Speaker 1: Hey much as we'll be on the winning team. Hello
Speaker 1: and welcome Jay, and thank you so much for joining
Speaker 1: us once again on Legalized freedom dot Com.
Speaker 2: Thank you, Greg. It's pleasure to be back.
Speaker 1: Okay, Jay, Today we're doing part three of our little
Speaker 1: interview series discussing your book Esoteric Hollywood Sex Cults and
Speaker 1: Symbols in Film, And of course we've been getting into
Speaker 1: a lot of other related things that you didn't necessarily
Speaker 1: cover in the book. Do recommend people hop back and
Speaker 1: listen to the first two installments, which the links to
Speaker 1: which can be found on the web page for this
Speaker 1: particular section. So with that in mind, we're going to
Speaker 1: go straight in to continue our chat. All the preamble
Speaker 1: stuff that about your book, et cetera, et cetera can
Speaker 1: be found either in one of the other interviews or
Speaker 1: at the end of this one. So now two things
Speaker 1: that we threaten to talk about last two occasions. Where
Speaker 1: first movie was Zardols from nineteen seventy four. That's a
Speaker 1: film by director John Burman and star Sean Connery, of
Speaker 1: all people, not long after he actually finished up his
Speaker 1: second stint as James Bond. Now Berman is perhaps better known,
Speaker 1: I guess One of his best known films is probably
Speaker 1: Deliverance with Burt Reynolds and John Voight and the other
Speaker 1: guy whose name I can't remember, the fat Dude, and.
Speaker 2: A very wholesome family film.
Speaker 1: It is, Yeah, no, and also excalib.
Speaker 2: When I say when I say family, I mean that
Speaker 2: in a very extreme sense.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, yeah, I'd like to keep it in the family.
Speaker 1: And so, yeah, people haven't seen Deliverance that they really
Speaker 1: do need to do that. It's still actually has not.
Speaker 1: We're not here Destiny to talk about that, but for
Speaker 1: me that that film still has the power to shock.
Speaker 1: Even though I've watched it quite a few times, you
Speaker 1: know that there's definitely something about it that's so you.
Speaker 2: Can go about thirty minutes from where I am and
Speaker 2: find people living in conditions fairly close to that.
Speaker 1: Yeah, or you could not do that. You could just
Speaker 1: stay in town and lock your doors.
Speaker 2: Yeah, but we were talking about the Mullet people. But yeah,
Speaker 2: we were talking the first episode, and yeah, it gets
Speaker 2: worse than just the Mullets. I mean, the South has
Speaker 2: a lot of great points to it, but there really
Speaker 2: are still some of those you know, very destitute backwoods
Speaker 2: times people.
Speaker 1: Yeah, wrong, turn type stuff. M HM and Excalibur is
Speaker 1: another one of John Berman's films that's his Arthurian, his
Speaker 1: take on the Arthurian legend, which I always think.
Speaker 2: Yes, it's interesting, it's very gnostic.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, it is. Rather it is rather, But I say,
Speaker 1: I wanted really to talk about zar Doors because this
Speaker 1: fits in with some of the themes that we picked
Speaker 1: up last time, last two times, specifically talking about science
Speaker 1: fiction distilly is, you know, visions of the future. Also
Speaker 1: things being laid out in decades gone by that would
Speaker 1: very much tie in with things that have happened since,
Speaker 1: particularly in the realms of technology, science and society, and
Speaker 1: things that look a lot closer to happening than they
Speaker 1: did back and movies such as this kind of laid
Speaker 1: them out. So Zardos is an interesting film. I mean
Speaker 1: visually I find it quite ravishing. Really, there's just so
Speaker 1: many points of interest, so many scenes and sections that
Speaker 1: he just kind of go wow, you know, look at that.
Speaker 1: Particularly at the time. It's one of those things where
Speaker 1: I can't quite imagine what it would be like going
Speaker 1: to the movies to see that for the first time.
Speaker 2: My underwear shaken not starred.
Speaker 1: Hey, listen, you gotta love Sean Connery, haven't you. Really.
Speaker 1: He's one of those actors that he hasn't got any
Speaker 1: other accents.
Speaker 2: You know, I'm not the only one, and I'm in
Speaker 2: my underwear.
Speaker 1: Appreciate it. I'm not quite sure how he got interacting.
Speaker 1: I know he used to be a milkman. He seems
Speaker 1: to be a guy that's kind of can act up
Speaker 1: to a point, if you see what I mean. But
Speaker 1: he's never he's never bravely taken on.
Speaker 2: That's a good question. I hadn't thought about that, but yeah,
Speaker 2: and he wasn't, you know, originally the choice for Bond.
Speaker 2: That was a lot of other people that were in
Speaker 2: the running first, and you know, Patrick McGowan and people
Speaker 2: like that. But yeah, yeah, I don't. I don't really
Speaker 2: know a lot about his background.
Speaker 1: But yeah, Patrick mcgooin, who well, by the way, in case,
Speaker 1: I don't know what you call them or if you
Speaker 1: ever had milkman in the US, but basically it's kind
Speaker 1: of dayed out now, but for many years in Britain
Speaker 1: you would often get your milk delivered to your door
Speaker 1: right by a dairy company and they just drove around
Speaker 1: in these little electric trucks. Delivering milk. It seems bizarre, no, but.
Speaker 2: Yeah, they had the US had that like in the
Speaker 2: fifties and sixties, and I think it kind of died
Speaker 2: out by the seventies.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well Sean Connery used to do that. But anyway,
Speaker 1: the point about his accent is no matter what film
Speaker 1: he's in, it's the same, isn't it. Highlander Scottish accents.
Speaker 2: That's a good point.
Speaker 1: Yeah, hunt for Red October Scottish accent.
Speaker 2: Well, I was just on a podcast and we were
Speaker 2: talking about this the other day, and we were it
Speaker 2: was funny because it's like all of those big time
Speaker 2: A listers that reach a certain level, you know, they
Speaker 2: pretty much just play themselves over and over, and some
Speaker 2: of them even joke about it, like like Jack Nicholson,
Speaker 2: you know, he just always plays Jack Nicholson.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: Al Pacino was always al Pacino. Robert and Narrow is
Speaker 2: always Robert in Niro.
Speaker 1: Oh yeah, there's a there's a little comedy show here
Speaker 1: that ran for a few years called Stella Street here
Speaker 1: in the UK. It's a cult thing. Almost no one's
Speaker 1: ever heard of it, but it involves a lot of
Speaker 1: movie stars who all live together on the same Street,
Speaker 1: and it's it's totally unlikely because it's a mixture of
Speaker 1: Hollywood people. I mean, Jack Nicholson lives there, Al Pacino
Speaker 1: lives there, Joe Peshi lives there, but even Michael Kane
Speaker 1: lives there, Roger Murr lives there, and they're all they're
Speaker 1: all next door neighbors. And on the shop on the corner,
Speaker 1: the seven eleven is run by Mick and Keith from
Speaker 1: the Rolling Stones, and it's.
Speaker 2: Just it's a great idea. I don't know why that
Speaker 2: didn't work.
Speaker 1: It's as well, it's just I just think it was
Speaker 1: just too too weird for people. But anyway that they
Speaker 1: take the piss out of Jack Nicholson in that one,
Speaker 1: because he keeps getting these new rules and he's always
Speaker 1: trying out for them, you know, see what the other
Speaker 1: guys on the street think of it. At one point
Speaker 1: he actually gets a job as a Scottish detective, you know,
Speaker 1: detective based up in Glasgow Capital or not Captain Tucker
Speaker 1: in Scotland. And at one point and he's saying to
Speaker 1: like he say, He's saying to whoever it is, Dustin Hoffman,
Speaker 1: He's trying and saying, I've just taken on a role
Speaker 1: as a hard nosed cop from Glascow. That's the voice
Speaker 1: he's gonna do, you know, let me let me.
Speaker 2: I gotta do my jack.
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, yeah, please do if you could, if you
Speaker 1: could say, hey, do your jack and try saying that
Speaker 1: you're a hard nursed cop from Glasgow.
Speaker 2: A right, let me do my jack line first, and
Speaker 2: then I'll try that line. I gotta warm up.
Speaker 1: Okay.
Speaker 2: Well, my wife Wendy's a confirmed horror film fanatic. Was
Speaker 2: that any good?
Speaker 1: That's pretty good? Better than I can do for sure.
Speaker 2: And so what's the line, I'm a hard.
Speaker 1: Nursed cop from Glasgow.
Speaker 2: Well, I am a hard nosed cop from Glasgow.
Speaker 1: Perfect, So anyway Connory Connory, Yeah, So it's like Scottish
Speaker 1: accent all away, and he's star of Zardal's Fizzardoza mckello,
Speaker 1: which is not really how he sounds, but that's if
Speaker 1: you take it to an extreme Scottish accent, that's what
Speaker 1: you end up with. Zardals. I'm going to get you
Speaker 1: to give listeners your take on that movie in just
Speaker 1: a second. But it's interesting for a number of reasons,
Speaker 1: not only because Connery was playing something clearly that he
Speaker 1: had no need to do. I'm not quite sure what
Speaker 1: appealed to him about the idea, but he went with
Speaker 1: it anyway. And after the success of Deliverance, it seems
Speaker 1: to me that director John Berman was basically given Kurt
Speaker 1: Blanche by the studio to say, Okay, that was a
Speaker 1: big success. You can just do some insane project that
Speaker 1: you've been ad up your sleeve for a while.
Speaker 2: Well, the tagline is funny, it's beyond nineteen eighty four,
Speaker 2: beyond two thousand and one, It's beyond love and death.
Speaker 2: So you get the Nietzschean themes of two thousand and
Speaker 2: one that are pretty overt with you know, the Wagner
Speaker 2: piece that Kuber played, and then the idea, you know,
Speaker 2: Bowman kind of transcending limitations of time and space, which
Speaker 2: was my analysis of two thousand and one, and here
Speaker 2: we're trying to go for something even beyond that, and
Speaker 2: you know it's going to have the dystopian themes, as
Speaker 2: the tagline says, with nineteen eighty four, but you know
Speaker 2: what everyone remembers as Sean Connery and underwear. But the
Speaker 2: odd thing is that there this movie is really deep.
Speaker 2: I mean, it's got a lot of symbolism. It's just
Speaker 2: packed with all these Masonic and esoteric themes. And I
Speaker 2: think the first thing that comes to mind in regard
Speaker 2: to what you said is Sean Connery seems to have
Speaker 2: a penchant for roles related to Masonry. Now I don't
Speaker 2: know for certain what his you know, Like I said,
Speaker 2: I don't know his background. I don't know a whole
Speaker 2: lot about him personally, but you know, he chose the
Speaker 2: man who would be king, I think probably because of
Speaker 2: that Masonic theme where he plays this con man basically
Speaker 2: who's you know, portraying himself as the reincarnation of Alexander
Speaker 2: the Great. And this is to fool a whole bunch
Speaker 2: of these sort of primitive people, and Himalayas are somewhere,
Speaker 2: and by extension, you know, Michael Kaine's there and they're
Speaker 2: they're both going to live as kings, you know, in
Speaker 2: a more primitive existence and so forth, and this it
Speaker 2: doesn't work, and then they get basically run out of
Speaker 2: the the village and h But it's very very Masonic.
Speaker 2: And of course Kipling's story would have all that Masonic
Speaker 2: imagery and thematic elements for a reason, because I'm sure
Speaker 2: he was you know, tied into that, and in my view,
Speaker 2: you know, there's a lot of scholarship that's been done
Speaker 2: on masonry as kind of the outpost of the British
Speaker 2: Empire that that the the lodges kind of function as
Speaker 2: these networks for you know, spying on people and transferring
Speaker 2: secrets and so anywhere that the Empire would extend, you
Speaker 2: would have you know, the British lodge system set up.
Speaker 2: So that's kind of what I think is in the
Speaker 2: movie with men who would be king, and so you'll
Speaker 2: see Connery a lot of times taking those kinds of
Speaker 2: roles and he's very much in a Masonic role here.
Speaker 2: You know, there's a memorable image from the movie where
Speaker 2: he finds that magic ring. It's kind of like a
Speaker 2: a futuristic ring version of the Eye Watch where he
Speaker 2: can you know, have access to basically the Internet is
Speaker 2: what he's accessing here in the movie. But you know
Speaker 2: it displays this image of an eye on his head,
Speaker 2: you know, this all seeing eye on the on his
Speaker 2: third eye. So yeah, again this is this movie is
Speaker 2: replete with all this kind of stuff. But what we
Speaker 2: have is a future dystopia with these roving bands of
Speaker 2: tribes we see at the beginning, and it's very bizarre.
Speaker 2: As you said, they they talk about their guns as
Speaker 2: if they're phallic. I'm not sure why that part is
Speaker 2: in there. I think I may have left that the
Speaker 2: analysis because I didn't really understand what they were getting at.
Speaker 2: But basically, they're they're breeding is controlled, and there's this
Speaker 2: immortal class of persons who flies around in these giant
Speaker 2: heads and they present themselves as gods and so zed.
Speaker 2: The The Sean Connery character sort of figures out that
Speaker 2: this is a scam and he kills one of the
Speaker 2: quote immortals and then rides back to the compound or
Speaker 2: the Elysian fields, where these immortals live in this very apathetic,
Speaker 2: very blase existence where they don't care about anything and
Speaker 2: everything is because they don't have any pain or sorrow
Speaker 2: or you know that they have every pleasure at their fingertips.
Speaker 2: And what happens is that Sean Connery, as this savage
Speaker 2: you know, kind of invades their eden, their xt state,
Speaker 2: and causes an uproar. He basically fosters a revolution somewhat inadvertently,
Speaker 2: and you know, you would think with a typical kind
Speaker 2: of dystopian film that it would be, Oh, you know,
Speaker 2: they cause the revolution and they overthrow the dystopian rulers
Speaker 2: and then you know, the good guys are in power.
Speaker 2: But that's not where this film goes. It goes into
Speaker 2: a very very bizarre direction. And then what you learn
Speaker 2: I'm going to go ahead and spoil it if you haven't
Speaker 2: seen the movie, is that the name of the film
Speaker 2: is based on the fact that he rediscovers books because
Speaker 2: the elite in this movie have hoarded all the knowledge.
Speaker 2: They have basically a giant pyramid that's a big ai
Speaker 2: system that allows them not just to control their environment
Speaker 2: and the kind of super smart city, they can also
Speaker 2: reincarnate or resurrect. So they've they've mastered every possible secret
Speaker 2: of nature and you know, it's a lot and have immortality,
Speaker 2: but they've learned that immortality in this film's presentation, at least,
Speaker 2: you know, it leaves you empty. Once you've had all
Speaker 2: the pleasures, there's there's nothing else left for you. So
Speaker 2: Zed starts the revolution, and what happens is that it
Speaker 2: is in a way successful, and some of the gods
Speaker 2: kind of join him in the revolution. They end up
Speaker 2: all killing each other. So this again The Nietzschean theme
Speaker 2: is very prominent here because I think, you know, Nietzsche
Speaker 2: would say things like, the elite, you have these cycles
Speaker 2: in history. It's a very cyclical presentation in this film
Speaker 2: Eternal Return and so forth. And the reason that the
Speaker 2: power structures collapse is because they insulate themselves from the
Speaker 2: rest of the world. You know that we've all heard
Speaker 2: this about elites throughout history with you know, Chinese emperors
Speaker 2: couldn't walk on the ground. They would have people carry
Speaker 2: them around on poles and stilts, and they would bind
Speaker 2: the women's feet because women and weren't supposed to walk
Speaker 2: around the elite, you know, women weren't supposed to walk
Speaker 2: all this weird stuff that they come up with. And
Speaker 2: what happens is when you get really insular like that
Speaker 2: and there's all this incest and inbreeding, you know, like
Speaker 2: amongst the British elite, you end up detached. And Nietzsche
Speaker 2: argues that that detachment from the real world actually ends
Speaker 2: up being the destruction of the elite, which is an
Speaker 2: interesting thesis, and I think that's kind of what's going
Speaker 2: on here in Borman's film, because the revolution is successful,
Speaker 2: but instead of adopting you know, the technology of immortality.
Speaker 2: They kind of destroy it, they get rid of it,
Speaker 2: and you're left at the end of film with this
Speaker 2: kind of oral buro scenario of the you know, the
Speaker 2: snake eating its own tail, because Z and his wife
Speaker 2: are kind of halfway pictured as Adam and Eve, and
Speaker 2: so you're kind of left with the idea, oh, maybe
Speaker 2: this is you know, just the whole cycle of all
Speaker 2: of the history of mankind being represented, and you know,
Speaker 2: maybe and maybe what I'm not saying this is absolutely true,
Speaker 2: but I'm saying that the film is kind of proposing
Speaker 2: the thesis of you know, maybe we think about elites
Speaker 2: gaining you know, transhumanist abilities and all this kind of stuff,
Speaker 2: and then and then maybe one day it collapses and
Speaker 2: then it all just starts over again and we're right
Speaker 2: back to Adam and Eve. And so I thought that
Speaker 2: was kind of interesting. That was a that was kind
Speaker 2: of the message of the New Battlestar Galactica if you
Speaker 2: saw that, if you saw the the end of the series,
Speaker 2: was that, you know, you're thinking the whole time that
Speaker 2: this is going on in the future, and then you realize, oh,
Speaker 2: this is actually starts the end of the series. Is
Speaker 2: Adam and Eve more or less, so, you know, alternate
Speaker 2: theories of origins that kind of ties in the Greek mythology,
Speaker 2: you know, the mists of the gods. That was my
Speaker 2: take on Zardas. What about you, well, I.
Speaker 1: Mean, I think you pretty much sum up most of
Speaker 1: my thoughts. But the general take away from me elites
Speaker 1: will become detached from reality and this will be their destruction.
Speaker 1: And that mirrored other dystopian sci fi that I had
Speaker 1: watched and read, and then I started to see that,
Speaker 1: you know, in the real world, you know, looking at
Speaker 1: developments and technology they're actually happening, and then looking back
Speaker 1: to some of this predictive sci fi. And I think
Speaker 1: you mentioned the word transhumanism. I think that's very much
Speaker 1: where we're headed. And I think for me that Zed
Speaker 1: in Zardo's it's a little bit like sort John the
Speaker 1: Savage type character and breeding New World. Yeah, it's kind
Speaker 1: of you see in Zardo's the react they kind of
Speaker 1: the fascination that they have with Zed this character and
Speaker 1: put it it's the animal nature of man that they
Speaker 1: have left behind.
Speaker 2: That that's a good point, right.
Speaker 1: The elite in the Tabernacle have and they're fascinated by
Speaker 1: his vitality and by his violence. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: they're kind of shocked, you know, they they've become so
Speaker 1: detached from, as you say, the real world are basic
Speaker 1: nature that the idea of like killing someone, fucking someone
Speaker 1: or or you know, or eating something or you know,
Speaker 1: taking a shit or whatever. It's all just kind of
Speaker 1: you know, but it's kind of strange for them. It's
Speaker 1: come running almost full circle, and they're like, oh my god.
Speaker 1: You know, for me, it was kind of about balance
Speaker 1: because it's like you saw the world that the brutals
Speaker 1: as they're called in Zardo's living. It's this post apocalyptic
Speaker 1: kind of wasteland. Yeah, but so's social class that he's
Speaker 1: part of is a classic middle of a hierarchy type thing,
Speaker 1: like an enforcer kind of rule, not really like police,
Speaker 1: but they kind of sit between the elite and the
Speaker 1: masses at the bottom of the pyramid, and that we
Speaker 1: see that very much in our society. So they're almost
Speaker 1: slightly privileged. Zed's kind of exterminator class. You see the
Speaker 1: way some of the brutals live and it's not a
Speaker 1: lot of fun, But then you see the way the
Speaker 1: elites live, and you kind of think, well, in some
Speaker 1: ways Zed and his cohorts kind of have it good,
Speaker 1: and for me things get worse. Things are already bad
Speaker 1: for the brutals, things are get worse for the elite.
Speaker 1: And it's actually Zed in this kind of like in
Speaker 1: his moments of nosis kind of coming to understanding. He
Speaker 1: gains in power throughout the film, and you can see
Speaker 1: him kind of like taking control. So the end, as
Speaker 1: you say, which is kind of like almost as Adam
Speaker 1: and Eve type wrap it up and start again thing.
Speaker 1: You can read that any way you want. You can
Speaker 1: read it as like, oh, here we go again. But
Speaker 1: for me it was kind of like, well, it's another
Speaker 1: chance we don't you know, the future isn't written yet.
Speaker 1: At the end of it, I kind of thought, yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, well done from Zand.
Speaker 2: That's a good point. Yeah. And I forgot to mention
Speaker 2: too that the Tzard Eyes, of course Wizard of Oz
Speaker 2: is what you realize it's based on, because he finds
Speaker 2: that book that was kind of hidden away or forgotten,
Speaker 2: and you know, he's kind of figuring out language and
Speaker 2: he realizes that the elite basically just mastered technology, you know,
Speaker 2: gnosis or knowledge. That's why they're flying around in heads,
Speaker 2: because where's the source of knowledge. It's the head. That's
Speaker 2: actually a thing that comes up in a lot of
Speaker 2: films too, by the way, with like very Baron von Munchausen.
Speaker 2: There's that planet where you know, Robin Williams's head is
Speaker 2: just floating around and he has no understanding of the body.
Speaker 2: And that's that's kind of what you're getting at that
Speaker 2: the bodily desires have kind of been discarded because the
Speaker 2: elite perspective was that the body was the problem and
Speaker 2: we've got to transcend that and if we can just
Speaker 2: transcend that, will we'll be free, will be if you know,
Speaker 2: we won't have those problems anymore. But they've forgotten and
Speaker 2: as you said, they're mystified by his brutal nature. And
Speaker 2: then that's why you get these guys who are kind
Speaker 2: of like that that one guy, he's got the head dress.
Speaker 2: They look like a sphinx, which is interesting because so
Speaker 2: they have this kind of Egyptian aesthetic to them where
Speaker 2: they literally look like, you know, the sphinx statue, and
Speaker 2: it harkens back to you know, Egyptology, and that's why
Speaker 2: they're tabernacle. The Ai thing is this big pyramid, And
Speaker 2: the irony you said is that I think part of
Speaker 2: it is showing that the class warfare doesn't really get
Speaker 2: you what you want, because it's all predicated on the
Speaker 2: idea of, oh, if I can rise up in the ranks,
Speaker 2: if I can overthrow the people above me, if I
Speaker 2: could just have access to what they've got, then I'll
Speaker 2: be happy. And then what you find out is that
Speaker 2: every time you, you know, if you've got a million dollars,
Speaker 2: and then you attain a billion dollars, you basically just
Speaker 2: inherit a whole other level of problems. So you're right
Speaker 2: in many ways, Z's middle class I guess you could
Speaker 2: say middle to lower class existence actually had a lot
Speaker 2: of positives, and there are a lot of negatives that
Speaker 2: would have come along with him trying to kind of
Speaker 2: move into the status of the elite, and it just
Speaker 2: doesn't work. And I'm not necessarily trying to say that
Speaker 2: everything about class systems or class systems is good. I'm
Speaker 2: just saying that that's kind of an interesting argument you
Speaker 2: could make from the is that, you know, do we
Speaker 2: really get anything better when the revolutions come? And I
Speaker 2: think if you look at something like the French Revolution. No,
Speaker 2: I don't think so, just real quick in adendum, and
Speaker 2: it's on my mind because we covered it in the
Speaker 2: show that I did. We did an episode on Christopher
Speaker 2: Nolan's Batman trilogy, which has its pros and its cons,
Speaker 2: but one of the interesting themes at the end of
Speaker 2: the trilogy was that when Bain tries to initiate his revolution,
Speaker 2: and you can look at Bain as kind of the
Speaker 2: anarcho syndicalist character, the the nightmare that arises out of
Speaker 2: the you know, far East. You know, we don't know,
Speaker 2: we don't understand this guy, and he's got a thing
Speaker 2: on his face that makes them dog very weird. And
Speaker 2: he institutes his revolution and it ends up worse. And
Speaker 2: then you have this imagery with you know, Killian Murphy
Speaker 2: is sitting atop this giant stack of books and he's
Speaker 2: basically deciding who's loses their head and who doesn't. And
Speaker 2: you know, it's very Robespierre. It looks just like you know,
Speaker 2: Rosepeer's Committee for Public Safety sitting there kind of just
Speaker 2: lopping off heads. And so that the Baine Revolution, you know,
Speaker 2: doesn't do anything positive. It basically ruins everything and and
Speaker 2: Gotham ends up in a worse state than they were before,
Speaker 2: which is a curious message for you know, a big blockbuster,
Speaker 2: and I think you're kind of getting a similar idea.
Speaker 2: I think you could argue here with with you know,
Speaker 2: Z's revolution. In a way, I guess it it's positive
Speaker 2: because what does that do well? It basically just goes
Speaker 2: back to kind of a you know, an earthy, living
Speaker 2: in nature kind of existence. You know, he's living in
Speaker 2: a cave and they basically just accept death. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I'm not entirely sure of director John Burman's motives and
Speaker 1: making the film, but certainly what you could take away
Speaker 1: from it the message we've been talking about. It's interesting
Speaker 1: that we get so much stuff fed to a snow
Speaker 1: coming down from above, and let's remind people if they
Speaker 1: even if they haven't listened to the first two parts
Speaker 1: that we did a lot of what you're talking about
Speaker 1: in the book is just what the title of the
Speaker 1: book says. You're looking at, you know, symbolism and these
Speaker 1: hidden meanings and what agendas might be being furthered by this.
Speaker 1: You look at the connections between the CIA and Hollywood
Speaker 1: and propaganda. So we're talking about messages coming to us
Speaker 1: here witting, unwittingly, or deliberately. But my point is we
Speaker 1: get so many messages these days about elites, about transhumanism,
Speaker 1: about the development of technology, about the Bill Gates and
Speaker 1: the Elon Musks of this world, and about how this
Speaker 1: reminded me.
Speaker 2: I just want to make one quick point for sure,
Speaker 2: to get sure is that they have a breakaway civilization.
Speaker 2: I forget about that. Yeah, that the elites in the
Speaker 2: film The Immortals have this It's like a hidden behind
Speaker 2: a hologram you and this giant sort of invisible force
Speaker 2: field type thing that wards out all the savages for
Speaker 2: their Elysian fields. And then that's interesting because, as you mentioned,
Speaker 2: Bill Geyser made me think of it, and Elon Musk,
Speaker 2: you know, these are the guys who talk about literally
Speaker 2: creating a breakaway civilization.
Speaker 1: Yeah. But all the while, a lot of the stuff
Speaker 1: that's coming down to us is that this is going
Speaker 1: to be a good thing and we're all going to
Speaker 1: get to take part as well.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah right, yeah.
Speaker 1: But strangely, and a lot of the films that kind
Speaker 1: of on one level look like pure propaganda. I mean,
Speaker 1: a lot of people have probably seen the relatively recent
Speaker 1: film Elysium. The message, the message really, no matter what
Speaker 1: the intention of the director is or the writers, the
Speaker 1: message is kind of like that, exactly the same wizardos
Speaker 1: that elites will end up becoming detached from reality and
Speaker 1: it'll just they'll destroy themselves. So it's like, no matter
Speaker 1: what the benefits are of all this this technical utopian stuff,
Speaker 1: it kind of ends up in a bad place. And
Speaker 1: that was a common message in dystill being sci fi
Speaker 1: in the seventies, but even today when when they try
Speaker 1: and spin something that we're all, oh, yes, I can't
Speaker 1: wait to dump my body, you know, and I can't
Speaker 1: wait till like my brain is, you know, in a
Speaker 1: jar of pickling vinegar or whatever. You know, I just
Speaker 1: want to know. I want to live for a thousand years,
Speaker 1: ten thousand years. Why not? You know that these stories
Speaker 1: of films, the books, whatever it happens to be, they
Speaker 1: end not kind of giving the same message, which it
Speaker 1: ultimately is negative. But yet and all that, the the
Speaker 1: barrage of this stuff continues a pace, doesn't it, really,
Speaker 1: Because whether it's Ted Talks or whether it's endless propaganda
Speaker 1: about saving the environment or whatever it happens to be,
Speaker 1: you know through all these you know, like all the
Speaker 1: latest technology, driverless cars, on and on and on. This
Speaker 1: is incessant, but it never seems to the propaganda never
Speaker 1: seems to at a deep level anyway completely satisfy people
Speaker 1: or completely do away with their concerns. And I think that,
Speaker 1: as you saw in Zardal's there's a visceral animal part
Speaker 1: of our nature that we never completely lose touch with,
Speaker 1: and I think we do so at our peril because
Speaker 1: like you and I are not running around, you know,
Speaker 1: having to fight with our bare hands every day to
Speaker 1: defend ourselves. We're not having to kill with their bare
Speaker 1: hands in order to eat. We're not having to secure
Speaker 1: a mate by doing by killing and you know, clubbing
Speaker 1: another guy over the head and taking his woman or whatever.
Speaker 1: But there's still a point you can get where you
Speaker 1: become detached from any of that stuff and you lose
Speaker 1: a lot of what it is to be human. For me,
Speaker 1: my gut instinct is that something that's really that must
Speaker 1: not be allowed to happen. And I know that that
Speaker 1: I had gotten into arguments and discussions with people are
Speaker 1: just saying, oh, you know, why on earth would you
Speaker 1: want to hold onto this if we could have the
Speaker 1: following and maybe I'll be proven wrong, but something in me,
Speaker 1: the transhumanist agenda taken as a whole, just generically what
Speaker 1: it basically is about. To me, this must be resisted
Speaker 1: with every favor of my being. That's my instinct.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean the message of the film is that
Speaker 2: you can't really get away from human nature and that
Speaker 2: you know that includes all those faculties and passions that
Speaker 2: you listed there and more and propensities and drives, and
Speaker 2: there's a kind of dialectical tension at work here that
Speaker 2: you know, are we going to see the body is
Speaker 2: bad in a kind of Plato neopolatonic sense, something that
Speaker 2: we need to flee from, to download our minds into
Speaker 2: some sort of central AI grid, which I don't think
Speaker 2: is ever going to happen. I think that's a bunch
Speaker 2: of nonsense and a that's the scam of transhumanism because
Speaker 2: it's all predicated on naturalistic materialism, you know, the idea
Speaker 2: that you don't actually have a soul or a spirit
Speaker 2: or a pecul or a noose, and that it's just
Speaker 2: basically all just the chemical reactions. And so you'll actually
Speaker 2: see the transhumanists like you mentioned the Ted Talks, and
Speaker 2: if you watch any of these big billionaires that are
Speaker 2: into transhumanism, and some of them are actually transgenders, and
Speaker 2: they try to I'm not joking, they try to create
Speaker 2: these bots that they think are copies of their lovers.
Speaker 2: I forget the name of this one. It's like there's
Speaker 2: there's like a black woman bought that this transgender billionaire
Speaker 2: has tried to create. And the argument is that, oh,
Speaker 2: it actually is my black woman lover because it has
Speaker 2: her voice and she has recorded a lot of her
Speaker 2: life and memories, and so therefore it's her. And that's
Speaker 2: again all based on this ridiculous naturalistic presubsition that see
Speaker 2: that you're just the chemical reactions that you know occur
Speaker 2: in your brain. There's nothing more. And so I guess
Speaker 2: by extension, if that's the case, then you know, if
Speaker 2: you're playing a YouTube video of me talking about Bill Cosby,
Speaker 2: then that's the same as me, yes, which is really stupid,
Speaker 2: but I mean that's literally what they try to push.
Speaker 2: And I've seen Ted Talk people try to push that
Speaker 2: same thing.
Speaker 1: But I've got into heated discussions with people of this.
Speaker 1: I'm talking about technical utopians eagerly quite often without actually
Speaker 1: any expert knowledge in the area. But you know, they've
Speaker 1: read a lot of articles, watched a lot of Ted talks.
Speaker 1: They're passionate about that some of these transhumanist ideas should
Speaker 1: come to pass. They'd be a good thing. Initially, More importantly,
Speaker 1: they think it can be done. It's just a matter
Speaker 1: of time. Everything's just a matter of time. Look how
Speaker 1: we've come, they say, you know, and I'll say them, okay,
Speaker 1: you know, we're joining to the end of our discussion,
Speaker 1: or actually I'm just bored now, so I'm going to
Speaker 1: end it. But I'll say something like, okay, okay, okay,
Speaker 1: let's just cut to the chase.
Speaker 2: Here.
Speaker 1: Make a bet with me. Now, if we're going to
Speaker 1: make a meaningful bet, we've got to have a sort
Speaker 1: of a time frame, and we've got to have something
Speaker 1: easily measurable. If it's like a horse race, you bet
Speaker 1: on the horse. Either the horse wins the race or
Speaker 1: it doesn't. If it's a photo finish, they sort it out.
Speaker 1: That's fine. But they make a decision. So I'll say
Speaker 1: something like, let's choose one of these developments you're talking about,
Speaker 1: and Elon Musk saying that about twenty thirty, it will
Speaker 1: be darn ray. Kurtzfeiler said, by twenty thirty, this will happen.
Speaker 1: Elon Musk says, yeah, that's doable. Blah blah. Set a
Speaker 1: date with me. Now we're gonna have to wait a
Speaker 1: few year. Set a date with me, and you tell
Speaker 1: me the amount, and you're going to say, this could
Speaker 1: be done and this will happen. Tell me how much
Speaker 1: money you want a stake, and I'll go for it,
Speaker 1: because it's a question. The question you have to ask
Speaker 1: yourself if you're betting on this is how much can
Speaker 1: I afford to lose? Because that's how confident I am.
Speaker 1: And do you know what, maybe people have just thought
Speaker 1: I wasn't serious. People get quite defensive, they get quite angry,
Speaker 1: and they will not even consider entering into a bet
Speaker 1: with me. I've said, we can do a contract if
Speaker 1: you want, we can get this witness, we can make
Speaker 1: this legal, we make it enforceable law. And then well
Speaker 1: that doesn't work, I say, okay, let's just take it
Speaker 1: down and notes. Let's say something that you're convinced is
Speaker 1: going to be happening in the next five years, and
Speaker 1: let's have an amount of money that's substantial, but it's
Speaker 1: not going to ruin us tenos well that works whatever,
Speaker 1: you know, and they will not go for it, and
Speaker 1: they get really angry if I try and say, give
Speaker 1: me something, give me this, because it's measurable, it's actionable,
Speaker 1: and if you're so confident, what's the problem exactly?
Speaker 2: Yeah, No, I mean, I don't think we have to
Speaker 2: be a luddite or a total transhumanist. It's a false dichotomy.
Speaker 2: I think if you look at the last few Builderberg
Speaker 2: meetings and you know the heads of Google and people
Speaker 2: from Apple, and what they're talking about is coming. They
Speaker 2: really want to push the body mod and modifications and
Speaker 2: all that kind of stuff in terms of the tech realm.
Speaker 2: And you know, Regina Dugan, who was formerly at DARPA
Speaker 2: now at Google, was at Builderberg Google last year, I
Speaker 2: think talking about this, and and you know that I
Speaker 2: watch is kind of a step in that direction. Now.
Speaker 2: I I'm not saying anything wrong with an eyewatch, obviously
Speaker 2: it's that would be stupid. But what I'm saying is
Speaker 2: that they're going to, I think, to try to find
Speaker 2: ways to integrate this into the actual body of the
Speaker 2: human and that is the predicted programming that we've been
Speaker 2: seeing for so long, all the way back to Ship,
Speaker 2: all the way back to probably Logan's run. I mean,
Speaker 2: you know there's that scene where he kind of sitting
Speaker 2: in that chair and they're doing some kind of like
Speaker 2: mind control thing on him, and then you know, you
Speaker 2: think about the Matrix and jacking in and I just
Speaker 2: saw a Ghost in the Shell recently, and that has
Speaker 2: the same theme. Actually that came out before the Matrix
Speaker 2: in its cartoon form, uh, And that's all based on
Speaker 2: all the exact same stuff. And I was kind of
Speaker 2: blown away actually at the level of transhumanism that was
Speaker 2: in Ghost in the Shell wasn't as successful, I don't
Speaker 2: think as they hoped it would be. But when you
Speaker 2: watch that movie, and again it's a mediocre movie, but
Speaker 2: Scarlet Johansson really has this penchant, I guess for these
Speaker 2: transhumanist movies like Lucy where she's you know, turned into
Speaker 2: some sort of cyborg goddess of some kind. But it's
Speaker 2: a scam because if you here's a funny thing. Even
Speaker 2: Ray Kurtzwell, I heard him do a talk where he
Speaker 2: was saying, actually a lot of people who think about
Speaker 2: transhumanism or the like the idea of downloading your mind
Speaker 2: to a computer. He's like, that might happen one day
Speaker 2: millennia away. But he's like, if you think about it,
Speaker 2: this was a I couldn't believe you said this. He said,
Speaker 2: the human body is actually a very proficient machine. And
Speaker 2: he said, you know what, actually, if we were to
Speaker 2: try to really initiate transhumanist he's like, it's not going
Speaker 2: to be where you put your brain into some hard drive.
Speaker 2: It's more like, how can we enhance the existing system
Speaker 2: or create a copy of the existing system, And that
Speaker 2: kind of I was like, oh wow, So what's ironic here?
Speaker 2: Is that the idea. I'm not joking about this, you
Speaker 2: can this is a theory I have. I think that
Speaker 2: a lot of the transhumanist elite that they actually kind
Speaker 2: of want to mimic Christianity. Believe it or not, you say, well,
Speaker 2: that's crazy. They hate Christianity, think it's a joke. Well,
Speaker 2: I think on the surface they do. But when you
Speaker 2: see Ray Kirtsvell say stuff like that, like, oh, actually,
Speaker 2: the human body is a really good machine for what
Speaker 2: it for what it does, and maybe we should actually
Speaker 2: construct some kind of machine like that. And then and
Speaker 2: then you watch Avengers Age of Ultron and the Paul
Speaker 2: Bettany character. I don't remember what that. I'm not a
Speaker 2: big superhero person now that I'm an adult. All the
Speaker 2: all the guys in America are like still into this,
Speaker 2: you know, comic book shit when they're like forty, it's
Speaker 2: kind of ridiculous. But that Paul Bettany character is some
Speaker 2: kind of I forget his name, like the Mystery I
Speaker 2: think it's his name or something stupid like that. But
Speaker 2: he is a like a resurrected kind of body. It's
Speaker 2: like he's a he's the he is the transhumanist character
Speaker 2: in the film, and he's like, you know, he's he's
Speaker 2: got a body that has all these capabilities beyond you know,
Speaker 2: whatever the former human body had or whatever. And that's
Speaker 2: actually what Ray Kurzwell says. He's like, he's like, yeah,
Speaker 2: we need to just fix the existing system and turn
Speaker 2: it into something. He's like, because look, if you think
Speaker 2: about it, you know, the human mind is constructed such
Speaker 2: that it it has a focus on one thing at
Speaker 2: one time, Like you know, if you're looking at I'm
Speaker 2: looking at a Mad magazine cover right now in my
Speaker 2: in my living room, like I'm not looking at the
Speaker 2: backyard at the same time. And he's making the argument
Speaker 2: that you can only really focus on one thing at
Speaker 2: one time. He's like, so, there's not really a way
Speaker 2: for the human person simply because it is a finite
Speaker 2: subject to have like ten different vantage points. You know,
Speaker 2: we're not going to have a bug eye that allows
Speaker 2: us to see, you know, like a fly does, like
Speaker 2: like Jeff Goldblum in the Fly or so where he
Speaker 2: can see you know, twenty different or a thousand. However
Speaker 2: many eyes bugs have, you know, a thousand different vantage
Speaker 2: points or whatever. He's like, that's that's very extremely complex,
Speaker 2: and it would be very difficult to you know, rewire
Speaker 2: the human brain to try to incorporate something even as
Speaker 2: simple as you know, the different vantage points that a
Speaker 2: bug has something like that. So and when you think
Speaker 2: about that and you think, oh, yeah, actually that makes
Speaker 2: a lot of sense. And so you know, if there
Speaker 2: was going to be some kind of transhumanism that they're
Speaker 2: probably going to try to shoot for something along the
Speaker 2: lines of a mimicked version of Christianity, believe it or not,
Speaker 2: where you have a resurrection and if you know, if
Speaker 2: you read the Gospel of John I'm not saying this
Speaker 2: is true. I'm saying this is I could see how
Speaker 2: they would look at it this way, like, oh, you know,
Speaker 2: you see Jesus at the end of the Gospel of John,
Speaker 2: and he's in his same body, but it's resurrected. It's
Speaker 2: it's not bound by time and space, it's not mortal.
Speaker 2: It has all these properties and characteristics that it's able
Speaker 2: to do things that it wasn't doing before the resurrection. Now, obviously,
Speaker 2: again I'm not saying they believe in Christianity. I just
Speaker 2: wonder if they don't have like a kind of a
Speaker 2: covert gnostic alteration of, Hey, why don't we take the
Speaker 2: mythology of Christianity and maybe turn it into you know,
Speaker 2: like a technological version and you know, something like out
Speaker 2: of Avengers, Age of Ultron. I mean, that's kind of wacky.
Speaker 2: I'm out there speculating.
Speaker 1: But you mentioned Loucan's Roun there, and we're going to
Speaker 1: turn to talk about that. But just before I move
Speaker 1: on there, you also mentioned lod Eites earlier on and
Speaker 1: how that's a false dichotomy between being a Loodite and
Speaker 1: being some kind of techno utopian transhumanist, and this is
Speaker 1: a theme that comes up some dystopian sci fi. The
Speaker 1: transhumanists run the risk of a backlash, a backlash that
Speaker 1: actually superficially the likes of you and I might say, well,
Speaker 1: you know saw that coming, you had that coming, you
Speaker 1: deserve it. But these things quite often go too far,
Speaker 1: don't they overshoot?
Speaker 2: Yeah? Yeah, yeah. One quick point they reminded me too,
Speaker 2: I meant to say earlier, was these are the people
Speaker 2: who are total lying psychopaths. I mean, look at all
Speaker 2: of the false flags, look at all of the scams
Speaker 2: psyops that they do constantly. How on earth do you
Speaker 2: think that they're going to tell you the truth when
Speaker 2: it comes to techno utopianism.
Speaker 1: They're lying, Yeah, exactly. And my worry is not that
Speaker 1: I worry much, but my concern, I guess, would be that,
Speaker 1: you know, we could get into a situation at some
Speaker 1: point down the line where and we've seen this locally,
Speaker 1: but you know, on a more global scale, is it
Speaker 1: because some kind of backlash that actually will everybody will
Speaker 1: suffer from, no matter what their point of view. And
Speaker 1: you and I might be sitting if we live that long,
Speaker 1: observing this and going, oh man, this is not good.
Speaker 1: You know it could have negative effects for us, simply
Speaker 1: because it's a reaction that turns into an overreaction, I guess,
Speaker 1: to the imposition of this technocratic so called utopia on
Speaker 1: the rest of us. I'm thinking one of the most
Speaker 1: striking stories in amongst the driverless cars kind of crashing
Speaker 1: themselves was people. I think it was in San Francisco.
Speaker 1: I don't know if there's one incident. I think it's
Speaker 1: probably multiple incidents, but people on the streets wearing Google
Speaker 1: glass being attacked because they were wearing Google glass. The
Speaker 1: attackers I don't remember. I didn't read any stories in detail,
Speaker 1: but there are some kind of motivation. These were not
Speaker 1: random attacks, and I suspect.
Speaker 2: Yes, I do remember that. That's a good point.
Speaker 1: I think there's something probably quite visceral in that you
Speaker 1: may even talk to some of the people who undertook
Speaker 1: these attacks and they might not even really nestly be
Speaker 1: able to articulate a very clear reason why they did
Speaker 1: what they did. I mean, I am, you know, grasping
Speaker 1: at strolls here.
Speaker 2: No, no, do you remember Surrogates the Bruce Willis movie.
Speaker 1: I haven't seen it, but I know what it's about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, Well, there's that very thing what you're talking about,
Speaker 2: because it's near it's a near future thing, and you
Speaker 2: basically the plot is that you live in this little
Speaker 2: where you spend your days in this kind of pod
Speaker 2: or something where where you're just kind of laying in
Speaker 2: the pod, and your surrogate, which is like this copy
Speaker 2: version of you, you know, goes out and does its
Speaker 2: daily activities, which is an interesting idea. But in the
Speaker 2: movie there's that there's a giant backlash of protests and
Speaker 2: activists and people who are opposing transhimitism. That's literally what's
Speaker 2: going on in the movie. So you you maybe I
Speaker 2: think you're onto something there that, yeah, we might have
Speaker 2: a kind of societal breakdown where the you know, people
Speaker 2: try to initiate a Butlerrian jahad like in the Doone novels.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and funny enough, I was suddenly reminded of a
Speaker 1: line popped into my head. They made themselves God, and
Speaker 1: now God has forsaken us, and I thought that's John
Speaker 1: Berm and then I realized it's actually an it's actually
Speaker 1: an excalibur. Interesting, yes, it's the peasants basically not not
Speaker 1: using that as a derography term, you know, but it's
Speaker 1: the people who live on cabbage soup and work the land.
Speaker 1: It's a tough existence for them in the dark ages,
Speaker 1: and they're lashing out against the real Knights, who they
Speaker 1: seen have become aloof and detached from reality. And they're
Speaker 1: an elite living up there in Camelot and their shiny
Speaker 1: armor and their round table and their shiny swords, and
Speaker 1: they're living in their own little you.
Speaker 2: Know, metal metal and metal and tech.
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, basically they've been they've got they've got high
Speaker 1: tech compared to the rest of them. And I just
Speaker 1: remember one of the as that they undergo their downfall
Speaker 1: before their ultimate recovery. That's one of the peasants lashes out.
Speaker 1: It's I think it's at at Lancelot just talking about
Speaker 1: the grill mats that they made themselves God, and like
Speaker 1: God has forsaken this society. The whole world for them
Speaker 1: has just got a whole lot darker as a result
Speaker 1: of what they see as the mishandling as the uh
Speaker 1: you know that the evil science of the g real Knights.
Speaker 2: Well, I just look at these social justice warrior slugs
Speaker 2: that can't do anything, which is like the younger generations,
Speaker 2: I mean when I compared to my my dad and granddad,
Speaker 2: I can't do any of the ship they could do,
Speaker 2: you know, like they could. My dad could build a
Speaker 2: car from scratch, he did that one time, and he's
Speaker 2: built houses and all kinds of you know, manly endeavors.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: And I turned out more of a bookish dude, which
Speaker 2: not necessarily bad per se, but you know, I don't
Speaker 2: have a lot of those skills that that my dad
Speaker 2: and granddad had. And it's even worse as you get
Speaker 2: down to the millennials, who are basically just I think,
Speaker 2: engineered to be obsessed with the tech stuff. And they're
Speaker 2: the ones that are going to be you know, they're
Speaker 2: being raised by iPads. You know, little kids now are
Speaker 2: being raised by iPads, and so I think they're going
Speaker 2: to be very primed for the acceptance of whatever the
Speaker 2: next phases of bodily modification and stuff like that. And
Speaker 2: you mentioned the driverless cars. I don't mean to change subject,
Speaker 2: but it just reminded me. I couldn't believe I watched
Speaker 2: that stupid Arnold Schwarzenegger movie Sixth Day, I think not
Speaker 2: too long ago, and that came out in two thousand
Speaker 2: and it begins with Google driverless cars.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean you've got a driverless car until recall,
Speaker 1: don't you it's got a little guy in the front
Speaker 1: who kind of talks to you.
Speaker 2: But that's not a it's a good point.
Speaker 1: Yeah, your comment, they're about emasculation and younger generations in tech.
Speaker 1: You've actually read my mind oddly enough, you know, at
Speaker 1: a time when apparently we can't do that yet. That's
Speaker 1: what I was going to turn too.
Speaker 2: Well, you're just assuming that I haven't been modified to
Speaker 2: read minds.
Speaker 1: I am assuming that, you know, silly may Yeah.
Speaker 2: You're just assuming that I'm not a darker black opp project.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Actually, semi your bank details, I owe you ten
Speaker 1: thousand boxs.
Speaker 2: Sorry about that.
Speaker 1: I'll get that transferred over immediately. But that's a theme
Speaker 1: that I really want to turn to. But we did
Speaker 1: say we get to Logan's Run and this is replete
Speaker 1: with motifs and the sort of themes we've been talking about,
Speaker 1: and then you actually deal with it in your book
Speaker 1: section are technocratic dystopia unveiled? Now, Logan's Run's quite well
Speaker 1: known film is from nineteen seventy six, and as we've
Speaker 1: mentioned before, this was really the sort of halcyon days
Speaker 1: of dystopian sci fi in many ways. We had roller Ball,
Speaker 1: which we talked about in the previous installment, Soilent Green
Speaker 1: t h X one one three eight, which is George
Speaker 1: Lucas' first film, developed from a project he first did
Speaker 1: when he was a film student, a fairly a lesser
Speaker 1: known film starting all over Red called z PG or
Speaker 1: Zero Population.
Speaker 2: Growth, Zero Population Yeah, yeah, exactly.
Speaker 1: And Logan's Run set in the twenty third century where
Speaker 1: pleasure rules in a synthetic society. That was the byline.
Speaker 1: It's got a lot in common at the later phone
Speaker 1: called The Island with Ian McGregor. It was very similar
Speaker 1: in many ways. So now Logan's Run was a feast
Speaker 1: for you to get your teeth into really in writing,
Speaker 1: not least the population control, which I suppose is a
Speaker 1: central theme. But it's a smart city as well, isn't it.
Speaker 1: So just just just cherry pick a few of your
Speaker 1: favorite aspects of Logan's Run then and just set there
Speaker 1: was a.
Speaker 2: Well, you know, it's weird about a lot of the
Speaker 2: dystopian stories is that it's almost like they all have
Speaker 2: two or three elements that are likely to be true
Speaker 2: that the other stories don't have. So what you don't
Speaker 2: have in maybe well no, I guess you could argue
Speaker 2: that you do have population control in Zardas. But you know,
Speaker 2: at times you'll see things in some of these kinds
Speaker 2: of stories that you don't see in others. But yeah,
Speaker 2: this has a very strong euthanasia theme, right, So everybody
Speaker 2: has this very easy existence in the big plastic ai
Speaker 2: smart city and you are deleted, you know. You what's
Speaker 2: and what's weird about it is that once again it's
Speaker 2: a kind of religious manipulation like we saw in Zardas, right,
Speaker 2: which was this faux religion that's kind of the noble
Speaker 2: lie of Plato that's foisted upon the tech utopia. And
Speaker 2: then when you reach a certain age of what was
Speaker 2: a thirty or thirty three, you you you're insiderated. But
Speaker 2: they've turned it into this happy floating ritual where you
Speaker 2: kind of dance around and float away and you float
Speaker 2: into the furnace or something. And which is funny because
Speaker 2: that again, this is very platonic. It's very much the
Speaker 2: the idea that you know, Plato said, oh well, the
Speaker 2: the ideal republic, which all the utopias are all based
Speaker 2: on the idea public of Plato. Well, they've got to
Speaker 2: have the noble life, fake religion, because you know, you're
Speaker 2: never going to have all of the society being philosopher kings.
Speaker 2: And you know, the philosopher king understands that men have
Speaker 2: to be governed. And you got to have the rigid hierarchy,
Speaker 2: and you've got to have the you got to lie
Speaker 2: to the masses because you know they're just too stupid,
Speaker 2: and you got to keep them their population under control,
Speaker 2: like like the Wildlife Authority you know, controls the deer
Speaker 2: population here in Tennessee, for example, because there'll be too
Speaker 2: many of them. Uh. And you know, so that you
Speaker 2: have all those Malthusia and Eugenics themes, and then what
Speaker 2: happens is you got the the Promethean character of Logan five,
Speaker 2: who the Michael Yorke character who finally figures out that
Speaker 2: not everything in his Edenic existence is what it appears
Speaker 2: to be. And that's of course always one of the
Speaker 2: great themes of the Dystopian stories, and I think why
Speaker 2: they resonates so well with all of us living in
Speaker 2: the age that we live in now, especially with the
Speaker 2: awareness of the new world order and all that we
Speaker 2: realized that, you know, we have not been told what
Speaker 2: is true. We've been told all this Bologne, and we
Speaker 2: live in the synthetic society. And you know, as the
Speaker 2: great philosopher Jean Baldrizard predicted in his book Simulacround Simulation,
Speaker 2: we are almost entering into a point where it's beyond synthetic.
Speaker 2: It's like a synthetic version of the synthetic.
Speaker 1: You know.
Speaker 2: I was amazed, for example, when I watched the last
Speaker 2: Jurassic Park reboot, and there was so many I did
Speaker 2: analysis of that, and one of the things that stood
Speaker 2: out that was very bizarre was that you have people
Speaker 2: in a synthetic environment watching synthetic people or synthetic dinosaurs
Speaker 2: in a control Like a large part of that movie
Speaker 2: is in the control room of Jurassic Park, and the
Speaker 2: people are watching synthetic images on their screens of synthetic
Speaker 2: things in this synthetic park. And then it gets even
Speaker 2: more meta because we're in the movie theater watching all
Speaker 2: of this syntheticness. Now I may have mentioned that before,
Speaker 2: but that just always blows my mind when when this
Speaker 2: synthetic topic comes up and I think about how like
Speaker 2: these gamers, right like these very popular YouTube channels of
Speaker 2: gamers who sit there people are watching people play a
Speaker 2: video game, and it just blows my mind. And then
Speaker 2: you know, there are some channels where it's like people
Speaker 2: watching people watching a video game going. I mean, it's
Speaker 2: it's just like madness. But so we're getting into these
Speaker 2: kind of infinite removals, you know, of meta of synthetic
Speaker 2: dystopia here in our reality that I don't even think
Speaker 2: these people could have could have come up with. But
Speaker 2: and again, all of that's kind of hinted at here
Speaker 2: in Logan's run. Another interesting element is governing the people
Speaker 2: in the dystopia through their base desires, right hedonism rules
Speaker 2: you have like these, you basically go home and you
Speaker 2: tell the computer what you want. The computer produces the
Speaker 2: like a Holow deck on Star Trek or something like that,
Speaker 2: Like you get the synthetic babe or whatever. And like
Speaker 2: you said, yeah, it's very much like The Island, I think.
Speaker 2: I think Michael Bay and he kind of blended a
Speaker 2: whole bunch of the dystopias together. I mean, I actually
Speaker 2: think The Island is a decent movie. If you go
Speaker 2: back and watch it, it's not as bad as you
Speaker 2: would think, coming from Michael Bay. But but yeah, it
Speaker 2: is kind of like just a cut and paste of
Speaker 2: all the dystopias. So there's all this I guess we
Speaker 2: should mention other you know, the symbolism too, of like
Speaker 2: the lotus. So there's this I lotus crystal, which is
Speaker 2: this Buddhist Hindu imagery and in those traditions, interesting that
Speaker 2: it references the heart and the passion. So the lotus
Speaker 2: is a reference to the flower of life, which if
Speaker 2: we think about like sacred geometry and Pythagoreanism and Platonic mysticism,
Speaker 2: the flower of life signifies the ecosphere, the biosphere as
Speaker 2: a whole, and this gets into the platonic solids and
Speaker 2: how in Pythagoreanism everything's kind of built upon itself up
Speaker 2: into you know, second, third, fourth dimension reality. And the
Speaker 2: reason I say that is that again we're back to Platonism,
Speaker 2: and that's a I think direct conscious referencing of all
Speaker 2: these Platonic ideas. And you say, well, Platonism isn't Buddhism. Actually,
Speaker 2: there's a lot of similarities between ancient Hindu ideas and
Speaker 2: Buddhist ideas and Platonism, and people have written many books
Speaker 2: on that. I cite one of those books in my analysis.
Speaker 2: And really what we're just talking about sacred geometry here,
Speaker 2: and that is mastering the secrets of sacred geometry. This
Speaker 2: is what Plato talks about the republic. That's how you
Speaker 2: construct the utopia. Literally, now I'm not saying it's a
Speaker 2: real utopia. I'm just saying that that's how it's viewed
Speaker 2: in the mystic texts, is that you master these things.
Speaker 2: You know, Plato says that the philosopher king has to
Speaker 2: go off for like twenty years and study math. Like
Speaker 2: you go for twenty years and you study geometry, math,
Speaker 2: master all that, and then you've got to come back
Speaker 2: and master the art or ruling men. And that's the
Speaker 2: true philosopher king, right, So it's not just you know,
Speaker 2: meditating on a mountain. For Plato, it's a little more pragmatic.
Speaker 2: You've got to actually come back and use that nosis
Speaker 2: and wisdom that you supposedly have obtained to rule the
Speaker 2: city state. And that's everything that we're saying here in
Speaker 2: Logan's run. And there's also Crolean elements too. I think
Speaker 2: you've got this kind of new aon where death has
Speaker 2: been accepted as this kind of necessary part of existence
Speaker 2: and of the regime. The regime just has to to
Speaker 2: kill people, supposedly because you know, we got to keep
Speaker 2: balance in the population for the ecosphere and all this
Speaker 2: kind of stuff inside the the bubble Doome city, which
Speaker 2: by the way, is very Disney. You know. You look
Speaker 2: at the kind of silly little models and artwork that
Speaker 2: was used for the movie and it looks almost exactly
Speaker 2: like Epcot, and you say, well, what's the connection there?
Speaker 2: And we have mentioned this on the first talk. I
Speaker 2: can't remember, but it's come up a few times. The
Speaker 2: Pentagon was directly involved with big corporations like the Semens
Speaker 2: Corporation in designing Epcot and it's it was called the
Speaker 2: City of Tomorrow, so believe it or not, Epcot Center
Speaker 2: and Disney. I'm not joking. This is one hundreercent truth.
Speaker 2: That was predictive programming, planning, conditioning people to accept the
Speaker 2: coming smart cities. They knew back then there would be
Speaker 2: smart cities, there would be all this reorganization, you know,
Speaker 2: under the kind of Agenda twenty one Model of Cities
Speaker 2: and a New City's Initiative and all this kind of
Speaker 2: stuff Target cities. I'm not joking about that, by the way, Yeah,
Speaker 2: you mentioned that before.
Speaker 1: That's hilarious.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it's all real. The Clinton initiative is very closely
Speaker 2: connected to the Target Cities initiative. You can't make this
Speaker 2: stuff up.
Speaker 1: I mean you look at the look at the Zeitgeist
Speaker 1: movement specifically.
Speaker 2: Oh yeah, that's a great example.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean you look at their city drawings and
Speaker 1: a lot of their a lot of their plans, you know,
Speaker 1: which are kind of like the sort of thing that
Speaker 1: you see in artists impression when there's a new development
Speaker 1: going up somewhere but it's not ready yet. So rather
Speaker 1: than put the blueprints up, which is really boring and
Speaker 1: nobody can understand them, an artist does an impression of
Speaker 1: what the finished building or development will look like up
Speaker 1: it goes. So these are in that sort of style
Speaker 1: Zeitgeist's movements there kind of vision of future cities and
Speaker 1: what's what's that that just looks like something of a
Speaker 1: set from Lubin's Run or any of these other dystopian
Speaker 1: sci fi or you know, I remember looking at rewatching
Speaker 1: Clockwork Orange and just going, oh, it's the Zeitgeist streets
Speaker 1: and plazas and stuff, except that, oh, here, we have here,
Speaker 1: we have so called real life. Here, we have the
Speaker 1: you know, the ugliness of the animal kicking its jackboot
Speaker 1: into all of this. What word does this kind of
Speaker 1: resolution come. It's when some of the characters reconnect with nature,
Speaker 1: you know, outside of the dome city. That's very much
Speaker 1: the theme in t X one one three year. Oh yeah,
Speaker 1: they finally get finally get above ground and reconnect with nature.
Speaker 2: Oh this is that's that's great, that's this is the
Speaker 2: algory the cave theme that is constant in dystopian stories.
Speaker 2: So THHX total algory the cave where they emerge and
Speaker 2: they see the sun. Right, they've never seen a sunset
Speaker 2: or sunrise whatever it is, you know, with the James
Speaker 2: coll Or Robert of All character comes out and he
Speaker 2: sees the sun. And then there's another movie that's actually
Speaker 2: a pretty good kids movie, believe it or not, with
Speaker 2: Soorcia Ronan and Bill Murray called City of Ember. And
Speaker 2: it's a very well done dystopian movie for for kids.
Speaker 2: And in that film, they're all underground. It's a future dystopia.
Speaker 2: And you know that, I don't think I'm spoiling it
Speaker 2: for anybody by saying that. You know, the end of
Speaker 2: the film is that the whole civilization was based on
Speaker 2: Why and Sorsia Ronan and whoever the male lead guy was,
Speaker 2: they exit the city. And what the irony in that
Speaker 2: one was that the Bill Murray plays a great sort
Speaker 2: of dissolute, corrupted president of the of the civilization or
Speaker 2: whatever he is, the mayor, that's what he's the mayor,
Speaker 2: uh and and he doesn't even remember the real story,
Speaker 2: so he actually believes the bullshit. And that's the irony
Speaker 2: of sometimes of the dystopias is that, you know, maybe
Speaker 2: in the earliest days in these fictional presentations, we have
Speaker 2: the idea that you know, the leaders thought, oh, it's
Speaker 2: going to be for the best if we create the
Speaker 2: giant y for the civilization, and then like five hundred
Speaker 2: years later, they've forgotten that. So they actually believe that,
Speaker 2: you know, oh, you can't step outside the dome city
Speaker 2: because the error is toxic. You know, there's there's nuke
Speaker 2: nuke dust and radiation and which is all made up.
Speaker 2: And you know that that was a great theme in
Speaker 2: City of Member. So if you haven't seen that, I
Speaker 2: actually recommend it's pretty good films.
Speaker 1: Sorry, I was I cut across you there. I didn't
Speaker 1: mean to do that, but that's okay.
Speaker 2: They have that. It has that platonic algoryth that came
Speaker 2: cave theme, which again it's always present in these dystopian stories,
Speaker 2: and consciously I mean that again, that just proves my
Speaker 2: thesis that you know, it's all really goes back to
Speaker 2: the pledge of public.
Speaker 1: Well, there's another book novel I read. I don't think
Speaker 1: it's ever been turned into a movie. It's called The
Speaker 1: Penultimate Truth and it might be a Philip K. Dick book.
Speaker 1: I just can't remember, but it's exactly the same theme.
Speaker 1: I think you'd enjoy it. It's about you can't go
Speaker 1: above ground, it's poisoned, but it's not. But of course
Speaker 1: that goes right back to the machine stops, doesn't it?
Speaker 1: E M Forrester.
Speaker 2: Let's not forget snow Piercer.
Speaker 1: Yes, yeah, exactly, because that you.
Speaker 2: Know, they can't go outside the train. But that was
Speaker 2: all a.
Speaker 1: Lie, exactly. But the whole all this kind of reconnecting
Speaker 1: with nature but also the animal nature of man. I
Speaker 1: use the term advisedly in this, you know, emancipated emancipated
Speaker 1: age kind of sticking its over in you know, jutting
Speaker 1: phallically kind of thrusting into the situation and kind of
Speaker 1: ruining everything for the technocrats. I mean that's you see
Speaker 1: that in a way in Blade Run or Don't You
Speaker 1: a classic dystopian film, because not necessarily in a good way,
Speaker 1: but you've got i mean, the central characters like a
Speaker 1: heavy drinker to the point of being an alcoholic. Everything's
Speaker 1: really grimy, the weather suck. Because there's so many things
Speaker 1: about the future in that film that kind of kind
Speaker 1: of where you thought, yeah, this was all really shiny
Speaker 1: and brilliant, wasn't it when it was kind of new,
Speaker 1: And now it's all just kind of gone the way
Speaker 1: all tech does. It kind of rusts and seizes up,
Speaker 1: it has it has scum on it.
Speaker 2: And there's actually not a huge, huge fan of Ann Rand,
Speaker 2: but she actually has a pretty good short story with
Speaker 2: that same theme too. Anthem Anthem is a good An
Speaker 2: Ran short story with that same theme too.
Speaker 1: Well, just a thought that suddenly occurred to me, just
Speaker 1: based on something you said a minute ago about Philosopher Kings.
Speaker 1: And this is just a general reflection, but it kind
Speaker 1: of as a continuation in a thought process of you know,
Speaker 1: some of the some of the things that we've discussed,
Speaker 1: you know, the the themes of the you know, technology
Speaker 1: versus the primitive and the kind of spectrum between the two.
Speaker 1: And isn't it interesting what a difference there is, particularly
Speaker 1: brought out in movies, What a difference there is in
Speaker 1: leadership that arises from so called from the bottom and
Speaker 1: that which is generally imposed from the top. That's that's
Speaker 1: the thing that comes up in a lot of movies.
Speaker 1: And you see that. I mean, the first one that
Speaker 1: came to mind was Gladiator. This using example that a
Speaker 1: lot of people know. You've got Russell Crue's character Maximus,
Speaker 1: a very strong, capable, smart leader as he turns out
Speaker 1: to be, but he's come up from the ranks, and
Speaker 1: so he's a bit like a sergeant in the army
Speaker 1: in a way, do you know what I mean? Or
Speaker 1: the guy that the men look up to because he's
Speaker 1: done what they've done.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he actually has you know, courage and virtue. And
Speaker 2: then you know, Combadus, is this totally degenerate a feat
Speaker 2: you know?
Speaker 1: Yeah? Absolutely, And this is what I I The thought
Speaker 1: first occurred to me when we were talking about Sean
Speaker 1: Connery playing Zed and Zardal's you know, the role that
Speaker 1: he has and how he's you know, yes, he's taken
Speaker 1: on the role of an exterminator, but it doesn't you know,
Speaker 1: you kind of is a man of character a few
Speaker 1: words in the in that movie, but you kind of
Speaker 1: have a you can kind of him, you see what
Speaker 1: I mean, whereas you've just got nothing but contempt for
Speaker 1: these pro wretches, contempt and petty. And in the army,
Speaker 1: I suppose you get the guys. I don't know what
Speaker 1: it's like in the US Army, but in the British Army,
Speaker 1: you get the guys that go to Sandringham wherever it is,
Speaker 1: you know, to officers school, and that you know, they've
Speaker 1: never been in the rank and file, never been in
Speaker 1: the infantry, and their combat experience may be very limited,
Speaker 1: a bit like the guy in Aliens. Do you remember
Speaker 1: the guy the military guy who's like parachuted in ye.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And then you know the Hudson and Hicks and
Speaker 2: all those guys are seasoned and they can't stand that
Speaker 2: guy being over over them because he has had he
Speaker 2: has no experience.
Speaker 1: And when does that guy the characters again can't remember
Speaker 1: his name as such, but You've got that slimy cretn
Speaker 1: from the company who obviously gets stamped out like the
Speaker 1: cockroops that he is. Yeah, but when the military guy
Speaker 1: who has been parachuted in to like take control sort
Speaker 1: of speak, when does he begin When do we begin
Speaker 1: to kind of of see something coming through that looks
Speaker 1: like courage. It's when he's up against it, but it
Speaker 1: shows that he kind of has that within him when
Speaker 1: he sacrifices himself with you know that the the the girl,
Speaker 1: the female soldier, you know, and he's kind of only
Speaker 1: then only that's only in that human situation. Only when
Speaker 1: he's forced to actually act does he find really some
Speaker 1: kind of courage, whereas Burke is just you know, as
Speaker 1: a slime ball from beginning to end.
Speaker 2: So, you know, Ripley, Ripley, you know, I really thought
Speaker 2: better of you. I thought better for you. Ripley. You
Speaker 2: know we could be wealthy, Ripley don't. I don't do
Speaker 2: a great Paul Riser. But he has that very you know,
Speaker 2: kind of New York Jewish accent.
Speaker 1: He's got a very punishable head. I will say, yeah,
Speaker 1: but yeah, you're gonna slaze your way out of this one.
Speaker 1: Burke's going to nail you.
Speaker 2: To the wall. Came over man, game over.
Speaker 1: He died recently, didn't he?
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, the actor tact. Yeah.
Speaker 1: One of the thing that I want to turn to.
Speaker 1: I mentioned this just earlier, is this idea of emasculation
Speaker 1: and kind of like where we're headed in terms of
Speaker 1: technology in the real world. And of course a lot
Speaker 1: of what we're talking about spills over into this in
Speaker 1: terms of propaganda and predictive programming, you know sometimes and
Speaker 1: I'm reading quite a lot about this at the minute.
Speaker 1: You know, the effect that this technology is having on
Speaker 1: younger people, but also older generation as well. I mean
Speaker 1: people of our age, people who are old enough to
Speaker 1: be our parents, you know, maybe the people who are
Speaker 1: our parents. And it's you know, the digital natives versus
Speaker 1: digital immigrants. I think the word is. You know that
Speaker 1: you and I are probably to some extent digital immigrants,
Speaker 1: because we probably have always known personal computers, but we
Speaker 1: haven't always known smartphones and the Internet and everything else.
Speaker 1: Digital natives being those kids or young people that have
Speaker 1: been born into this. And we're seeing some negative effects here,
Speaker 1: and yet we're not here to discuss the positives. Okay,
Speaker 1: we're not here to dig some of the positives. You
Speaker 1: and I are talking with technology, we're talking over the Internet.
Speaker 1: It's amazing technology. I wouldn't want to be without it,
Speaker 1: even though I think we might be someday, maybe in
Speaker 1: a couple hundred years time. But you see so much
Speaker 1: apathy and so much vitality being drained away from a
Speaker 1: certain type of person who get immeshed in technology and
Speaker 1: I'm obsessed with it, and they live through it to
Speaker 1: the point where sometimes their never mind, their minds atrophying,
Speaker 1: sometimes their bodies waste away. I don't know if you've
Speaker 1: read anything about that. In particular, there's a class of
Speaker 1: young person in Japan, there's a name for them that
Speaker 1: I can't quite remember, who basically live with their parents
Speaker 1: and spend all their time in one room. And I've
Speaker 1: read a story recently about a number of kids who
Speaker 1: have died as a result of going on three, four
Speaker 1: or five day gaming marathons during work. They did not
Speaker 1: eat and did not sleep. And this passion, this sense
Speaker 1: of purpose, dry fire, desire, these things that seem to
Speaker 1: historically have driven us on as a species, good and all,
Speaker 1: but anything that we've achieved it you can look back
Speaker 1: and say, Wow, it's been that. I'm also reading a
Speaker 1: lot of articles in general about well, the first ones
Speaker 1: I read, we're along the lines of what's happening to men?
Speaker 1: You know, where are they? You know this young women
Speaker 1: just sort of saying you've got these like gaming, slack
Speaker 1: job to kine of phrase, pencil nets, slugs, this is
Speaker 1: the next generation of these, our future husbands and fathers.
Speaker 1: But I also start to read these sorts of things
Speaker 1: now about young women, you know, and why would the
Speaker 1: effects really be any differently, just affect you know, the
Speaker 1: different genders somewhat differently because the genders are different, but
Speaker 1: it's the same basic phenomenon.
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, here in the US, like if you scroll
Speaker 2: through like the dating websites, if somebody is single, you know,
Speaker 2: you're looking through these profiles and what you tend to see.
Speaker 2: You can learn a lot from that. By the way
Speaker 2: of the culture, You'll see all of these girls now
Speaker 2: that are obsessed with weightlifting. I'm not joking. This is
Speaker 2: a huge trend. And not just being fit but or toned,
Speaker 2: which you know that makes that's fine with me, but
Speaker 2: actually wanting to get buff, literally like really stout buff.
Speaker 2: You know, you've got girls going into UFC fighting. You know,
Speaker 2: you've got women. The argument is now they need to
Speaker 2: be in special forces and on the front lines. And
Speaker 2: simultaneously for the men, the programming is, like you said,
Speaker 2: enter into the what Max Kaiser called a long time ago,
Speaker 2: the virtual gulag, you know, the synthetic video game realm.
Speaker 2: So it's this total reversal of the norms, and it's
Speaker 2: absolutely by design, and it's a I don't think we
Speaker 2: have to look a whole lot further than just the depopulation.
Speaker 2: I mean, the whole goal of all that is just
Speaker 2: I mean there's probably other experiments too, you know, more
Speaker 2: specific localized experiments of you know, what what can we
Speaker 2: do with you know, what happens to somebody who plays
Speaker 2: video games, you know, for five days straight? What's the
Speaker 2: effects of I'm sure that government's done experiments of that
Speaker 2: of that nature. But overall the plan is really just
Speaker 2: to mess people up so they don't reproduce. I think
Speaker 2: that's I think it's pretty that pretty simple in that regard.
Speaker 2: And you know, we've mentioned many times Aldus Tuxley and
Speaker 2: WIT's in Brand New World, but being Bertrand Russell says
Speaker 2: this very clearly too in the scientific outlook and impacted
Speaker 2: science on society. That the goal would be to really
Speaker 2: just mess people up. I mean, it's just pretty much
Speaker 2: that simple.
Speaker 1: Yeah. I did an interview recently with a psychologist who
Speaker 1: deals with a lot of young people who are having
Speaker 1: problem relationships with technology. You know, they're usually referred by
Speaker 1: their parents because it's destroying their lives, and in some
Speaker 1: cases it turns out that the parents are actually falling
Speaker 1: down into that trap as well, and it makes the
Speaker 1: whole situation worse. But she related an interesting littl anic
Speaker 1: dope to me father of a child who had been
Speaker 1: referred to her. And the father was talking to her
Speaker 1: just when the kid wasn't around, and it was just
Speaker 1: in person or on the phone or something, and he
Speaker 1: was saying, yeah, you know, I remember they kind of
Speaker 1: had a bit of a little bit of a party
Speaker 1: over at the house. Not not kids old enough to
Speaker 1: be smoking and drinking and stuff, you know, they were
Speaker 1: just doing what slightly younger kids, but they were they
Speaker 1: were teenage kids being the point you know that they
Speaker 1: were they passed puberty. And he said, also, I just
Speaker 1: went down to the basement, you know, because we have
Speaker 1: it turned into a kind of a den, and you
Speaker 1: know there was the guys and the girls, you know,
Speaker 1: my son and all his friends and some some girlfriends
Speaker 1: I you know, female friends, not Nestley girlfriends in dating
Speaker 1: or anything like that. And he said there were there
Speaker 1: were going to throw cushions and stuff on the floor,
Speaker 1: and they were all kind of like lying there and
Speaker 1: kind of just chatting and doing stuff. And they were
Speaker 1: something that were kind of draped over each other. And
Speaker 1: he was kind of, you know, just looking on Okay,
Speaker 1: you know, there there's my son with the girl dripped over,
Speaker 1: and there's one of the other lads and this kind
Speaker 1: of girl lying with him, so you know, doing anything,
Speaker 1: not doing any harm, but there they are. You know,
Speaker 1: it's just blah blah blah. And he thought and he
Speaker 1: said to this psychologist, he said, man, I couldn't have
Speaker 1: done that without getting aroused when I would that age.
Speaker 1: But he said, they were all just lying there like
Speaker 1: exactly like the immortals and Zartles. You know, that's my
Speaker 1: free is not his, but you know that's what it was.
Speaker 2: That's funny. Yeah. The well, I think there's totally a
Speaker 2: drop in testosterone and the spurm counts have dropped and
Speaker 2: all kinds of crazy stuff like that that's you know,
Speaker 2: appears to be confirmed and I don't doubt it in
Speaker 2: even mainstream news. So yeah, I think it's all by design.
Speaker 2: You look at Ecoscience by John P. Holder and the
Speaker 2: quote sciences are that Obama appointed. He wrote back in
Speaker 2: the late seventies, that big fat book with Paul Erlick
Speaker 2: and other Malthusian global warming guy that you know that
Speaker 2: you could do all this through you know, chemicals in
Speaker 2: the environment, chemicals in the water, you know, inoculations, vaccines,
Speaker 2: all that, and you know, again, this is just it's
Speaker 2: just the restating of what Bert and Russell said so
Speaker 2: many years ago, one hundred years ago. And I mean,
Speaker 2: I'm not trying to be base. It's just it's really
Speaker 2: is that simple. You know, we can do all the
Speaker 2: analysis and trying to plumb the depths of all this stuff.
Speaker 2: But that's really the big plan in my view.
Speaker 1: A not thing that you mentioned quite early on, but Superhero,
Speaker 1: which when you know, your comment was just that I'm
Speaker 1: not really a big superhero movie yet, you know, I
Speaker 1: don't necessarily know a lot about it, blah blah blah,
Speaker 1: and then you're you know, but mentioning about guys in
Speaker 1: their twenties, thirties, forties, whatever, just being like really into
Speaker 1: the superhero thing.
Speaker 2: But no, no, no, this is this is a huge thing. Man.
Speaker 2: It's it's hard. I mean, have you been to I'm
Speaker 2: not quizzing you, I'm just wondering, have you been to
Speaker 2: the US? Have you seen like there are the I mean,
Speaker 2: I'm sure this is true of the Western world and
Speaker 2: probably other areas as well, like Japan or something especially,
Speaker 2: but there are these giant conventions and they just get
Speaker 2: bigger and bigger and bigger every year, and they pop
Speaker 2: up in every city and it's like not just I mean,
Speaker 2: when I was a kid, there used to be comic
Speaker 2: book conventions at maybe a few cities, and the San
Speaker 2: Diego Comic con is very famous. I went to that
Speaker 2: when I was a kid. No, it's neat, you know,
Speaker 2: Spider Man, Batman. But now it has become this gigantic
Speaker 2: industry and the big I'm not joking. Look this up.
Speaker 2: The A listers can even make more money by convention
Speaker 2: appearances than they do in their films. Chris Evans, the
Speaker 2: guy who's Captain America, he can make more at one
Speaker 2: convention than he does, you know, in the whole I'm
Speaker 2: not joking, look that up. It's crazy. And so it's
Speaker 2: it's just this whole other realm of the cosplay theme.
Speaker 2: That's that's kind of taking on a new life of
Speaker 2: its own. I've been speculating with some of my friends
Speaker 2: that I think what they might even do in the future,
Speaker 2: I'm not joking, but but so we think about, oh,
Speaker 2: it's going to Logan's run. There's gonna be you know,
Speaker 2: like a big plastic city, smart city. No, no, no,
Speaker 2: here's what I think they're gonna do. I think they
Speaker 2: will actually create, like, imagine a whole state or a
Speaker 2: whole region that is Avatar World. Imagine a whole land
Speaker 2: that is Harry Potter Land, and you can literally go
Speaker 2: immerse yourself in that world. Now, it'll be totally a
Speaker 2: sy op, totally mind control. By the way, this is
Speaker 2: don't steal this. This is my idea for a sci
Speaker 2: fi dystopia. Of course, you know you can if you
Speaker 2: write a dystopian story that way, you can't use Avatar
Speaker 2: or anything like that. You get sued. But I think
Speaker 2: that I think that's what they're gonna do. And Disney
Speaker 2: was the test bed for this. So I don't think
Speaker 2: it'll totally all be virtual. I think you'll have I mean,
Speaker 2: I think we're a long way away from people totally
Speaker 2: living inside the matrix. But you know, we're going to
Speaker 2: continue to see these big DARP Pentagon style projects where
Speaker 2: they create, you know, entire areas. I mean, I'm amazed.
Speaker 2: For example, at disney in down in Florida, which I've
Speaker 2: been a few times in my life. Last time i
Speaker 2: went was about five years ago. And so when I
Speaker 2: was a kid, you would go to Disneyland and there
Speaker 2: would be the Magic Kingdom, which was kind of the
Speaker 2: central theme park, and then they added there was Epcot
Speaker 2: Magic Kingdom that was kind of it maybe a few
Speaker 2: beaches and resorts or something. Now when you go there
Speaker 2: are whole worlds, Like you go to Harry Potter World,
Speaker 2: you go to you know, they're opening Avatar World now,
Speaker 2: so entire parks are expanding based on Avatar, Harry Potter.
Speaker 2: It just kind of blew me out. I was like,
Speaker 2: I cannot believe this is insane. So it's almost like Vegas,
Speaker 2: you know what Vegas is for adults. It's gonna I
Speaker 2: think it's going to merge into something like Disney World,
Speaker 2: and the dystopia that we're gonna see is going to
Speaker 2: be something just mind boggling like that.
Speaker 1: I've got nothing against the superhero concept. I used to
Speaker 1: read not very much, but I used to read Marvel
Speaker 1: annuals when I was a kid. But I kind of
Speaker 1: preferred some of the lesser known superheroes. Like there was
Speaker 1: one guy there was made of Stone, and there was
Speaker 1: another guy that was like Iceman or wherever he used
Speaker 1: to silver Surfer, I don't remember what they helped. Some
Speaker 1: of the lesser known, you know, of the of the
Speaker 1: pantheon were interesting to me. But when you get guys
Speaker 1: that are like your age or my age, and they're
Speaker 1: kind of like on a weekend, you know, kind of
Speaker 1: kissing their kids and their wife and then say, you know,
Speaker 1: for they I don't know if there is such a
Speaker 1: man as astro Man, but they're kind of putting on
Speaker 1: a fucking cape and going off the weekend. I am
Speaker 1: astro Man, and this kind of.
Speaker 2: Wonder Now, this is becoming people's identities, and that's because
Speaker 2: they've lost their traditional heritage and identities. So they're derascinated
Speaker 2: and they're just kind of floating and so in consumerist culture.
Speaker 2: Just like you can buy a new gender quote unquote,
Speaker 2: people are buying and purchasing new identities based on you know,
Speaker 2: these these fictional worlds, these imaginal worlds. Uh. And absolutely
Speaker 2: that's been that's been designed and engineered. And all you
Speaker 2: have to do to to note that that's true is
Speaker 2: study the history of Disney World and Disneyland. Well, have
Speaker 2: you been to have you been to Epcot? By chance?
Speaker 1: No? No? I when you went to the States once
Speaker 1: and it was New York only I didn't get outside
Speaker 1: New York.
Speaker 2: So it's it's something to see just because it will
Speaker 2: really blow your mind. And then you know, and I
Speaker 2: was hipped to all of the you know, conspiracy stuff
Speaker 2: the last time that I went to to Disney and Florida,
Speaker 2: and I did it kind of as a project to
Speaker 2: observe it, and it was mind blowing. I mean, you
Speaker 2: you the for example, when you go through Epcot, which
Speaker 2: is not that great of a ride, it's kind of goofy,
Speaker 2: but you you just you know, I'm talking about the
Speaker 2: Big golf Ball, right, that's Epcot Center. So you ride
Speaker 2: this roller coaster that just kind of circles around inside
Speaker 2: the Big Ball I'm not making this up. You can
Speaker 2: I think people have, you know, posted their videos of
Speaker 2: it on YouTube. You can go watch people writing EPCOT.
Speaker 2: So you go through the story is a mythology, and
Speaker 2: it's the history of mankind inside EPCOT. And so you're like, oh,
Speaker 2: here you are as the Darwinian Apes, and then you
Speaker 2: grew up into these ancient civilizations and so you're writing
Speaker 2: through the animatronic Egyptian Land and you're going through I'm
Speaker 2: not joking, you're going through ancient China Land. And so
Speaker 2: then at the end of it, I'm at a loss
Speaker 2: for words just because it stupid. So the last part
Speaker 2: of it is like if you've moved up into the
Speaker 2: present day of mankind and it's like, where are we
Speaker 2: going into the future? Right, because EPCOT is all about futurism.
Speaker 2: And the very last second to last thing that you
Speaker 2: see is a nerd in his basement creating a computer.
Speaker 2: And it's like this little Bill Gates. It's like a
Speaker 2: little animatronic Bill Gates guy at in his garage working
Speaker 2: on a computer. Uh, and it's you know, and then
Speaker 2: and then EPCOT, the little module that you're writing in.
Speaker 2: Then you go into the matrix that's how it ends. Wow. Yeah,
Speaker 2: now you say, well, what's the point of that? So
Speaker 2: what who cares? That's a stupid ride. No, No, EPCOT
Speaker 2: is an indoctrination center. The whole thing is the entire project,
Speaker 2: the whole It's all created by the Pentagon. That's why
Speaker 2: Walt Disney was doing all of that propaganda. He was
Speaker 2: making all his propaganda movies. He was involved in the
Speaker 2: Laurel Canyon stuff. Uh. You know, go back to Daffy Duck.
Speaker 2: Uh telling you to join the military and pay your taxes.
Speaker 2: That's all. That's all propaganda. And so it's been linked
Speaker 2: to the Pentagon the entire time.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: By the way, Disney is its own city state. Do
Speaker 2: you know that it's like the Vatican?
Speaker 1: The Vatican. Wow, it's like like DC. I suppose as
Speaker 1: well to some extent, you know, like it's Did you.
Speaker 2: Know that it has its own laws and constitutions. No?
Speaker 1: I didn't know that. But why am I?
Speaker 2: People? People do not believe that. I swear to you
Speaker 2: that's true. Go look it up.
Speaker 1: Well, Well, you know utopian sorry, dystopian sci fi that
Speaker 1: we've been discussing. One of the common themes is that
Speaker 1: the idea of distractions, isn't it. It's all amusements, isn't it,
Speaker 1: Things to just kind of do instead of instead of
Speaker 1: real life. It's kind of things to keep you busy.
Speaker 1: And it's like, oh, that's wonderful. Listen. Wonderful that you know, and.
Speaker 2: Wow, yeah, this so Roger Waters song Amusing Ourselves to
Speaker 2: Death based on based on the Norman Mailer book or something.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, again, very very ahead of its time, that
Speaker 1: book actually so. And this is why my comment about
Speaker 1: dystopia is, this is why I have never had any
Speaker 1: time for theme parks. I've never had any interest in it. Now,
Speaker 1: somebody wants to get up and going to Merry Go
Speaker 1: Round or maybe going a roller coaster, there's kind of
Speaker 1: a you know, there's a best throw there. Maybe not
Speaker 1: only a Merry Go Round, but on the roller coaster
Speaker 1: it can be quite a physical experience. So I get that.
Speaker 1: I can see now. To me, it just looks like
Speaker 1: an accident waiting to happen. So you're not going to
Speaker 1: get me up in one of those. But in general,
Speaker 1: what you described about Epcot whatever, I'm like, why are
Speaker 1: we doing this? And I've been to some interactive museums
Speaker 1: and stuff. That I found interesting. It depends where it's
Speaker 1: pitched in what the level is, isn't it you know,
Speaker 1: But in general, what we would call a theme park
Speaker 1: to me is like why am I here? Okay, we'll
Speaker 1: get a hot dog and then we'll go okay, because
Speaker 1: I just don't want to be here. It's always felt
Speaker 1: to be like one massive distraction, especially when they try
Speaker 1: to recreate things. You know, the whole idea of going
Speaker 1: to the middle of a landlocked contrary and oh they've
Speaker 1: created a They've created a beach, so god forbid you
Speaker 1: go to the beach. You don't have to go to
Speaker 1: the beach anymore. You can go to beach World. Yes, exactly,
Speaker 1: completely enclosed, you know, sort of climatically controlled, three hundred
Speaker 1: and sixty five day a year experience.
Speaker 2: You know.
Speaker 1: Beaches are so yesterday. Welcome to you know, ultra beach
Speaker 1: or whatever it happens to be.
Speaker 2: That was kind of inn the last Terry Gilliam movies,
Speaker 2: Z Zero. The I have mixed views on it has
Speaker 2: some interesting insights, and you know, he's always very good
Speaker 2: with cinematography, but I don't know, it's kind of to me,
Speaker 2: it ended kind of nihilistic, but I'll tell you the
Speaker 2: movie to watch for this point is the independent film
Speaker 2: that came out four or five years ago called tomorrow Land,
Speaker 2: Escape from tomorrow Land, or Escape from Tomorrow I forget
Speaker 2: the name of it exactly, but are you familiar with that.
Speaker 1: I am not to know what you're Oh, this is.
Speaker 2: A brilliant film. You got to watch this, you will
Speaker 2: love this. So it's all shot in black and white.
Speaker 2: And the selling point marketing point, which there's no way
Speaker 2: this could be true. But the marketing point was that
Speaker 2: supposedly the filmmakers snuck into Disney and filmed the entire
Speaker 2: thing in the theme part without Disney knowing. Now, there's
Speaker 2: no way that that's true because the Disney has, like
Speaker 2: it's the whole theme park is a smart city under surveillance,
Speaker 2: so there's like you have to scan biometrics to get in. Like,
Speaker 2: there's no way they did that. But that was a
Speaker 2: selling marketing point, which is I guess kind of clever.
Speaker 2: But this film and I did do an analysis of
Speaker 2: a long time ago, but this was overlooked. People didn't
Speaker 2: I guess didn't see it. Maybe didn't have as big
Speaker 2: a marketing as you would think, but very very deep,
Speaker 2: very esoteric, very dark themes in this it's a dystopian
Speaker 2: kind of story actually, but it shows all of the
Speaker 2: stuff that I'm talking about in the movie. Now. It's
Speaker 2: curious because what I'm suggesting is that it would seem
Speaker 2: Disney was behind the film if they allowed I mean,
Speaker 2: you know all that goes into shooting a film. There's
Speaker 2: no way they did this without Disney knowing inside the
Speaker 2: freaking theme park. But so if Disney was involved covertly,
Speaker 2: then you are about to have your mind blown about
Speaker 2: revelation of the method when you watch this movie.
Speaker 1: No, that's that's just I think moved to the top
Speaker 1: of my watch list. To follow up on something that
Speaker 1: you mentioned in one of the previous installments of this series.
Speaker 1: You mentioned that, you know, there were laughable idea of
Speaker 1: whole states being given over to particular themes. You said, like,
Speaker 1: you know, laughed at the idea of Harry potter Land,
Speaker 1: And I immediately thought, well, you know, west World, what
Speaker 1: happens exactly. West World's a new thing on TV. But
Speaker 1: I'm thinking back which I haven't seen yet, but you
Speaker 1: can tell us about that in the second But going
Speaker 1: back to the original movie of West World, based on
Speaker 1: a Michael Crichton's story. What you've got there is a
Speaker 1: grown men going to just regressing into like, you know,
Speaker 1: pre pubacent boyhood, going to this wild West theme park
Speaker 1: with the latest tech where they can pretend to be cowboys,
Speaker 1: and not only pretend to be cowboys, badass cowboys that
Speaker 1: get the girl, drink the bourbon, and get the gundawn
Speaker 1: the bad guy. These weak saplings couldn't fight the way
Speaker 1: out of a wet paper bag, but they can. They
Speaker 1: can all be Clint Eastwood for the weekend. You know,
Speaker 1: And what is that if not that immersive virtual you know,
Speaker 1: not virtual reality, but that immersive experience of giving yourself.
Speaker 1: It's it's beyond the fan convention, isn't it is? It
Speaker 1: just turns into No.
Speaker 2: That's exactly right. And Michael Crichton has it to where,
Speaker 2: you know, in the story, it's it's rich people who
Speaker 2: can pay, you know, these exorbitant amounts. And I'm just
Speaker 2: saying it would be funny if you extended that to
Speaker 2: be like, oh no, no, you're actually going to like
Speaker 2: Tennessee will become Harry potter Land. I'm joking, but uh,
Speaker 2: but yeah, no, I did do an analysis of Westworld,
Speaker 2: and I watched it and k Jonathan Nolan was the
Speaker 2: writer and then JJ Abrams directed it, and Jonathan Nolan
Speaker 2: being Christopher Nolan's brother, and so you're gonna get a
Speaker 2: lot of the Nolan themes of the Maze, which always
Speaker 2: comes up in Christopher Nolan stuff. Uh, and so there
Speaker 2: were interesting elements to it. But I I was it
Speaker 2: was underwhelming for me. I expected more. I thought it
Speaker 2: would would give us more than kind of. I mean,
Speaker 2: they did diverge a little bit and introduce, you know,
Speaker 2: new ideas building on the Crichton story, but I just
Speaker 2: I felt like it's still it just lacked something, something
Speaker 2: was missing. It was it was a little too predictable.
Speaker 2: Everybody kind of everybody that I know that watched it
Speaker 2: kind of figured it out, like right away what was
Speaker 2: going on, what the what the plot was. I don't
Speaker 2: mean that it's a synthetic city. Everybody knows that, but
Speaker 2: I mean the inter story plot of why the characters
Speaker 2: are doing what they're doing. But it does have the
Speaker 2: very point that you're talking about. It's the prediction of
Speaker 2: the elites in this in this story, immersing themselves in
Speaker 2: the synthetic world because they're the only ones that have
Speaker 2: the money, you know, to be involved in this, and
Speaker 2: then the synthetic world kind of breaks out. It's encasement,
Speaker 2: and you know, that's what we're kind of left with
Speaker 2: is you know, where are we going to go next
Speaker 2: next season? You know, are the the bots actually going
Speaker 2: to like take over the world? You know, this kind
Speaker 2: of stuff.
Speaker 1: Further to what we were talking about, this theme of
Speaker 1: emasculation in general, and say, this is not just affecting men,
Speaker 1: it's affecting all human beings to some extent, particularly those
Speaker 1: who are like losing themselves and losing their bodies and
Speaker 1: their minds. Is there any link I wonder between this
Speaker 1: demonization on the one hand, the other holding up with
Speaker 1: this superhero character, but on the other hand, a demonization
Speaker 1: of manhood or womanhood in the real world. You know,
Speaker 1: it's almost like, yeah, you get screen superhero, but you
Speaker 1: can't be a superhero. You can't as a father, as
Speaker 1: a husband, or as a wife or mother or grandmother
Speaker 1: or son or you know, you can't attee in that
Speaker 1: in your real life. You know, you've got to be
Speaker 1: pathetic and weak and the rest of it. And you
Speaker 1: you know, be told what to do and to go along,
Speaker 1: to get along, and is there any connection between that?
Speaker 1: And then you look at people like Bill Gates and
Speaker 1: now look again, not every I'm not saying everybody's got
Speaker 1: to be a particular type of individual in body or
Speaker 1: in mind, but for the purposes of our discussion, I'm
Speaker 1: just looking at parallels. And you look at someone like
Speaker 1: that who's physically deeply unimpressive, and then you look you
Speaker 1: think of Wizard of Oz and the story there and
Speaker 1: what's revealed to us in the end, you know, behind
Speaker 1: the curtain. And then you think of someone like David Rockefeller,
Speaker 1: for example, who he recently bought it, didn't he And
Speaker 1: that's sort of like, you know, what a decrepit old demon?
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, what could could a man aspire
Speaker 1: to be anything less? If you see what I mean?
Speaker 1: And so I'm just wondering about interesting parallels there, about
Speaker 1: the messages that were handled about what it is to
Speaker 1: be a man, what it is to be a woman,
Speaker 1: you know, regardless of your sexuality and the future.
Speaker 2: You know. Yeah, well, there were very strong feminist themes
Speaker 2: in West world this this go around, And that's not
Speaker 2: my interpretation. That's pretty pretty obvious and you know, other
Speaker 2: critics that we're writing on it, we're championing the feminist themes.
Speaker 2: So basically, there's not really any good male characters in
Speaker 2: the film. Maybe the black guy who's the Arnold character.
Speaker 2: I forget the actor's name, but I guess you could
Speaker 2: already he's kind of a good guy, but then you
Speaker 2: realize that he's not a guy. So a little bit
Speaker 2: of a spoiler there, But the message there, of course
Speaker 2: is another one of the themes that we've seen throughout
Speaker 2: many of these transhumanist films is that the bots are
Speaker 2: humanized and the humans are roboticized. So humans are robotic,
Speaker 2: they're totally driven by evil. Oh but don't worry, because
Speaker 2: there's a bright future of the bots, and they are
Speaker 2: compassionate and strong and virtuous and all of these all
Speaker 2: these selling point it's basically of transhumanism that you see
Speaker 2: in movies like AI. You know, where the Haley Joel
Speaker 2: osmic character is has the empathy and the humane characteristics,
Speaker 2: and then the humans in that movie are for the
Speaker 2: most part all shit has totally and that's by design too.
Speaker 2: I think that's that's all part of the inversion, really
Speaker 2: is what this is all about that we've been talking
Speaker 2: about with you know, the virchant Russell's quotes and whatnot.
Speaker 2: So yes, I think you're onto something there with the
Speaker 2: idea of I think you're right. So what I said earlier,
Speaker 2: you could you could argue that women are being masculinized,
Speaker 2: men are being feminized in the real world. But as
Speaker 2: long as a big portion of your time is and
Speaker 2: attention and focus and energy is directed to the synthetic world,
Speaker 2: then the elites are happy. I think that's the main point.
Speaker 1: We could discuss this all day really, But and as
Speaker 1: we begin to bring things for close this time around
Speaker 1: to what extent this is a theme that came out
Speaker 1: in your book also, do you think that kind of
Speaker 1: a coming to the surface of a lot of these
Speaker 1: themes and people coming to an understanding of some of
Speaker 1: what they're being presented with and how that's working. There
Speaker 1: seem to be two divergent trends. One is people kind
Speaker 1: of waking up to some of these ideas that we're
Speaker 1: talking about, and other people getting further and further lost
Speaker 1: in this kind of like matrix. So how do you
Speaker 1: read that situation? What do you feel negative about, what
Speaker 1: do you feel positive about?
Speaker 2: You know. Well, the positive side is I said for
Speaker 2: a long time, I think precisely, yes, the establishment the
Speaker 2: system might master technology, and we can think about it
Speaker 2: like the Death Star, you know, but it's kind of
Speaker 2: like the rebellion in Star Wars consistently says to the Empire.
Speaker 2: You know. I think that Darth Vader even says, you know,
Speaker 2: don't put too much trust in this, this technological terror
Speaker 2: that you've created, because human humanity in the world, the
Speaker 2: universe is more than matter and techne their their spirit,
Speaker 2: which I think has precedence over those things. And so yes,
Speaker 2: even though they might master mind control and these different tactics,
Speaker 2: the good the good takeaway from Logan's run and from
Speaker 2: Zardas is that the elite systems usually collapse in on themselves.
Speaker 2: And you can see that in all the attempts throughout
Speaker 2: history at trying to create these unrealistic utopias, is that
Speaker 2: they eventually collapse. And so yeah, you might have to
Speaker 2: go through a period of of of the dystopia, you know,
Speaker 2: the dark period, but they they don't work because of
Speaker 2: the fact that they're self destructive. And so anytime you
Speaker 2: get these systems that turn on humanity itself, and the
Speaker 2: problem for the elite is that they too are humans.
Speaker 2: It's a self destructive cancer, and cancer eats away at
Speaker 2: all of them. You know, they might put all these
Speaker 2: they might attack all of us with this stuff, but
Speaker 2: you can't totally immunize yourself from it. And that's what
Speaker 2: we saw that the elites trying to do in both
Speaker 2: Zardas and Logan's Run to an extent, but it doesn't work.
Speaker 2: So I think that because it's built on a faulty
Speaker 2: anthropology and a faulty worldview, ultimately it's not going to work.
Speaker 1: No, I think a lot of the techno utopianism is
Speaker 1: really which you can put the Zeitgeist movement into that category.
Speaker 1: I think it's not unlike in many ways the twenty
Speaker 1: twelve idea, you know, the idea of a shifting consciousness
Speaker 1: and that we're going to ascend or be raptured or
Speaker 1: whatever it happens to be. The idea it's this sort
Speaker 1: of magical process that's going to allow us to side
Speaker 1: step difficult problems, you know, a bit like going to
Speaker 1: adulthood from childhood, having to go through teenage years when
Speaker 1: you have to kind of learn.
Speaker 2: Limitations are a good thing. And there's no way to
Speaker 2: ever get rid of all limitations. And really that whole
Speaker 2: project is built on that presubposition. That's actually what aldis
Speaker 2: Texley says that he says the enemies of the future
Speaker 2: will be people who in any way and in any
Speaker 2: sense believe in limitations and exclusions. So that's why you're
Speaker 2: seeing the attack on language, the idea of oh we
Speaker 2: have sixty genders now, oh, words don't mean what they mean.
Speaker 2: All of that. There's just no way that can work.
Speaker 2: I mean, it might cause some havoc, it might cause
Speaker 2: destabilization and wreck a lot of things for a long time,
Speaker 2: but it's just so fundamentally out of a chord with
Speaker 2: the actual world in which we live that you know,
Speaker 2: you can only sustain synthetic systems for so long before
Speaker 2: they have the internal problem of breakdown. And I don't
Speaker 2: think that they'll ever overcome that. It doesn't matter how
Speaker 2: many bots that you create to program other bots, you're
Speaker 2: never going to escape the natural world.
Speaker 1: Well, whatever progress they make with virtual reality. To be honest,
Speaker 1: I think that your movies are a great metaphor for this,
Speaker 1: that you know, the screen is bleeding into so called
Speaker 1: real life so much now that you can see a
Speaker 1: lot of individuals that we've referred to who have actually
Speaker 1: kind of lost track of what is what. You know,
Speaker 1: people who are going maybe going to show up for
Speaker 1: work on a target, let's just say, or Walmart. They're
Speaker 1: going to turn up on Monday morning dressed is astro man,
Speaker 1: and they're they're going to walk in and somebody's going
Speaker 1: to go, oh, hi, Jim, you know, what's with the
Speaker 1: what's with the tights and the cape and the and
Speaker 1: the goggles? You know, I am astro man. Yeah, well Jim,
Speaker 1: that's fine, do that in your lunch, char but could
Speaker 1: you get to your station please? No astro man. You
Speaker 1: know when it gets hauled away in the you know,
Speaker 1: to the rubber room. So but I just think that
Speaker 1: that's an increasing trend that we're going to say it's
Speaker 1: going to be an interesting ride because it works both ways.
Speaker 1: Is and it you know, you get stuff, real world stuff,
Speaker 1: it gets turned into movie, you know, it becomes a
Speaker 1: suit called reality TV. I think is a brilliant manifestation
Speaker 1: of this. It's kind of like I'm going to tune
Speaker 1: into the TV for some real reality because the reality,
Speaker 1: the real reality I've got I don't really want so
Speaker 1: let's really really get the real thing on the TV exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think you're right, and uh, I mean they're
Speaker 2: gonna keep pushing the limits. But again, you know, it's
Speaker 2: you just can't. You can't force the entire biosphere into
Speaker 2: something that is anti biosphere. And when we look at
Speaker 2: similar projects in the past that have attempted to do
Speaker 2: this kind of stuff, like Bolshevism or Stalinism are great
Speaker 2: examples of trying to impose an ideal that is totally
Speaker 2: mismatched with the real world. It just collapses. And the
Speaker 2: the the Jacques Frescoes and the Saint Simon's uh, and
Speaker 2: the Zeitgeis the types that you're talking about who are
Speaker 2: really kind of at the core of the this this ideology. Uh,
Speaker 2: it's just it's not going to work. I mean, and
Speaker 2: again it's because they arrogantly think they understand everything about
Speaker 2: humanity because they've mastered some technological thing. This is not true.
Speaker 2: I mean, humans are humans, and human persons transcend nature.
Speaker 2: I believe that's part of the theology that I adhere to,
Speaker 2: and so that informs my worldview, and that's the vantage
Speaker 2: point from which I think I can accurately critique and
Speaker 2: argue against the idea that you can engineer Man into
Speaker 2: being something other than Man.
Speaker 1: Well, to borrow Freeze from Mad Max or either going
Speaker 1: to crash or we're going to crash through So stick
Speaker 1: around to find out which it's going to be. Today, Jay,
Speaker 1: we've been talking about your book Esoteric Hollywood Sex Cults
Speaker 1: and Symbols in Film that's published not so long ago,
Speaker 1: that's available everywhere.
Speaker 2: If you would please get it, Please get it from
Speaker 2: me at my website.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well, tell folks about that, and also just tell
Speaker 1: them you've just shot a TV show that's in the
Speaker 1: can for a broadcast and not too just so, yeah,
Speaker 1: share your web details and tell folks about the TV show.
Speaker 2: Yeah. So the book can be obtained from me whether
Speaker 2: you're in the US or well actually anywhere in the world.
Speaker 2: I have a outside of the US PayPal that you
Speaker 2: can do too. And yeah, it's a little bit pricey,
Speaker 2: but it helps the author. You know, if you can
Speaker 2: get it directly from me, not through Amazon. Amazon undercuts
Speaker 2: author is pretty bad and they're process and that's why
Speaker 2: they offer it so cheap. But so you can get
Speaker 2: the book there and I do sign the copies, and
Speaker 2: then you can also get access to my archives where
Speaker 2: I have a lot of interviews and talks and podcasts
Speaker 2: and lectures. The second half that you pay for. The
Speaker 2: first half's always free. And then you know probably a
Speaker 2: thousand or so posts and articles at the website, big
Speaker 2: vast archive that you can dive into that's all free.
Speaker 2: And yeah, we just shot seventeen episodes, very high production quality.
Speaker 2: I'm very impressed with what the production company had there
Speaker 2: and how it all turned out. It all went well,
Speaker 2: went pretty smooth, And it'll be basically a Cisco and
Speaker 2: Ebert style show of me and Jay Weiedner of Kubrick's
Speaker 2: Odyssey in Room two thirty seven Fame, going back and
Speaker 2: forth kind of debating and critiquing and analyzing film from
Speaker 2: the kind of vanished point that you that you and
Speaker 2: I've been doing it right. So not the bland ciscl Ebert,
Speaker 2: you know this is good, this is bad. They were
Speaker 2: good actors, they were bad actors of view from the
Speaker 2: symbology side of things. And that's why I think it's
Speaker 2: going to be really high quality, not like anything else
Speaker 2: that's out there in TV and media, and I think
Speaker 2: it'll be a couple of months before it's done in
Speaker 2: the post production, and then it'll be available on streaming
Speaker 2: on the Gaya network Guya TV, which is available on
Speaker 2: Amazon Prime, Roku, Apple TV, and in the US at
Speaker 2: least it will also be available on a lot of
Speaker 2: cable and satellite so through like Exfinity Cable in the
Speaker 2: US and things like that. So yeah, I'm looking forward
Speaker 2: to that. I think it's going to do really well,
Speaker 2: and if it does good ratings wise, they will order
Speaker 2: up another twenty two episodes.
Speaker 1: Wonderful. Well, look forward to that. In the meantime, Jay,
Speaker 1: thank you so much for joining us on Legalized freedom
Speaker 1: dot com.
Speaker 2: Always a pleasure. Thank you, Greg,