Speaker 1: All right, what's up. Welcome everybody. We're live today special guest.
We haven't had Courtney on in a while, but she
is live from the Chicago Comic Con as one of
the biggest supporters of the Furry convention that's going on
up there, and she's a huge fan of Frodo and
Sam and Lego, Les and all of the hobbits that
are in the circles of Mensius Moldbug. Today, we're gonna
be talking about that's all being stupid. By the way,
we have an odd topic today, probably something you didn't expect.
It's gonna be technocracy. But Courtney has done a lot
of in depth research and information into subjects that probably
not a lot of people are that familiar with. We're
gonna be talking about the Dark Enlightenment. We're gonna be
talking about the circles of Peter Teel, their interest and
influence from the Lord of the Rings. We're gonna be
talking about the technocratic takeover. But before we get into
Courtney's recent research and her articles on substack, let's do
a little bit of a stepping back, because the audience
over here had grown quite a bit, and we may
have some people I was on a comedians podcast the
other day and I just sort of launched into this
and the first thing he said to me was like, whoa, wha, whoa,
what is technocracy? So we probably have some people that
don't even know what this is. So Courtney begin with
telling us, first of all, what is technocracy, the origins
of it, the overview of it.
Speaker 2: So technocracy started in the nineteen thirties as a response
to the Great Depression. Actually this was their solution to
create abundance. And the very famous you know, Elon Musk,
his grandfather was Josh Hattleman, was actually the head of
Technocracy Inc. In Canada from nineteen thirty six to nineteen
forty nineteen forty one, right before it shut down. And they,
in their own words like in there, and I think
I might have that if it's not in this most
recent articles, in my last article, but I actually have
the screenshot from Technocrat magazine in nineteen thirty seven. They
say themselves that the definition of technocracy is social engineering.
So of course it is really you know, where you
have the scientific elite will control everything. And they had
this vision back then, but they didn't have the technology
that we have today. So I think back then the
ideas were scary enough. I think that that was it
was definitely enough to be concerned about back then. But
today it's very concerning because we have the technology, we
have AI, we have you know, all of this, that
we have the potential for a completely tokenized world, not
just economy, but really make everything tokenized. And to me,
that's their end game, and I think it's the most
most scary aspect of all of it. But yeah, so
that's the kind of cliff notes of it. They also
say themselves that the data of mining, the surveillance is
for the purposes of control, So just in case any
of you know, it's confused about that, that's their own
words all the way back in the nineteen thirties. And
the platform is very progressive, so they're aligned with things
like ubi's you know, they call the energy credits, and
you can find in their manual you'd have to go
to the wayback machine, but you can find the Technocracy
study guides and they talk about the energy certificates, which
are basically carbon credits today in the language of the UN.
Speaker 1: So, yeah, now that's a great history. And you know,
as we know in this channel, we've gone into a
lot of the predecessors to modern technocratic movements. We've looked
at Jeremy Bentham and the idea of penopticism. We've looked
at the writings of H. G. Wells, Bertrand Russell, Lord Birkenhead.
I'm not going to spend too much time on all that,
because we've covered a lot of that over the years.
Of course, key texts would be things like Bertrand Russell's
Impact of Science on Society, and I'm just holding this
up for the benefit of the audience who may not
bear with these texts. I know Courtney is familiar with them,
Scientific Outlook by Russell as well. And then really important
would be the writings of HD Wells that are not fiction,
because when you get into books like New World Order
or AHG. Wells's Open Conspiracy, we find out that technocracy
isn't a.
Speaker 2: World brain world brain, because that's could they keep couching
everything in decentralization. We'll get into that, but the world
brain is actually even GAIND references.
Speaker 1: It, so yeah, exactly. You know. Jaq got to Lee's
two thousand and six book Briefits for the Future, gets
really deep into what he thinks world brain will become
and what it'll do. So let's fast forward to now.
And now I've got Teale's book over here, zero to one.
He's got a whole chapter in there about the NSA
and how they were happy to you know, have Pallenteer,
and Pallenteer might have had a hand in helping to
find Osama bin Laden and all this, which I think
is a bunch of nonsense. But also in your new
piece here you talk about three things Game B. You
talk about the Dark Enlightenment, and you talk about the
Network States digital secession. So let's walk through what these
three things are because I think a lot of people
who maybe even know about this topic, they probably don't
know about Game B.
Speaker 2: Sure, so I had to frame this as you know,
they tend to work through regardless of what you think
of the political spectrum, they tend to work through left
hand right hand paths, right and game right. So Game
B very much operates through, at least from my estimation,
the left hand path. The Divine Mother. They're concerned about,
you know, their their gaya worshiping yah, yeah, exactly. You know,
they're concerned about the sustainable development goals and the climate right,
Greta type stuff, Yes, exactly, So that's very much Game B.
And there a lot of the people in Game B
are disciples of Barbara Marks Hubbard, so you know there
who is an intellectual disciple of Tar day shirting concept
of the nosphere. In Game B, the term is collective intelligence,
so they don't use the term nosphere specifically, but it's
the same concept, same idea. And actually some of the
technologies they talk about and some of the they call
it DialogOS, which is basically like dialogues for consensus making.
They also have a term called sense making, which is
also dialogues for consensus making. But they talk about how
they do talk about terms like the nosphere inhabiting the
intellectual nosphere, so they are pretty overt about those sorts
of ideologies and how they're aligned with them. So that's
kind of Game B. And to give a little backstory
on Game B, since a lot of people might not
be as familiar with Game B, although it's not new
at all, Game B spawned out of the you know,
twenty tens era back. Actually, I've learned a little bit
more since I started researching all of this. I've seen
some of the you know conversations with Jordan Hall, who
is one of the founders of Game B, talking about
how he he called Eric Weinstein the Rabbi of Game B.
And they met at the Perimeter Institute when Eric Weinstein
was giving a speech. He was giving a speech a
post you know, two thousand and eight financial crisis, and
actually in that speech he talks about Plan A and
Plan B in terms of economics. So I think that
was kind of a little foreshadowing of what was to come.
But he insisted repeatedly that Jordan Hall meet with his
brother Brett Brett Weinstein, and the way Jordan explains that
they really didn't hit it off too much in the beginning.
And there was also simultaneously these Stanton meetings in Stanton, Virginia,
where Jim Rutt was hosting these Really they were centered
around creating a new political party called the Emancipation Party.
The Emancipation Party was very much in the vein of
like the Forward Party of Bernie Sanders movement. You know,
they wanted things like the UBI, universal basic healthcare, those
types of things, and so they met Jordan Hall and
Jim Rutt met at the Santa Fe Institute. Jim Rutt
had been recruited. He was chairman of the Santa Fe
Institute for a while, but he fell into that because
he was working on a software called the Evolutionary Software.
And that's part of how Brett Weinstein got brought in
because he's an evolutionary biologist and Jordan Hall was there,
and so they started doing this political movement. The way
Jim Rutt explains it is he says that he could
get the boomers on board. They were all in, you know,
they loved it. He said gen X, he could persuade them.
But he said the millennials loved the platform, but they
were such anarchists that the notion of a political party
was an anethema to them. And he said, well, you
really can't start a political movement without the millennials. So
he didn't think that there was much hope and it
wasn't going to take off the way that he had hoped.
And Thorn Mueller, who was part of these Stanton meetings,
had said keep the name game B for branding, and
so they did and they kind of split because the
way Jim Rut explains it is that he's, you know,
a hard scientist. You know, he's a complexity theorist. I
might think otherwise, but you know, we'll take his word.
He you know, he's very mechanistic and he's a complexity
system theorist, and that's hard science. And some of the
others were a little bit more woo. These are like
the Barber Marks Hubbard disciples, people like Mark Gaffney, Daniel
Schmocktenberger who are in this movement. And they've reconvened though
in like the twenty thirteen twenty fourteen they you know,
decided to move forward with trying to create Game B,
which they call a new operating system for civilization, and
so they proceeded. And I had this theory that the
Intellectual Dark Web was an influence operation for Game B
and I actually found an article in Manifest Nirvana from
Andrew Cohen and he pretty much says that he doesn't
use those words, those are my words. That's a little
heavy handed. I don't think you would say it was
an influence operation, but that's pretty much what he says.
He says that the Intellectual Dark Web he laid the
groundwork for the audience to acquiescence to the ideas of
Game B. It kind of seeded that ground. So that
is a game B and we can go into more
of the details on it. But then through the right
hand Path and a lot more people are familiar with
it because so many of them are influencing the and
surrounding the Trump administration currently we have the Dark Enlightenment.
And I thought it was so funny because it was
a couple of weeks ago CNN did this little short
clip about Curtis Jarvin. He said, there's this blogger. He's
been blogging for over a decade. I'm like almost two,
but who's counting? Apparently not them, so that he said,
but it's very concerning because he has a lot of
influence on the Trump administration, which is true, and the
Dark Enlightenment operates, when I say right hand path, more
of the patriarchal kind of autocratic, you know, very kind
of muscular type of energy, and they are very influential
in the current Trump administration, which is supposedly a right
hand path. Right he was under the Republican banner, and
they really want to create you know what they call.
Curtis Jarvin calls it the soft Corps. Nick Land, who
is kind of the advanced this concept of the dark Enlightenment,
also known as the neo reactionary movement. He was also
the regenitor of the Accelerationist movement and he calls it
gov Corp. But they're essentially very similar concepts, just operating
under different marketing banners. I would say, you know, the
game b is more of your soft power kind of
opt in tyranny, where you have the illusion of everything
being decentralized and you have complete voluntary you know, authority
and sovereignty, personal sovereignty and agency. But they are going
to create this collective intelligence and that it will be
recentralized that way and through the Dark Enlightenment. It's more
of a top down In fact, Curtisy Jarvin himself says
that the problem with America is it needs the government
needs a reboot, and that we need to get over
our fear of the dictator and it should operate like
a CEO running a company that he is the dictator.
And so that's kind of his concept, the idea of
retire all government employees, he calls it. Rage was very
influential on this doge operation of out.
Speaker 1: Have you seen the movie that The Watchmen, based on
the Alan Moore famous graphic novel, I don't think I
have no Yeah, in that story, Moore, who with himself
was kind of a committed Croleyan, he has this character
named Ozamandias, who is this tech sort of well, he's
like a business ceo, mogul magnate, and his idea is
kind of like it's time to just kind of take
over and let you know, ceo tech philosopher kings run everything.
And it kind of gets into this idea of like
it's not explicitly technocracy, but it's kind of like a
it's sort of like that, and it's kind of a
The idea is that he needs to massively depopulate, you know,
the planet, like half of the planet needs to go
away so that we can have a time of peace.
And so it just this vision reminds me of what
Alan Moore is kind of getting at. And I think
the key point here that a lot of people I
want to be very clear about being nuanced, because you know,
my audience is going to take issue with some of
the things that that you're going to argue, which is fine,
not a big deal. I think that, for example, I
want to get into the Christian nationalism part because I
want to be really precise, I believe that the ideal
government should be in a Christian majority society, laws that
reflect the belief system of the majority Christian people. That's
my position. That does not mean that I think that
we need to sort of subvert take over the country,
change everything, reboot everything into some kind of like Byzantine
theocratic model. I don't think any of that's realistic. I
also believe that a lot of the movements that would
come forward as Christian nationalists, Protestants and these kinds of people,
I would never trust those movements. I would assume that
those movements are from the outset, probably co opted or
funded or created. So, because most movements, you know, don't.
They don't come out of nowhere. Movements generally have funding,
and if they are generally organic, typically they can easily
be bought and taken over. So being very precise, I
do believe in the form of government of a kind
of Christian monarchy where there's limitations on the state. I
do not believe that today's Christian nationalist movements represents some
authentic vision of something that I would support, although I'm
sure there's many people that are sincere in that. I
just know from my Protestant background that a lot of
the goofballs that I was involved in as a young
Protestant who believed in this sort of Christian nationalist stuff
are just clowns or Feds or worse. So being very precise,
then where we come in here with Courtney's point, which
I think we would a lot of people ascidis will
probably agree with, even if they take issue with some
of the pro Enlightenment stances of the article. The puppet
master type tech people they know these movements and these ideas,
and what they want to do is seize upon the
trends and where the winds are blowing to steer that
into something which in the case of say, you know,
Curtis Jarvin, seems to be just another kind of atheist,
nihilist Nietzschean techro control grid as well. I mean, is
that kind of what we're getting you're getting from your research?
Speaker 2: Yeah, And it gets way worse when you add Nick Land,
because Nick Land is pretty much a straight up occultist.
He was a one of the forerunners of the CCRU,
which is the Cybernetic Culture Research Unit at Warwick University.
And there's I have some links actually that are really
hard to find. I did quite a bit of digging
in the way back, and one of them is like
Xenosystems dot demon dot UK. And he's got all sorts
of ideas about you know, essentially demon type using fictionalized
kind of labels, but very much demonology in order to
influence the direction of the future. And he's very influenced
by people like love Craft and Evola, Julius Evola, and
he had this whole idea of technoplastic beings. He has
this idea of you know, accelerationism just for people who
are not familiar. Is essentially this theory that he thinks
capitalism is doomed, it's going to fail. He's not a
proponent of it, but he thinks that we should use
it in order to push it to its nth degree
so it can reach it to apocalyptic state much faster,
and that we should use technology to do that. And
so that's what his whole thesis is around.
Speaker 1: It's that we're quick question here. Now. We've done some
interviews with BX on Twitter. I don't know if you're
familiar with her, but she's come on Info Wars with
me a few times, I think, and she's been on
with Harrison Smith too, and she talks about accelerationism having
a lot of overlaps with these sort of online satanic cults.
Do you think that's also kind of going around here
going on here as well? Is there a sort of
I mean, I get the impression from I don't know
Nick Land's philosophy that well. I did hear him on
a couple podcasts of some friends of ours, and I
don't think they were I think they were just talking
about Nietzsche. They weren't really going into accelerationism. But it
seems like the idea is pretty wicked, like, oh, let's
collapse everything quicker so that we can have the new
thing come in. But the thing about that is like
what they want to bring in is probably going to
be worse than the worst parts of what we have now.
Speaker 2: It's way worse. And I mean, Nick Land brings through
this really dark fantasy. He brings to fruition, the vision
of what would be this transhuman leading to a post
human world. His concept of technoplastic beings is basically you
know this like synthetic biology, man merging with machines kind
of a vision. So it's just transhumanism it's transhumanism, and
he lays the groundwork through, you know, a more mechanistic
type of philosophy. Actually, he has a term the mechanistic desire,
which you know, he talks about the future of humanity
is going to be reshaped by and eclipsed by technology,
so essentially the singularity, right, that's a that's his whole vision.
But he's he's really really dark. So yeah, I would say,
you know, Curtis Jarvin comes from his parents were you know, communists.
He's more of a nihilistic kind of yeah, atheistic, that's
more of his framework, and he looks at things very
it's bizarre, but it's also very it's linear in a way,
you know, like you just have a CEO. He's a dictator,
he runs everything, and you know, this is just kind
of black and white type of operating in a vacuum
type of philosophy and theories. Whereas Nick land Is, I mean,
he's pretty dark. The c CRU his his partner, was
founded by Sadie Plant, who's like a cyberpunk feminist. So yeah,
I have a.
Speaker 1: Lot of such But maybe then again, maybe it's not
an odd pairent.
Speaker 2: You know, I don't think it is because of the concepts,
you know, like the concepts of hyperstition, or we're going
to use hyperstition. It's like where we're going to use
fictionalized ideals in order to create reality. So everything is
kind of it's just not rooted in reality. And that's
a common theme I find with all of these things,
like all of the concepts that I've laid out, particularly
in this article, is it's not rooted in reality. It's
it's what I call spiral meta physics as opposed to
a plumb line. It's not anchored in anything. And I
think that that's so important because the whole goal of
these technocrats and now they're merging it with religion. And
I'll touch on that, you know, to address what you
pointed out with the Christian nationalism, and I agree with you.
I don't think they're authentic. I think it's ve near.
It's a facade. They're using it because you know, that
concept of the three legged stool. They need the religious
component in order to especially since they're operating currently in
the right hand path, which tends to be comprised of
more religious orientation.
Speaker 1: One question when you use the term dark enlightenment early
on are you referring to when the New York Times
put out that article a while back, when it was
like Peterson and Sam Harris, and I forget who was
sitting around this big table or using this? Is this
more specifically like tech bros.
Speaker 2: No, they were probably I don't know what reference you're using,
but they were probably talking about the dark and Lightment.
I mean, the dark and Lightenment comes from Curtis Yarvin.
It was called the neo reactionary movement. They called it
n r X, so it's a neo reactionary.
Speaker 1: This I do know about. But I just think when
I hear dark Enlightenment, I think of that. It was
a famous New York Times piece and they had a
picture of a dinner meeting with Joe Rogan. I think
Joe Rogan was there, and it was like Peterson and
Sam Harris. Let me see if I can find it.
And maybe maybe Curtis Jarvian was even there. I don't remember.
Let me see who was at this New York Times. Oh,
excuse me, excuse me, I'm mixing this up with the
intellectual dark Web. I'm sorry, I'm mixing up my terms.
Never mind, that was a nineteen but actually some of
these people overlap, right, Like, isn't.
Speaker 2: There some intellectual dark web was an influenced operation for
game B and there is? Yeah, so my mistake carry No,
that's a I would say dark Maga has a lot
of ties. I think that they're parkening to the dark
and lightement.
Speaker 1: Is that that was? That was Teal? Right?
Speaker 2: That was Elon Musk.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah, I'm totally forgetting Elon's part. Like I'm thinking
of I'm looking at your article and I got Peter
Teal and you know, I'm thinking about Jarvin and then
like I'm telling forgetting Elon Elon.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I I in this article, I talk about
Peter Chilo as being kind of like the grand Master Architect. Now,
I certainly don't think that he's like I think there
are puppet strings above him. Uh, you know, he's only
a billionaire. Like that's a lot to me. But like,
you know, I don't think he's running the world. But
he's what we can see, you know, I can speculate
about the strings that are being pulled above him. I
know he has some like over state ties. There's obviously
his whole military industrial complex affiliations, and I think there's
some habsort access there, but you know, for what we
can actually see, I was focused more on the tangible.
That's also what we have some agency over, right, you know,
I can we can only you know, speculate otherwise. So
uh but yeah, so I talk about him as kind
of and he's also the overlapping between the two groups.
So when I was saying that they're not rooted in reality,
there's not you know, like a it's not a plum
line where they're anchored to anything real. I think it's
so important because what essentially they want to do, in
my opinion, is they want a technological imminititization of the escaton.
So they that's how I see it, Like I think
that you know, they're whether they you know, don't think
they're going to heaven, or they don't know what happens,
or they're just complete nihilists. I don't know what their
worldview is. I can speculate, but I'm not in their heads.
But I think that they want to bring create heaven
on Earth, and so they have to make a simulacra
and that's what this whole transhuman agenda is all about.
And in order to do that, you have to disort
people's perceptions of reality. You have to have a constructivist
worldview in order for that to functionally operate. And I
think that's why these philosophies are so incredibly important for
their agenda.
Speaker 1: They're all they're all rooted in some form of relativism
where you kind of create your reality. And when you
talk about the sort of hyperstition and the influence of
these different I mean, are you quite literally saying like
they're literally taking Lovecraft and Tolkien and like saying, let's
use that as a way to actually create this reality.
Like like they're basically sci fi dorks that are saying
we're gonna set up like a sci fi future and
we run the ship.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And like one of his terms is shug up.
Speaker 1: From Lovecraft.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and that's like a huge term for Nick Lambs,
So yeah, I know he's literally I mean almost all
of Peter Thiel's companies are named after like right, volar
and yeah, volunteer.
Speaker 1: And then you've got what's the one that the lucky
guy runs underill, which is the sword that that's.
Speaker 2: Has invested in. Oh interesting, Yeah, Epstein invested seventy million,
and I think it's now like one hundred and forty
or maybe yeah, maybe it was forty million, it's now
one hundred and seventy million, something like that. Yeah, so
they were partners on that, but yeah, so there. So
I kind of see those two as like the Hegelian poles.
But the synthesis is the network states and the network
states are kind of the umbrella because all of them
operate under network states, even if they don't call them
network states. So in Game B, they have a term
called Scivium, the Syvium Project, and I had done one
of my sub stacks. I outline that it was the
path to mass surveillance, and I talk about all the
different fifteen minute cities, the smart cities, the c forty
cities for the uns AI World Society, right, and then
they have But the way the analogy that I use
is it's kind of like if you had a buffet
of ice cream, but it's not made with any of
the real stuff, Like it's all chemicals that are not
so great for you. But they're going to give you
all different flavors to choose from. So if you like strawberry,
if you like you know, chocolate, vanilla, blueberry, whatever it is,
you can pick your poison and it'll be in a nice,
pretty rapper for you. And that's kind of what they do.
So a lot of people are not on board with
the fifteen Minute Cities, so don't worry. The Trump supporters
can get the Freedom Cities.
Speaker 1: Well, this reminds me of did you. I'm sure Crypto
ties into this too, because I remember there was a
while there where Metallic from Ethereum was pushing the idea
of freedom city, so I think that was his term too.
I don't know if he's referring to the same thing
that Trump was talking about, but it was freedom cities,
where you're going to have essentially the whole city, a
smart city built on and around Ethereum. I mean, I
don't know that that will ever actually come to fruition,
But did you encounter anything like that where Crypto ties
into it?
Speaker 2: Yes, hugely, So it ties in across the board with
Peter Scheel, He's got his prospera right. This is the
Bitcoin Cities in Vatan, Honduras. And there's a really interesting documentary.
I forgot the exact name of it, but it's something
like the Illegal Billionaires.
Speaker 1: Oh, I'll watched a documentary on this it's like a
little bitty tiny place that doesn't even have any hardly
anybody living there yet.
Speaker 2: Well they yeah, I mean it's not super populated. But
there's a lot of controversy because.
Speaker 1: I'm familiar with this now, I know what you're talking about.
Speaker 2: And they there's like this one. They're doing a lot
of kind of transhuman experiments there because they don't they're
not subject to any you know, laws that they make
their own laws, and they can do all this quote
unquote life extension under the banner of life extension, they
can do all this experimentation. They had one where in
this documentary they showed that there, uh, they use like
a VR headset and it creates basically like a psychedelic
trip yeah through yeah, through these headsets. So yeah, so
and the subsidiary of Prospera it was called they Oh,
this is another thing. They always rebrand They're always changing
their names, their personal names, their names of their companies.
We saw this with Neurohacker. Is now quality of Life.
That's a game b affiliated kind of operation under the
guise of like you know, basically life extension and wellness.
But then we've got Prosperous subsidiary was Vitalia, and if
you go to the way back you can still find it.
And it says come to you know, a city where
you can make death optional. And now it's called Infinita.
And these are all yeah, it's bigcoin cities. There's Bitcoin Nation.
This the whole concept of all of these network states
is that everything will be run based on whatever your
flavor of cryptocurrency would be.
Speaker 1: Yeah, right, I noticed too, like when you go to Prospera,
now there's links to like here's a guy's discussion where
he says, I went to Prospera to edit my DNA
so that I could live for forever. It's like, come on, dude,
that's so ridiculous. I mean, yeah, it's like they're they're
going to and we've been talking about this for a
long time. I know you have too, Like the idea
of these smart cities, which were planned a long long
time ago. It's almost like they're going to have like, oh,
this will be where the CEOs and the entrepreneurs come
to live in their freedom city. But to me, I
would never trust this, not because I doubt bitcoin. I'm
a big believer in bitcoin, but this is just some
guy's idea of getting a bunch of influencers and entrepreneurs
onto some transhumanist island. It's like, you know, the plane,
the plane, the plane, you know, fantasy Island, but it's
like fantasy island with it's like Peter Thiel's Fantasy Island
or something which sounds like a horror movie, you know
what I mean.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it sounds very dystopian to me. The other thing
that people need to recognize is that they couch this
all in very I have issues philosophically with libertarianism, but
they I don't even think that they are authentically libertarian,
even if well, a.
Speaker 1: Lot of these people, yeah, they're not really.
Speaker 2: Even holding to that even what libertarian claims to be.
They're not so, but they're using that banners. They use
the terms like decentralized and like uh so when they're
talking about these concepts, I think, you know, they keep
using terms that would appeal to more libertarian minded people,
and I think it's because they're trying to capture the
people who weren't captured through either left or the right.
Right now, they're going to put the libertarian kind of manner.
Speaker 1: Oh, this is how Silicon Valley was built up, was
the whole ethos was libertarian, but it was actually essentially
a militre industrial complex thing.
Speaker 2: Exactly with overlapping with things like burning Man and the
whole theosophical drugs. Right. So, but they use terms like voluntary, right,
So that's very appealing to somebody who might be a
quote unquote voluntariost. But what they don't recognize is, and
they never mentioned this, is once a smart contract is
in place, I don't know, good luck, buddy, Like I
don't know how you're exiting that one. Like you don't
negotiate with a smart contract. You can try and negotiate
with people, and that doesn't always go as well as
you might hope. But shoot, with a smart contract, especially
one that's recursive, right, once it's been put in place
and it's recursively implemented, then it's just going to be
exponential as to whatever code has been inputed. So I
find that really concerning, and I think a lot of
people have this idea. It's a very Pollyanna kind of
notion that oh, well, you know, if I I go
into this network state and it's my my carnivore network state,
or I decide now I like I want to be
a vegan, I'm going to go into this one. I
don't think it's going to be quite that fluid, and
I don't think that it There's also the I think
the mistake that people make thinking that somehow you're going
to have more freedom just because it's a you know,
smaller community. But do you think that you violate the
roles of this uh, you know community, this network state
that that's going to go well for you? You think
they don't have like stasy networks.
Speaker 1: Offering well I was going to say, I mean, how
do we know this isn't just some you know call
that's running it. And then the private security on the
island basically the answers to the oligarch that runs the island.
So it's like, I mean, what's under the guise of
libertarian freedom is literally going to be like a you know,
technocratic dictator island. Is really is what this sounds like
it turning into. And I don't I'm not saying that
because of some you know, vast principled idea of what
the ideal system should be, but rather human nature has
a tendency to want to to dominate, you know what
I mean it's Libido Dominondi to a degree. I'm not
saying that I agree with everything Augustine said, but falling
human beings have a tendency to, you know, to be
corrupt when they get extreme amounts of power. And what
appears to be a very supposedly freedom based situation, I
would just be very I mean again, it's like if
I'm going to this island where supposedly it's based around freedom,
but you know, Peter Thiel owns like a private security
come Many that runs the island. I mean, who has
the power there? Really?
Speaker 2: Yes? Well, and let's not forget I wrote. It's a
very long piece. It's called the out Algorithmic Oracle, and
the whole premise behind it is the origins of the
Delphi method come from sensitivity training, which is essentially brainwashing,
but and does have military roots as well. You know,
Naval Intelligence Research and Kurt Lewin have a stock. But
then the Delphi method kind of codified this into a
much more kind of systematic, mechanistic type of operation through
RAND Corp. And now what we have is essentially the
Delphi method and sensitivity straining on steroids through algorithms. The
cybernetic feedback loops of the algorithm. So they're data mining you.
So if you have like a Peter Teel Pallenteer type
of panopticon network state, they're constantly watching you and they're surveilling,
collecting all this data. And you think they can't use
that data to then program you and to control you.
I mean it's that that's how the cybernetics operate. So
uh yeah, I would not trust that. I think that
that's exactly what they want, is people siloed in these
kinds of And there's also they always talk about the decentralization,
and I warn people that, you know, the world brain, right.
He talks about how the decentralization of the academ of
the academic institution, the information institutions, the media, that would
be the conduit to create the world brain. What would
we say the information institutions today would be I would
say the Internet technology, right, And so that's what we're seeing.
He can also use Bruce S. Lifton, the evolutionary leader
of Bruce S. Lifton, who is a kind of ancilliary
to this game B movement, Barbara Marks Hubbard and those types.
But he talks about he and he uses a spiral
to uh paint his picture. Of course, you know totally
hegel diectric spiral. But he talks about how, you know,
we started out as a meba, and but what makes
the amiba intelligent is that it has a membrane, and
so that's where collects this information. And then you know,
we move up as we evolve, and that he says,
we go to multicellular organisms and then humans. We're so
intelligent because we're this complex multicellular organism. We have so
much service area of membrane, and that's why we're intelligent,
he said. But we're at a crossroads now where we
have to choose if we want to co create the
super organism of humanity. If we don't, we're going to
go extinct. But we can co create this super organism
of humanity, and what does he say, the membrane for
that organism is going to be. Of course, it is
the Internet.
Speaker 1: Internet, and.
Speaker 2: Just and with this that Belagi Sernavasin in his Network State.
He also keeps talking about decentralization, but then he actually
has a whole chapter on recentralizing towards the center. So
the whole purpose of the decentralization is to recentralize. Anybody
who understands how technology works, if you want it to
be interoperable and if you are going to have any
control locust. Obviously, this whole decentralization theory is kind of
a surface illusion.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean we've been hearing this terminology out of
the progressive, you know, tech oriented left for for a
long time, and it's not I don't think it's accidental
that you know, cryptocurrency picked this up. I'm not saying
that they're not legitimate uses of the term, or that
you know, networks can't be genuinely decentralized. But you know,
when you get like people like Greta and people like
this talking about this, you know, using this kind of terminology,
obviously it's it's a buzzword for a mega corporate agenda.
You mentioned too, which is interesting Teal and sovereign house
and all that. And I don't know, did you see
my debate with Dasha.
Speaker 2: Oh no, I haven't had to check that out.
Speaker 1: I mean it was more of a sort of tongue
in cheek. It's kind of a silly debate. I mean,
it wasn't really, but yeah, Dasha, I think she wanted
to know, she was talking smack on Twitter and so
that she would debate anybody, and I was like, all right,
let's do it. So we had a religious debate. But
what what what is the I mean, I'm not denying
that Sovereign House and Teal you know, or interested in
touching on elements of the you know, culture that are
formerly left New right like, but I mean, what what
does he get out of the sort of you know,
Red Scare. Like, I'm not denying that he's but I
just don't understand, like, what what's he really getting out
of that? Because there's not a huge I mean, it's
not like Red Scare had like this massive audience, you
know what I mean, They're they're kind of medium, minimal
level influence. What do you think Teal is getting out
of that?
Speaker 2: I think it's just a cultural influence. I think that's
really what it is. And it's a you know, it's
a way to kind of mold the New Right. So
it helps to bridge the gap because we have this
uh you know, these from the left, this uh you know,
whole operation with it's more of the game B types
and there's a lot of kind of inciliary movements, you know,
there's like the super what is it, super illuminal Uh? Group?
I forgot what it's.
Speaker 1: So basically dirt bag Left. Have you heard of that?
Which one dirt bag Left? No?
Speaker 2: I haven't heard of them.
Speaker 1: Uh. That's like the terminology for the left that like
chop O trap House podcast and the people that were
the they were left where they didn't like Biden and Obama,
so they were like they were like committed principled leftists
supposedly right and trap House was a popular podcast back
during the heyday of alt right that was sort of
the left's answer to alt right was dirtbag Left. And
then I think Dasha kind of evolved out of that,
and red Scare podcast evolved out of that, and then
they've taken this sort of kind of right turn, which
that just could be because I mean, I'm not saying
it's not because of Peter Tiel, but I mean, I
mean just from an audience perspective, like people are just
kind of getting tired of the left, you know, especially
as Trump was becoming more and more you know, in
the ascendancy and in the last you know, two years,
Trump has pretty much just been a phenomenon. And I'm
not like I have plenty of criticisms of Trump. I'm
just stating what is the case. And I'm not saying
I'm saying that this can still be like a All
I'm trying to say, I'm rambling. All I'm trying to
say is like these are the influenced networks that if
you were wanting to steer the culture, these are the
types of things that you would kind of latch onto
or try to step into because those networks are ahead
of the curve. In other words, Alex Jones is talking
about stuff ten years ago that Fox News talks about today.
So you know, these kinds of podcasts, whether they're kind
of culture driving nish podcasts, like whether it's Sam Hyde
or whether it's you know, Dawsha or whether it's whatever,
Like these are more niche but ahead of the curve.
Speaker 2: Yes, And so it was a super luminal Systems, which
is that Robert Edward Grant is tied with it right
with his Crown sterling, and so they're kind of they
use all the Game B vernacular, so they're not officially
Game B. But that's what I was thinking. But what
I'm trying to say is that it's a way of
steering these So I'm not saying that there aren't organic
you know, people who, yeah, we're tired of the left,
but if you can operate through them, then you can
create a much broader banner that looks more populous, even
if it's not.
Speaker 1: Yah the way you phrased it, just remake.
Speaker 2: The right, which is what it kind of looks like
to me, is they're remaking the right. And you know,
we can look at a couple of just really I
think overt examples that everybody can. They're two really big
ones in the past five years, and then this one,
and I'll use coding just to you know, elucidate this.
But you know, five years ago, you had a lot
of people who were very kind of maybe we'll call
them like the more crunchy freedom kind of people, and
they were traditionally on the left. But then you had
the medical freedom movement come in, and suddenly those people
got slacked with right wing labels, whether Republican, conservative, or
you know, whatever it may be. And a lot of
them were actually very confused, like I've been on left
my whole life. I voted Democrat my whole life, Like
I'm not a Republican or I'm not a conservative whatever
it was, but they're okay, and a lot of them
kind of went along with it, like, okay, now we
shift the overtoon window, right, So people who reject certain
experimental uh you know, medications are now suddenly right wingers.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: We had this again really recently with Traditionally a lot
of people on the right would never buy an electric vehicle, right,
because that's a subscribe.
Speaker 1: Oh. I mean it wasn't even that long ago, you know,
before Elon, even when Elon owned Twitter, it was still like, oh,
that's that leftist bullshit of having an ev you know.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean suddenly like you had all these quote
unquote Republicans rushing out when those you know, when they
had those protests of the Tesla. Suddenly you had all
these conservatives and Republicans rush out to buy a Tesla
they could afford.
Speaker 1: It, and yeah, exactly what.
Speaker 2: But it shifts the overtuon window, right. That's part of
the I think that's part of the uh the purpose
of it.
Speaker 1: So yeah, now go ahead.
Speaker 2: I was going to say, remaking the new Right. I
think that's part.
Speaker 1: Yeah, Well, this is where we get into the character
of Vance and I suppose people are concerned because the
ideas that well, Vance represents the next generation or the
next potential you know, Republican presidential candidates. So what's the
what's the real deal from your research on the influence
on Vance.
Speaker 2: Here, So Vance has kind of connections to both this
dark Enlightenment Curtis Jarvin network, so he's got that angle,
and then he also has a lot of connection to
this I called them the Theobros, which is not my term,
but you know, through this rock bit Bridge, which is
a feel backed investment firm, and this Christian nationalist umbrella.
So I will clarify, I'm not talking about people who
might be Christian might also have a nationalistic bent, you know,
I'm not saying that's just the you know, hyphen of
those two. I'm also not talking about people, as you said,
who might you know, want a nation that you know
is more based on those types of principles. These are
people who really literally want biblical law to replace the
Constitution and they have explicitly said so, so we're talking
about a constitutional subversion. So regardless of you know, your
thoughts on the Constitution, that that is what they're advocating.
So it is a subversive type of movement by definition.
Speaker 1: Well, that's what I want to say, is like, even
if I have I don't have a problem critiquing America's
enlightenment of founding ideas and presuppositions. But I wouldn't trust
these people to be leading a Christian nationalist system, is
I guess what I would say?
Speaker 2: Yeah, And I think a largely a lot of these people,
not to say that none of them are are, you know,
true believers, because oftentimes the true believers make the best
propaganda agents because they have conviction, right, So oftentimes that
is how that works. But I think they're using the
Christian I call it Christianese, so it's like Christian language.
You see the theosophists do this all the time.
Speaker 1: I think this is Did you see that the Teal
interview where he was talking about the Antichrist? Yes, yeah,
see I think so. And I was looking over here
at Sovereign House Events and I bought Renee Gerrard. I've
not read it. I don't know exactly what the whole
idea of Gerard's theology is. I think I take it
to be more of a symbolic kind of approach, maybe
something it can to a Peterson style approach to what
religion is. I'm not sure because I haven't read it yet,
but I mean even here on the Sovereign House Events page,
I mean, it's all it's there's a whole event about
Renee Gerard. And I've had many people in the audience say, hey,
you need to read this guy. So that seems to
be like when when Peter Till's using the terminology of
Christianity and immortality and all that. It's almost like the
impression I got from the interview that Jamie and I
covered was, Yeah, there's this idea in Christianity which is
mythical and fictional of a resurrection and all this kind
of stuff. We're going to do that with tech. That's
what it really means.
Speaker 2: Yes, I don't see his his beliefs as being commensurate
with Christianity of any type, you know, regardless of what
sect of Christianity. I don't really see him being commensurate
at all. I think he's taking just the notion of
Christianity and he's kind of projecting.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and Gerard, that was one of his professors, a
mentor of his, and the big concept he takes from
him is a like mimetic theory, that this idea of
mimicking others, but it's very tied to envy, and that
that kind of drives a lot of Teal's philosophy, and
so that we have to avoid this and we need
to use that in order to advance, because he says
we're in a stagnant of society and we have to
you know, advance. So basically the proponent of accelerationism, we
want to Well, he said.
Speaker 1: Something in that interview with that Ross guy, something like, well,
Antichrist is this idea of a collectivist system where Greta's
and he used Greta I think as an example of Antichrist,
where people like Greta, you know, set the agenda and
have status control and I represent you know, fantasy island
where I'm going to you know, be floating over here
with my freedom coins and all this stuff. It's like,
I mean again, like how is it really in my
view if you don't have a consistent, coherent worldview based
in as you said, reality from my perspective, orthodox Christianity,
I don't see how you're going to have any basis,
for example, for values and value judgments right and wrong,
virtue vice right, you've got to have some kind of
a system. And I think one of the problems with
the tech bros, especially out of the whole libertarian ethos,
is that they have a utilitarian idea of ethics that
they think technology can somehow, through quantification, tell you what's
right and wrong and what's good and bad. And that
goes all the way back to the moral calculus era
of dun Thumb. And it's just a really silly spurgeep is.
You've got to kind of be a spurg to even
think that calculations could tell you, in the basis of
pleasure points what's good and bad. It's just silly.
Speaker 2: It's absurd, Yes, completely absurd. And the irony is that
the New York Times interviewer asked him, he said, well,
some might say that you were the anti Crist. Isn't
the Antichrist when he talked about how he's going to
bring you know, essentially love and life through his freedom,
you know, cities and whatever, he didn't use those words.
That's essentially with the picture that he's painting. Isn't that
like the Antichrist supposed to bring peace? Right? So it's
it's almost like he's yeah.
Speaker 1: No, there's a time. I mean, the in the classical
idea of Antichrist, there's a period where you do have
a false global peace based around whatever type of system
he brings into into fruition, and then eventually that collapses
and you have a giant war. But yeah, there is
a false piece.
Speaker 2: So well, I just thought it was an appropriate question
for him to throw back on him and be like, well,
some might say maybe maybe you're at the antich Christ.
I personally think Elon might look a little more like
the Antichrist, but I'm not saying he is. I'm just
saying from from you know, uh optics. But yeah, so
that I don't think it is at all commensurate. And
I think all of them have elements of where they're
really just using Christianity as a way to entice people.
And you now have this with GAMEB. So Game B
was very historically, you know, aligned with more spiritual theosophical
princes bulls, they were not. You know a lot of
them like attribute their their roots to Spinoza. It's very
neo Platonic in their philosophical underpinnings. But now we have
Jordan Hall, who a year ago converted to Christianity. I
always want to give the benefit of the doubt. It's
not my place to judge somebody else's, you know, belief system.
But I was a little bit skeptical and that just
because I see this a lot where they use Christianity
in order to create credibility, right, to lure people into
the movement. And yeah, and so he he did this
speech at Prospera. So four years ago there was at Prospera.
It was the Startup Society's foundation, and he did a
speech there on Game B startup societies, network states. And
then he did another one recently and it was a
like a forty five minute speech and he talks about
at the end of it, he's talking about network states
and using essentially Game B concept for network states. But
at the end he talks about liturgy. And I know,
I understand the concept in Christianity of liturgy, but he
was kind of using this concept to justify communitarianism, which
is they're not they're not, they're not the same. And
you know, it's a very I think it's very deceptive
because if you're not really paying attention, you hear the
words and they sound like, oh, this is a Christian
talking about, you know, bringing community under God.
Speaker 1: That's well, it's just like yeah, like the term of
going around a while about Christ's consciousness. I mean, that's
such a vague, weird term that that could mean, uh,
you know, like actual the mind that Jesus himself actually
had as a human being. Or could does it mean
like this new agy concept of everybody acting and love
and light and that's Christ. I mean, it's so vague,
it could be all kinds of things, but it is
a very uh you know, new new ag buzzword for sure.
And you write this is from biology. We think d
stetting can be revived in long term because it can
be a part of a network state paradigm. You just
need to grow a startup society capable of crowd funding
a cruise ship. Your society wouldn't start with something so expensive.
It is started by something more modest, territory around the
world connecting it into a network archipelago. But you have
a startup city with tens of thousands of members, something
as crazy as a crowdfunded cruise ship becomes a possibility.
What's funny about this is that, I mean I remember,
like fifteen years ago when Ron Paul was really popular
and there were people on the left, not that I'm
supporting the people on the left, but they were criticizing
these libertarian Silicon Valley oligarchs, because even back then, in
like two thousand and seven, eight nine, you had libertarian
oligarch guys talking about creating their own floating cities so
that they could be outside of the balands of any
laws of any nation state. And again, it's just it's like,
it's weird. It's like we're stepping back into all of
the conspiracies of two thousand and seven and eight when
Ron Paul was at his peak, and but now the
right is being coaxed into and tempted into accepting, i
think basically just technocracy under the guise of it being
anti communist, anti collectivist and somehow Bays and trad because oh, well,
we're gonna have hierarchy as of hierarchy itself is somehow
like Bays and trad when it can you can have
a hierarchy that's a bunch of degenerates and wicked people.
Speaker 2: Yeah, exactly, I think that's exactly what's going on. They're
just they're operating through wherever they think the power locus is,
and right now that is under Trump, who is technically Republican,
and so they're they're they're using that in order to
usher in It's the same thing though this is technocracy
on either side. I'm very concerned because into traditional Hegelian
dialectic faction, you're gonna have a lot of people who
are going to reject this very autocratic, top down type
of control state, which is kind of overtly technocratic, and
they're going to offer other options, solutions, if you will.
And I'm seeing a movement towards this what I think,
And I wrote an article about the technological age of
Aquarius h third Way dream or digital dystopia was the title.
But I'm talking about how they're using essentially third way
politics to create a radical center. Now it's very deceptive
because again people think center, oh, this is, you know,
very balanced, moderate type of politics, and that's appealing to people,
right and it's beyond it's trans It's transpartisan is the
term the buzzword they're using. So this is, you know,
beyond the two party illusion, beyond the two party do
Optly a lot of people recognize there's obviously flaws in
you know, this kind of Hegelian two party system, but
they're using it to create third way politics, which are
always left of center. That the radical center is not
in the center, it's left of center. Anthony Giddens himself
says that in his Third Way book. So they're using that,
I think, to usher in technocratic movements. And you've now
got Elon Musk talking about his American Party, who is
supporting that Andrew Yang from the Forward Party.
Speaker 1: Remember I was going to say Yang Yang Gang and
all that stuff they tried to immediately they remember, they
were trying to appeal to the alt right. Uh when
as your Yang first popped on the scene and suddenly
all these so called alt right accounts were like Yangang
Yangang Yang Gang because they thought they were going to
get a universal basic income. I mean, I'm like, you
guys are so stupid.
Speaker 2: So stupid. And now he's consulting with Curtis Jarvin, uh
right on this party. I don't know if Yarvin knows
about creating a political party, but he's somehow going to
be the authority because I guess he influenced rage and
for doge Right, So somehow he's an authority. So I'm
very much seeing that they're pushing that under the guise
of like this centralized political movement, but it's really third
way politics guiding us towards technocratic movements. And then we
also still have the game b people who are very active,
uh you know, they're creating all sorts of networks and technologies.
There's a technology called no Map. They changed the name,
of course, you know, but they changed it to the
S seven Foundation, but it was no Map and they
literally said it was about inhabiting the no sphere. So
they're still they're very, very active, and they're going to
present themselves as you know, they're decentralized. It's often kind
of it's often to your own tyranny, of course in
my opinion, but it's very much couched in this whole
love and light. So I think a lot of people
who are going to reject this top down autocratic algocracy
that's kind of overt from the dark Enlightenment are and
to say, oh, we've got this movement over here which
we can choose and we have options, and it's you know,
it's so soft, it's divine mother, you know. Also, you know,
I'm half kidding but I think that that's what we're
going to see is people ushered into that. And you
have these people in the quote unquote Freedom Movement, and
there's a lot of overlap with the two, this left
and right, because they do operate through whatever path they
need to. And we have I use the Phoenix Conspiracy
as kind of the metaphor for this this particular article,
But there is an actual operation going on right now
that's called Operation Phoenix, and it is the United Independence
who are running it. And RFK has now joined in
with them. And I think this is actually quite key,
and it's a very integral component because I think RFK
was kind of at home. Maha movement, I think was
a big in my opinion, it was kind of very
deceptive ploy to get people in, you know, the people
who might not have been sold on Trump. A lot
of them were right. So you had RFK and the
Maha movement, and who could argue with Maha. I mean,
the messaging make America healthy again. I mean, I'm all
on board. Let's get rid of pesticides and seed o
loyals and you know, fake garbage and chemicals. I'm all
on board with the messaging of that. But I was
warning even before Trump got elected that he's a huge
proponent of precision AI medicine. This goes back, I mean,
it goes back further than Obama. But you can go
back and look at his you know, precision medicine document
on the Obama White House archives and he and he
talks about using this whole uh you know, uh, I
forgot the acronym. But it's all about using the like
behavioral modification to basically brainwash people into the you know,
Internet of nanobile things is essentially what it talks about.
And so you now have RFK talking about how MAHA
is MABA, which is the make America biotech technical again right, No,
make make America biotech accelerate. That's the term, right, How
could I forget accelerate accelerationism? And he literally that's literally
what MABA is And he's talking about how that's what
MAHA really is is make America biochech accelerate. And he's
talking about how everybody should be wearing wearables so that
the Internet of wearables and in that Path to Mass
Surveillance article, I outlined like all the the Internet of things,
the Internet of everything, the Internet of wearable. This is
all part of how they build their fifteen minute cities,
which I know you've covered extensively. So I just I
caution people because this is kind of how whether or
not it's intentionally you know, a dielectrical framework, I think
that they use it in that fashion, and so they push,
they steer peace. But when they recognize that one is
not working so well, they're going to prop up the
other in order to get their agenda to march towards
the Omega point to use you know, the Kurs.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well that John Land a guy in his twenty
eighteen book that Jamie read, you know, he said that
Silicon Valley is a for lack of a better term,
occult that believes that they will kind of give to
the world a diosex machina that will become a kind
of god, and that that it'll probably be worshiped and
treated like a deity. So and it's really just the
algorithm that they're coding and you know, telling it basically. Also,
I think that AI is kind of a scam because
it's it's it's really just tailoring its answers to each
individual person to sort of inflate the ego of the
individual person and make them think that they're coming to
all these great conclusions and that they're really getting you know,
they're really getting this wealth of information out of this
glorified search engine, which is just an audio search engine.
It's basically all AI is at this point. But it's becoming.
It's going to become a companion. It's going to become
your kind of personal avatar, like you see in the
movie Her We're Walking, Yes, falls in love with his
operating system, his AI. So that's going to be I
think the locus of control according to Lenny A, how
does AI fit into this?
Speaker 2: Yeah, so I don't want to address that. Yeah, her
freaked me out at the time, and now in hindsight
it's like way more creepy to me than I think.
I had nightmares for a week. But now I agree
with you. I think they're essentially going to create I
call it the cyber Satan. So they're going to worship
this being that they're going to tell us is sentient.
And I don't really believe that AI has sentient I
know something say it already does. I don't believe it
ever will. That's my opinion, But I think that they
can convince people and that will have very similar ramifications,
and I think those ramifications will be incredibly dystopian. So
you know, it doesn't actually have to achieve sentience to
achieve the result that they're looking for if they can
convince enough people that it's sentient. So I do.
Speaker 1: Yeah, do you think this is another thought I had
to when long time ago we were kind of speculating
on We did a boiler room maybe ten years ago,
and we were talking about the possibility of future cities,
city states, smart cities kind of being crafted around ideas,
so not so much you know, where you were born
and your family and your heritage, but a future model
where people migrate to places, assuming they're able to based
around even fantasy ideologies. For example, what if there's a
smart city And I'm saying this kind of on the
basis of the Disney theme park model. You know what
if there's a city a community that is you know,
Harry Potter World, then you go And I mean, I'm
I'm not kidding either. I'm saying, like people that are
so committed to living in sort of fantasy world where
you sort of go to these places and maybe you
don't even have to physically go to them. Maybe you
live in them, like in Ready Player one, in a
virtual world for most of your life or something. Does that?
I mean, when you think about Prospera or I think
about freedom cities or these things they want to construct,
whether they become dystopian or whether they really do have
maybe some kind of free movement. I don't know, but
like you said, like if you maybe you sign into
Star Wars Wars World, if you're a super soy man,
you go live in Star Wars World for ten years,
and then you get tired of living there, but you've
signed a smart contract for your you know, bio, but
your biodata for the next twenty years. You can't get
out of this contract. You can't leave Star Wars World.
You're stuck there. I mean, is this possible? You know
what I mean? Is this what we're looking at where
everybody's basically a giant tech experiment that's being surveiled. And
the reason I say that is Jamie and iwer Hat.
I'll let you talk over those. But we were at
Disneyland one time, this is the last time we went,
maybe like seven years ago, and we were talking about
how it's just kind of a funny thought to think about.
If you were watching Disney World or Land from a
drone or from up above, you would see a bunch
of wearing little mouse hats, you know, running around like
a mouse maze, like you were being studied in sort
of like some big mouse science experiment. So do you
think that that's where we're going into this world where
we don't have nation states the way we've thought about
them in the past, but we have these sort of
idea states or imaginal states that are maybe not even
states but megacities where you sort of sign over your
rights and your biology and your data to live in
some sort of UBI smart city thing or something.
Speaker 2: Yes, I think so that's actually what the network state is,
he explicitly says, is a dissolution of geographical nation states.
Speaker 1: Oh well, there we go.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's very explicit.
Speaker 1: And we forget that on Bullrum. You're gonna go live
in Harry Potter World. Do you want to live in
Lord of the Rings world? Or which fake world do
you want to live?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 1: Did you ever watch West World? This is actually kind
of like West World.
Speaker 2: It is kind of like West World. And when you
talk about the biometric data, I think it's going to
be like Black Mirror, you know, where you use you know,
because they have that six gy technology where they talk
about like humans are like the antenna to power the
six G. The AI World Society talks about using that
for the Internet of NanoBio things, So, I mean, these
things are not so far off. And there's that Black
Mirror episode where they're like on the bikes powering, and
they've talked about being able to mind crypto using human
you know power. So all of this technology, especially as
it advances, does pink kind of a very dystopian type
of network state. But this is why the network state
concept came out of the c Setting com which, by
the way, I think is very reminiscent of Gilliam Maxwell's TerraMar.
That's just a total side.
Speaker 3: Note, but yeah, the reason for sea setting is because
you're on international waters, right, so you're outside of the
confines of national laws and so basically they can make
up their own laws, so the tech oligarchs can decide
that the laws are whatever they want them to be.
Speaker 2: So that didn't go over that well. I think you
put in one point seven million dollars into the concept
and it you know, didn't take all, but Vilagia has
a whole chapter dedicated to it and says that it
was the inspiration for creating these network states, and that
network states are the dissolution of geographical nation states in
favor of cyber ideological states, and so you you might
have a hybrid like Prospera, which they are actually a
physical locale, but it's really more about you could have
somebody across the world who is and Curtis Jarvin talks
about how it's one of the most like horrendous quotes
I've ever read in my own life. It's so awful.
But he says that the humane alternative to genocide would
be to virtualize human beings. And this is in his
patchwork positive vision. I don't know, it doesn't sound all
that positive to me, but maybe I just have a
I'm not wearing his rose colored glasses, so I don't
see it that way. But yeah, he's so he's talking
about creating technoplastic beings, which is what the term that
Nick Land uses. So it's all moving towards this transhuman vision.
And of course game B says they're opposed to transhumanism.
They're not, but I mean Barbara Marxs Hubbard was one
of like the grandmothers of the transhuman movement. She actually
called Christ transhuman and she wrote this book like Escape
from Armageddon, and in that she calls Christ transhuman. And
she's not talking about because he's you know, a.
Speaker 1: Good well as you've wrote. For just a second there,
you were talking about the Christ transhumanist Christ.
Speaker 2: Yeah, she's not talking about in the sense of like,
you know, being a divine being. She's talking about transhumanism.
And she actually rewrote the New Testament. And there's this
whole story that she tells about how she told her
dear friend Bucky Buckminster Fuller, who is definitely a technocrat. Yeah,
you know, the architect Buckminster Fuller. But she talking about Yes,
she said, her dear friend Bucky, and she said she
told him that, you know, she had this vision that
she had to rewrite the New Testament, and so she
took it upon herself to do so. And he was
so proud of her. He said he had the same
vision and he's so glad that she did it. So,
you know, these are the people that we're dealing with.
Speaker 1: But yeah, you go on to talk about from anti
humanism to techno feudalism, and a lot of people forget that.
In Tragy and Hope, there's a very important middle chapter
as well as chapters discussing the move away from international
law that was set up, you know, post Enlightenment for
nation states, and then we're moving into a globalization period
where and Quickly talked about this the future would be
neo feudal And in the middle of the book there
is an entire chapter about the future cities which will
be run by AI giant supercomputers. So even in the
nineteen sixties, Quickly as well was talking about the managerial state,
the efficiency state, the technocratic state. This was planned a
long time ago, and you know, it's just really difficult
to get people, whether the right or left, to look
at long ranging, multi decade, you know, even of century
plus plans to bring about this kind of a you know, essentially,
you know, Huxley and Brave new World scenario is really
what this I think is going to result in. But
tell us about techno feudalism.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so it's a Yannis Vera Fucus. I don't know
if I pronounced his name right, I apologize.
Speaker 1: No, wait a minute, Vera Falucus. Didn't he come up
back in the days of when they were doing the
banker looting of the European nations? It wasn't vera focus
first mentioned back then?
Speaker 2: Yes, and he is. So he's the one who coined
this term of techno feudalism, and I might put it
up to see if I can find how he explains it,
because it's exactly what we're witnessing.
Speaker 1: Was he the guy though that was he was like
the Greek Was he the Soreza party of Greece that
was like the socialists or the right wing I'm trying
to remember.
Speaker 2: No, he's a he's a socialist.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so he's the Greek socialist that was part of
Soresa right.
Speaker 2: Yes, and his father actually, I think was jailed because
he wouldn't denounce communism and so yeah, so he he
says he's not a communist, but he's a socialist. I
mean he's essentially, but yeah, he talks about how we're
going to be run by these essentially what he calls
techno feudalism is essentially this notion that we're going to
have these little fifetoms that are going to be run
by tech overlords. And that's kind of what the gov
core solve core of this, the network states all of
these that's essentially what it looks like. But that that
is what he says that he says the capitalism has
already done that, that it's already over. But that, yeah,
where we're what we're already in this techno feudal state.
And he's he uses the justification of things like you know,
Amazon and Google and Facebook and all these social media platforms.
And he says that in particular in the past few years,
because things went much more remote, that kind of accelerated
those fifetoms because they have so much power over our
economic and social world today. So yeah, I I don't
know that we're in a fully techno feudal society currently.
I'm not quite that, you know, black piled, but I
do think that that's their goal and I think that
is very much if things go the way they're going,
that we're headed in that direction. If things don't change, Yeah,
so that does seem to be.
Speaker 1: We got a few super chats here. Now your your
article continues on. It's pretty lengthy. It goes on to
talk about THEO bros. And I see Doug Wilson even
made it on there. How does Doug Wilson fit into this?
Speaker 2: He's been a huge, kind of like mentor with his
church to a lot of these theobors.
Speaker 1: So interesting, Who did he in this collection of bearded
figures here? I'm not familiar with who these people are.
So I see Peter Thiel, I see a bunch of
bald dudes and bearded dudes. I see Vance. Oh so
you got a list here, I say, Boss, Kirk Iskar, Wolf, Stevens,
Tan Andresa. I don't know who Mark Andresen is, Peter
Teal and this is like the new uh tech right,
I guess or quasi tech right, mm hmm.
Speaker 2: And even what's his name, Pete Hegseth has been Yeah,
so yeah, Doug Wilson's kind of like a mentor to
a lot of them. But yeah, that's obviously Vance and
uh heg Seth. And then we have what's his name?
Why am I blanking? Augustus de Rico, the Rainmaker and
he he's kind of in that American dynamism movement and
backed by Teal as well. And here there was a
short video where he basically admitted that he was involved
in this. You know, cloud seating technology that preceded the
Texas floods. But yeah, so I don't know if we
can say that definitively that that's what caused it, but
he pretty much did kind of allude to that in
his It was like a few minute interviews. And then
we have the Gundobros and I talk about them in
the article as well, and they're directly tied to military technology,
and so they're using this kind of Christian identity. But
again it's at the banner and a lot of these
Christian nationalists who are affiliated with Doug Wilson are talking
about replacing the Constitution. They want a theocracy, they want
to replace it with you know, they call it biblical law.
Speaker 1: No, I used to be involved in the reconstruction of
stuff when I was younger, and I mean I read,
I mean I was reading people at Rush Duny and
van Hill and Monson who were the prior generation before
Doug Wilson who so in other words, all those guys
influenced Doug Wilson's ideas on it.
Speaker 2: Sure, yeah so.
Speaker 1: Yeah, well so I see also here Verveke makes uh
makes it into your article rot Jordan Hall and others
in the space as Verveke have had many discussions visioning
and new governance systems. What do you think about Verveaki?
Speaker 2: What?
Speaker 1: Why is he in here? Because I remember him. We
haven't heard of him uh in a while, because he was,
you know, in the Peterson sphere talking about silicon sages
and uh then he makes it into your article here.
What do you think about Verveaki?
Speaker 2: Well, Vervicki is kind of Game B adjacent. He does
a lot of dialogues with all of the Game B people,
like certainly Jordan Hall. They're talking at that that particular episode,
they're talking about AI governance, uh and using AI to
replace human governance, and of course it's because AI is
so rational, you know, we don't have to deal with
messy humans and so, but I would like to remind
people that this notion of AI governance, this is not
a distant future kind of concept. We in almost every
state in the United States they have digital governance summits.
There is a portal on chat GPT which is a
chat gpg dot gov and you have to be a
government official to use it. We have, of course, the
AI World Society, which says this is the centennial vision
for the UN, which is a twenty forty Right there,
they claim that we're going to have this AI world society,
and in there they say we'll supplant all human government
with AI. This is a concept that now they're talking
about Grock in the Pentagon Grock governance. So this is
just there was the AI dot gov. I was actually
on Harrison Show recently talking about this. So they started
back in twenty nineteen. It was under Trump, and then
it went from White House dot gov a slash AI,
and then Biden advanced a lot of the agendas around it,
and it went back and forth AI doc of White
House stock of slash AI. Now it supposedly was going
to launch July fourth, but there was a leak people
like me who opened our big mouths, and so I'm
not the one who discovered it, but I talked about it,
and so they didn't actually transition it. But AI dot
gov still redirects to White House STOCUV. So I mean,
this is an agenda, clearly, and it's not in the
distant future, this idea of having And then when I
talked about these third way, you know, technocratic movements, whether
it's game B or they have different variations of it,
but it's already being utilized in many states. This notion
of using blockchain voting like rank choice voting, right fiction voters,
well though.
Speaker 1: One of the hottest genres of crypto that's now so
like in the last this cycle, the supposed hot top
were a last cycle that was like gaming metaverse coins.
This cycle of crypto, it's RWAs and AI rt OFAs
are real world assets, which are all the cryptos that
supposedly tokenized that that can tokenize everything in the world.
Speaker 2: And that's exactly what you're talking about, yes, And you know,
the joke I like to make is that they talk
about how great it is because it can be fractionalized,
and I point out that, you know, you would love
to think that you could have shared assets among loved ones,
family members, but there's a reason that a state lawyers exist.
This doesn't always worked out so well. So I don't
know how people think this is going to work out
in your you know, network state with strangers, but somehow
it's all.
Speaker 1: Going to be our people that are bitcoin Maxi's also
laugh at this because the whole point of a currency
is to tokenize anything in the world that you want
to sell. So that's the point of whether it's gold,
whether it's dollars, or whether it's bitcoin. Like, that's the
purpose of it is to you know, if you want
to attach a price to the chair or to your car,
that's what the currency does. And so really you don't
even need this tokenization of everything in the world. So
I would say that a lot of these are probably
not that there's not a real danger, but a lot
of these are probably just pumping dump schemes to get people, Oh,
this is the next big crypto trend in the future
to tokenize all real world assets, and that's going to
immediately dump when the when the bull market ends.
Speaker 2: Well, I have a slightly darker vision of it, honestly,
I know.
Speaker 1: I'm just talking about in the short term. I think
in the long term they will try to have a
tokenization of all things in.
Speaker 2: The world for sure, and I think it'll be connected
to your biology.
Speaker 1: Yeah, it'll be based on like are you using too
much carbon? And it's kind of.
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah exactly. So yeah, I think that's the purpose
of the tokenization because the ultimate control grid is through
a tokenized network that is connected to the internet, NanoBio things, so.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's what Gotviy Klauss talked about that in the
last section of his twenty eighteen book Fourth and Nuss Revolution.
He talked about Internet of things, everything being linked in
and everything being tokenized for the purpose of control. So
the idea then again the Gaeian dialectic synthesis. There's a problem,
you either accelerate the problem or you clash it against
something else, and then you have the ready made solution
that you wanted all along. So that's the key point
here is that they want to blow up the old system,
whether it's education, whether it's economics, whether it's the nation state,
whether it's voting, all of it. Oh, look how bad
it was. See how it was a subject to human
frailty and human emotions and people, you know, corrupt to politicians.
We can fix all that. The algorithms are going to
run at all, and it's going to be a perfect system.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I I think they have to. You know
what I pointed out my article that I think that
this is a global plan, but I think they really
want to. I use the reference of Phoenix the Republic
in order to and then the West right, So that's
why they keep using the illusion of democracy. The United
States is not a democracy, so right off the bat,
that tells you they want a revolution. But then of
course the democracy concept is really important because they do
want to target the West, and most of the West
is democracy. And of course they want to use the
blueprint of some of these surveillance states that are already
set up in the East. And all of these movements
talk about scalability, whether it's going to be you know,
they talk about planetary scalability, that term planetary right, the
planetary citizen. That's a Robert Mueller.
Speaker 1: Planets are faking gay, so space is faking gay, so
you can't you can. I'm not it's a jug, but
I will think that when I say that, who doesn't
believe planet's are real? It's a dumb joke.
Speaker 2: Yes, right, well there's that too, But the planetary citizen. Actually,
you know, Robert Mueller in his like two thousand that
became four thousand, maybe it went on to be seven
thousand ideas, I don't know. He fancied himself quite the visionary,
but it was totally predicated on the worst of Alice Bailey.
That you know, when you talked about christ consciousness, that
comes straight out of Alice Bailey and Madame Blavatsky, they
use that term, but he his whole world core curriculum
comes straight out of the Education in the New Age
Alice Bailey's work. But he talks about in that document
like I did just a quick scan and I already
got to close to one hundred times where he's planetary citizen.
And I think it was very heavily influenced by Abraham Maslow.
Speaker 1: Actually, Abraham madd also sounds like Gene Roddenberry and Star Trek,
And somebody was talking the other day about some of
the really really wild stuff that Gene Roddenberry was influenced by. Anyway,
I was going.
Speaker 2: To say, you know, very I'm sure your audience is familiar.
But Abraham Maslow wrote a document that was posthumously published
published and it was called Politics three. And this was
his wife, Bertha, had brought it to Willis Harmon and
Robert Canter, and it was right around the same time
that they were doing Changing Images of Man with Stanford
Research Institute. So I thought that was kind of interesting.
Speaker 1: Mas work with is a lot of people don't know.
Speaker 2: Yes, And so that whole positive psychology movement which has
a kind of ties to Game B as well, because
Stuart Brand right right on the cover of the front
page of that Game Be Wiki, he says, we are gods,
we better get good at it. That was the opening
for his Whole Earth magazine back in I think it
was nineteen sixty eight, and then he updates it in
twenty fifteen, we are gods, we might as well get
good at it something very similar, And he's now affiliated
with the long Now Foundation. Right the long Now does
all those dialogues with people like Jonathan Hat and Jonathan
Hate is kind of a you know, a disciple of
of Abraham Maslow. Some of the younger crops are people
like Scott Barry Kaufman, so they're using that humanist movement.
Of course, a Jason to Escelin as well as the
positive psychology movement usher in a lot of these ideas
and concepts, and Game B is very much wrapped in
all of that. But the Document of Politics three he
enters this term of holistic politics, which I very much
think you was a part of what the UN ran
with with their planetary politics. And in Game B they
talk about planetary scale, and of course, you know, the
goal for the Dark Enlightenment is the same, and the
Network States is of course, you know, it's a worldwide vision.
Speaker 1: But yeah, yeah, I'm looking at your conclusion here. You
talk about the idea of centralized crypto elites, ideological gamekeepers,
and then you point out that really the only defense,
and I'd totally agree, is that mental liberty, cognitive liberty,
you know, self sovereignty is really the only option here.
And that I mean just even the Internet off and
spending so much we've Jamie and I've been talking about
this this week, just how much time we spend on
the Internet, even though yeah, it's our job, you know,
it's how we make a living, but even that is,
like I feel like it's just way too much, and
there's a real danger. I think that the Internet itself
is this potential future you know, octopus monstrosity that will
basically it's a web spider's web. I know that's kind
of a cornball analogy, but it's like I'm almost starting
to think that, like, you know, when we're able to retire,
you know, maybe we should just try to spend as
the future will be a new set of elites who
actually don't spend much time on the Internet. How's that?
Speaker 2: I think so well, we already have even the tech
elites who won't let their children.
Speaker 1: On the terry exactly. And I mean this, yeah, this
came out with like Steve Jobs, right, he wouldn't let
his kids even look at an iPad.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I know my husband dreams of the day when
we are off the grid. That's very much is a fantasy.
So hopefully we can make that a reality at some
point in the future. The other metaphor that I use
is of the phoenix. And part of how I found
out about Game B was because Brett Weinstein did this
very interesting speech with the Rescue of the Republic and
again to talk about very deceptive types of movements. Right,
we had the medical freedom movement, which he was a
huge part of, and you know, the freedom movement in general.
That people perceive him as being a right winger, and
he is a very progressive self admittedly, you know, ideologically.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I'll never understood why that people would think he's
a right winger. It's like it's like if you speak
out on one topic, oh is it right? Like like
Bill Maher is suddenly a right winger now because he
I don't know, said one thing about the left being crazy.
That doesn't make you right winger because the left's crazy.
Speaker 2: No, I mean, it's I think that was a huge
part of I know this isn't popular, but I said
this pretty early on in my whole podcast thing that
the whole woke anti woke was a dialectical operation. Intentionally,
it's to trap people in that conversation because a lot
of the people who were anti woke, it's not that
they were conservative or you know, in any fashion, it's
just that, you know, they argued very logical things like, yeah,
a woman's a woman, man's a man, and why are
we discussing craziness?
Speaker 1: You know, yeah, if that's far right, that's just insane.
I mean, dialectics is just all the time at work
in this in this nonsense, because reality is complex, it's nuanced,
and you know, human nature prefers ease and simplicity. It's lazy,
it doesn't want to get into things that are nuanced,
and what's a very simple or who's the good guy,
who's the bad guy? That's that's all they want.
Speaker 2: Exactly, and they want you to distill it for them.
So he did this speech at the rescue of the Republic,
which was this kind of like medical freedom and Jason
type of movement. And then at the end of the
speech he makes this statement which was very strange to me.
He's talking about the West through the whole statement, which
is strange at a rescue the Republic, right, it's supposed
to be about the United States of America, where it's
not the whole West. Not that I don't you know,
support the West, but you know, this is and obviously
we grew out of the West, but it's the Republic,
and so that's very specific. And he keeps talking about
the West, not the Republic. But he ends the speech
with about five minutes talk and he starts his you know,
entry to the conclusion is that we have to phoenix
the Republic. And I was like, whoa, whoa, whoa, what
does you mean by this? You know, that's that's a
strange statement. And he goes on to say how we
have basically have to tear it down and you know,
build it up because of the you know, because of
the trajectory that we're on, and he uses the whole
evolutionary biology analogy of how you know, when biology we
have this uh, you know, genetic traits that are passed through, uh,
you know, the these species, and but we don't have
that now, so we need to tear down and basically
tear it down so we can build back better. But
I had looked, it's a rumor, and I cannot find
the video, so I can't corroborate this. But apparently a
year earlier it would make sense. Again, this is hearsay,
so I don't know if it's true, but I do
know it is true that he was a keynote speaker
at this United Independence which, by the way, is Christopher Life,
who is the founder of this United Independence movement, which
encompasses people like Andrew Yang and the Forward Party and
lots of other quote unquote independent movements which are not
really independent at all. But Christopher Life is a game
be advocate and also worth noting very tied in with
Charles Eisenstein sacred economics, which is where tokenized economics is
going under the spiritual kind of concept of sacred economic
and Charles Ezenstein was also the running Arf Case campaign,
and so that's fourth noting. And in this United Independence
twenty twenty three, supposedly the title of Brett Weinstein's keynote
speech was what was it the self governance and Phoenix
and the Republic. Now again I can't corroborate that's the
name of the speech, but in my article I do
have a picture of the phoenix. In this twenty twenty
three you have to go to the way back because
it's kind of paywallt now the site of it. He
talks about independence rising above the ashes a failing system,
and I just so I saw this in the Independent.
You know, it's what I call indie sphere. It's really
non truly independent. For those who aren't familiar with my
reference on this, it's that I come from a film background,
and in the film industry it's very different now because
of the distribution models have completely changed. But you know,
back in the day, you had kind of the big
like Hollywood studios and obviously these are your big blockbuster films,
and you know, huge hundred you know, multiple hundred million
dollar projects, and then you had like truly independent. So
this might be a student film, this might be somebody
in their basement to scramble together resources and some cash
and made a project, and you had what I called
what we're called indie films, and these might be five
one to twenty million dollar project. I don't know about you,
but you know, if I want to make a film,
I don't have even one million dollars in my back
pocket to do you know, a vanity project. I just don't,
and most people don't. So oftentimes what happened was these
quote unquote indie projects were backed and they became a
propaganda vehicles. Now I'm not saying the artists knew that
or that they were wittingly advancing some sort of a
propaganda machine, but the people who were investing in them
were investing in them for those purposes. And then seeing
this replicated in the media right now, where we have
a lot of people who look independent, but they're getting
funding and they're inde So whether it's being propped up
through algorithms, it's also it's often a hybrid, you know,
of modalities, so you know, that's a you know, it's
a combination of things. It's not usually just one thing.
Sometimes it is like, oh, they're backed by foreign interests
and they're they're pumped up. It's usually not quite that simple.
It's usually much more nuanced than that. However, I saw
in this this indie sphere of the media. These people
who keep talking about the two party you know, illusion
how there's a problem with the two party system. Now
I'm not saying that they're not correct. Even George Washington
warned us against the two but they're going to.
Speaker 1: Give you the false solution because it's a.
Speaker 2: Real problem, yes, exactly. And that's what I'm seeing with this.
And so now to see that this United Independence is
actually using the symbol of the phoenix, they're saying, and
they're actually calling it Operation Phoenix, and they're using the
whole agenda is to flood Congress in twenty twenty six
with quote unquote independence. And these independents again are you know,
people who support things like using blockchain voting and UBIS
and so it's it's technocratic even though it seems more socialists,
but it's scientific socialism, which.
Speaker 1: Is yeah exactly. Guys, won't remind you that we have
a show sponsor, which is Chalk dot com. Head it
over to chalk dot com and use a promo co
Jay four zero to get forty percent off all those
great Chalk products, including the ton Catalie proven it a
boost testosterone in purview studies which you can read over
at chalk dot com. We also have the nano fiber
tech that you can swallow, which will make you into
a transhumanist deity. It's only twenty three bitcoin right now.
I'm just kidding. We don't have that. That's a joke.
I wanted to blow your minds with the fake products.
And people always ask about that ad. They're like, why
do you have that weird ad of the guy talking
about chalk with the Indian voice and the woman's voice.
That's a joke ad on purpose that the Chalk dude
made because we thought it was funny. So yes, it's
a real ad, but it's a joke, real ad, so
it's levels of meta that nobody's even gonna understand. Spireau
Fhiloropolis twenty pounds. He says, this is timely. I hope
people are paying attention to this. On my streams, I
go over how these people infect the world that we
write as programmers. It's very insidious. It's literally in their code.
Stay safe, Yeah, I think that. Like even Jack Dorsey
had this interesting comment. He said that it's not really
AI that we should be worried about in the sense
of what's the danger right now? It's that the algorithms
are controlling and steering you into what they want you
to see, what they want you to know, and shuttling
away anything that they don't want to see it. So,
actually we're governed by algorithms, and I mean AI is
basically that too. But I mean that's the problem here,
is like it's eventually going to shut out anything that
they don't want in the discord.
Speaker 2: Algocracy.
Speaker 1: Oh there exactly straight why mailfa dollars? By the way,
support the stream if you guys want to with super chats,
you can send superchests natively through YouTube or through stream labs.
The link is linked there at the top of the chat.
This check is awesome, she gets it. Well, you have
a huge fan there, Courteney and straight white male Gary G.
Five dollars. Please have Courtney show some more of her
books that she's read on this topic that are recent.
For example, does she have books on Plan B, dark
Enlightenment or anything like that?
Speaker 2: All right, so game B is Game B does not
have books, But there are a lot of people in
the movement and they have books, so you know some
of the people and they have no shortage of podcasts.
If that's your thing. They do dialgos, so I would
probably start with I did do a three and a
half hour presentation, so if long presentations are your thing,
I did it for Rising Tide Foundation on Game B.
And so that's a kind of an overview and be
from my perspective, which is admittedly a critical perspective on
Game B, but it's pretty extensive. Then in that presentation,
I showed half of a film that you can go
watch the full length film, and I recommend if this
is something you're curious about, that you check it out.
It's on the STOA, which is a Game B kind
of a forum. They do other things as well, but
the STOA on YouTube, and they have a film it's
I think it's eighteen nineteen minutes and it's called Initiation
to Game B. As if that doesn't say everything, it's
an initiation to Game B. And so you can watch
that film. That'll give you a really good kind of
overview of what Game B is. There's Jim Rutt, so
I would look at he's got a lot. They love medium,
so they use medium as their platform. There's he has
a Journey to Game B where he outlines it. He's
I think he started it maybe twenty eighteen, but he's
updated it since and it's pretty extensive. It's very long,
it's interesting. In it, he predicts that the proto game
b's are going to be in twenty forty, which I
think is really interesting. I'm sorry, twenty forty five, which
I think is really interesting because right, that's the AI
world society. That is also the Singularity, Right, that's he says,
that's when the proto games are going to murder. I
just think that's a it was an interesting time marker. Uh.
So there's that. You can look at a lot of
his writing, mostly in those that format medium. Uh. There
is also Jordan Hall. He has deep Code and he's
both on medium and substack. His Sibyan project I will
give you a really good understanding of game b. Uh.
There's also Daniel Schmockenberger. Interestingly enough, a bunch of these people,
the game b people are actually members of the Club
of Rome. We've got Zach Stein, We've got Noura Basin.
Nora Bason is the daughter of Gregory and Gregory bateson
Mead and so there there's also the Office of the Future.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: This is the institute that was created under Barbara Marx,
Barbara Marx Hubbard and the uh what do they call
the cosmo erotic Humanists. The three of them the trio
make up David Temple, which was this you know, pseudonym
that they created in order not to have any kind
of rivalry, right so that it could be a collaborative
high mind project essentially, And that's zach Stein. Kenneth Wilburg.
Kenneth Wilber is another big one, his integral theory, integral platform.
He's written several books as well, so you can read
his work. And then of course Danish Schmanckenberger was the
other one. So there are many more game b people,
but those are some of the big ones who have
done quite a bit of writing as well as dialoguing
and podcasting. So you can look at there where Curtis
Jarvin has no shortage of written material. You can get
his online Unqualified Reservations going all the way back to
two thousand and seven. You can actually buy the book.
I think I have links to it in my article,
but it's all online for free as well if you
prefer that. Some of it is on the way back machine,
because I think you know, things like when the alternative
to the humane alternative to genocide are not so popular
ideas now some of this seem to be you know,
taken off, but he has that. He also has this
Gray Mirror substack, which is more recent, and he has
copious writings there which will give you really a lot
of insight into his work. Nick Land does have some books.
He also has his Xenosystems blogs that goes back at
least a decade, and he has now Gothic Zeno is
his updated version of that. So and then Belaji Shrina
Boston has the Network State Book. It's both available online
and in kindle form. So and then all of the
people are you know who? They're ideological and intellectual mentors.
Obviously I could probably compile a whole list, but that's
probably a good start for people. I know that was long.
Speaker 1: Jamel says, for ten dollars, how do we guard against influencers?
I used to listen to Red Scare and I saw
it turned the right over the years. Well, I mean,
I don't know. I mean, I mean, I don't know
in the regards I never listened to Red Scares, So
I don't know what. I don't doubt that, but I'm saying,
how do you guard against it? Just guard your mind, dude,
guard your Internet time Spireau the Master Programmer ten dollars.
If you look at AI and the code and the
mathematical science behind it, AI can never be sentient and
not buy into Yeah, we totally agree with that. Jam
Al twenty dollars. What about Protestantism is an attractor of
these intellectuals like Jordan hall Well, Protestism is very uh
di I y. I mean anybody can be a Protestant minister,
starts your own church, open up a so it's very
amenable to a business model kind of Christianity.
Speaker 2: I think he's actually a Baptist. I don't know if
that falls under Protestantism.
Speaker 1: But I think Baptists are Protestants. I mean everything that's
you know, not Catholic or Orthodox, therefore Protestant by necessity
because it all comes out of the Reformation historically. Is
Orthodoxy inoculated to this No, I mean anybody is susceptible
to falling into any kind of error, So you're not
inoculated just because you're Orthodox that you wouldn't fall into
subversion or deception or ignorance. I mean everybody is susceptible
to this straight white male ten dollars.
Speaker 2: Discord Peter and sorry Peter Cheel and Drew and Hall.
We're both referencing Orthodox, I think, to try and deceive
Orthodox Christians.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I was curious. I don't know if he
meant Some people were actually wondering if he meant referring
to like David Patrick carry because Daved Patrick Carey did
finish his PhD. And it was on a tech and
transhumanism in Christianity. I don't know whether Teal meant Orthodox
Eastern Orthodox Christianity, or if you just meant little o
like fundamentalist Orthodox. So sometimes Orthodox is used in the
sense of anybody that believes that their position versus the
Orthodox Church as an institution. I don't know which one
he meant. Straight white male ten dollars. Does Courtney think
that people we'll be using Christian nationalism as a vehicle
to subvert an accurate form of Christian nationalism.
Speaker 2: Yes, I think very much so. I think this movement
is subversive in nature. I think that that is the purpose.
But they're really their their primary target right now is
to subvert the constitution, subvert America.
Speaker 1: Guys be sure and follow Courtney. I'll have all of
her links below. We've been linking of course, her subsec
in the chat as we've been covering it, and Courtney
you can find her over on Twitter. You can find
her on I'll have all that below. We're not going
to say the R word here on YouTube because we
know that YouTube doesn't like the R word. But Courtney,
anything else you want to leave us with. I know
that you've got a book that's going to be coming
out soon. When is that going to be available? I
definitely want to read that, and I think you should
probably take this subsecment Heial and put that into a book.
Speaker 2: Well, I am actually I have been approached. I don't
know if I can quite say, but we'll call him
the living expert on technocracy. People who know will know
who that is. He's actually asked me to collaborate. We've
both written outlines already, so we're meeting tomorrow to move
forward on that on this particular piece. So that is
in the works and my book on Hegel's Dialectic and
astick Jacob Flatter. I'm hoping to have that done by
September that I have a preview of it up on
my substack currently, so you want to sneak peak of
it that's available there, but hopefully by September. What else
is there going to say? I do think that I
just want to add one more thing on the Christian nationalism.
And I'm not a theological expert obviously that I will
defer to you on that, but I would say that
I don't see their the ideology and even the theology
that they're presenting as being commensurate with Christianity. This is
a very forceful movement. This is a tricky put much
more bluntly than yeah, than I would have but yes, exactly,
that's how I And also, by.
Speaker 1: The way, Courtney has done many interviews with our buddy
Matthew Era, so shout out to Matthew. I saw that you.
You just have a recent post up there Darwin's Trojan
Horse with Matthew, and Matthew does a lot of great works,
so people can go check out Matthew and Courtney's stuff
and Courtney's substect And I just.
Speaker 2: Did a presentation on this actually yes yesterday the day
before on this article for and we're having another round
table this weekend. So cool. The one other thing I
will add is people if they haven't, I won't give
it away, but if you haven't seen the movie, what
is it? Megan?
Speaker 1: Oh? Jamie and I thought it was pretty funny, like
in a like it it was, I mean, it was
a horror movie. It was kind of tongue in cheek silly.
But yeah, we watched it.
Speaker 2: Okay, and I thought it was funny and like a
Buffy the Vampire Slayer kind of way, like very much
that kind of humor exactly. Yeah, but a lot of
these themes and it ends with actually like a game
be term. I won't give it away for people who
want to watch it, but.
Speaker 1: It's literally are you talking about the one that came
out a couple of years ago or the newer re Megan?
Speaker 2: The new one?
Speaker 1: Oh okay, yeah, we haven't seen that one yet.
Speaker 2: Okay. Yeah, so they literally end it with like game
B terminal.
Speaker 1: Oh wow, now I'm gonna say it too. Also, and
movies are always very important to the propaganda because that's
what reaches a lot of the masses. At least for
maybe now video games are going to take over movies,
I don't know, but at least we still kind of
have movies as an important cultural programming phenomena. Guys, I
will be speaking at the Ludlow Orthodox Conference up there
in d C. Stafford, Virginia. You can get the tickets
in the show description. I linked it in the chat
as well. You can also support me by getting the book,
which I don't think it'll be ready in July because
I'm having to do some revisions, so it might be
September four esoterically with three the books don't I just
had to rewrite some paragraphs and some sections that were
they Chris was was right. They were not very well written.
They needed to be they needed to be readone so
we got most of that ironed out. I just have
one last thing to do and then he'll make those
corrections and hopefully we can get the book out as
soon as possible. You can, of course, get all the
other books. We are still behind on book orders, so
you don't have to message me. I know that you
guys want your books. I'm going to get them to
you as quick as possible. I promise you the book
is done. It will be I mean, for the most
part it's done. I have to rewrite some sections, but
I think you guys are gonna like us start Clay
with three. It's a little bit different, but some of
the same. It's enough of the same that you'll like it.
So get your copies of that and get to take
us to the Ludwell Orthodox Conference. According to do you
have any engagements or events you're doing anytime soon?
Speaker 2: I want to have one more thing very quickly on
the other theme that I noticed through all of this,
So we talked about the kind of like relativism and constructivism.
The other kind of underlining theme I see in all
of this is self apotheosis. So it is very much
aligned with this is what my book is going to
be about. You know, the gnostic Jacobs Ladder. It really
is like that's ah, you know, the technological imminicization of
the esquton is all about making you know that you're
you're your own God. So I see that throughout everything.
Speaker 4: So yeah, no, I just working on getting these these
out and uh, yeah we're you know, get back to
the show and yeah, follow me at Courtneyturner dot com.
Speaker 1: Awesome, And you're on Twitter too, right, Like are you
more active on any platform over any other platform? Like
what does it you have like a home base where
everybody can really.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I'm pretty active on Twitter at Corney Turner my name.
I just felt like courton Ay, so it is Courtney,
but Courtenay Turner. I'm pretty active on there. I am
on Instagram as well, and I'm pretty active there, but
I don't post as much of the uh you know,
this type of work just because they they don't love
me as much. I don't know that any of them
love me, but you know, so I post more of
like my fitness content there, more health wellness kind of stuff.
Do post some of this type of material, but I'm
definitely active on there as well, and Substack. I'm very
active on there with all of my articles and stuff.
Speaker 1: So awesome, right well, thank you Courtney a great interview,
and everybody be sure and follow her and check out
her materials.
Speaker 2: Thank you,