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