Speaker 1: Hey, everyone, welcome back today. I have an interview for
you with the incredibly intelligent Jay Dyer.
Speaker 2: Jay is a.
Speaker 1: Philosopher, an author, and a comedian known primarily for his
analysis of geopolitics, Hollywood, and culture. If you are interested
in following Jay's work or purchasing any of his books,
you will find all of the relevant links in the
video description. I really hope that you enjoy our conversation together.
To start off, could you talk a little bit about
what initially drew you to analyzing Hollywood. I guess it's
namely celebrities and culture and films. Also, do you believe
that Hollywood is as important a vehicle for propagandizing people
as the media.
Speaker 3: Well began me on this track was when I was
in high school.
Speaker 4: I was we had clicks in high school.
Speaker 3: I had to ask everybody on Twitter the other day
if this still exists. And I get the impression that
clicks don't exist as much anymore. But when I went
to high school, it was very much like a John
Hughes movie. So there was all these cliques and I
was in the cool guy click.
Speaker 4: Of you know.
Speaker 3: We would party, have fun, and we did theater, and yes,
we were heterosexual. Okay, So, but I was in a
small town, and in a small town, there's not a
whole lot of options.
Speaker 4: So we were all in the movies. We were into
the arts.
Speaker 3: A lot of my friends were in bands, and all
of us from movie bops, and so we were always
interested in that as an art form. And then when
I went to college, I decided I wanted to study
philosophy and film and somehow trying to make all these
things kind of mesh together, just because I had a
lot of interest, and I took a lot of film classes,
took a lot of history of film classes, history of Hollywood,
and it did a history degree at the same time too,
as well as philosophy degree. So it was kind of
like all these worlds were meshing. And that was around
mid two thousands, and that was right when blogging was
starting to kind of get get going. So I just
started writing blogging about movies and doing my own weird
movie analysis, which is kind of like if we had
a college class on you know, literature, that it would
be like a close reading, but I would spring in,
you know, these kind of weird esoteric critiques, and you
know how a lot of these people tied into intelligence
agencies and how a lot of the you know, military
and Pentagon offices had liaison, you know, connections between different
studios and Hollywood. And then when I was doing grad work,
I was like, you know, this is also fascinating. There's
so much on this topic that nobody knows about, and
I was finding so much information on this. I was like,
I've got to in some way, you know, use this
as something to you know, like a book or documentary or.
Speaker 4: Something like that.
Speaker 3: So the easiest thing to do is just kind of
collect together all the essays and then Whitney Webb's publisher,
which is he's also the publisher of like Daniel Esslin's
book on Builderberg. So those are the famous books from
that publisher that reached out and they were like, hey,
do you have a book? And I didn't, but I
was like, yeah, sure, I got a manuscript ready to go.
Speaker 4: So I just kind of put all my best essays together.
Speaker 3: And the weird part was that when I got into
the grad school era of studying this, there was so
much more that I didn't know about.
Speaker 4: That again just kind of like tumbled down this.
Speaker 3: Rabbit hole, so to speak, and I found you know,
a lot of Pentagon money, a lot of Foyer.
Speaker 4: Requests, a lot of that kind of stuff that.
Speaker 3: Had gone into influencing movies and TV shows to the integrit.
I mean things that you wouldn't expect, you know, all
the way down to things like Cupcake Wars, these.
Speaker 4: Really stupid TV shows.
Speaker 3: But when you start to understand, yeah, when you start
to understand like what the idea of culture creation and
culture engineering is, then it starts to make a lot
more sense why you would want to have you know,
messaging and propaganda and even those kinds of shows. And
then it got even into areas of like cartoons and
the Pentagon consulting on various cartoons.
Speaker 4: In the eighties. I grew up watching G I. Joe,
so you know, I was like, what, so even that
was like a SiO So.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's what that's what That's what I got into,
and it was all weird and crazy. But you know,
the weird part too, is that I was studying that
in the mid two thousands, and now it seems a
lot more amenable to people like, you know, after Argo,
when Ben Affleck made that, he did these interviews where he.
Speaker 4: Was like, yeah, Hollywood and the CIA. They're like flip
sides of the same coin, and it was just very nonchalant.
Speaker 3: I'm like, well, here he is saying it, right, And
I've been researching this and people call me crazy for
so long for talking about this.
Speaker 4: It was like, oh, you're crazy, dude, Temple, and I'm like, you.
Speaker 2: And Damon have like provable ties to the CIA.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's like once that stuff started coming out,
it seemed like it was a lot more again, like
people accepted.
Speaker 4: It more easily.
Speaker 3: But but I mean the thing with Argo was that
it was made with the CIA, right, Like it was
one of these movies where they publicly spoke of it
as a CA consultant maybe just like zero Darc thirty
American Sniper.
Speaker 4: So I guess I'm just saying it.
Speaker 3: It just started becoming more acceptable or normalized once those
people started talking about it.
Speaker 4: But you know, I'm just emphasizing it.
Speaker 3: In like in the two thousands, this stuff was so crazy,
Like it was just like, yeah.
Speaker 4: That's crazy and there's no way.
Speaker 3: But I mean, I've got academic texts up there on
the top shelf, which is you know, going back to
the nineties and two thousands where you know, there was
academics already writing about this back then, that you know,
movies were basically made as propaganda. And the reality is
that I'll stop rambling after this. That was always the
case when you go back to the you know, the teens,
the nineteen teens of the silent pictures, and you get
into the twenties and thirties. I mean even in other countries, right,
I mean the German film they use it for propaganda.
I mean it's just kind of natural that, oh well, yeah,
it's going to be used for propaganda. And that's where
you get these sort of backdoor influences. And in the
second book, I went beyond like Caa and Pentegon and
all that stuff, and I got into like organized crime
and its relationship to Hollywood, because there's always been a
deep relationship between intelligence age She's an organized crime as well.
So that's how I got into it, and that's kind
of what took me down this path that in studying
Ian Fleming and the history of the Bond series and
how James Bond was another one of these key elements
in this tie between intelligence and movies because it was
a very important Cold War archetype figure that they wanted
to prop up and put him up as kind of
the image of Western masculiney at that time, which is
iran because now the very people like now, now.
Speaker 4: I got this book the other day. Check this out.
It's called this one.
Speaker 3: Yeah, the Stars and Spies, Right, this is about this
is a mainline dude, a main line historian, right, writing
about the history of spot And it's like, okay, so
now that the mainline dude writes about it, it's cool, right,
it's kosher, you can.
Speaker 4: Talk about this.
Speaker 3: But when I put my book out in twenty sixteen,
it was like.
Speaker 4: Oh, it's crazy conspiracy. Oh, but he's the main line historian,
so it counts.
Speaker 3: But at the end of his books, he's got another
book too, where he's writing about the history of Riverish intelligence.
At the end of the books, it's like, oh, yeah,
during the Cold War, James Bond was the you know,
archetype of masculinity and.
Speaker 4: You know, suave, dub and air and blah blah blah.
Speaker 3: And it's like now he's he's not allowed at the
British intelligence because they're woke, and.
Speaker 4: He's championing he's championing it. He's like, no, it's time
for James to get out of here with his toxic masculinity.
Speaker 2: That was actually going to be my next question.
Speaker 1: It's obvious that there's a lot of collaboration between the
intelligence agencies and the media, and then obviously there's collaboration
between them and Hollywood.
Speaker 2: But how deep does this go?
Speaker 1: Do they even create films anymore for entertainment purposes or
is it only a vehicle for some kind of propaganda
to get some sort of message across.
Speaker 3: I think the way it works is that and there's
a lot of films that are made that that aren't
propaganda and don't have any specific messaging per se. But
usually what they would do is focus on the big
blockbusters because those the ones are the most important because
most people would see that. You know, if you think
about a franchise series like Bond or even something like
Harry Potter. I mean, those are to be seen by
a billion, maybe more than a billion people. So the
propaganda the messaging in those is very important, especially to
the power structure, so that they'll focus.
Speaker 4: A lot more on that.
Speaker 3: But they will also focus on things that they consider
to be culture drivers, and that's why you could get
things like even food shows might have that kind of
influence because we might not think of it that way,
but food is part of culture, you know, just like
fashion is part of culture. And so if you have
an attitude of full spectrum dominance, which we see this
now with you know, great reset for example, that's every
area of life you can't have, you know, a full
spectrum dominance model put into place and allow everybody to
like create their own fashions or whatever. And that's why,
for example, in the circular economy, they specify that you're
gonna have to share your white e tities with everybody
else in the neighborhood.
Speaker 4: Like you you don't get to, you know, sew.
Speaker 3: Your own boxers and whitey tidies or whatever you like,
you got to you gotta share everything, saying because you
can't allow that level of independence. I mean, I know
that sounds crazy, but that's that's the socialist model the
economy that they want to bring in. But yeah, to
go back to your question about the about the media,
I think hollywoods always been kind of extension in the media.
Speaker 4: They've always had an overlap.
Speaker 3: All the heads of the first TV networks they were
all from wartime intelligence so like Tarnoff, Paley, Uh and
then people from consulting agencies that also worked in the OSS,
people like Walter Lippmann Lawyers. They were always kind of
overlapping with Hollywood and media, and so they took a
lot of that wartime knowledge that they had of psyops
from the OSS and they put that into how to
run and do mass media. So it's always been that way,
I think, in varying degrees. But it's really the blockbusters
that are the most important because that because of how
many people see those and what kind of market types
they project in those. But nowadays it's like it's it's different.
I don't think the studios matter that much anymore. It's
gone to you know, streaming stuff. Revenue for these big
blockbusters is way down unless it's something like Avatar. So
it's really shifted and changed. But that's just because the
Internet and now the movie is like, you know, Jamie
and I were watching some horror movies, like now the horror.
Speaker 4: Movies are woke. It's just really ridiculous.
Speaker 3: Really, yeah, it's it's almost almost almost everything's unwatchable almost.
Speaker 2: I agree.
Speaker 1: I haven't been able to watch a new movie and
I can't even remember what the last good new movie
I saw was.
Speaker 2: It's just, yeah, unwatchable. Things used to be subtle.
Speaker 1: There are sometimes I'll watch movies now that I watched
in early two thousands or something. I'll be like, oh,
I missed that. I never noticed this before. This is
a little bit of propaganda, but now it's just in
your face, shoving it down your throat, and I can't
I can't even watch it anymore.
Speaker 3: And that's the that's the more subtle, like you said,
that more subtle form of culture and cultural engineering, uh,
which is kind of I think obvious to us now
when we look at say, oh, you know, everybody is
Skittles in the movies, it's like, is that really how
it is?
Speaker 4: Everybody? You know, Skittles.
Speaker 3: I don't know about that, right, but yeah, like you're saying,
when you the further you go back is a lot
more subtle. And it was also like the further you
go back, there was a lot more truthful films that
were made that did have real messages and real content
and real warnings. You know, in the seventies they made
a lot of movies about the coming dystopia. In you know,
the nineties, there was a lot of movies that kind
of exposed, I guess you could say kind of deep
state type things in a very very basic way. But
the more that we get up into the you know,
past the two thousands, especially after the Big Nine event,
like everything really changes and turns into more and more
just straight up propaganda. And the weird thing about that
is that even after the Big Nine event, when you
had these movies that were really pro America, like you know,
American Sniper or Argo or like that, Like Ben Affleck's
a great image of this because he's that post nine.
Well remember Pearl Harbor that came out right before the event,
and then you know Ben Afflecks kind of this image
of the two thousands era face of Hollywood. Dude, Now
that's all bad, right now, he would be toxic masculinity.
Speaker 4: It's racist because it's Americana.
Speaker 3: And I'm saying it's I'm not saying that was good
because that was all propaganda at that time too, right,
But now it's like you can't have pro American stuff
because that's propaganda, that's racist. That's you see what I'm saying.
How crazy it is that even like them from the two.
Speaker 1: Thousand way Is that why we're seeing so many remakes
of film is because there's just remaking and remaking. Did
they have to remake it according to the propaganda of
the time.
Speaker 4: Yeah, there's two things going on with that.
Speaker 3: One is that they don't want to put any risks
and anything, so they think they could just you know,
make money, just money level of the safety of a remake.
But there's also, like you said, there is this weird,
maoist kind of element of rewriting the past. Uh, And
I think we're going to see that that's going to
go even crazier because we were watching forties movies and man,
I mean there's some like pretty wild, you know, red
pilled and based stuff in the forties movies that when
people figure out that that was in the they just
don't know. But they're going to ban that stuff. That's
what I'm trying to say, Like, you won't be able
to watch these kinds of movies. They're all going to
be banned because there's.
Speaker 4: A lot of.
Speaker 3: How shall we say, jokes about people's types I'm trying
to speak around it.
Speaker 1: Well, if it's all digital, then they can just edit
things out or even exactly completely. But if you have
hard copies of things, then yeah, that might be a
leagal contraband At some point, though, do you believe in
the theory of predictive programming And if so, could you
talk a little bit about it maybe. I'm sure there's
some people that don't know what that is, so maybe
you could explain it.
Speaker 4: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I don't know exactly who came up with that term,
but I think the basic idea is correct.
Speaker 4: I talk about it quite a bit in my books.
Speaker 3: The idea is just basically that one form of propaganda
can be to see the ideas of what you're going
to be doing ahead of time, and that fiction can
be a lot more effective for that than mainstream news.
And my bad because the news has kind of churned
out and then people forget it a week later, so
the news isn't is minimum has minimal effect in that regard.
But movies are a lot more powerful for that because
they're the kind of the myths of our of our culture,
of our civilization. So movies have about the ability to
affect people at a very subconscious level. That's actually been
studied too, by the way, this is not just theorizing,
but uh, the people who study propaganda.
Speaker 4: So I obviously study film and.
Speaker 3: Literature for these purposes, for these reasons to figure out
the best way to tailor the message to affect the
target audience. And that could be enough, is the way
it could be in a negative way, and so you
can brute on.
Speaker 4: One idea is the it's called the theater of brutality,
where you brutalize an audience and desensitize them through the
worst forms of film.
Speaker 3: Right, so hardcore, this that murder, death, all that kind
of stuff that can be a form of desensitizing and
putting the audience and putting your target people in under
a form of psyops to degrade and destroy them. And
this is part of warfare, right, This is not this
goes beyond the arts, but it's weaponizing the arts. That's
very it's a very real thing. But there's also this
notion of preparing an audience or preparing the target group
for what you want to do ahead of time. And
you can actually see this in psychology. You know, remember
there was a few years ago when all over YouTube
it was all like videos about narcissists and uh, you know, gaslighting.
Do you remember that when like there was just hundreds
and and there was thousands of videos on YouTube about and.
Speaker 4: Like everybody before came. It's was about twenty eighteen.
Speaker 3: Like suddenly there and everybody was their own little pop
psychologists on YouTube and talking about there my boyfriend is
a n and then all the vegans are liken it.
Speaker 4: This is carness. So narisis, is your gaslighted me? No?
Speaker 3: Which it's just funny to me because like they were
saying that if you disagreed or if you debated that
that that's not what narcissm is disagreeing with you. It's
not it's not gaslighting. But Gaslight is a great movie
to watch to see this principle from the nineteen forties
with Ingrid Bergmann. In that movie, the guy who's messing
with his wife to get her money, he's gaslighting her
by doing all these tricks and like kind of revealing
that he's doing it interface and it throws her off balance.
It's it's a form of psychological manipulation that it's that
is a real thing. And so I'm just making that
analogy to the reason that you might see or put
the stuff into fiction might be too gaslight the target
audience to put it in their face that you're doing it,
and then they typically will fold, they'll back down, right,
That's what happens in the film, for example, until she
gets pushed to the point of madness. But the other
thing that a predictor programming can do is kind of
give the impression that the establishment is godlike that, oh
well they they how do they know ahead of time
they were going to do this? Well because they planned it, right,
That's something I mean, it's not magic, it's yeah, it's
just a military strategy and planning. So once we understand it,
I think the easiest way to understand this kind of
stuff is from the military vantage point, because that's where
it's most utilized, is techniques and tactics of weakening and
breaking down an enemy or target population, you know, sun
Zoo type stuff.
Speaker 4: Right.
Speaker 3: So, but there are actual academic people that are written
on this theory of predictive programming, Like there's a professor
named Elliott Gaines who has an essay about semiotic symbolic
destructions of landmarks in films before the Big Nine event
and how that might have contributed to how we perceived
the bringing down of those towers. Right, So you want
to have the narrative in place, ready to roll when
that occurs, to then steer the audience into how they
interpret that event. So it's a big part of narrative control.
I think it's a big part of conditioning people to it.
Better example than that would be probably you know, H. G.
Wells is the Burnets before Burne's. And when AHG. Wells
wrote all his science fiction novels, he was perceptible enough
to know that if he wanted to convince people of
his Fabian socialism and his free Masonic views of the
atheistic star Trek future that he wanted to bring about,
the best way to do it would be not through
his non fiction political writings, but through all that sci fi.
So the most important sci fi novels that we know
in you know, the West in the twentieth century, I
mean they're from the dude who wanted to bring in
the state owns your.
Speaker 4: Kids, the state decides if you have kids.
Speaker 3: You know, total egalitarianism, total you know, one world order.
I mean all of that fiction, whether it's Island of
Doctor Moreau or whether it's War the Worlds, I mean
all that stuff from him time Machine, it's all geared
towards this, and he perceptibly understood that if you put
this into the fiction, you could see the ideas and
control the zeitgeist of the culture, you know, maybe even
one hundred years down the road.
Speaker 4: So he and he's not just a fiction writer.
Speaker 3: He was a you know, high level geopolitical strategist, involved
in the Royal Society, the Fabian Society, all these different groups.
And he's the one that designed the propaganda for World
War One against you know, the non Western powers. So
again he's Burne's before Burneis. So these are all very
real things, even though we just don't think about them
or know about them as you know, strategies of warfare.
Speaker 2: Am I mistaken?
Speaker 4: Is?
Speaker 2: Isn't the grandson of Brene's like the owner of Netflix? Y? Yeah?
Really kind of crazy, kind of makes you think.
Speaker 1: I wanted to ask what your opinion is on why
you think there's so much satanic and demonic symbolism and film,
not just film in the fashion industry, it's everywhere.
Speaker 2: Do you think people think it's just edgy.
Speaker 1: Or are there a lot of people who are genuine
Satanists working in these industries?
Speaker 4: All the above.
Speaker 3: So we went back and we've been looking at some
of the early nineteen teens German expressionist film, because that's
the first era when you had overt satanism in film.
Now it's not I'm not saying it's satanic because it's German.
I'm saying that they were the first in their experimental circles.
And there's a bunch of socialists, right, So there's a
bunch of people. There were socialists, probably had Bolshevik leanings
in German film, and they just happened to be, you know,
in the circles of very radical kind of sexual liberation
types of groups that existed at that time. The same
thing was going on in England too. They weren't necessarily
into film, but there were people that were pushing I
couldn't believe this until I read it recently. So people
in the Fabian circles, they were pushing the most degenerou
stuff you could think of in the arts in the
eighteen nineties. So they were like way ahead of the
nineteen sixties cultural revolution. They were doing this stuff in
the eighteen nineties, and the Marxists were doing this. The
Socialists were doing this in Germany in the nineteen tens,
and they were experimenting well with all the satanic imagery,
best examples Metropolis, but also a lot of surrealist imagery,
a lot of what I guess we could say is
loosely a cult. And then that had an influence on
a lot of people in Hollywood. But the weird part
about Hollywood was that at that time, Hollywood was very
much not all my guard It was kind of all
about just making pictures around the stars that were in them.
So you would have these big thirties and forties movies
that were, you know, centered around Carry Grant or Jimmy
Stewart or you know, whatever starlett was hot. At that time,
they weren't really interested in anything avant garde. But by
the time we get up into the fifties and sixties,
Hollywood starts getting more and more weird, more and more
avant garde. I don't exactly know what the full reason
for that is, but probably by the time of the
cultural revolution of the sixties, which was a top down thing,
it wasn't a purely organic cultural revolution that was part
of social engineering.
Speaker 4: I've done a lot of talks analysis on.
Speaker 3: That, but that's kind of what opened the door I
think for more and more what was seen as edgy stuff.
But at a certain point, you know, in terms of evil,
it only you can only go so far to be edgy,
to where it's just like the next thing is the
next most disgusting thing, right, so it just kind of
bottoms out like just nothing but pure, just gross. So
I think that's where we're at now. It's like there's
no there's nothing more edge, there's no edgy to do
except for like I don't know, people are going to
marry their farm animals or something like there's no other
way to go.
Speaker 4: And that that'll probably I'm sure that'll probably be like
the next.
Speaker 3: Oh, it's so the moving drama of the farm girl
who fell in love with the cow, you know, something ridiculous,
like it'll be like the draw It'll be you know,
the love story of the year.
Speaker 4: Right. Well, they already kind of did this with that
stupid What's Up movie? That one that isn't there like this.
Speaker 1: I never saw it either, but it was really just
maybe I'm wrong, that's not the name. It was some
alien movie they created.
Speaker 4: And twice that's right, that's one.
Speaker 2: I don't know if if that you fell in.
Speaker 4: Love or whatever, but I think you did.
Speaker 3: I think you're right, Okay, Well, and then there was
that one with that that fish one.
Speaker 2: Oh is it shape of water?
Speaker 4: That's it.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's not really my We're already getting into that
domain of like, oh yeah.
Speaker 4: So edgy, mary fish so hot right now? Mary fish
is so hot right now.
Speaker 3: So that's but that's all totally like I think people
don't realize that.
Speaker 4: They think it's, oh, it's just degenerate people trying to
make money. No, it's warfare. I mean this is.
Speaker 3: Like really serious, hardcore warfare. And people have known for
a long time. They were experimenting with this in the
Iraq War and probably way before that, beaming like hardcore
prawn uh into Iraq to change the culture. So I
mean this is like it's it's well, it's all part
of warfare. As what I'm trying to say. That's one
layer of it.
Speaker 4: Though.
Speaker 3: It's not like everybody involved in making the movies as
part of some you know, secret society, although some are.
There are some directors that are outright Satanists, outright occultists,
people into Kabbala, people into anything you could think of.
So that also exists, and that is I think not everybody,
but some directors see their art as you know, this
kind of ritual magic Crowley type of thing where they're
putting a they're putting their magic spell and intention out
in to the world to you know, to do their magic.
So that does exist too at a certain level with
certain directors. I think that are that are explicitly into occultism.
Speaker 1: You know, do you think that Hollywood and celebrities in
general are losing some of their influence? I personally think
social media has been responsible for dimming a lot of
their glow and taking away the mystery around them. But
I'm curious what your opinion is like in relation to
how how influential they were in the nineties early two thousands.
Speaker 4: Oh yeah, totally like it was.
Speaker 3: It was a completely top down system back at that time.
And uh, I mean, I'm not saying the new system
is way better. It's just different because it's we all
know the problems with social media, right, I mean, it's
like a whole new set of problems with a new
set of overlords and masters. So I'm gonna I was
gonna do my Mark Zuckerber impression, but I'll refrain.
Speaker 1: But don't worry, I'm gonna I was going to ask
you to do an impression at the end, so we'll
see there's a certain moment.
Speaker 4: Mark. I'm so glad.
Speaker 5: So it's gonna be great when you're in the metaverse
because you'll have vitamins pumped directly into your blood veins.
You won't have to do anything. It's gonna be great.
You'll live in a koon pot and I would be
so happy for you. That was my Zuckerberger.
Speaker 4: So I forgot the question.
Speaker 2: I was talking about the celebrities their influence.
Speaker 3: Oh yeah, So I didn't even realize this Because I didn't.
You might you might think that what I do like,
I not you, but people in general. You might think, oh,
you you follow celebrities, and no, I actually don't. Like
I don't know what the celebrities is up to unless
some kind of important story comes my way. Because a
lot of what I did for this stuff was just
research the films and read the books about different studios
and the history of people and whatever. I don't really
follow a lot of like, you know, celebrity news, but
every now and then, if something pops up, I'll pay
attention to it when it relates to you know, Ben
Affleck doing an interview, saying that Hollywood and CEI are
basically the same thing, and uh, celebrities their influence because
they didn't realize that when social media came on the scene,
it was all about authenticity and so people appreciated and
they liked authenticity. We have a friend who I won't
say his name or anything, but we have a friend
who does things for some of the biggest A listers, right,
and they back around twenty twelve, they were realizing that, like, hey,
what's the social media thing? Like people are getting popular
and they were telling people like him, hey, do our
production stuff.
Speaker 4: And make us famous on social media.
Speaker 3: And it's like, we can't just make you famous on
social media because it's not a matter of just a
high produced thing that automatically makes you famous. It's people
are enjoying the authenticity of real people now rather than
the fakeness. And so what I'm I don't follow TikTok,
but my wife watches it and keeps up with it
because she said that the younger that you go, it's
this trend now on TikTok to where they don't like
celebrities at all. So like eighteen, nineteen, twenty year olds
are like getting in this idea being anti seletelebrity. So
that's that's definitely a trend. And and and they definitely
wanted to try to hop on that bandwagon. But I
see that going away.
Speaker 4: We did. We did an.
Speaker 3: Interview with Jamie Kennedy from Scream uh and a lot
of other shows the other day, and this is what
he was saying.
Speaker 4: He's like, dude, I'm a Hollyway and like, it's crazy.
Speaker 3: It's all done, man, this is just do your thing, man,
be your own boss. Right, So he was basically saying
and making this point as somebody still working in the
Hollywood system.
Speaker 4: So absolutely, but this is and there's pros to that.
That's a good thing.
Speaker 3: But then there's these you know, the downsides are now
like you know, Zuckerberg's are a master or whatever.
Speaker 1: So I guess that's true. But I mean, when you
don't have a script anymore. If you're acting in a film,
you just have a script to follow to make yourself likable,
whatever that character might be.
Speaker 2: But if you have to actually be yourself online, then
maybe you're not so likable when people put it together.
Speaker 1: You know, you're actually you're nothing like the amazing characters
that you play in films. I'm curious, what are some
of the most important books you recommend for people to
understand to best understand the mentality of the elites and
the specific direction they want to take society.
Speaker 3: And Yeah, it reminds me before we go to that
that Jamie was talking about this clip that I think
she said Jennifer Lopez put up about her and Ben Affleck,
and it was it was supposed to be some authentic
clip of them hanging out and having fun, but it
was like really fake and rehearsed and and anyway, that
just made me think of that, like understand that that's like, oh,
you could be an authentic person and attract an audience
now on the Internet, and they're like, oh, okay, how
do I get into the role of being an authentic person?
Speaker 4: What's not a role? Right?
Speaker 1: Yeah, they're all popping up on TikTok, but in a
manner that it seems as if their management is like,
you got to get on TikTok, yeah, and then a person, Right.
Speaker 4: So best let's see, Uh, is this like best books
for overall understanding? The big plan is that what do
you ask?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's a lot So one thing that I do
is lecture through a lot of these top texts, and
so we've gone through the writings of the elite for
the last hundred and twenty years. We've gone through about
fifty or sixty of them over the last six years.
So you know, we do a lot of things. We
do movie breakdowns, we do debates, we do comedy shows
now live, which we're doing, by the way, plug for Austin,
Texas February eleventh.
Speaker 4: If nobody wants to.
Speaker 3: Come out to our live event, we'll be having a
comedy show with BG Combi and five hours of lectures.
So it's like comedy and a bunch of information. If
you want to get tickets to that, you can go
to my Twitter. The best books are probably overall. Number
one book would be Tragic Hope by doctor Carrel Quigley.
But that is a massive, almost unreadable beast of a book,
so I don't recommend trying to read that.
Speaker 4: There's a smaller book that he wrote that's the same information.
Speaker 3: It's called Anglo American Establishment, and that's really about the
totality of the Western power block, how they gained the
twentieth century that they were, who was behind the two
World Wars and so forth, the you know, superstructure of
the industrialists and the banking power that they kind of
engineered the two World Wars and the Cold War to
bring about a technocracy, and so that they had had
this planned the whole time. And he's he's important because
he was the mentor to Bill Clinton. He was a
big establishment person. Archive is historian for the Council for
Foreign Relations, and his books are not conspiracy texts, they're
expose a's. So what I usually focus on is books
that are written just from people in the establishment saying
what they're up to, like what they're doing, and what
they believe. Another classic would be the very recent Claud
Schwab text. I mean Klaud slays everything out in this book.
I mean it's one hundred percent like full on house
the sky nets.
Speaker 6: We would have change all DNA, I would penetrential cobinates,
so we would have a word government, so there would
be the Nino tech.
Speaker 4: All of that in this book.
Speaker 3: So those are two easy ones that really kind of
lay out the overall plan. And you can see it's
the same plan from when Quickly was writing in the
nineteen sixties up till now. But you could also go
back and see the same Let's see where's my.
Speaker 4: You know, like classics like HG. Wells he wrote Open
Conspiracy and New World Order.
Speaker 3: I mean, it's kind of that kind of lays out
very easily, right. So those are some some readable options
that really lay out the whole plan.
Speaker 4: There's a lot more, I mean, so.
Speaker 1: You are convinced then that there is this long standing
master plan of sorts that even just broadly speaking, that
the elites have been working together for a very long
time to kind of bring to fruish in their vision
of how the world should be.
Speaker 3: Well, I think we could go if we go back
to like the Middle Ages and the Renaissance era and
maybe a little bit after that. There were other powers, right,
But the power structure that we are under now, which
you could call the Atlantis' power block, is the remnants
of the British Empire that sort of re organized as
the American Anglo American establishment Empire that also includes other
countries that can't name on YouTube, but you know what
I mean, right, So this is the Atlantis's power block,
which is not the Nation States themselves, but it's this
inner core group of people that are not hidden, they're open.
So I would say in that regard, it's like the
British Empire, but it's the British Empire resurrected and re
revamped as the Anglo American establishment, which quickly details as
the most powerful families in Europe and in particularly England,
the Royal Society who gathered around the Rhodes Milner Roundtable
group to set up steering committees which are above government,
but they give policy to the government and they elected
officials and that's they allow find themselves with the wealthiest,
most powerful families in the US at the turn of
the century, last century, and that is what is the
Anglo American nostalgier. So that's where we get counts on formulations.
That's where we get the Trilateral Commission, which Brazenski headed up,
and that's where we get They also created the oss CIA,
That's that's who created the United Nations, That's who created
the EU. So yeah, so that's who runs the show
right now, especially in the West, for sure. And they've
been at this at least since the turn of the century.
Speaker 1: Obviously, we have our own opinions of people like Klaubs
Schwab and Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates. I mean, a
lot of us perceive them as a bit villainous, But
how do you think they see themselves? Do you think
they see themselves as morally good and that they're doing
what's best for society.
Speaker 3: I think these guys have they aren't. They know what
they're up to because they see themselves. I mean, they're
sort of the front faces of this inner group here
that runs things, and which doesn't not say they.
Speaker 4: Don't have power.
Speaker 3: They do have power, but they have power because they're
part of this superstructure that we're talking about. I think
they're in their minds, it's all sort of just rationalized
and justify on the basis of pragmatic power politics that well,
this is just what we have to do because this
is the best for everybody. So you know, if you
read when Quickly writes his gigantic you know, thirteen hundred
page Tragy and Hope, when he's defending why this is
all good, he's like, oh, well, the ends justify the means,
because we're going to bring in a global order, which
in the future, you know, when we have the Star
Trek future, it'll be the best for everybody. Right, So
when we get Star Trek Federation, won't that be happy?
Everybody'll be happy then, right. So I think they do
have these kind of justifications that run in their head
like a hamster will. But I also think that they
also don't care because they don't I mean about any
kind of moral duties or anything like that, because they
don't believe that any of those things exist. There's no morals.
Morals are just determined by power strung ructures. So there's
probably a Nietzschean element involved in this, but there's also
I think for certain people, the higher you get up
on the food chain of the globalists.
Speaker 4: There is a they're self aware, not all of them,
but some of them.
Speaker 3: So I think when you get up to that level,
especially people like a Kissinger, of Brazenski, David Rockefeller, these
kinds of people like they full on one und percent
know what they're up to, and they write about it
in the books. And I think some of those people
are self consciously actually evil.
Speaker 4: Okay, they're aligned with it.
Speaker 1: A lot of people refer to this whole battle war
finding as a political war or a cultural war.
Speaker 2: Do you believe this is the case? Do you see
it more as a spiritual war.
Speaker 1: And do you think that the situation, this hideous situation
where in with society, is even solvable via politics or
is it only solvable through God and people returning to
the faith.
Speaker 3: So it manifests on the political sphere, on the geopolitical sphere,
and it manifests in the culture war. But you're correct,
I think that it's more than that. It's is ultimately
and to me, that's the best explanation for why you
we don't see this just manifesting in the twentieth century
or in the waning era of the British Empire. This
goes back to you know, empires in history have always
kind of functioned in this very brutal way. I'm not
saying that hierarchy is bad, you know, I believe in
hierarchy in terms of government. But you know, the orthodox
position is that that Christianity christianized the empire and turned
it into something at least intending to be a humane,
civilizing force.
Speaker 4: And that's what you see in something like Byzantium, for example.
Speaker 3: And what we have in post Enlightenment modernity, post revolutionary
era modernity is the idea that everything is inverted. There's
no such thing as hierarchy, there's no such thing as God.
It's now a will to power or sort of, you know.
Levias on Allahabb said the situation that the super state,
the corporate state, can create value, creating, create a utopia
or whatever, that now is outligned with Malthusianism, which is
the idea that most people need to die for the
good of this system. So that to me is like
full on one Luciferian Satanic system. So I think that
ultimately it's it's a spiritual thing. But I don't think
that everybody involved in that system even has to know
that or think that, right. I mean, you can be
a rabid atheist who thinks that, you know, you need
to depopulate the earth to save mother Earth or whatever,
or a new ager and you can be influenced by
the Satanic without even knowing it.
Speaker 4: So I definitely think it's a spiritual thing. That it
goes beyond.
Speaker 3: Politics doesn't mean politics is totally worthless. I think maybe
at a local level people can have an effect. But
like Quickly says when he was writing in the nineteen
sixties that there had not been a full on, honest
presidential election in one hundred years. So the money power
and industrial power had basically control the presidential elections from
the eighteen sixties up to the nineteen sixties. So I
don't think politics, you know, really does a whole lot.
Speaker 4: It's a lot of noise.
Speaker 3: And the thing about politics, it is so annoying, is
that it always looks past, like the real problems and
what's really going on you know what.
Speaker 4: People, Yeah, that's true. People fight over.
Speaker 3: Donald Trump for four six, eight years and the technocratic
agenda just marches on oblivious to whatever is going on
on the echo chamber of you know, political stuff.
Speaker 1: Well, I definitely think, yeah, politics is very influential, but
now it's just not so influential for us because the
system's been completely corrupted and they own it all, so
they can sure use it for their ends, but not us.
Even if we get somebody we elected that we actually
support and like, they never end up being able to
do anything good. As my last question, I'm curious where
you think will be in the next few years. Do
you think, as some people speculate, we're going to see
World War three, or we're already in World War three,
or perhaps another pandemic or are you optimistic or pepsimistic
for the future both, Yeah.
Speaker 2: Same.
Speaker 4: Poptimistic. So I think that, you know, I don't.
Speaker 3: I don't know what they'll do, but I know that
there's certain things that they they tend to run, scenarios
they tend to run.
Speaker 4: So they are running new.
Speaker 3: Exercises for a new contagion. Gilbates just ran one called
catastrophic contagion. So and we know before the big you know,
recent events, there was.
Speaker 2: Events a specific like smallpox.
Speaker 3: Or just I don't remember if it was a version
of monkey pocks. I don't know what they called it
in catastrophic contagent. But yeah, I mean what that will be,
whether they even go with that model, I don't know.
Speaker 4: It looks like what they're going to.
Speaker 3: Try to do is push the climate thing very hard
that oh look, you know, because we shut down it
healed the environment, So we need regular climate lockdowns.
Speaker 4: This is what they're trying to push.
Speaker 3: And then that will be tied into austerity, you know,
tiny living that will be tied into your carbon footprint.
Like the last Davos meetings, that's all they were talking
about was controlling and track intration and everybody's carbon rationing
and that means your food, that means your livelihood, everything,
track and trade. So what they're going to try to
utilize whatever works to bring that in. So it could
be you know, economic correct crash. It could be you know,
they ran the cyber Polygon exercises, which Klaus was making
a big deal about the last few years, which was
a you.
Speaker 4: Know, global cyber collapse or whatever. You know.
Speaker 3: So in those exercises, it's Internet maskill going down, being hacked.
Speaker 4: Blah blah blah blah. That then leads to.
Speaker 3: A new revamped system, right, So that could be one
route they could go with war as well, because but
I did an interview interview with the Colonel Dos McGregor,
who's a pretty high up there guy on the food
chain when it comes to this kind of analysis, and
he well, this is this is maybe a month or
two ago, so maybe it's dated now, but he didn't think.
Speaker 4: That there would be a World War three.
Speaker 3: So yeah, he didn't think so, But I did announced
with another guy who's a marine, former marine Southeast Asia analyst,
and he thinks they will try to have a World
War three. I don't know, but so it could be
any of those scenarios. But we do know that the
goal is by twenty thirty to have a lot of
this global architecture for the control system, the sky Net
stuff in place. By twenty forty they want to have
the population severely reduced of the world, and then by
twenty fifty in a lot of the texts, they say
they want the full on total sky Net supercomputer, Zeitgeist
city world government in place.
Speaker 2: Do you see it happening. Do you see them succeeding.
Speaker 3: They were going to definitely push hard to get this
in place, but a lot of people are waking up
to it, and even if they have a lot of
power and a lot of influence, like it's very hard
to force these things into place if people are opposed
to it. So it's just really hard to say, because
it's really going to depend on in the next few
years what happens, like how many people continue to wake
up or whether people submit.
Speaker 4: Cave in go along. I mean, look at what they
did in Australia.
Speaker 3: It's just insane, Like the levels of clamp down and
shutting down and beating up people and ruining lives.
Speaker 1: And you know, it was pretty hideous here in Austria too,
we have the early country were the first to have
the mandatory vaccines.
Speaker 2: I mean I didn't take it.
Speaker 1: We pushed back against it till they eventually got rid
of that because they lost too much support. But it
was hitty. I went through three lockdowns. One was almost
like eight months, so I feel like this whole space
of my life was just stolen, like a few years.
So yeah, it was not not nice, but I think
in Australia.
Speaker 2: Was much worse.
Speaker 3: Yeah, it sounds like you got like pty much almost
the same level, like as bad as them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and having to wear the masks everywhere.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and also banned from everywhere if you were unvaccinated
except supermarkets and like churches and obviously health related places.
Speaker 2: But yeah, it was it was really awful. You couldn't go.
Speaker 3: Did you get Like if you if you walked outside
without a mask where they try to like intimidate you,
or where they like full on arrest you or beat
you down, or what would they do you?
Speaker 1: They would make you put on a mask if you went.
I think you could be outside in spaces away from
large crowds without a mask, but if you went in
any sort of building or on the metro or whatever.
You had to wear a mask they would ask you to.
Speaker 3: Yeah, that was all conditioning for compliance, like seeing how
many people would comply, what could they get away with
for whatever they run next?
Speaker 4: Right?
Speaker 3: That will all that was all relevant data R and
D for the next thing. So what that next thing
will be, I don't know. But I am optimistic because
number one, well, I think that you know, history has meaning.
I think that the history has an end. I'm not
saying we're in the end times, I don't know that,
but I think that, you know, we come out victorious.
But I don't think that it's going to come easy
in terms of what they're going to push in the
next several years.
Speaker 4: So they're really going to.
Speaker 3: Try to push the CBDC that will control everybody's economic
transactions that they get that through. But I also think
that these systems, they're not as fluid as they think.
A lot of these things are going to collapse, especially
given the fact that this system that they're trying to
push in is so unnatural that you know, it may
result in a lot of death and damage, but it won't.
Speaker 4: Work because it's so just ridiculous.
Speaker 3: And it's like a bunch of mad scientists cooking up
this like ideal thing, and it's kind of like the
French revolutionaries when they try to force the whole society
into it. It's so absurd that it just collapses. It
does result in a lot of death and destruction, but
it doesn't actually work. And I think it's going to
be the same with this type of thing, that this
doesn't actually work, but it might lead to a lot
of chaos on the way.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I can't see that being able to sustain itself
long term. ID it's too against human nature. So we'll see.
On that poptimistic note.
Speaker 1: I'm going to end this interview, but I really really
appreciate you joining me before you go. Could you please
close this interview and talk about where people can find you?
But in the voice of plush, Well, that's what I
was going to ask you to do. It's my favorite
impression of yours. I know you already did it, but
one more time would be great.
Speaker 6: Or whatever you do, do not go to the website
of Jason. Also, even penetrators or cobnates if you'll do However,
if you do decide to go to this, even persions
just decendence website. You will also find him on the
old toube on door find him on where else am
I'm trying to? I was getting lost in my class? Yeah,
you find me on YouTube under my name. You can
find me at my website U and my books are there.
Don't get him from Jeff Bezos.
Speaker 3: Get him from my website if you want the signed
copies of That's a turr Collywood wanted too. And yeah,
so I host the Fourth Hour Lord Voldemort on Fridays.
Speaker 4: And what else do we do?
Speaker 3: Yeah, that's you Find me on Twitter and go to
the live event if people want to go see me
and Jamie and Bgcombe the Philosopher of Comedy live in
Austin February eleventh. And then I got to give a
shout out to my sponsor chalk dot Com the best
supplements on the Internet.
Speaker 4: Get those through the promo codes at.
Speaker 3: My website, and Richard Grove at Trajan Hope, Grand Theft World.
Shout out to my other sponsors. So that's all I
can think of. Thank you, Brittany.
Speaker 1: Yeah, super, And of course I'll leave everything in the
video description so people don't have to go search for themselves.
Speaker 2: But yeah, thanks again.
Speaker 1: It was really really nice talking to you and meeting
you finally personally.
Speaker 3: Absolutely yeah, we'll have another chat down in the future hopefully.
Speaker 2: Thank you so much for watching everyone
Speaker 1: I really hope you enjoyed and I will see you
all soon