depleted.

Incidentally, this was likewise the evidence of my innocence, since numerous cameras recording the mayhem captured many angles of the conflict, and at no point did I do what I was charged with doing.

Sadly, one angle of video was missing. The first person perspective which my body camera had captured. At some point in the fighting the camera had been lost. I am unsure when, or how.

It was true enough that my accusers had been pepper sprayed, just not by me.

To Be Continued…

I’ve already written upwards of 6,000 more words on that document, but they are not yet fit for publication.

Before the book is published, I will elaborate more on the text I’ve just published here. For example, I’ll be more verbose about the parts where I’ve inserted the contextual links which readers will see in the show description. I’ll also have to elaborate on ideological points which most of you are already familiar with, and will likely borrow a lot of that from the piece I wrote in response to Michael Malice’s book “New Right”, along with some of my other blog posts and show descriptions along the path.

To give that the time and attention it deserves, I am going to be seeking some time off from the show in the near future. In the coming weeks, I plan to conclude Stage 5 of the Radical Agenda. In the intermission, I will be releasing the “Best Of” compilations, which I’ve also been working on behind the scenes, and burning to CDs for distribution as a promotional mechanism.

I would appreciate your help with these pursuits in the following ways.

  • Contact me with your suggestions on content to be included in the Best Of compilations
  • Volunteer to drop fliers, distribute CDs, and otherwise promote these now numerous platforms to new readers and listeners
  • Combat false narratives peddled about me online
  • Encourage interesting people to be a guest on the show
  • Offer content submissions for the niche websites I’m starting.
  • Donate to help me finance these projects and sustain myself while I work on them.
  • Pay me in other ways, like by buying voiceovers, or products, or Outlaw Conservative premium memberships.
  • If you’re not already using cryptocurrency, start today.
  • Let me know, if you think you have some other way to positively assist in these efforts.

The next 13 months are going to be absolute insanity with the Presidential election coming. We need to insert ourselves into the discourse, and if we succeed at this, there will be no stopping us.

It is my honor and privilege to serve in this battle in whatever capacity I can, and I thank you all so much for the opportunity.


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Outlaw Conservative S01E034 – Another 9/11

Next year’s election will mark the first in which people who were not yet born on September 11th, 2001 will have the opportunity to vote for President of the United States.

That scares the heck out of me, if I’m honest with you.

Worse than that, we’ve already had at least one presidential election where people voted who were alive, but do not remember a world before September 11th, 2001, and there will be plenty more of them this time around.

Worse still, I’m 38 years old, and I feel like I’m one of them, sometimes.

I certainly don’t remember politics before that. I never voted before 2004.

A lot of people perceive conservatism, or even Right wing thinking more broadly as trying to turn back the clock, or get back to a simpler time, or something to that effect. That’s never really been my goal, personally. That is what drew me to libertarianism at first, and later to the alt right. That very harsh rejection of Leftism, without the stupid time machine fantasies.

Yet I can’t help but think today that 18 years after those towers came down, we’ve hit this really terrible precipice in time where we might never have the sort of normalcy that, at least I perceived, before that day.

I cannot imagine a world anymore, where I take no interest in what the government is doing. That was certainly my life before I went to work that morning 18 years ago. I couldn’t have told you the difference between a Republican and a Democrat that morning. There are days it is challenging in the current era, of course, but at least now I can say “That is not how a Republican should act” and that would have gone right over my head back then.

Is that the silver lining?

Should we, in a sense, be grateful that 19 cavemen with boxcutters, or whoever, sent world affairs careening out of control nearly two decades ago?

Did the Project for a New American Century have a point in relishing the prospect of “a new Pearl Harbor“?

They had a very different plan than us, of course. The Project for a New American Century was a neocon outfit, led in part by none other than Bill Kristol. They were primarily interested in America’s “global responsibilities” as they put it. Their statement of principles says America needs to “strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values” and “promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad” and “accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles”.

And in case it requires clarification, when Bill Kristol says “our security” and “our prosperity” and “our principles” – he is not talking about America’s security, prosperity, or principles. He is talking about his own, in group, if you will.

In fact, here’s what Bill Kristol has to say about Americans in the context of immigration.

Look, to be totally honest, if things are so bad as you say with the white working class, don’t you want to get new Americans in? Seriously, you can make the case—this is going on too long and this is too crazy, probably, and I hope this thing isn’t being videotaped or ever shown anywhere. Whatever tiny, pathetic future I have is going to totally collapse.

You can make a case that America has been great because every—I think John Adams said this—basically if you’re a free society, a capitalist society, after two or three generations of hard work everyone becomes kind of decadent, lazy, spoiled—whatever. Then, luckily, you have these waves of people coming in from Italy, Ireland, Russia, and now Mexico, who really want to work hard and really want to succeed and really want their kids to live better lives than them and aren’t sort of clipping coupons or hoping that they can hang on and meanwhile grew up as spoiled kids and so forth. In that respect, I don’t know how this moment is that different from the early 20th century.

Fortunately, it was recorded.

That is not what you say about “our” country. That’s what you say about “their” country.

Notably, neither Kristol nor anyone else from PNAC says any such things about countries other than yours and mine. Their favorite country, least of all, and I leave it to the reader to guess which is their favorite.

John Bolton, you might have heard, was a director of PNAC before they dissolved in 2006. He was also the National Security Advisor to President Trump until just the other day. Fitting that he depart in time for post 9/11 America to reach the age of majority.

In any case, what the PNAC wanted was obviously very different from what we want. They wanted to have America act as planetary arbiter and police force, militarily intervening on behalf of a handful of people anytime things didn’t go according to their plan. They saw a “new Pearl Harbor” as a way to sort of shake things up, and get people prepared to spend infinite amounts of money on the military, and they so far seem to have been pretty successful in pulling off that coup.

By near any measure, this has been about the worst thing that could have happened to our country. I don’t think it has been particularly beneficial to most of the rest of the world either, and it would seem to go without saying that everything would be a lot better in the world if Howard Stern had just kept on talking about kissing Pam Anderson that morning.

But then again, I’m not certain of this. I doubt I’m the only person in our movement who was spurred to political consciousness starting with that attack. I doubt I’m the only person who earned a healthy skepticism of government and media by questioning the narratives of that day. Maybe, just maybe, 18 years after that gift to the neocons, things are starting to backfire.

The first Pearl Harbor worked out fine for the people who wanted it to happen, because information was easier to control back then. Most people don’t question that event today, but there is considerable speculation now that FDR permitted and even encouraged the Pearl Harbor attacks. I doubt there was any Pearl Harbor truth movement in the lead up to WWII. Back then, the radio, TV, and newspapers told people what was going on, and that was, for all intents and purposes, the truth, so far as the people were concerned, no matter how false it may actually have been.

September 11th went mostly unquestioned, but certainly not entirely. It was not nearly so simple as giving the public the information you wanted them to act on, and awaiting the predictable response. There was a nearly immediate pushback on the narrative, and for several years it grew louder and louder and larger in number.

On December 29, 2009 Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13526 which says, amongst other things, that classified documents 50 years or older, must be declassified unless they include the names of confidential intelligence sources or information on weapons of mass destruction technology. There are some notable exceptions to that rule, which may interfere with the prediction I am about to make, and of course, a lot can change in 50 years. So when we get to Stage 30 Episode 200, don’t hold me to what I’m about to say.

I would wager that in thirty five years or so, we’ll find out about the counterintelligence operation waged on the 9/11 truth movement. The way inconvenient information started moving around so uncontrolled after that event, likely required a response like never before, and it probably formed the basis for the operation waged against you and me today.

Yet, I’d say its success was rather limited in comparison to Pearl Harbor. This nonsense about Iran bombing that tanker was dismissed by most thinking people. Only an idiot would believe it if we were told today that Assad “gassed his own people” again.

Trump was about to meet with the Taliban before they killed an American soldier in Afghanistan recently, and if they hadn’t claimed credit for it, I wouldn’t have believed it. I half figured that Trump ditched Bolton for being suspect until I heard the Taliban was bragging about the attack. Though, perhaps the two are not mutually exclusive.

In 2008, people ignored Ron Paul.

In 2012, they laughed at him.

In 2016, they started off laughing at Trump, but now they’re fighting him.

What’s that Gandhi quote again? “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

I checked, turns out he never said that, but it’s still a great quote.

Well, in any case. It took 18 years, but First they ignored us, then they laughed at us, now they’re fighting us.

You are here.

Then you win.



On another note, have you tried the Brave Browser?

Follow Chris on TelegramParlerMinds – Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Join us, this and every Wednesday from 5-7pm US Eastern time for another exciting episode of Outlaw Conservative! I’m looking forward to hearing from you at 808-4-Outlaw, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call.

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at



Become an Outlaw Conservative premium member today to support this production, and get access to members only perks!

Hire Me To Say Things at PennedAndPronounced.com

Shop At EdgyGoodies.com


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 




Radical Agenda S05E068 – Buyback

I just saw a story in my news feed that Kamala Harris is on board with Beto’s compulsory gun buyback program. The story was published in a conservative news source, which was unhappy about the position she had taken. I don’t know why everybody is so up in arms about this proposal. I think it actually sounds like a fantastic idea, that fully brings the 2nd amendment into alignment with our Nation’s newly defined concept of Rights.

I’m kidding of course, but bear with me.

Back when I used to spend a lot of time in bars in New York, buyback had a very different connotation than the one being used today in the gun control debate. There, a “buyback” is a free drink, courtesy of the bartender and/or the house, a reward to a good customer/tipper, to keep them coming back.

Now that our country has abandoned the concept of Rights established at the founding, and replaced it with the idea that the government provides us with things we have a right to, such as food, shelter, and medicine, it is time for us to fully honor the 2nd amendment in this context as well. Thusly defined, a mandatory gun buyback program would compel citizens to accept free firearms from the government, or pay a prohibitively expensive fine.

Conservatives may scoff at the proposal for myriad reasons, and I would scoff right back for many more.

“How do we pay for this massive expenditure?” they say…

To which I dutifully respond: “Balderdash!”

At the end of the day, this is an investment in our economy that should grow our wealth as a nation, so the question isn’t how we will pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity.

The cost of this program will be less than $320,000,000,000. Far less, indeed, since I simply took a rough estimate of 320 million people living in the United States and multiplied it by $1,000. Surely the United States government could provide every man woman and child in the United States with a rifle, a pistol, and a shotgun for less than this, once the bargaining power of such a massive purchase is factored in.

That is less than half of our annual military spending, and will certainly do more to protect the homeland than anything our military has done for Israel in the last 18 years. By putting an AR-15, Glock 17, and Mossberg 88 in the hands of every man, woman, and child in America, our Nation will be the best defended country on the planet.

Not only that, but this program will put an end to the Democrat Party, once and for all. This alone will reverse the trajectory of our national debt, and usher in a new era of American prosperity unlike any seen in our history.

In the immediate wake of our gun buyback program, one could reliably predict a short period of brutal violence, most notably in the inner cities. Tragic though this may be, it will, in the long run, reduce crime by ending the lives of criminals and fools. People who are unsuitable for firearms ownership will surely misuse them, and lacking proper training, they will be no match for those who come to stop that misuse.

Save for perhaps Redneck Revolt, MS-13, and certain OG Bloods & Crips whose aged wisdom displays their keen navigation of life in da hood, Democrats are notoriously unfamiliar with firearms. They have always imagined that, by mere proximity to an AR-15, one becomes so overwhelmed with the urge to murder the innocent, that evil Nazi spirits consume the soul, and send the bearer off to gun down as many people as police response times permit.

Doubtlessly, many of them will set off to fulfill this fantasy within moments of receiving the gift of their new compulsory right, and now surrounded by fellow gun owners, will fortunately have their mass murder fantasies cut short by saner citizens of lighter complexion, and Republican Party affiliation.

By this mechanism, the Democrat base of criminals and defectives will eradicate itself without Republicans having to fire a shot. No longer a force in electoral politics, they will be reduced to a handful of iron fisted warlords, who will attempt to rule by force over small territories of major cities, and finance their government through crack sales and sex trafficking.

Once this consolidation of power has been permitted to unfold, the federal government may opt to send in troops to reclaim these territories, or simply allow things to run their course, and send hazmat crews in to remove the bodies and drugs some 12 to 36 months later, depending on how much food was on hand at the time of the outbreak.

In addition to the end of the Democrat Party in terms of sheer numbers, the rapid depopulation of inner cities will cause home prices to plummet, bankrupting countless Jews, and thereby depriving both the Democrat Party and its myriad activist, media, and anarchist front groups of the financing requisite to continue their campaign of terror against the country.

Surely this all sounds too good to be true, while raising some concerns with varying degrees of legitimacy.

The precipitous decline in population, and corollary drop in home prices is worthy of addressing.

The economic model of the United States depends on a fallacious anticipation of perpetual growth, not only in dollar terms but in population size as well. A sudden drop in the housing market would in effect resemble the bursting of an economic bubble, similar, and perhaps more damaging than prior such problems caused by routine business cycles. Additionally, Social Security, Medicare, and other programs for senior citizens, now removed from the compulsory savings models under which they were originally introduced, are in effect “Ponzi Schemes” which rely on an ever expanding number of young people to finance the lifestyles of their elders.

We must resist the temptation to scrap our program based on these concerns. These models were always doomed to fail at some point, and it is better we do so in this controlled fashion, than kicking the can down the road for a less White and thereby less intelligent citizenry to manage later.

Some would contend that we could easily solve the decline in population numbers by continuing the open borders policy imposed on us by the kritarchy. Indeed, we could replace our blacks with Mexicans in short order and rapidly fill up our census data with foreign born newly minted citizens, but this would fall short of stemming the economic fallout, and of course result in all manner of crime and other social maladies, perhaps even the revival of the Democrat Party.

While it is true that temporary discomfort would result, we can recover from this in a single generation so long as our women return to their sacred duty of bearing children. This too will be facilitated by our gun buyback program.

Once guns are in the hands of every man, woman, and child in the United States, the awesome power and responsibility of gun ownership will reinvigorate the masculinity of our men. With lactose intolerant blacks gone from our economy, demand for soy products will plummet, causing farmers to reallocate their resources to more profitable crops, and removing phytoestrogens from our food supply. This will turn our women into sex addicts in frighteningly short order.

With the blacks gone, demand for abortions will plummet, and with the Democrat Party out of the way, no subsidies will find their way into the coffers of Planned Parenthood. By these mechanisms, birth control and abortion will not even have to be outlawed, they will simply be forgotten. But of course, we will ban them anyway, for the sheer joy of doing so.

To ease the economic burden, we can sell the rims, hoopties, grills, and Hi-Point firearms left behind by the blacks, to China. In addition to the sudden influx of revenue, this will have the added benefit of reducing the population numbers, and cultural level of our most capable competitor on the world stage. With the Chinese knee deep in rap music, shell casings, and uninspected vehicles, American manufacturing will be lifted by increased export demand, as world markets adjust to China’s decline.

A global realignment of foreign policy will necessarily emerge from this. Whereas the Russians and Europeans had been hedging their bets, planning on America’s downfall, they will once again accept us as the world’s leading superpower, and their allegiance shall necessarily follow.

At that point, there will be scant reason for world leaders to care what the Jews say, and we can finally turn our attentions to the root of the problem.



There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E067 – Domestic Terrorists

If there is one thing you can reliably count on Leftists to do, it is to debase language.

Their exploits in this arena are the stuff of legends.

They’ve convinced roughly half the country that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” is somehow ambiguously worded enough to permit not only all manner of “infringements” such as licensing and regulations, but even mass gun confiscation.

Marriage no longer has anything to do with families, nor does it infer any meaningful commitment, it’s just another government program to be inflated away like paper money in an African democracy.

They are in the process of severing the connection between sex and gender in the popular consciousness.

Rape no longer has anything to do with forcible penetration, rape is supposedly woven into the very fabric of our culture.

Riot and protest are now roughly interchangeable terms, depending on what the motivations for the action are. As Jared Howe aptly put it “Their violence is speech, our speech is violence.”

“White Supremacy” is now so all encompassing a term that it has been rendered useless as anything other than pejorative.

The word “Freeedom” no longer carries any connotation of the unrestrained exercise of individual will, but is rather a question of who can afford what, and who will make up the difference when some desirable product or service is out of one’s reach.

“War” in the traditional military context, is something only Republicans engage in, when Democrats embark on identical adventures, they are peacekeeping.

From “global cooling” to “global warming” to the more durable “climate change” – the Left has managed to politicize the weather, and by a surprisingly intricate dot connecting exercise, indecipherable to the average Joe, have managed to frame this once uncontroversial subject of small talk into a racially charged bidding war of other people’s money which, after a 7 hour long auction aired recently on CNN, now stands at approximately 5 trillion dollars.

There are no “illegal aliens” only “undocumented Americans”.

When white people move to an area and improve it, this is considered “Gentrification,” and when they leave, causing a place to decline, this is called “White Flight,” and both are equally racist.

In San Francisco, “justice involved individuals” have replaced convicted felons in the State lexicon, just as “drug addicts” have been replaced by “persons with a history of substance use”.

If you took any of these changes individually you might think the idea was to ratchet up hysteria, or to downplay concerns, and depending on one’s perspective, they might be able to find some justification for either.

Taken together, they represent a far more sinister pursuit. Normalcy is relentlessly attacked, while crime and filth are venerated. The delineation between victim and perpetrator is determined not by their respective deeds, but by how each entity impacts the Left’s pursuit of political power. “Those who control your words, control your mind” as Tucker Carlson so aptly put it on a recent episode.

In no arena is this more evident than in the current battle to define “terrorism”.

It is no longer a thing to concern oneself with when somebody screams “Allahu Akbar!” and teleports directly to paradise, sending all infidels in proximity the opposite direction. This is merely a fact of life, when one lives in a populated bit of geography.

Masked anarchists setting fires, breaking windows, and assaulting people for their political views is “direct action” as part of a “diversity of tactics”, and the people who try to stop them, including law enforcement, are the real threats to National Security. Even when Leftists try to assassinate lawmakers, or firebomb federal facilities, they are scarcely worth mentioning, much less terrorists.

Contrast this with the new definition of terrorism, which is necessarily of the domestic variety. There is no such thing as a foreign threat, once border enforcement is itself considered terrorism.

Elizabeth Warren said that White Nationalism was “domestic terrorism” at a recent presidential debate. It didn’t seem to trouble her that illegal immigrant MS-13 gang members have committed far more murders than any of the ever expanding list of people deemed White Nationalists. Nor does it seem to trouble her that White Nationalism was viewed positively by more than 8% of Americans in a 2017 poll conducted during the media haze of the United the Right rally. Or that issue by issue, anywhere from one-fifth to more than half of the country agrees with White Nationalist ideas. The fact that the President of the United States and the second most popular show in cable news have been deemed White Nationalists by many on the Left, in fact only serves to solidify her point.

Mind you, Warren is not some obscure figure on the fringes of a radical third party. She is by some estimates, favored to become the Presidential nominee for the Democrat Party in 2020. What she says is mainstream by definition.

Terrorism today has come to mean little more than that which stands in the way of Democrat political power. It is wholly disconnected from violence or illegality. Speech, text, donations, commerce, permitted demonstrations, and even voting, are now thusly classified.

So perhaps we should be less than shocked to find that in San Francisco, where felons have been defined out of existence, the National Rifle Association, a tax exempt 501(c)(4) social welfare organization, has been officially designated a “domestic terrorist” group. Consequently, “The City and County of San Francisco should take every reasonable step to limit those entities who do business with the City and County of San Francisco from doing business with this domestic terrorist organisation,” reads the resolution.

The NRA has a reputation as one of the most influential organisations in the United States. According to the New Yorker, the NRA’s annual lobbying budget is roughly $3 million and has an annual operating budget of $250 million. The NRA were key players in the 2016 US election, with an audit revealing that the organisation’s spending rose by $100 million to more than $419 million in 2016, in an effort to get Donald Trump elected.

According to Center for Responsive Politics, the NRA spent in excess of $30 million backing Trump’s candidacy.

According to Pew Research, three-in-ten U.S. adults say they currently own a gun, and of that group, 19% say they belong to the National Rifle Association. The NRA boasts five million dues paying members.

Gerald Seymour, in his 1975 book Harry’s Game, famously said “One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter”. Now that the Democrat Party has endeavored to brand millions of the citizens they hope to govern as terrorists, this oft cited quote has become far more than a cliche, or vision of some dystopian future.

To be a terrorist today is for a citizen to support the duly elected President of his country. To donate one’s money and time to a charitable organization which exists for the singular purpose of defending a right which pre-dates written language and, in theory, ought need no more than the law to protect it. To apply for a permit to hold a demonstration, to act in accordance with that permit, and to flee from armed communists when they, in their infinite wisdom, deem such a demonstration so heinous as to justify criminal violence.

Meanwhile, the supposed “freedom fighters” wear masks, wield improvised weapons, block traffic, assault cops, and hate people for their religion and skin color.

Well, if those are the rules of the game, perhaps we’ll just have to begin playing by them…


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Outlaw Conservative S01E033 – Just Plain Evil

When terrorists crashed planes into buildings and sent the world spiraling toward oblivion on September 11th 2001, I really wanted to know why.

I didn’t think I got a very good explanation, to say the least of it.

George W. Bush said “the terrorists” were “evil” and they “hated us for our freedom”. He later seemed to shut down alternative opinions by condemning “ridiculous conspiracy theories”. At the time, I wasn’t much of a conspiracy theorist, but just calling people “evil” really didn’t seem like a valid explanation for such a world altering event.

My dissatisfaction wasn’t entirely about evidence standards, mind you. It wasn’t even some prior distrust for the government. I just thought the bit about the cartoon super villain, cackling with his henchmen about their plans to destroy the world, for no other reason than the sheer joy of doing something terrible, was kind of hard to believe.

Perhaps if I had stronger religious convictions it would have been easier to swallow. “Ah, must be the devil!” wouldn’t bring us any closer to solving such problems, but it would at least give my mind the comfort of considering the puzzle solved.

Whatever the obstacles, I didn’t buy it, but at the time, I didn’t care, either. “It’s us vs. them” was enough for me to support the wars and feel good about killing the bad guys. Maybe they were evil, maybe they just had a conflict of interests, maybe they were getting back at us for something, but if your team and my team are going to have a killing contest, I want my team to win, and we can ponder the philosophical implications after the game has ended in my side’s victory.

Years went by, and I didn’t feel like I had gained a much clearer understanding of the underlying issues, even though I spent my evenings watching Fox News on more nights than not.

Then, in 2009, I stumbled upon what would commonly be described as conspiracy theories. Greed, envy. vendettas, thirst for power, and other simple human motivations were assigned to various known and unknown persons and groups to explain world events. The world was no less scary when I started to think my own government was responsible for every horrible thing in the world, but there was a certain comfort that came with thinking that things were at least going according to someone’s plan, even if it was a plan I disagreed with, and being able to make sense of things through a series of dot connecting exercises which, in hindsight, varied significantly in their merit.

A few years of that often paranoid worldview eventually gave way to what I, for a time, thought to be more grounded to reality. Sure some people were control freaks and greedy beyond the average person’s comprehension, but the vast majority of people, I told myself, were simply misguided. They had simply not been exposed to what I told myself was the one true moral principle of non-aggression, and by this ignorance had sought to impose various methods of control on their fellow citizens with the most noble of intentions. In this view, everyone wanted to be a good person, and was simply in error as they went about this pursuit.

The Leftist infiltration of the libertarian movement made this viewpoint impossible to maintain. As well financed propagandists, well versed in our way of thinking, went about trying, with substantial success, to subvert the teachings of our thought leaders with communist propaganda, ignorance was suddenly off the menu. It is easy to believe somebody is misguided when they are unaware of the better path, but when they study that path, and use that knowledge to deter people therefrom, mens rea, a Latin legal term for guilty mind, comes into play.

This revelation was vital in my ideological shift rightward from libertarianism. I used to think Left and Right were equally misguided in their pursuit of power over one another, but now the Left had revealed themselves as knowingly working against what I perceived to be the highest value.

One could say similar things about the Right if they translated the term to mean “whatever is said or done by members of the Republican Party”. However, as the Leftists were wreaking havoc on the libertarian movement, and more of us were pushed rightward thereby, it became obvious that there was a significant disconnect between the likes of Paul Ryan, and the intellectual foundations of Right wing thought.

My effort to understand this phenomenon, combined with the sudden focus on immigration in the political discourse, led me to more deeply contemplate ethnic motivations as being more central to human action. This surely did more to explain our foreign policy than mere greed and bloodlust. Domestically, it served as a vital complement to my prior view which was much more centered on economics. Ethnic groups, acting on primal motivations to see their group succeed over others, acted in often unconscious ways to that end, and since their subconscious minds were being led by primitive survival instincts, they were always assured of the righteousness of their cause.

Though not speaking in ethnic terms, Jonathan Haidt described this in his book The Happiness Hypothesis. He used the analogy of “The elephant and the rider” in which one’s conscious decision making processes represent the human rider of an elephant, which itself represents one’s deeper instincts and the emotional needs which stem from them.

He describes the analogy thusly;

I’m holding the reins in my hands, and by pulling one way or the other I can tell the elephant to turn, to stop, or to go. I can direct things, but only when the elephant doesn’t have desires of his own. When the elephant really wants to do something, I’m no match for him.

Viewed this way, moral narratives are reduced in value almost to the point of irrelevance. Our moral narratives are shaped in our own minds around baser instincts, and have no objective standard by which to measure them. It seemed rational, however, and my mind is the sort which demands rational explanations.

On some days, however, I find even this explanation wanting. On those days, I find myself somewhat envious of people who have strong religious convictions. Evil simply does a better job of explaining certain phenomenon.

There are plenty of examples, but abortion tops the list for me, and a piece in Vice News, published yesterday, provides an excellent example.

Titled “If You Don’t Want to Provide Abortions, Don’t Go Into Healthcare” Monica R. McLemore rails against a female nurse who, owing to her religious convictions, refused to participate in abortion procedures provided by her employer, the University of Vermont Medical Center.

Such conscientious objections are supported by US law, and the US Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) has taken her side in the dispute.

Ms. McLemore finds this abhorrent, proving definitively that abortion advocacy was never about choice, or about women, but something far more sinister.

She hits every intersectional Leftist talking point imaginable, and a few beyond the common limits of imagination. To hear Monica tell it, anything done “under medical supervision” is “by definition … healthcare”. She specifically includes “gender affirmation” procedures, such as cross sex hormones, puberty blockers, and genital mutilation, and course, abortion, but there really is not any limit to the scope of this viewpoint.

By that same reasoning, the Nation’s opioid crisis is merely health care. Euthanasia surely falls under the same umbrella. Ditch the camouflage and issue medical licenses to the military, and one could just as easily justify unprovoked wars in this fashion.

To hear her tell it, anybody who does not want to participate in such activities ought to be barred from employment in the medical profession.

Yet, if one were to interrogate Ms. McLemore about her views more broadly, inconsistencies would surely emerge.

Can a funeral home refuse to employ a transgender person because their repulsive appearance is offputting to their clients? I suspect Ms. McLemore would say no. Is a bakery, which fits none of the special criteria she assigns to health care, allowed to refuse clients over religious convictions? One doubts she would permit such a thing if given the power to decide.

If the medical industry were turned to eugenic purposes, carrying out abortions and sterilizations with ethnic aims, would she chastise medical professionals who objected on moral grounds? Of course not. If conversion therapy for homosexuals and gender dysphoria came back into fashion, would she classify all dissent as heresy? I doubt it.

It is difficult to assign an ethnic motivation here as well. Ms. McLemore would certainly deny having any racial animus against black people, but she notes that “people of color, and Black people in particular, are disproportionately more likely to receive care from public and religiously affiliated institutions that are affected by these conscience rules.” The implication necessarily being that she favors the disproportionate impact of abortion on black families, a thing which, in any other context, would be considered White Supremacy.

This being the case, it is difficult to frame Ms. McLemore’s supposed convictions as part of a coherent theme of righteousness, even a misguided one. Her desire to compel a woman to do things which are against her conscience, seems little more than a desire to kill children, and conscript decent folk to participate in the slaughter.

Maybe George W. Bush was right. Maybe the terrorists really are just evil people, who hate us for our freedom.


On another note, have you tried the Brave Browser?

Follow Chris on TelegramParlerMinds – Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Join us, this and every Wednesday from 5-7pm US Eastern time for another exciting episode of Outlaw Conservative! I’m looking forward to hearing from you at 808-4-Outlaw, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call.

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!


The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at



Become an Outlaw Conservative premium member today to support this production, and get access to members only perks!

Hire Me To Say Things at PennedAndPronounced.com

Shop At EdgyGoodies.com


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 



Radical Agenda S05E066 – Proletariat Counter Revolution

There of course exists no shortage of things to be repulsed by, when one endeavors to familiarize themselves with the words and deeds of Leftists. Their utterly low-down conduct is so appalling, that one really cannot be surprised if, in the imagination of our people, the Leftist is pictured as the incarnation of Satan, and the symbol of evil.

It might be a challenge to pin down just what aspect of this pestilence is the most disgusting. A subjective choice to some degree, I suppose. Depending on one’s particular tastes, it might be their penchant for smearing decent people, or their unceasing thirst for blood, the kleptocratic nature of the rule they seek to impose upon the world, or the degenerate filth they peddle as though it were life saving wisdom. Perhaps for you, body count is the primary determinate factor of wickedness, and thus you would recall the millions of innocent and often magnificent lives they’ve needlessly snuffed out, or the extraordinarily and wholly unnecessarily cruel manner in which they joyously destroyed those lives. Or perhaps the survivors have the more gruesome tale to tell, the gulags, the prisons, the camps, the slave labor, the conscription to senseless wars, the rape, the destroyed families.

For me personally, it isn’t so much what they do to their enemies. That might be distasteful, but at least the malice and motive are plain to see. I can totally understand wanting to do such terrible things to one’s foes, seeing as to how I am so repulsed by them that I am amused by the retribution they have occasionally been met with over the years.

Even the innocent victims, tragic though their stories may be, can in a sense be seen as mere collateral damage in a larger conflict. To be sure, no government or group aiming to become one, ever pursued and wielded their powers without some negative impact on the blameless.

In my perhaps peculiar taste, it is what they do to the people they purport to advocate for that troubles me the most.

Women, most notably. Feminism has done more to make women miserable than Sharia Law could ever aspire to. Depriving women the joy of motherhood, subsidizing their chemical sterilization, and even conning them into snuffing out the lives within them. Women are indoctrinated to think that the only measure of value lies in manly pursuits of wealth and martial prowess, then then they are convinced that their failure to live up to masculine standards is some conspiracy against them. A conspiracy waged by none other than their protectors and providers, of course, and by this method they set the sexes into the most excruciating and unnatural of conflicts, for eternity.

As I listened to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s The Gulag Archipelago, one of the most painful chapters was about women in the camps. Today the Left talks about “family separation” at the southern border of the United States, as if producing children would somehow exempt people from the consequences of defying the law under their rule. Hearing the stories of women in the Soviet Union, compelled to thievery to feed their children after their husbands were imprisoned or killed for imaginary or petty offenses, infuriated me. They would in some cases be sentenced to a decade in the camps for the sin of swiping a meager meal to feed their offspring.

And in the camps, equality remained just as selective as it did on the outside. Women would be given the same destructive work assignments as the men, with the added burden of sexual coercion, of course. Women would get pregnant in the camp, give birth in the camp, watch their child die in the camp, and see the child’s body disposed of as common trash, all in the camp. Then do it all over again, repeatedly, for years.

Then there’s the blacks, of course. Democrats can barely prostrate themselves before the negro enthusiastically enough during primary season. They are promised everything from equality, to cash prizes, to immunity from prosecution, and have been for longer than most listeners have been alive. Their lot in life remains comparatively dismal regardless, of course, and sickeningly enough, it is the promises kept that have done more harm than those which they have failed to honor.

Taking advantage of their lesser intellect, the Left cons blacks into similar persecution fantasies as those they’ve duped our women into. The only possible explanation for their lesser accomplishments is said to be a conspiracy by White racists to deprive them of their fair share, lock them in cages, and gun them down in the street, for no other reason than the sheer joy of harming those whose skin color they find aesthetically undesirable.

When the outrage such lies inspire predictably result in riots and arson, the criminal element is given license to prey upon wholly innocent blacks.

The gays are no less preyed upon, of course. Whereas they were once free to keep their lifestyles a secret and move about the world largely unnoticed, the Left has now convinced them that their affliction is a thing to celebrate, to brag about, and make to an activist cause of. In the worst cases, they are told to transition genders, and venture down a course which carries a roughly 50% probability of ending in suicide.

For those who do not give into the temptation toward lethal self harm, they are rather sentenced to life as an abomination and social outcast, all the while screaming “die cis scum” at their healthy counterparts, and likewise deluded into believing it is the happy families who are responsible for their unending misery.

This being Labor Day, it would be negligent not to address their most abused victims of all. The working class.

“Workers of the World, Unite!” goes the slogan. So in solidarity with the worker are they, that the entirety of their policy agenda revolves around increasing the supply of labor while reducing its demand. Open up the borders, subsidize invasion and sloth, tax and regulate employers out of business, then ship whatever jobs remain off to some foreign hellhole where nets are required to prevent workers from dying when they leap from the windows out of despair.

In this their egalitarianism is revealed for the degrading and soul crushing horror that it is. Equality indeed. Take a capable White man in an industrialized country, then organize public policy to drag his standard of living to equal that of hut dwelling savages. Take from him what wages he is still able to obtain, through force of the tax code, give it to the women he would like to marry, and tell those women that marriage is akin to slavery, until fatherhood is reduced a peculiar rarity the old folks reminisce about.

When the staggering misery such a scheme predictably brings about, has those workers ready to lay down their lives in opposition to it, direct their enmity toward the employers. Pay no attention to the Jew behind the curtain, he is your friend. Unbeknownst to you, the enemy has been signing your checks for the last twenty years and provided you with everything you own. Once he has been eliminated, you and the Jew will rejoice in a workers’ paradise without a hierarchy of any sort. Planetary, even universal, brotherhood lies just over the horizon, once the Jew aids your revolution against the Gentile elites, and the intelligentsia of your society has been slain.

Those with the most cursory understanding of history know all too well, that paradise proves elusive in the end. Rather, an all too familiar hellscape emerges wherein all the features of the human condition which we like to think separate us from lesser animals, vanish before our eyes in the course of a generation. In enough time the people find themselves equal not only to one another, but to beasts and insects as well.

And this, sadly, is what so many celebrate, on “Labor Day”. Just like “Pride Month” the “Women’s March” and “Black Lives Matter” – it is an abuse of language so egregious, that is scarcely comprehensible to the common mind. Whatever they say they are for, one can reliably profit by betting they aim for the precise opposite.

“The Big Lie” as Hitler so aptly put it, in Mein Kampf;

All this was inspired by the principle–which is quite true in itself–that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.

In place of this Big Lie, we might hope to spread a greater Truth. The Marxists have never truly been a friend to the worker, but rather scheme to enslave the Nation and ultimately the whole of the Earth. They are no more in “solidarity” with the worker than the butcher is in solidarity with a cow.

For all the innumerable and tremendous failures of President Donald Trump, I’d still grant him a degree of credit for at least flinging a spark of skepticism toward the machinations of the Left into the minds of working men, which might yet lead to Samuel Adams’s brushfires of freedom. Our irate, tireless minority might yet prevail, aided thereby.

In Mein Kampf, one of the most inspiring stories Hitler told was how he came to understand the plight of the proletarian in Vienna. He had set off to become a painter, but circumstances led him to instead pursue a career as an architect. To plot this course, he needed work, and began as a “so-called extra-hand”.

His life prior to this was quite disconnected from the life of a manual laborer, and his time in Vienna was an enlightening, if difficult one.

The life which I had hitherto led at home with my parents differed in little or nothing from that of all the others. I looked forward without apprehension to the morrow, and there was no such thing as a social problem to be faced. Those among whom I passed my young days belonged to the small bourgeois class. Therefore it was a world that had very little contact with the world of genuine manual labourers. For, though at first this may appear astonishing, the ditch which separates that class, which is by no means economically well-off; from the manual labouring class is often deeper than people think. The reason for this division, which we may almost call enmity, lies in the fear that dominates a social group which has only just risen above the level of the manual labourer–a fear lest it may fall back into its old condition or at least be classed with the labourers. Moreover, there is something repulsive in remembering the cultural indigence of that lower class and their rough manners with one another; so that people who are only on the first rung of the social ladder find it unbearable to be forced to have any contact with the cultural level and standard of living out of which they have passed.

At the beginning of the century Vienna had already taken rank among those cities where social conditions are iniquitous. Dazzling riches and loathsome destitution were intermingled in violent contrast. In the centre and in the Inner City one felt the pulse-beat of an Empire which had a population of fifty-two millions, with all the perilous charm of a State made up of multiple nationalities.

But Vienna was not merely the political and intellectual centre of the Danubian Monarchy; it was also the commercial centre. Besides the horde of military officers of high rank, State officials, artists and scientists, there was the still vaster horde of workers. Abject poverty confronted the wealth of the aristocracy and the merchant class face to face.

There was hardly any other German city in which the social problem could be studied better than in Vienna. But here I must utter a warning against the illusion that this problem can be ‘studied’ from above downwards. The man who has never been in the clutches of that crushing viper can never know what its poison is. An attempt to study it in any other way will result only in superficial talk and sentimental delusions. Both are harmful. The first because it can never go to the root of the question, the second because it evades the question entirely. I do not know which is the more nefarious: to ignore social distress, as do the majority of those who have been favoured by fortune and those who have risen in the social scale through their own routine labour, or the equally supercilious and often tactless but always genteel condescension displayed by people who make a fad of being charitable and who plume themselves on ‘sympathising with the people.’ Of course such persons sin more than they can imagine from lack of instinctive understanding. And thus they are astonished to find that the ‘social conscience’ on which they pride themselves never produces any results, but often causes their good intentions to be resented; and then they talk of the ingratitude of the people.

At that time it was for the most part not very difficult to find work, because I had to seek work not as a skilled tradesman but as a so-called extra-hand ready to take any job that turned up by chance, just for the sake of earning my daily bread.

Thus I found myself in the same situation as all those emigrants who shake the dust of Europe from their feet, with the cast-iron determination to lay the foundations of a new existence in the New World and acquire for themselves a new home. Liberated from all the paralysing prejudices of class and calling, environment and tradition, they enter any service that opens its doors to them, accepting any work that comes their way, filled more and more with the idea that honest work never disgraced anybody, no matter what kind it may be. And so I was resolved to set both feet in what was for me a new world and push forward on my own road.

I soon found out that there was some kind of work always to be got, but I also learned that it could just as quickly and easily be lost. The uncertainty of being able to earn a regular daily livelihood soon appeared to me as the gloomiest feature in this new life that I had entered.

I saw this process exemplified before my eyes in thousands of cases. And the longer I observed it the greater became my dislike for that mammoth city which greedily attracts men to its bosom, in order to break them mercilessly in the end. When they came they still felt themselves in communion with their own people at home; if they remained that tie was broken.

I was thrown about so much in the life of the metropolis that I experienced the workings of this fate in my own person and felt the effects of it in my own soul. One thing stood out clearly before my eyes: It was the sudden changes from work to idleness and vice versa; so that the constant fluctuations thus caused by earnings and expenditure finally destroyed the ‘sense of thrift for many people and also the habit of regulating expenditure in an intelligent way. The body appeared to grow accustomed to the vicissitudes of food and hunger, eating heartily in good times and going hungry in bad. Indeed hunger shatters all plans for rationing expenditure on a regular scale in better times when employment is again found. The reason for this is that the deprivations which the unemployed worker has to endure must be compensated for psychologically by a persistent mental mirage in which he imagines himself eating heartily once again.

Housing conditions were very bad at that time. The Vienna manual labourers lived in surroundings of appalling misery. I shudder even to-day when I think of the woeful dens in which people dwelt, the night shelters and the slums, and all the tenebrous spectacles of ordure, loathsome filth and wickedness.

What will happen one day when hordes of emancipated slaves come forth from these dens of misery to swoop down on their unsuspecting fellow men? For this other world does not think about such a possibility. They have allowed these things to go on without caring and even without suspecting–in their total lack of instinctive understanding–that sooner or later destiny will take its vengeance unless it will have been appeased in time.

To-day I fervidly thank Providence for having sent me to such a school. There I could not refuse to take an interest in matters that did not please me. This school soon taught me a profound lesson.

In order not to despair completely of the people among whom I then lived I had to set on one side the outward appearances of their lives and on the other the reasons why they had developed in that way. Then I could hear everything without discouragement; for those who emerged from all this misfortune and misery, from this filth and outward degradation, were not human beings as such but rather lamentable results of lamentable laws.

Even in those days I already saw that there was a two-fold method by which alone it would be possible to bring about an amelioration of these conditions. This method is: first, to create better fundamental conditions of social development by establishing a profound feeling for social responsibilities among the public; second, to combine this feeling for social responsibilities with a ruthless determination to prune away all excrescences which are incapable of being improved.

Just as Nature concentrates its greatest attention, not to the maintenance of what already exists but on the selective breeding of offspring in order to carry on the species, so in human life also it is less a matter of artificially improving the existing generation–which, owing to human characteristics, is impossible in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred–and more a matter of securing from the very start a better road for future development.

During my struggle for existence in Vienna I perceived very clearly that the aim of all social activity must never be merely charitable relief, which is ridiculous and useless, but it must rather be a means to find a way of eliminating the fundamental deficiencies in our economic and cultural life–deficiencies which necessarily bring about the degradation of the individual or at least lead him towards such degradation.

How often our bourgeoisie rises up in moral indignation on hearing from the mouth of some pitiable tramp that it is all the same to him whether he be a German or not and that he will find himself at home wherever he can get enough to keep body and soul together. They protest sternly against such a lack of ‘national pride’ and strongly express their horror at such sentiments.

But how many people really ask themselves why it is that their own sentiments are better? How many of them understand that their natural pride in being members of so favoured a nation arises from the innumerable succession of instances they have encountered which remind them of the greatness of the Fatherland and the Nation in all spheres of artistic and cultural life?

Day after day the bourgeois world are witnesses to the phenomenon of spreading poison among the people through the instrumentality of the theatre and the cinema, gutter journalism and obscene books; and yet they are astonished at the deplorable ‘moral standards’ and ‘national indifference’ of the masses. As if the cinema bilge and the gutter press and suchlike could inculcate knowledge of the greatness of one’s country, apart entirely from the earlier education of the individual.

I then came to understand, quickly and thoroughly, what I had never been aware of before. It was the following:

The question of ‘nationalizing’ a people is first and foremost one of establishing healthy social conditions which will furnish the grounds that are necessary for the education of the individual. For only when family upbringing and school education have inculcated in the individual a knowledge of the cultural and economic and, above all, the political greatness of his own country–then, and then only, will it be possible for him to feel proud of being a citizen of such a country. I can fight only for something that I love. I can love only what I respect. And in order to respect a thing I must at least have some knowledge of it.


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E065 – Groomers

Here at the Radical Agenda, we’ve done our best to keep you apprised our civilization’s decline, and the growing list of people and groups responsible therefore. Regular listeners are thus all too well aware that there exists no party more responsible than the transgender community.

What started off “in the privacy of their own bedrooms” quickly became “pride parades” and before we had fully digested the repulsiveness of those displays, we were prohibited from criticizing or discriminating against gays, which paved the way for them to obtain marriage licenses. Before they had even gotten finished incarcerating elected Democrats over that assault, we were suddenly inundated with transgender propaganda and told that only Nazis want to keep dicks out of the ladies room.

From there the pace only accelerated. Before you knew it, we were told that it was progressive and forward thinking to put a dress on your son, and have him dance on the bar while homosexuals throw dollars at him. Every single day, news stories are published by once seemingly respectable outlets, talking about transgender children, and staged medical debates over how young they should be given cross sex hormones.

In our current milieu of late stage degeneracy, the rules of the debate have dramatically changed. The side we used to think of as degenerate and predatory, are now thought of as “tolerant and inclusive” and the people we once thought of as wholesome and prudent are “bigots” and “Nazis”. This creates a system of incentives where the interests of the child are abandoned entirely, and the way to be seen as the most tolerant, is to remove all limits on depravity. Thus the debate over when to start sexualizing and chemically altering children rapidly declines to the point where a London based clinic is prescribing hormones to children as young as 3, and using Skype and Facetime to do so.

Fortunately, the United States hasn’t gotten quite that bad yet, I think. But there are people working hard to get there.

We’ve talked numerous times about Drag Queen Story Hour, the most recent of which was put on by a confessed Jew. Others are more cryptic about their ethnic intentions, but going all the way back to Magnus Hirschfeld and those glorious Nazi book burnings, the Jews have been behind it all along.

A few episodes back, we featured two Denver activists as our guests, who informed us about their protests against an “All Ages Drag Show”.

They will be returning to the show today to inform us of the progress they’ve made this far, and the criminals who stand in their way. At a recent demonstration, Antifa terrorists showed up, maced a man, “milkshaked” others, and slashed tires.

Should the protests stop? Should decency advocates prepare for war? Is it snitching to involve the cops?

We’ll discuss.

There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Outlaw Conservative S01E032 – Opiate of the Classes

I don’t get a whole lot of opportunities to disagree with Tom Woods. I don’t listen to his show that frequently, but I do read his emails, and more often than not he is blasting some neocon or social justice warrior, which I find profoundly amusing.

Such an opportunity presented itself yesterday though, when I got an email titled “If there’s an opioid crisis, government just made it much worse”.

The libertarians obviously have a vested interest in questioning whether or not an opioid crisis even exists.

  • Their ideological opposition to the war on drugs is not well served by acknowledging hundreds of thousands of avoidable deaths placed squarely on the shoulders of drug pushers.
  • They (humorously) blame the war on drugs for racial inequality.
  • Drug addicts on welfare become a useful tool in attacking the welfare state
  • Etc…

There are varying degrees of merit to these ideas. The war on drugs obviously isn’t working. We have problems in our society that cannot be fixed by throwing desperate people in prison.

I honestly think you could accomplish 90% of what the war on drugs aims to accomplish with a $50 fine + forfeit of revenues, for selling drugs. People who break the law are doing so because they don’t plan on being caught. So creating ever stiffer penalties is not the most productive of policies, especially since an endless stream of risk takers are willing to take their place.

I stop short of drug legalization, personally. The big problem with legalizing drugs, in my opinion, is that legalizing them would lead to marketing campaigns like we’ve seen with alcohol and tobacco. People buy advertising because it influences the behaviors of people who see the ads, and anyone who denies this is living in a decidedly unlibertarian ideological fantasy world. Nobody would buy advertising if it didn’t have the power to influence behavior, and anybody who believes in the power of the marketplace ought to find that uncontroversial.

The law ought to discourage behaviors which are destructive to society, but as the libertarians know all too well from arguing against gun control, criminals don’t obey laws.

Corporations on the other hand, do tend to at least try. When the government creates special privileges for corporations that the rest of us lack, through licensing and regulations and the like, very bad things happen. This ought to be an uncontroversial statement for libertarians, even if we come to differing conclusions on what to do about this.

Woods and the members of his “Elite” Facebook group, were lamenting the recent court decision in which Johnson & Johnson was ordered to pay $572m for fueling the Oklahoma opioid crisis.

Here’s what one of my folks (and longtime reader of this newsletter) in that group had to say:

“Good job, [expletive]. Keep it up and you’ll get your wish of opioids manufacturers ceasing to create these very useful and much needed miraculous drugs.

“I sure hope I never need surgery again. I sure hope my wife’s two brain aneurisms just magically disappear soon.

“Guess we will have to turn to street drugs to manage her chronic pain. Big improvement for us you meddling, uncaring, destructive idiots.

“Eliminate opioids from society and watch the massive increase in suicides you’ll create. Would that make you happier? Would that abate your sad feelzies? Do you prefer suicides to overdoses?

“Opioids work really well to manage pain. Do people misuse them? Of course. Guess what: those people have agency. Don’t blame the tool. Blame the user.

“This ruling is childish and very destructive. I really hope it’s overturned.”

No way can I improve on that.

Let me state this up front. Yes. I prefer suicides to overdoses, though I also see this as a false choice. Drug addicts kill themselves all the time, intentionally or accidentally, and they also have a really nasty habit of killing other, often innocent people, as well. So we aren’t talking about a choice between suicides or overdoses. We’re talking about a choice between suicides, or suicides AND overdoses AND murders, which would not happen absent the drugs.

A suicide as a conscious decision made by a sober person is sad. What’s sadder is filling our prisons and cemeteries for the sake of some global corporate entity to raise the living standards of the Sackler family through outright fraud and special government privileges.

If you or me went around selling opiates to every idiot with a headache, we would go to prison for the rest of our lives. Johnson & Johnson got off with the equivalent of a stiff fine, which won’t even cramp their style. It is hardly a libertarian principle to suggest that a handful of people ought to be granted license to do deceptively, that which anyone else would go to prison for doing honestly.

Besides that, it is not just a matter of easing the feelz of mushy moralists that this suit was brought. Johnson & Johnson was not simply held liable for the misuse of their products, in the way Democrats want to be able to sue gun manufacturers. Johnson & Johnson, just like in the suit Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family are contemplating settling for $10-12 Billion, were RIGHTLY accused of running a deceptive marketing campaign, and defrauding both doctors and patients into believing absurdly false things about the safety and efficacy of prescription opioids.

Purdue Pharma is privately owned by the Sackler family, whose wealth skyrocketed after OxyContin sales raked in $35 billion over a 20-year period, giving the family a $13 billion net worth and making them the 19th richest in the U.S. in 2016, according to Forbes. Meanwhile, more than 400,000 people have died from overdoses involving prescription opioids since OxyContin was launched in 1996, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

The Daily Caller reported in January; [Emphasis Mine]

A federal prosecutor recommended felony indictments against company executives for misleading the public about abuse surrounding OxyContin. This could have resulted in jail time if convictions were secured, but the head of the Justice Department’s criminal division under President George W. Bush, reportedly rejected the notion after meeting with the Purdue Pharma executives and their defense team. She has since joined a private law firm and has successfully defended pharmaceutical companies against government investigations.

Purdue representatives lobbied top DOJ officials on multiple occasions during the Bush administration, according to news reports and congressional testimony. Future FBI Director James Comey was involved in one instance, and Rudy Giuliani, who now serves as President Donald Trump’s attorney, was tied to another.

The prosecutor who recommended felony indictments against Purdue executives found he was recommended for termination after a third instance that occurred hours before Purdue accepted a plea deal that was offered in lieu of felony charges. As part of the plea deal, Purdue and three executives conceded they downplayed OxyContin’s addictiveness and collectively paid a historic $635 million in fines in 2007. No one saw jail time.

Massachusetts was one of the states to file a lawsuit against Purdue in 2018, but it uniquely named eight members of the Sackler family. A recent complaint cites documents indicating the Sacklers headed a campaign to deceive doctors about the dangers of OxyContin and passed blame of negative press onto addicts.

“The launch of OxyContin tablets will be followed by a blizzard of prescriptions that will bury the competition,” Richard Sackler, the son of a Purdue founder and the company’s president from 1999 to 2003, said while celebrating the drug’s entrance to the market, according to a document cited in the complaint. “The prescription blizzard will be so deep, dense, and white.”

If that is a lot to process, permit me to recap;

  • OxyContin is a lethal and addictive drug, as are all opioids.
  • Despite this obvious fact, through a massive lobbying effort, they got permission to sell it from the FDA.
  • The Sackler family knew this, and deceived doctors and the public in order to make money.
  • Hundreds of thousands of people died.
  • The Sacklers acknowledged repeatedly that they had deceived doctors and the public.
  • They settled one lawsuit after another, but because the profits exceeded the costs of the settlements, they kept on selling the drugs.
  • Hundreds of thousands of more people died.
  • A federal prosecutor, after a four year long investigation, recommended felony charges for this crime wave.
  • Through their political connections, they got a Bush appointee to tank the case.
  • Through those same political connections, they got the prosecutor fired.
  • The drugs are still being sold as I write this.
  • Even after settling the current suits, the Sackler’s will still be wealthy beyond most of our imaginations.
  • If any of us did this, we would never be let out of prison.

The supposedly libertarian position echoed by Tom’s listener is as devoid of honest reasoning as is the Left libertarian obsession with open borders and homosexuality. It’s also why the adults in the room have a tendency to dismiss the libertarians out of hand.

Suggesting that the “agency” of the individual drug addict is the culprit here, ignores the fundamental nature of the human condition. Human beings are not perfectly autonomous individuals who bear sole responsibility for everything they do. We are herd animals who follow leaders, and those leaders bear responsibility for the outcomes of the people they lead.

When a person goes to a doctor, they are seeking guidance and help from an authority figure who is licensed by the State. The doctor in turn, relies on information which is given to him, to make qualified decisions for his patients.

A pharmacist is supposed to act as a check on the doctor, that if he is overprescribing medication, it sets off a red flag.

The government is supposed to act as a check on the pharmacist, that if he ignores red flags and irresponsibly floods an area with dangerous drugs, there are penalties involved.

Yet, reports Michigan Live;

Michigan has more annual opioid prescriptions than people

In 2016, there were 11 million prescriptions written for opioids, about 1.1 prescriptions for every Michigan residents, about the same at 2015, according to the state’s drug monitoring system.

That compares to roughly 8 million prescriptions in 2009.

The 2016 prescriptions accounted for 835 units of opioids — enough to give every Michigan resident about 84 opioid pills, patches or other types of doses of opioid drugs.

This kind of thing does not happen unless there is a vast conspiracy of malevolent and/or profoundly irresponsible actors, abusing privileges granted to them by the government.

Now perhaps the libertarians could make the Hoppean case, that in the absence of the State, where all resources were privately owned, monarchs and other property owners would do a better job of controlling these kinds of problems. They could surely make the case, that the government failed spectacularly in its purported duty to regulate the drug market and keep people safe. They could easily make the case that regulation breeds the sort of corruption which allowed this to ensue.

But don’t tell me that Oxycontin is some kind of miracle drug that should be dumped on our streets with reckless abandon, just because you know a sick person, or like to smoke weed at parties.

That is modal libertarianism of the most degenerate sort.


Follow Chris on TelegramParlerMinds – Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Join us, this and every Wednesday from 5-7pm US Eastern time for another exciting episode of Outlaw Conservative! I’m looking forward to hearing from you at 808-4-Outlaw, and the more you talk the less I have to, so please do give us a call.

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!


The players on this site now have 24/7/365 streaming content!

You can always listen to live Radical Agenda episodes at



Become an Outlaw Conservative premium member today to support this production, and get access to members only perks!

Hire Me To Say Things at PennedAndPronounced.com

Shop At EdgyGoodies.com


This production is made possible by the financial support of listeners and readers like you. I literally cannot do this without you. 


Radical Agenda S05E064 – Home To Roost

Writers at Gizmodo are throwing temper tantrums over what might be the most predictable of outcomes to Big Tech’s censorious and unlawful efforts to interfere in American politics.

Alyse Stanley commiserates with Twitter’s Trust and Safety Council, about the company becoming unresponsive to their demands, and neglecting to consult them about product and policy changes in advance. Members of the Trust and Safety Council are not employees of Twitter, but rather a group Left wing agitators, almost certainly financed by the same handful of wealthy Jews. Originally formed in 2016, the council hosts roughly 40 organizations and more than a dozen (((experts))) from around the world, according to a blog post announcing its formation.

In illustrating Twitter’s supposed failure to combat hate on the platform, Stanley cites their unwillingness to ban the President of the United States, as well as users who have not been in violation of Twitter’s policies. In Stanley’s talmudic worldview, the fervor of the mob, and the interests of the Democrat Party, are the only requisites for action, and the “Trust & Safety Council” seems to agree.

Unfortunately for the mob however, Twitter is not yet a government. They are a business, and until just last year, not a profitable one. Lacking the capacity to inflate currency or tax, they are compelled to actually meet market demands if they are to survive. Though dressed up in warm and fuzzy language about tolerance and inclusion, the rapacious Left wing hysterics which dominate the company’s corporate ideology, are hostile to anything that even resembles success.

Eventually, if anybody wants to remain in business, they have to tell these idiots to pound sand.

I figure that’s why Jennings Brown was shameless enough to publish similar whining about new workplace guidelines at Google, which he says “Stamps Out Political Speech Among Staff“. According to the new rules, “disrupting the workday to have a raging debate over politics or the latest news” doesn’t “build community,” and employees should, therefore, “Avoid conversations that are disruptive to the workplace or otherwise violate Google’s workplace policies”.

Imagine if you worked in a place where the CEO actually had to put in writing that “Our primary responsibility is to do the work we’ve each been hired to do, not to spend working time on debates about non-work topics”. If you were smart, you would polish up your resume, and begin seeking greener pastures.

Both propagandists make a point to deny the obvious and well documented fact that all the major tech platforms are violating campaign finance laws, as well as the conditions of their immunity under the communications decency act, by interfering in the political discourse. This would be humorous, given the never ending stream of company insiders going public to blow the whistle on this subversion, were it not for the catastrophic implications of the illegal behavior. Like other Left wing fanatics, they insist that the companies are not exhibiting a Left wing political bias, but are rather just ridding the platforms of “hate speech,” as if there was some kind of substantial difference between the two concepts.

What Twitter and Google seem to be discovering, the hard way, is that the (((people))) who want to stamp out “hate speech” are never satisfied. If you let these people indulge in their delusions, eventually, over time, even Barack Obama becomes a Nazi. Their attacks are not on “hate” or “White Supremacy” so much as on the very concepts of epistemology and objective reality. Trying to rid the world of all information that contradicts transgender ideology, means a world in which language must be reduced to grunts and clicks, eyes must be gouged out to avoid witnessing the obvious, and the very propagation of our species must be halted to prevent anyone from feeling left out.

As I was reading Brown’s piece about Google, an older piece by the same author was suggested that caught my eye. In this one, Brown takes a look at an anonymous discussion app called Blind. The app allows employees of certain companies to join private anonymous discussion groups for employees of those companies that can only be accessed with accounts created with a company email address. Blind claims it does not store email addresses in its database, and does not track data that can identify users. The company’s mission statement says the platform was built to “empower every individual in the workplace” and “uplift voices that have been silenced.”

So predictably, this resulted in what Brown describes as “Harassment, Transphobia, and Racism”. In other words, the app is doing exactly what it was designed to do, uplift the voice that have been silenced.

I was profoundly amused by the story, because I recognized the tranny freak of whom Brown was speaking, immediately. In early January, Google systems reliability engineer Liz Fong-Jones announced that he was leaving the company after 11 years on the job. Fong is a tranny degenerate who spends most of his days on Twitter whining about the inherently oppressive nature of reality and the human condition. He has close ties to notorious Antifa terrorists and other criminals, and is not at all shy about saying so in public. Even while working at Google, he constantly blasted the company as being party to his persecution fantasies.

Realizing how far affirmative action and the progressive stack had allowed lunatics like Fong to climb through the ranks of companies like Google, played a huge part in my growing affinity for encrypted communications, and distrust for the communications infrastructure.

When it was announced that Fong was leaving the company, his coworkers celebrated on Blind. Some of the messages Brown saw fit to highlight included;

“Best news I’ve heard all weekend. I’m hoping all the jackasses that sympathize follow her out the door.”

“What a piece is [sic] shit human being.”

“Malignant tumor finally removed !”

“It’s a happy moment for Google.”

“I love you fong time, not”

“What did she do when at google? Leader of SJWs?”

“Pretty much. Good riddance.”

“If you think Google is a breeding ground for racism, microaggressions, and bigotry, there is no place that will be safe for you. You are a perpetual victim that needs mental help.”

It’s worth noting that Brown took polar opposite positions in the two posts. When Google tried to tell their communists to do their fucking jobs and shut up about politics, Brown lamented the “chilling effect that this will have across all areas of Google”. When Google employees were actually free to speak their minds on Blind, Brown laments that “the forums seem to be growing toxic, making some employees feel unwelcome or unsafe.”

Not long after Fong announced his departure from Google, another tranny was gearing up to leave Facebook. Sophie Alpert left his position as an engineering manager, because he claimed to have been harassed by other employees after he was frustrated with the slow pace of White genocide at Facebook. “I want to spend my time at a place willing to push further on diversity and inclusion. One where it’s not OK to write on Workplace that white privilege doesn’t exist. One where if I call out that our board has too many white men, I don’t get harassed by other employees on Blind with transphobic messages saying I should be fired.”

Reading the three pieces was a pretty good White pill for me this morning, and I hope you’ll see it the same way. Time and again we find familiar patterns developing, and the efforts to reverse them consistently fail, instead managing only to increase tensions and delay the inevitable.

Nobody actually likes “diversity” especially that of the delusional gender variety. The moment people feel empowered to say so, they express their disgust with this garbage vociferously.

More importantly, even when the corporate culture of a company becomes thoroughly infested with this cancer, the profit motive eventually wins out, and social justice has to take a back seat to corporate survival. That doesn’t mean Google will stop being evil, or that Twitter will become honest, or that Facebook will be any less Jewish, but it does mean that there are some hard physical limits to how far Left a company can go if it wants to remain in business.

Perhaps the bigger white pill is this. It might be too late for these companies to turn things around.


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading

Radical Agenda S05E063 – Pressure Points

By now, you’ve surely heard everyone with access to a TV camera talk about Trump calling Jewish Democrats “disloyal”. You’ve more than likely heard a whole bunch of Democrats calling it anti-Semitic, and a whole bunch of Republicans trip all over their words trying to find a way to straddle the issue without hurting what little remains of their balls.

I never fully comprehended the concept of trigger warnings, until this week. Things piss me off all the time, and nobody sees fit to warn me in advance. Until now, I had simply taken this as the run of the mill Leftist speech policing.

Now, I realize it is about something much deeper.

Leftists, especially Jews, really do require trigger warnings for their very survival. Jewish neurosis is a contagion spread through media, a terminal mental illness which causes those infected to commit the political equivalent of suicide by cop.

When Trump said Jews were “disloyal” for voting Democrat, it was obvious to sane people he meant they were being disloyal to Israel.

Jews, for better or worse, are not sane people. They hit the fucking ceiling, screaming at everyone who would listen that “disloyalty” is an anti-Semitic trope. “That’s why Hitler wanted to kill us” they shouted, at people who had been propagandized their whole lives to think Hitler killed the Jews for no reason whatsoever.

But the Jew-as-Nazi-Summer-Santa circus did not end there. Every Jew in the world piped up as loudly as they could, to remind Republicans that Jews not only vote overwhelmingly Democrat, but also finance HALF of the Democrat Party, and nearly all of their various subversive activist groups. When Republicans pipe up about facts like that, they get banned from Twitter, but when the Jews do it for us, we get to sit back and giggle at their self own.

Luckily for the Jews, the goyim have been propagandized for generations. The pogroms had not yet started. They now had the perfect time to regain their composure, and quit while they were ahead.

Obviously, they didn’t do that. They never do. The Jewish mind, when triggered, is psychiatric quicksand. The more they fight, the faster they sink, and the faster they sink, the more they fight. When Trump clarified what was obvious to the rest of us, the Jews just refused to take the hint, as usual. Right after they had just got done screaming that nobody could accuse them of dual loyalty, they turned right around and said to Americans, “Well, we’d never be disloyal to our ethnostate!”

Of course, they reconcile this by insisting, in stark contrast to an abundance of evidence, that the interests of Israel and the United States always coincide, without exception. (((Our Greatest Ally))) as the saying goes… Hopefully Trump says something else triggering before the end of the month, and we can get the Jews to start talking about how criticizing the war in Iraq is anti-Semitic. That ought to be fun.

Mind you, that this came in response to Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar’s understandable contempt for the State of Israel. They’ve done and said things that would get any other person hunted down by CNN, doxed, and jumped by a black bloc. None of which seems to be of any particular concern to American Jewry, because “The Squad” is doing such a fine job, in their sick minds, of destroying America. And that’s their true priority.

I don’t think really think Trump was trying to 4D Chess this thing. Though I do sometimes like to think the President listens to the show, I’m not saying the guy necessarily got this idea from me, but those of you who have been listening for awhile know this is straight out of the Radical Agenda playbook.

Leftists love to throw around their “solidarity” buzzword almost as much as they love “diversity”. But we ethnonationalists know all too well that the two concepts are wholly incompatible.

All that holds the Leftist coalition together is a contempt for White men. These people have nothing in common with one another save for that. Jews, Muslims, atheists, homosexuals, trannies, dindus, and illegal immigrants do not a cohesive group make. Stoking tensions between Muslims and Jews is excellent politics, because even when it doesn’t work to divide them, calling attention to that obvious problem is red pilling to White folks.

If not for the United States, Israel would be destroyed in an afternoon by their Muslim neighbors. Every surviving female (should any remain) would have an Arab baby in her belly by the next day, and you can be certain they would forget all about feminism shortly thereafter.

Saying so might not make Jews want to close the borders, but it will make White people see them as fucking nuts.

And that’s hardly the only pressure point worth grabbing.

Just after Omar and Tlaib were barred from invading Israel, the Palestinian Authority banned homosexual activity in the West Bank. The Jewish Press quickly pounced on the story, trying to frame their treatment of the Palestinians as a gay rights scam. Pressed about their support for a group that would oppress one of the Democrat Party’s favorite constituencies, Omar said “Pretending that this act somehow balances or mitigates Israel violating the dignity & rights of Palestinians – or undermines case for defending Palestinian rights – is deplorable!”

Ah yes, deplorable. That powerful word is the sound of imminent victory. Just ask Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats are letting transgenderism become a central issue for their presidential campaigns. This is no way to win a popularity contest, to say the least of it. Especially not when you’re trying to win the black vote.

Everybody knows that Blacks Hate Fags, and especially trannies. So far this year, 16 people who have been infected with transgender ideology by Jewish media have been murdered. All but one of them, were black. In all cases where the killers have been caught, the killers were also black.

That’s why I launched BlacksHateFags.com, taglined “The Rift in the Rainbow”.

This blog post and opening monologue is incomplete and will be updated before showtime at 5:00pm US Eastern. 


There’s a lot more to get to, plus your calls at 323-9-AGENDA, that’s 323-924-3632

Join us, this and every Monday and Friday from 5-7pm US Eastern time, for another exciting episode of the Radical Agenda!

Follow Chris on Telegram or Parler or Minds. The Jews banned me from everything else.

Podcast RSS FeedSubscribe via Email

Today we will have live streaming video courtesy of JoshWhoTV. Subscribe to our JoshWho Channel here and watch live on JoshWhoTV.

You can listen live on the Radical Agendas Radio Network. Catch video on demand on our Bitchute channel!

Continue reading