Speaker 1: Hello, everyone, Welcome to another episode of The gold Silver
Bitcoin Show, brought to you by Goldsilver Bitcoin dot Com.
We are more than an honored to be sitting down
today with Jay Dyer. Jay is known for his deep
analysis of Hollywood, geopolitics, culture, and much more. His graduate
work focused on psychological warfare and film, and he is
the author of two books, So Tera Hollywood one and two,
and the co creator and co host of the television
show Hollywood Decoded. He's been featured on numerous popular shows
and podcasts and debates with some of the world's top debaters.
Thank you so much, Jay for joining us today.
Speaker 2: Yeah, man, glad to be here. I've been wanting to
do more economic, crypto based type podcast, so I'm really
honored to be here to talk about that with you today.
Speaker 1: Well, then, you know, with that said, like, why don't
we just kind of jump into that arena on this
show we try to just talk about bitcoin because for
a couple of reasons, I noticed at the Bitcoin Conference
in twenty twenty one that there was this overlap between
the American conservative movement and the bitcoiner And it was
a overlap that I guess was there from the beginning
when bitcoin had a lot of libertarians involved. A lot
of the cyberpunks from back then were also kind of
like small government minded individuals. But I've seen it evolve
really to overlap with what we're seeing as the American
conservative movement. In fact, some of my colleagues who are
more on the block chiint the corporate blockchain side of things,
mentioned to me they're like, Wow, I feel like I'm
at a q rally.
Speaker 3: When Jack Dorsey was on stage, he was being booed.
Speaker 1: Laura Lumer ran up the stage and was confronting him
for kicking her off of the platform and other conservatives
and then also now I remember somebody yelled from the audience,
you're on American Jack, and the whole discussion there was
about inflation, central banks, debt, and so I saw this
overlap between the bitcoin industry and then of course the
American conservative movement. Mike mcgloane, who's actually a Bloomberg crypto
and commodities analyst who's really interesting, he also notices this.
He's got a clear head on his shoulders. And then
I've also noticed that there's been this split between like
bitcoiners and the rest of the all coin industry or
the rest of the cryptocurrency industry. So there's Bitcoin maximalists
and they're always kind of you know, calling all coin
shit coins, for instance, and then the all coiners are
all kind of saying that, you know, there's this Bitcoin
toxic maximalism. All that is to say that I see
increasingly this overlap between the American conservative movement who harke
him back to the right wing of the right wing,
I mean, the radical kind of republican base of the
American Revolution who were known for kind of being conspiracy theorists.
They thought the king was like conspiring against the colonies
and all this stuff. And Bernard Balin, who I believe
was a Harvard academic, actually has a note in his book.
It's called a Note on Conspiracy maybe all four of
this to you, and he addresses that there was this
radical element who were convinced of a conspiracy, though not
everyone was. I see overlapping between the modern conservatives with
them and the modern conservatives and bitcoin and all that
kind of leads me to what are your thoughts on
the overlap between American conservatism and particularly bitcoin, And then
from there maybe we can talk about this black Swan
event that the w EEF has mentioned.
Speaker 2: I think that's a really good insight. I think there's
definitely overlap, probably because of education. I think most of
the time people who are knowledgeable about economics have a
high degree of education, and more and more people are
getting educated on economics, especially as the economy gets worse.
They want to figure out like why is everything costing
so much more now? Why is there super duper inflation,
you know when I go to buy you know, eggs
or whatever. So I think that there's a confluence of
things happening. The idea of the debt based FIAT system
being a trap, being a scam definitely, you know, overlapped
with the so called conspiracy world, which is really just
the reality world. I mean, it's not even conspiracies, it's
it's people who were looking at what's really going on
behind the scene, learning about the Federal Reserve. So I
think that, you know, the Ron Paul era, which I
was really involved in both I ran and ran Paul
you know, campaigns and trying to you know, help out
with that back in you know, the two thousand and seven,
eight nine ten era. That was the period when a
lot of people were getting educated in the libertarian and
conservative libertarian camps on economics, and I saw, you know,
I remember that time at the time when you know,
Ron Paul would have rallies where he could fill entire
stadiums and he was really calling out the Federal Reserve.
And so, you know, Ran, I remember he based his
whole campaign in twenty twelve or something, I think on
the problems with the IRS, the problems with taxation, the
problems with ultimately the Federal Reserve, and it was just
really heard of at that time, even though you know,
there's been a lot of you know, very goldwater types.
We've been talking about the Fiddle Reserve for a long time.
And it just was a perfect confluence because as we
started seeing deplatforming, as we started seeing people noticing what
I think last year there was a twenty ten to
twenty percent loss in the purchase of nower of the
dollar within a year. So people were really starting to say,
wait a minute, like, we've got to have alternative systems,
both in terms of media, in terms of how we
get our information out, in terms of social media, in
terms of video platforms, and so obviously to money, we
need other ways to uh, you know, conduct economic transactions
to share ideas and value that cannot be destroyed. They
cannot be easily you know, gotten rid of, cannot be deleted.
Since or so, the parallels became natural, as you said,
between increased education on money, monetary policy, how everything's a
scam when it comes to the Fed, it's private banks
ripping off everybody in terms of general rational wealth through inflation.
And then at the same time, we have, as you said,
this sort of amazing invention that comes about with bitcoin,
where you have this really ideal money system. I always
call it like an ideal or a neoplatonic type of
money system, because that's what it is. It's the hardest,
best way to do money, hardest asset gold and silver.
Obviously we're next to that, but it's the ideal. And
so I think so many people being forced to come
to grips with reality when it comes to the great Reset,
when it comes to what's been happening the last two years,
also forced people into reality when it came to how
they're going to manage their personal finances, their investments and
all this stuff, and so that just it was just
a perfect confluence of all these things at once.
Speaker 1: Can you come up more on bitcoin as the quote
perfect money as some have said like Max Kaiser for instance,
and define like neo platonic, I guess some more.
Speaker 2: Well, that was just kind of my own thought process
on it, because, like in, because I'm a philosopher, I'm
not really trained. I do. I do have one published
paper in economics and social theory, but most of my
work has really been in terms of philosophy and history geopolitics.
But one thing that I did was I got inadvertently
into studying monetary policy and money through reading geopolitics, because
I started learning about the Federal Reserve and I started,
you know, reading quickly Stragic Hope, which basically admits everything
that people have been so called conspiracy theorizing about the FED.
It's all in that gigantic geopolitical tone, which is basically
trying to defend the actions of a debt based monetary system.
And he even begins the book by saying, this really
has his origins in the goal promissory notes system, in
basically going back to Renaissance medieval Europe, where they started
separating the currency from what was the paper currency from
the actual held back value of gold or whatever, and
that allowed the banking elite to sort of run up
these debts and they could then buy up assets on
you know, on the cheap. So it's it's a pretty
simple and yet the same time complex scam that they
run over and over and over, and so from a
philosophical perspective, it was I was able to look at
that and say, well, in philosophy, we have the idea
of systems or systems analysis, or things that operate in
the kind of objective way that are that are just
totally math based, totally fact based, totally objective, and so
what you would want to shoot for in that type
of a system, whether it's a system related to engineering
or a system that relates to a worldview. Actually, worldviews
operate in the same way our belief. Systems operate in
a systemic way. And then you know it basically, you know,
computers operate in the same way of systems. So everything
that we do, even the household, like a household, mom, dad, kids,
it operates as a kind of a system. So when
we understand systems and how they work from a philosophical perspective,
I know, probably a lot of the listeners or watchers
are familiar with Michael Saylor, the way he describes things
in terms of engineering, and how bitcoin is this amazing
engineering feat. You know, my analysis is more philosophical, so
I can look at it from the vantage point of
like philosophical systems. And the ultimate idealist system is Plato.
And so I'm not advocating everything Plato said. He was
actually a statist and you know, very problematic in his worldview,
but one thing that he did have a conception of
was objectivity, the importance of mathematics. And then if you
could make mathematics and objectivity kind of the ultimate ledger
or the ultimate decider of monetary policy, then you could
have what would be at least the closest approximation of
an ideal system. And that's what we have with a
bitcoin type of system, is that approximation of an objective,
mathematical based ideal. And the more it's based on that,
the less it can be potentially manipulated by human beings.
So no system is perfect obviously in this world. So
I'm not avid. I'm not saying that, Oh it's the
you know, like the salvation of everybody. I'm not a
religious I do think ultimately it's kind of a gift
from God in that sense that it is an answer
to a lot of human kinds problems. But I don't
think that it itself is divine or anything like that.
But that's what I meant by kind of a neoplatonic
money system is that in that it's ultimately shooting for
a public, definable, objective, mathematically based way to have monetary transactions,
to have an economy, to have money and value an
energy stored over time. And there's nothing like that. Really,
there's there's not anything in history. I mean, you could
approximate it to things like gold, but but in ways
bitcoin is even superior to that.
Speaker 1: So I came to economics through history, and I studied
history in college. Then pretty much right after college, the
first thing I did was start getting into economics. That
thought that might make that might help me make money
in the long I've learned since then that it's best
just to follow your passion and be really passionate about
it and consistent with it. But that aside, I just
start studying economics, and then of course the economic history,
particularly in the context of the twentieth century. In college,
my focus was on places like the Soviet Union, where
their shortage was something that was quite common. Another focus
of mind was on Nazi Germany. Learned a lot about
the German Democratic Republic thereafter, and of course the Weimar
Republican in the Wymar Republic, of course, there's these stories
of people going to restaurants and the price of the
items on the menus changing during the course of their meal,
or they would rather actually pay before they ate to
make sure that that didn't happen, and their stories and
I guess probably photos if I'm not mistaken, of people
wheelbarrowing money around. And so I began learning about the
World Bank and the International Monetary Fund and their role
in world affairs in the post World War two period.
I think a lot of their funding, most of their
funding came from the US taxpayer, and their policy was
to only give loans to countries throughout the world in
exchange for not only is it there that debt, but
there's this austerity measures in quote economic medicine that those.
Speaker 3: Leaders must impose.
Speaker 1: And then there's a long standing critique that that money
essentially just goes to the plutocrats of each individual country.
And so I started learning about this. The debt based system.
The Federal Reserve was obviously a big played a big
part in the global economy, stated back to nineteen thirteen.
And then there was, of course some other big events
in the US history. I think in nineteen thirty three
Goald confiscation comes to mind, so gold was confiscated, but
not everyone turned the gold in.
Speaker 3: And then in nineteen sixty five four Lyndon B.
Speaker 1: Johnson says, don't worry, this isn't going to change anything,
but we're gonna take all the silver out of the
coinage and we're going to get We're gonna put it
nickel and zinc and copper in.
Speaker 2: It, debasing the currents that yeah, we're going.
Speaker 1: To debase the currency completely to zero, which is quite
a radical step, by the way, and I began learning
about the new kind of FiOS system post nineteen seventy
one with Nixon doctrine taking the.
Speaker 3: US off the gold standard.
Speaker 1: So now bitcoin is almost direct statement, I would say,
a philosophical statement, if you will, against the system that
we've seen unfold, especially post two thousand and eight when
there was the bailouts and the money printing. Of course,
as Henry Hazlitt wrote in Economics in one lesson that
inflation or money printing causes reckless spending, and it leads
inevitably to fascism or communism, and that is essentially the
path that we've seen a Bitcoin as an alternative. Not
only was capped at twenty one million, I think is
the only commodity in the world where we know exactly
how many will exist forever more, but also it had
in the genesis block a reference.
Speaker 3: To the bailout.
Speaker 1: In On January third, two thousand and nine, the headline
of the UK Times read Chancellor on bring a second
bailout and so here's bitcoin. It's this clear statement against
central banking. Really and now we see that we the
libertarians adopted it in some way, the cyberpunks adopted it
in some way. A lot of other kind of countercultural
movements also did adopt it. I remember on Bitcoin Talk
there was debates is bitcoin like a communist organism or technology?
And so a lot of countercultural people were rallying behind it.
But I think it was in the US it was
really driven by the libertarian movement. Whenever you win, it
was all like small government minded individuals for the most part.
That evolved in twenty fifteen when the I think blockchain
was co opted by corporate America and they started calling
distributed ledgers blockchains, and they said, hey, we're going to
turn the world into a blockchain. They're really just talking
about distributed ledgers at that point that by twenty sixteen,
twenty seventeen, I was like, man, there's a lot of
democratic socialists running around.
Speaker 3: This industry now.
Speaker 1: So we see this strain from the libertarian movement, the bitcointers,
the statement on the inflationary policies of central banks, and
then of course the very kind of well the reference
to central bank policy and the genesis block So in
so many ways, it really is a commentary on the
nature of our political systems, our financial systems, et cetera.
And to see how it from that kernel with kind
of this libertarian movement to becoming pop culture in rap songs,
in TV shows and movies.
Speaker 3: Has been quite a sight to behold. It's like, I
can't think of any other moment in history where something
like this has happened. I guess you could argue the
revolutions are those like the American Revolution comes to mind. However,
on the front of just finance, there have been private moneies,
but nothing that has disrupted things like this in such
a short amount of time. Von Nohouse comes to mind.
Speaker 1: I think in twenty shortly after the release of bitcoin,
bernardvon Nohouse started creating Liberty dollars out of silver coins.
They were being minted in North Idaho by Sunshine May
and the FEDS rated the mint They arrested Bernard von
Nohause and said that he was basically counterfeiting US currency. Well,
how far have we come in the last ten years
on the on the back of bitcoin? Really?
Speaker 2: Oh? Absolutely, yeah, I wasn't trying to cut you off.
I disagree. I mean, yeah, I remember too when that happened,
because that was around the time I first bought some
gold or silver. It was probably around two thousand and
eight or nine, so I was following that kind of
stuff relatively close. And I remember that story, and I
remember thinking, and I think maybe I was a little
for many years initially suspicious of bitcoin because I was
so kind of mired in the conspiracy world that I
was overly negative in my appraisal of everything. And I
remember thinking, well, if they if they rate a guy
for that, like, they're not going to allow bitcoin, right,
I mean, if bitcoin is what it says it is, Uh,
you know, they're gonna shut that down. And I think
they intended and tried, you know, for a long time.
They're really shut down bitcoin. They didn't want it to
be what it could become and what it is becoming.
You know, we've seen actually who Bill Gates, Hillary Clinton
within the last couple of weeks have come out and
said we got to get rid of this bitcoin. Crypton
needs to go away, you know, Hillary, even Hillary is
on to the fact that cryptocurrency, especially bitwin, is a
threat to the traditional banking model and they're calling it,
you know, terrorism and all this nonsense. But their reality
is that they're the central bank terrorists, right, They're the
ones that are terrorizing the economy and have been for
a long time. And there a lot of those people
are Boomer tier. They're Boomer era, which means that they
don't realize that people can within five to ten minutes
figure out that the monetary system for centuries is a scam.
And it's that this is people aren't ready to grapple
with that reality that for whatever reason, you know, especially people,
you know, I have a lot of my audience is
a lot of people probably twenty five and younger, they're
a lot more hip to being able to figure those
things out like quicker. So I think that again we're
kind of at this point where we've the wave has
sort of crusted and tipped over to where I don't
think that we're going to see a real shutting down
a bitcoin or and in the stuff that they were
threatening in the FUD you know, ten years ago, eight
years ago, because I think it's really proven itself. And yeah,
I think that you're right about when we think about
the projects that for example, Klaus the World Economic Forum
projects that he recommends, and the blockchain that he recommends
in his books, you know, it's it's an alternate version
where we need to be on these centrally controlled things.
And in the iron is of course that the original
idea here is to not have a centrally controlled mechanism
but to have it decentralized. And so I think most
of those projects and blockchain technologies that Klaus in the
World Economic Form one everybody shifted over to are the
ones that are going to be the most threatening. And
so that's why I think it's central to conservative minded
people or people who might be deplatformed to begin to
think about the alternate ways. I mean, we should have
already been thinking of We should have been on the
top of this along. I kicked myself for not, you know,
getting into this stuff earlier. I got into it in
twenty seventeen. I heard about it in twenty twelve, right,
and I thought, Oh, it can't be that. But you know,
the sooner the better, so you know the future that
we're going into. I read a good article I think
about six months ago. I don't remember what website it
was on, but it was basically arguing that actually, you know,
bitcoin and cryptos might actually be a great heade for
going into a Great reset, because the Great Reset is
going to be kind of a global economic attack. I
made a lot of videos last year talking about how
I think that's this is really largely I mean, it's
a lot of things that's to move towards global government
all that, but it's also an economic attack to centralize wealth,
to centralize control.
Speaker 1: Uh.
Speaker 2: And so it's it would be wise for people who
want to hedge and to fight against that, to go
for the systems and the types of things that fight
against that. And like you said, it's a philosophical announcement,
especially you know, bigcoin against that central banking model. That's
that's precisely what conservatives need to wake up to.
Speaker 1: What are the implications for Bitcoin of the Great Reset?
And perhaps even what is your view of the Great
Reset generally? I know you've probably hashed that over many,
many times.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I've done a lot of podcasts and shows on
that in the last couple of years. So we did
several We read and analyzed several of Klaus's books, several
of the white papers that dealt with the Great Reset.
And I think that it's part of a long term
technocratic plan that's been there for one hundred years. When
people hear technocracy, that's probably what might get some people
nervous about things like bitcoin or cryptocurrencies. But I think
that that's it's a you know, there's phases and layers
of education that we have to go through. And so
it's not that any of these technologies are inherently bad,
it's that they can be misused. So the point the
problem is not blockchain. The problem is not the Internet.
The problem is not e money, e cash or any
of this stuff, because we already use this, right, I mean,
we already use the Internet, we already are banking is
already more or less electronic when we're using apps to
you know, transfer money already just from our fiat bank accounts.
Uh So, none of those things is inherently the problem.
The problem is, as you know, when we have shadowy, central, private,
unaccountable you know, individuals who can manipulate the currency basically.
At well, I just covered a white paper that was
kind of in the domain of I guess you could
say conspiracy for a long time. But I think really
we've seen vindication of what was written in this white
paper in nineteen seventy nine. That it's a real document.
It's called the Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars, and that
document it's about one hundred pages, but it covers different
ways that the society can be manipulated through economic warfare.
And they actually it actually says in the document that
what people aren't going to understand is that the economy itself,
the US economy itself, is a weapon, and it's a
weapon that targets and attacks the society, not necessarily just
at one point, but over time to rob people of
their wealth through inflation. Basically, it puts people into a
black hole where you run hamster wheel that powers the
black hole, and the black hole it just always sucks away.
You're in value and your your wealth over time, and
you're the one powering the black hole because you keep
investing in the system. And that was the sort of
amazing thing that I'd never really thought about. I mean,
I knew about you know, IMF and all that World
Bank and Bank for National Settlements because quickly covers that
really in depth, and he talks about how it's kind
of a control mechanism and so we really have to
understand that first. And like you said, Big Quinn is
a philosophical statement against that, and so it's really just
it's it's that's why it's a great hedge against it,
because it represents everything that is what the Great reset
is not, and it's using it's using computers and technology
obviously to fight on the ground of computers and technology.
So we're really I think out of critical venture where
education is because if people don't choose the right forms
of these things, they're going to be co opted into
you know, fed Cooin.
Speaker 1: Patrick Burn discusses how he sees and saw bitcoin as
a continuation of Western philosophy of classical liberalism, which he
notes is today most often referred to as libertarianism, but
classical liberalism, to perhaps oversimplify, proceeded, preceded I guess, social liberalism,
which was more of a sixties variety of liberalism, and
then today we have, I suppose, what Noam Chomsky refers
to as neoliberalism, which so is it far cry from
the classical liberalism which really inspired a lot of the Enlightenment,
as well as the founding of the United States and
our Constitution and Bill of Rights. Patrick Byrn knows that
bitcoin is really a con continuation of that, and it's
the acknowledgment of the sovereignty of the individual, the ability
of the individual to make decisions for themselves better than
the few can or some leaders. And could you kind
of speak about the kind of philosophical history of the
individual and then the way in which bitcoin, for instance,
really I guess, empowers the individual.
Speaker 2: So I'm maybe a little bit of a anomaly in
this regard because I'm not actually a libertarian, but i
am very much a proponent of bitcoin, because I would
say I'm more of a classical traditional conservative in many ways,
maybe paleocon in a lot of ways, but and I
recognize the libertarian ethos from which bitcoin arises. I recognize
the positive aspects of the history of classical liberalism, but
I'm also very much a critical of classical liberalism, which
you might think is ironic given that I would be
such a proponent of a bitcoin. But what I think
has happened is that we're at a point now where
those things in the past don't even really matter. I mean,
they're interesting to study from a history of ideas perspective,
from a history of the world or history philosophy, and
yes they do relate, but I look at it like, look,
if bitcoin works, and if it is fair, and if
it is just and it's not a debt slave model,
then it's virtuous money. It's actually a monetary system that
is based on facts, truth, logic, math, objectivity, and virtue.
And if that's the case, it doesn't really matter whether
it came from libertarians or even if some Marxists invented it,
which obviously wasn't a Marxist. I don't think a Marxist
could have invented but you know what I'm saying, why
they were at the point where it doesn't matter anymore
about like, oh, you like bitcoin. Then you must be
one of those libertarians, you must be one of those anarchists,
you must be one of those conservatives getting deplatformed who
you know wants to be a pseudo terrorist. None of
those things even matter anymore, And now are at a
stage where it's like we have to adopt some things that,
even just from a pragmatic standpoint, that work. So if
this is better, if this works, that's all the justification
that's really needed. Yeah, I don't have a problem admiring
and admitting the elements of the libertarian free market ethos
that I do respect. But at the same time, I'm
a big critic of neoliberalism. I'm a big critic of
classical liberalism in many ways. That does not mean I'm
a socialist. I'm not at all socialist. I would be
probably more amenable to something like a hop of you.
But yeah, so I just think that just from those perspectives,
when we do understand the reality of central banking, I mean,
who cares if it comes out of a libertary and ethos,
whether you agree with the returners or not. If it's
a better, more virtuous, objective, truth based model, then why
would we not accept that, like.
Speaker 3: What would help think of bitcoin?
Speaker 2: I don't know. It's a weird question because I find
his defenses of traditional societies like that are monarchical. Maybe
he thinks that's a better model, even that you might
have potentially more economic success in a monarchy than you
could in a democratic republic. So I'm I have very
big critiques of democratic republicanism. I'm speaking of the classical
positions out of the Enlightenment. I'm not talking about the
Republican Party. I'm not talking about today's two party politics.
I'm talking about the ideas out of the French Revolution
and Enlightenment. So I would say, I guess if he
had the belief that a a monarchical hierarchical society that
was also decentralized or localized was a better model than
a gig gigantic US imperial democratic republican model, if you
had something like that, then and if if he argued
that that was the on the basis of like Western
monarchies that had even lower taxation models and principles than
the I R. S and the FED have had, then
he would probably think that bitcoin would make the most
sense that any that that the operations of someone like
like a king going onto a Bitcoin model for his people,
like El Salvador is doing, would probably be something that
Poppa would think was a great idea. But and let
me preface that by saying that that does not mean
I am an advocate for most of today's quote monarchies.
I think they're mostly degenerate, just terrible situations. It's just
my own kind of eccentric opinion that I think monarchy
as a form of government is a better form because
I think high ierarchy is natural to human beings to
have a hierarchy, and that might be kind of at
odds with the sort of libertarian ethos of the individual,
the atomized individual, something I'm leary of. But I think again,
we're at a weird situation where the world is in
such a bizarre place that these idealistic disputes don't matter
as much anymore. And now it's a where situation where
we've got to make the right decisions based on pragmatic things.
And so what's our best options for economic theory. It's
going to be a model like Bitcoin that's hard, that's
not inflatable, that's objective, math based. That's one of our
best options in fighting against the emerging global government, which
is what the great recet is.
Speaker 1: You know, there goes back a long time literature about
the world state. Ishu Wells wrote about it. It's not
there is a draw of literature written by many cases
influential individuals throughout the last especially one hundred years, one
hundred fifty years, maybe further back, but there's no shortage
of it between that time range, which essentially posites this
stuff and anybody who wants to think critically can't just
be dispelled by as a bunch of blue needs on
the internet who are saying this stuff. That's not what
this is obviously now libertarianism aside. I'm curious, like, you know,
what's the individual's role bin in history, and like, how's
bitcoin a continuation of that if it is at all
in your opinion, Well, there is.
Speaker 2: Some truth to the fact that individuals can be the
driving impetus of a new paradigm or a new idea
or sure, but I also believe that it doesn't happen
just on the base of a sort of Anne Randy
and kind of you know, John gall Figure. I think
there's also we are beings that are also parts of
classes of things. Whether we like it or not. So
for example, as an individual, I do have an individual existence,
but I don't have that existence apart from my connection
to other groups. And that doesn't necessitate that group or
class relations, which I believe are actually ontological metaphysical realities,
it doesn't necessitate that I being oppressed by them, or
that I'm necessarily confined by them. Think for example, about gender.
I mean, I believe gender is connected directly to our biology.
But if I was a radical individual as I might
conclude that I am being oppressed and I'm being And
that's what we hear a lot from the left is
the narrative that any sort of objective reality and classification,
that that sort of binds us or restricts us, is
inherently oppressive, and so therefore they must punish anyone who
restricts them in any way. But I think that some
restrictions are real or natural, they're metaphysical or ontological. They
haven't objected reality to them. So I'm just saying it's
a little for me, it's more nuanced from a philosophical
perspective to realize that it's not in my view that
the struggle of history is not the individual against the state,
or the individual against the collective. There are cases of that,
but I think that's an oversimplification of how the world
is and how we operate in the world. But yes,
there have certainly been many outstanding geniuses who have you know,
propelled society, and I would definitely class you know, bigcoin
as one of those amazing inventions that potentially could change
the world. Comparable to the Internet. I mean you could say, well,
what's it comparable to? Probably to the way that the
Internet has changed the world. You guys shouldnt debate whether
it was good or for evil, for the better or
for the worse. But ultimately, then if we get these
kinds of amazing additional inventions like bitcoin, then maybe the
Internet can be a great thing. It's really up to
us what we do with it. We're either going to
use these technologies for enslavement, We're going to use these
technologies for virtue and for good.
Speaker 1: What do we make of Klaus's cyber pandemic and what
are the implications for the I guess our infrastructure generally,
which would include the Internet and bitcoin.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I went and I watched and read the paper,
his white paper on that sound a couple a couple
of notes on that if I could remember what all.
It's actually not that long. It's only about a twenty
page thing if you read it, But just to be accurate,
I was gonna try to file my notes here.
Speaker 3: Go ahead, take a look.
Speaker 1: And for those that don't know, Klaus Schwaba leads the
World Economic Forum. It's I guess based in Devo, if
I'm not mistaken, and entails a lot of the fortune
you know, top fortune, say ten one hundred companies on
the planet. They have published stuff like own Nothing, Be Happy,
which elevates the sharing economy and a context that perhaps
is not what you might think of in terms of
a sharing economy. I more like a I guess a
public utilitarian economy probably seems to be more good.
Speaker 3: The feeling. So go ahead. So Klaus Schwab.
Speaker 1: He talks about a cyber pandemic that we're gonna have,
like essentially a at least internet wide or even infrastructure
wide power or outages.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it calls it a digital pandemic. And the idea
here is that they would run these drills of red
team versus Blue team. Red team being the attack team,
blue team being the defense and it would be a
tax on certain areas of society and of the economy.
And see what would happen in these attacks and how
well they could defend against it. And it's see this
was part of a Rockefeller plan as well. It is
a It included partners such as IBM and i CAN,
which was what Obama had handed over to the UN. Basically,
I guess the control of like the domain names and
that kind of stuff. And the idea was that this
would reduce this would create an entire world changing event,
so the world would never be the same. According to
page twenty one, after this, what they called a cyber
version of the Kufid so to speak, right, So this
would lead to a new implementation rollout of AI. AI
would then be rolled out as supposedly the answer to this,
you know, pandemic this or this collapse. I don't think
that it. I don't think literally it means the collapse
of the entire Internet. I mean, I'm not like an
IT specialist person. I don't think they could do that.
And I think, you know, decentralized networks are really difficult
in that regard, how in terms of shutting everything down.
But the end result is that five G and the
role out of five G would be key, would be
key to the new Internet, as you said, which would
be related to the Internet of Things, and that would
be related to if you don't know whether the Internet
of things is basically everything in the world in a
way being modeled and mimicked in the simulant world in
some way. Thus the tracking and tracing would then potentially
be total, right, so all of the world basically is
the idea is is to be mirrored on the Internet
in real time, so that everything could be tracked and
traced and you could get future predictive you know, algorithms,
all that kind of stuff. I'm trying to My note
is a little messys is all all, oh uh, all
global nation states that are all the global the globe
will adopt this new model, they're saying. And then it
goes on to say that one of the key areas
they would attack, for example, will be hospitals. We would
see the rollout of ransomware. I actually think that the
last year we've already seen kind of this with the
pipelines and this kind of stuff, So I don't think
that this is literally intended to be the entire Internet
shutting off because a lot of people think, oh, why
would I invest in dickcoin when Klaus wants to destroy
the internet. You know, Klasses don't want to destroy the internet.
Klaus is actually rolling out all these cryptos that he
wants you on, and those are the centralized ones that
can be you know, implemented into this tracking and tracing
total control system. It's rather breakdowns and attacks on certain
areas of the economy, like I said, hospitals. And then
they actually this was an interesting element. They actually say
that there would be an attack on anyone who opposed
it or called it out. They would say that they
are cyber terrorists. So if you question the narrative within
the cyber Polygon exercise, they say that those questioning the
narratives are thus aiding the cyber criminals, when, of course
we know from this document the cyber criminals are the
people running cyber Polygon. They're the one is Klaus wearing
his hoodie hacking, you know, bent over his computer hacking,
not literally Klaus himself, but the people underneath him, you
could say. And so basically it leads to one of
the advantages of this is the shutdown of all alternative media,
because they will say that anyone in alternative media questioning
the narrative of the attacks will be framed as cyber terrorists.
They will all be shut down and then ultimately it
even now this is my own speculation. If you've read
about promis and backdoor technology, my speculation is that a
lot of these infrastructure programs and places already have back doors,
so it's already they can easily cause these problems through
the back doors as they so choose. So it is
not actually Russia, China or foreign enemies that are doing this,
there's actually the people hired into this operation that will
be doing these these I guess you could, for lack
of a better time, false flag attacks basically is what
it would.
Speaker 3: Be and kind of down the hierarchy.
Speaker 1: I think it'll play out, and it has played out
very much like the Milgrim experiment. So you'll have like
people who are dependent on the Internet, like the ISPs, right,
they need to open out the internet really, but yet
they'll shoot themselves in the foot and pull yank websites,
perhaps with enough pressure on them, so now I can
That was an interesting moment in time when Obama did
see control of I can over to international organizations. So
your read on this is that they will basically like
YANK at the domain level websites.
Speaker 2: Well, I don't think it says that explicitly. I think
it's implied because it does mention. It just mentions the
partners in the cyber Polygon event, and the partners included
IBM and I CAN so they at some level will
be involved or are aware of this exercise And the
reason we pay attention to the exercise is just like
when it came to the twenty twenty events, we had
multiple previous exercises that match in many ways perfectly with
what happened in twenty twenty and even now with the
Spars document. But we had Clayde actually had Dark Winter,
we have Crimson Coctasian, we have Spars, we have Event
to A one, and so those were all exercises and
plans that really sort of set the stage what happened
in twenty twenty twenty twenty one. And so that's why
when we pay attention to something like cyber Polygon, we're
watching because we think that that's a potential card they
could play in the future. So, yeah, I don't know
exactly to what degree I can would be involved, but
it does look like they're you know, involved in this
to some degree. And to your comment too about sort
of collectivism, socialism, Marxism, communism, I think that Klaus and
these people, you know, they're very open about for the masses,
that's what they want. They want the masses to essentially
be in a collectivist socialist communists, sharing economy, circular economy.
These are all the words they use for that model
they want to bring in, and it is just really basic,
basic bitch socialism Marxism. But it's a corporate sponsored and
funded Marxism, which is the kind of the bizarre twist
in this that a lot of people have a hard
time with. Well, why would corporate elites banking at least,
why would they want Well, well, that's actually the whole
history of Marxism socialism is that it's a banking funded thing.
It always has been, especially when you go into who
funded marx right, wealthy stock owners or why would well, Well,
because it's a system of weapons and control. It's an
economic weapon. It's not a system of liberation and freedom,
and so it's it's a tool. It's a mechanism of warfare,
is what Marxism and socialism are. And so just like
the Silent Weapons document, you might think, you know, if
you're a John Bircher reading that forty fifty years ago, oh,
this is Marxism communism. Not exactly, it's Marxism communism by
a fortune one hundred cabal, by a you know, top
banking elite cabal. That's what it is now. So for
the masses, it's socialism communism, and for the elite it's
a tier of kind of exemption from all of that
and basically just THEFT.
Speaker 1: I guess, wonder what is the system after a process
of monopoly plays out?
Speaker 3: And whymar republic.
Speaker 1: I remember we were reading that it was pretty much
like a cartel run society, and I think that's very
much where we find ourselves today.
Speaker 3: It's like a cartel run world.
Speaker 1: So now there are projects on the decentralized Internet front.
They're trying to create a new Internet that won't have
these potential security issues. So one project that is doing
that is stacks formerly blockstack. So they're trying to create
a decentralized Internet on the bitcoin blockchain. They think the
bitcoin blockchain is something that can be built on in
a lot of the same ways that the other blockchains
are being built upon, like Ethereum and the smart contract platform.
The bitcoiners are arguing on the engineering front that because
Bitcoin forces this to be built out in a modular manner,
so you have to build it layer by layer, that
that is a form of I guess hyperfrigility if you will,
or it is a more sound engineering framework then just
trying to stuff everything into an S two for instance.
So that's the argument of like those that are making Lightning,
those that are working on RSK, which is a bitcoin
smart contracting platform.
Speaker 3: And then I suppose that's also.
Speaker 1: The argument of, like, for instance, we need ali of
blockstack or stacks. Now they they're you're they're creating NFTs
all the bitcoin blockchain now on that front, so there
is some work on a decentralized Internet. And then I
wrote back in twenty thirteen in an article called the
Internet is down the Bitcoin Uh, the Internet is down?
Speaker 3: Bitcoin over no, And so yes.
Speaker 2: This is what I'm glad we're going to go to that.
I wanted to touch it because the number one, number
one thing everybody says as well, if the Internet is down,
you lose all your bigcoin bitcoins destroyed, which is a
huge misunderstanding that. No, it's not that.
Speaker 3: So let's get into that.
Speaker 1: I write in this piece I cover how people could
theoretically create networks using wireless routers, PCs, laptops, and ultramobile
devices like head cell phones, which have the capacity to
become part of an ad hoc network whereby all network
devices transmit the data of the network. These networks can
become very big and are not difficult to set up,
apparently for some I imagine probably be pretty difficult for
me to set up. So I wrote this a long
time ago. The tech savy can use such a network
to host temporary websites and chatrooms. Apple computers have an
easy to use functionality built in which includes the pre
installed iChat which will automatically run an ad hoc rendezvut
chat room among anybody on the network.
Speaker 3: It's me.
Speaker 1: So now many would argue, well, these hardware is a problem,
and that is and I know that there is a
gentleman working on a company that's already live.
Speaker 3: You can buy the products now. It's called purism.
Speaker 1: I think it's like pur dot ism, purism laptops, and
he's creating an alternative to these major companies that essentially
have a quasi monopoly on the hardware. Theoretically, then we
got this ad hoc network of ideally these like Purism
or you know, uh, we'll call them like boutique hardware manufacturers.
You can also build large bridge wireless networks with wireless
access point devices such as link C's wireless bridge networks
can effectively create a local area network or a private
Internet for all users within a range. Most access points
will cover a one hundred meter area. And if your
wireless device is built to support this wireless standard, I
guess it's the AO two point one point one end
wireless standard. Do you enjoy nearly a five hundred meter
coverage area for each access point for instance? And I
guess you can even use Nintendo DS supports Wi Fi
and its own wireless protocols, So there are options. And
you want to mention that if the Internet goes down,
then your bitcoin also are not destroyed.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well that's just because it's such a common mistake
in bizarre objection. I mean, I guess it depends on
where you have your bitcoin conceivably, but I mean, I
don't you know, I would never I would store on
you know, cold storage, hardwallet. That's that's what I do.
So you know, unless the device is destroyed or hacked,
I mean, no, you're not going to lose your bitcoin.
And you know that. And I'm not an IT tech person,
but you know, my basic understanding of the network is
that you know, the bitcoin network is distributed amongst ten
thousand different nodes. Some of those nodes are house the
public ledger. So unless every node is destroyed like that,
there's which is very unrealistic, very unlikely, And if that
does happen, then there's much bigger problems in the world anyway.
I mean, if that happens, you're not going to be
able to access your FIAT bank either, you know what
I mean, You're not gonna be able to use your
banking app if the whole Internet goes down. So you know, yes,
in that case, the gold or silver, if there was
a you know, a terrible event like that, those would
be the most logical means to go to next. So
you know, that's why I don't believe in only having
one thing. I don't. I don't know why people think
that you can't have bitcoin and gold and silver. That's
another mistake that people make because like, like if you
say that bitcoin is even in my view it is
a superior way of doing things than even gold, that
doesn't mean gold's bad. You have, you know, multiple ways
to hedge against multiple bad scenarios. So yeah, if things
get really bad, then yeah, we would want to have
gold and silver. We want to have assets, We want
to have things that are not even necessarily connected to
the Internet or relate to the Internet. But that's a
very unlikely scenario that the whole Internet goes away, or
that all the blockchain computers are destroyed. It's just very unlikely.
So yeah, I don't think we have to worry about that.
And in regard to that, it just matters where people
are storing their bitcoin, which you know, I would definitely say,
you know, use a hard wallet in that red m.
Speaker 1: Hm, because some of the scenarios that you were outlining,
really you could argue that a coinbase or a Kraken
or some of these other centralized exchanges are a betting terrorists,
cyber terrorists, and therefore we're gonna have.
Speaker 3: To shut them down and confiscate everything.
Speaker 1: So now, what gave you confidence that bitcoin is a
product of the free market or of just spontaneous order
or of some of a god given gift as opposed
to like a honeypot or an intelligence operation. Of course,
there's stories of Gavin and Dreesen and early bitcoin developer
visiting the CIA to explain to them what bitcoin was
all about. Shortly there after, Satoshi leaves the project, and
then there's been a long standing rumor that the NSA
created Bitcoin, and I know a lot of the American
conservatives automatically say that it's like it's probably got some
nefarious back story.
Speaker 3: So what gave you the confidence that this isn't the case?
Speaker 2: Great question. So when I first heard about bitcoin, that
was kind of my default was just to assume that
anything like that has to be inherently bad or evil.
And I didn't even wrote a blog piece maybe in
twenty thirteen or fourteen saying that like I didn't know
anything about it. Really about was just like I would
be weary of this, This is, you know, some kind
of a trick. And that was because at that time,
you know, it was right around you know, Obama had
been in for a year, and I think everybody's expectations
about the economy in general were pretty bad with Obama
and then I think that you know that we'd had
the collapse housing collapse in two thousand and eight and nine,
and so everybody there was just a very dismal outlook.
You know, the public confidence was very dismal in terms
of the economy during the Obama administration. So all of
those things probably affected why I was just very reticent initially,
and I just didn't know what I was talking about.
And over time, what did I hear. I don't know
that I even heard one specific thing, but I remember
in twenty seventeen, when I noticed bitcoin going up, I
was like, well, you know, why is it going up
if it's you know, this this big scam, and you know,
are they just pumping at the dump it? And I
remember all of the news at that time was really
just hammering away at it. So my first suspicion that
maybe this isn't that bad is well, if the system
is constantly attacking it, trying to destroy it, constantly talking
about how much of a scam it is, I know,
the system is constantly lying, well, why why would they
be saying that? So if the news is just blowney
and the central banks hate bitcoin, why, I mean, is
this a long scheme of oh, they're really attacking bitcoin
because they want you to get bitcoin, so and so
that I just started doubting that approach, that it wasn't
that wasn't very likely and very tenable. Yes, maybe they
could be playing a sixty six degree chess game where
they want you to buy a bitcoins so they can
destroy it down the road. But it just didn't make
sense because the more I would hear you know, these
boomer Charlie Mungers and Dan Pena or whatever his name is,
and Warren Buffett, when I would hear them attack it,
I would hear them saying stuff that made no sense.
Say and no, they didn't know what they were talking about.
So more I would learn about bitcoin, the more, well,
they don't know what they're talking why that doesn't make sense.
It's a stupid it's a bad argument. And as a philosopher,
I try to recognize bad arguments. That's what we do,
is look for fallacies. And so I would just notice
more and more bad argumentation, bad reasons. And then I
listened to Max for many, many years, even when I
was skeptical a bitcoin, I hear I heard him talking
about it way early on when it was like a dollar.
I was still listening to Max's show all the time,
and I knew his you know, take on central banking,
and I remember in twenty fourteen or fifteen, I went
through about maybe one hundred episodes of Max's shows, and
I would take notes to try to learn more about economics.
I went and I listened to hours and hours of
Peter Schiff's podcast. I would listen to his lectures taking notes,
and so I just really wanted to learn more about economics,
and the more I heard from Max, I just felt
like he had a much better argument, a better case
for a bitcoin as opposed to the things I was
hearing from critics like Peter Schiff, who I still liked
on gold and stuff. But I read Peter Shifts books
over the years too, and I just felt like Max
had better augmentation. As a philosopher, I could judge who
had the better argument, who had a more logical presentation overall,
And so eventually I just got into it. In terms
of it from an investing perspective, I wasn't really that
philosophically invested. I was just interested in how can I
put the money that I'm making into something that's not
going to lose value through inflation, you know, crazy inflation
over a year or over two years, And so it
was just purely pragmatically motivated. In twenty seven. I got
scared again when we had the crash in twenty seventeen
from nineteen thousand down to three or whatever it was eventually,
and so but I was still very ignorant. I didn't
know much about it, what it was while we were
doing this, and then over time I would kind of,
you know, buy a little more and kind of play
around and experimenting with trading a little bit here and
there and learning more about it, and eventually it just
I saw. Another thing that was a big vindicator for me.
Was vindication was how you would if you followed this
stuff from news in twenty ten, eleven, twelve to now,
you have seen the same thood recycled. And so when
I saw, like, I've seen this for twelve years, ten years,
this is a stupid argument that they just recycle every
couple of years or even every year. And so one
by one, all of the objections just fell away, and
it was just like, that's a dumb argument. That's I've
heard that for twelve years. China, Oh, John, and they
just hear the same dumb arguments over and over and
over it's a Ponzi scheme, and you realize, no, the
fiat system is a Ponzi scheme, not Bitcoin, right, So
over and over and over it would, they would. The
dejections just fell away. And then I met certain people
who were involved in coding, who were involved in early bitcoin,
who were involved in engineering, and they explained a lot
of stuff I didn't know and just made it even
more coherent and clear for me. So it's a learning
curve that we all go through. Not that I've gotten,
I mean, that's still a lot I don't know, but
you know, that's what it takes to be ahead of
the ahead of the curve. That's what it's. I mean,
even twenty seventeen is for most people ahead of the curve,
because you know, we're still early in bitcoin. I think
I think we're going to see obviously bitcoin going to
I don't know when, but you know, ultimately eventually be
a million dollars, probably in five to ten years at least,
especially if the existing system continues with its spiraling out
of control madness. So yeah, that's a long Sorry, that's
a long winded reply to just a long period of research.
The more that I got involved in, you know, trading
cryptos and moving this there and doing this and that,
experimenting with this, the more the more confident you get.
I remember the first time I bought the coiners really nervous, like,
are they gonna take my money? My money's going to disappear?
But so over time, you you know, you get confident
and comfortable with it, and you're not as worried. So
it was just a just education.
Speaker 1: Really Max posits this as like a new renaissance. Do
you have the same hope or outlook?
Speaker 2: So I think I listened to a lot of Michael
Saylor's talks and podcasts, many many hours of that over
the last year, and he made a lot of good
arguments why they could be the case. I think the
potential is there, but whether we will act on that
is I don't know.
Speaker 1: What's your hope for the future of humanity.
Speaker 3: A return to.
Speaker 2: Traditional organic ways of living, I think is the best hope.
And obviously, you know, economy is a huge part of that.
The way that we what we live for diet, where
we live, not being in mega cities, not that it's
inherently wrong to be in a city. But I think
as things degrade as they try to bring in this reset,
big cities are going to be really difficult to be in.
So it might be better for people, at least in
the near term, to you know, try how to get
into the countryside. That kind of a thing. I usually
advocate that kind of stuff, you know, having as being
as self sufficient as you can in terms of feeding yourself.
Most of my friends are into homesteading. I live in
the country and I don't have a homestead. I'm not
a farmer. I'm not a farming kind of dude. But
a lot of people have found that to be a
good avenue, especially if they have, you know, a lot
of kids. So I believe in self defense. I believe
in you know, owning guns, goal, living outside of cities,
having your own land, being as self sufficient as you
can in terms of not on the grid, so to speak.
That's the best hope for us now and in the
long run.
Speaker 1: One of the refrains about bitcoin is that it empowers
everyone to be their own bank, or be their own
central bank. Does that play into this idea of self
sufficiency in your opinion?
Speaker 2: Absolutely? I mean when you understand what a central bank
is in terms of the scammery and the Fiat theft,
then you realize, well, now, wait a minute, shouldn't I
be in charge of my own value? Shouldn't I be
in charge of my own capital accumulation? Yes? Why must
I have this amorphous, shady thing staring over me? And
I think the way you call it a cartel? That reminds
me that in Quigley's traging hope, that's what he says.
He says that the official geopolitical model for the system
that we're under is a cartel. It's a central banking cartel.
So it's an organized crime cartel. And when you understand
it that way, then you understand exactly what you're saying.
It's basically another type of slavery. It's a covert type
of slavery. So yeah, shouldn't I be in charge of
the capital and the money that I make just as
much as I'm in charge of the land that I own.
Speaker 1: So silver is written up in the Constitution. We're supposed
to be on a biometallic standard gold and silver. I
still believe the American conservative movement should adopt silver. With
an activist mindset. I think in the countryside you're a
lot closer to getting small business owners to accept silver
for their products and services than in the city. And
I think that's actually less of a pipe room than
many people think. Look at what we've seen with bitcoin,
for instance, over the last ten years, and I think
that the silver community can adopt this attitude that the
bitcoin community has taken. And some older critiques of Bitcoin
that I've heard from older gentlemen is something like, look,
I'm a little old to be getting into that bitcoin stuff,
because that's the equivalent of storming the beaches at Normandy.
Speaker 3: And that's why we need young people so that they're
the ones that take up these projects.
Speaker 1: And I still while thinking, well, I think gold and silver,
particularly silver bugs could adopt this mentality, and in many
ways that mentality was drained from that movement and into Bitcoin.
With that aside, Bitcoin has adopted that movement. It is
essentially skeptical of central banks. It's a skeptical of the
debt based system. It's always ahead of the curb on
the economic news as well. Inflation was a story at
Bitcoin twenty twenty one, before it was the story in
every popular culture. Exactly So that said, any further comments
on the world.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think just again that when we one of
the things I've highlighted in the last couple of years
is studying organized crime and studying the international geopolitical power
clicks and power blocks, and through studying organized crime at
a local level, the history of the Sicilian mafia, the
history of other mafia is how they work, how they operate,
how that cartel works, as you're talking about, as well
as drug cartels for example, we start to realize that, wow,
they seem to be really similar to the central banks, right,
I mean, they're really just the big cartels, right, and
then there's the little cartel. So when we begin to
understand that that's really what's going on, that's the reality
of things on the ground, then we can reevaluate our
approach to the world on the basis of the hard facts,
the hard reality. And that's my bigcoint is an answer
economically speaking to a lot of the problems. It's not
every an answer to everything, but and by extension, yes,
gold and silver as well. And that's really the takeaway here.
So what I do a lot of times is I
lecture through the writings of the elite so called for
the last one hundred years, kind of do a summary
of those books because a lot of people don't have
time to read all these big, boring global elite books.
And what you start to realize when you read fifty
sixty of these is that's really what's going on. It's
cartels writing things, keeping people in the dark, tricking people,
using all the scams at their disposal to steal your
value and your energy over time. That's it. That's how
it works. That's how the system works. So educating people,
getting people to make the right decisions, getting people to
one thing I didn't grow up with that Bitcoin and
gold and silver taught me it was saving because they
don't incentivize saving when you have what a banks give you,
like a negative interest rare, like like you get like
a two percent say, I don't know a zero point five.
I don't know what it is, but it's not even
worth And that's on purpose, as the some of the
white peoples even say, is that they want to de
incentivize saving money. And one of the things that you
mentioned HG. Wells and like the socialist technocrats from one
hundred years ago, they discussed that when they roll out
the universal basic income. One of the tricks it would
be to have the UBI that you get it goes
away after a week, and that means you can't save
it up because for you to save up wealth, value,
energy over time time is for you to have your
own firewall, to have a defense mechanism against the tyrannical system.
And obviously one of the if the system can disarm
you from that, then you're no longer a threat. So
that's that's the key takeaway here.
Speaker 1: I think we've had the honor and privilege of sitting
down today with j Dyer of jasanalysis dot com. You
can also find him on YouTube at Jay Dyer. Is
there anywhere else people can find you Jay.
Speaker 2: All the other ones just under my name, and then yeah,
you can find me also on Rockfinn. Rockfin is a
really awesome free speech based platform. So a lot of
my content, a lot of exclusive stuff is over there
on Rockfin is free to sign up. And then there's
you know, if you it's kind of like Netflix, or
if you pay you get access to all the creators
uh paywall content. And then I also host the fourth
hour of the A L e X j O n
E S show.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining us today, absolutely thank you,
and thank you everyone for listening.
Speaker 3: Then