Speaker 1: This is six year agenda. I'm your host, Andrew coming
Speaker 1: at you here. Give him my boy just award on
Speaker 1: the court, and we talked about what they want. So yeah,
Speaker 1: we had a little technical difficulties with the last episode.
Speaker 1: Unfortunately we had to botch it. We went ahead and
Speaker 1: made some clips. We'll get those to you. There will
Speaker 1: be a couple of cool topics. We got Brittany Murphy,
Speaker 1: uh suspecially suspicious mysterious death kind of you know, talk
Speaker 1: about what's going on there. It's pretty fun. We may
Speaker 1: even cover that again because, like I said, that whole
Speaker 1: episode got botched. We want to talk more about the
Speaker 1: Harley Pasternak connection. I mean, Candice Owne talks about it alive.
Speaker 1: If you want to check out kind of the basics
Speaker 1: of it there, check that out. But she hasn't really
Speaker 1: touched the Britney Murphy topic. I think that was pretty cool,
Speaker 1: so we'll put that clip out. I thought that we
Speaker 1: did talk about Alex Jones Bill Cooper beef recently. If
Speaker 1: you didn't see it, Duncan or almost Sai Duncan, Trussell,
Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson, he had on Alex Jones and h Yeah,
Speaker 1: it was just odd to me that you know, Tucker
Speaker 1: Carlson seems not to remember Bill Cooper predicting nine to
Speaker 1: eleven kind of first and talking about how it's going
Speaker 1: to be blamed Onsama bin Laden and he seems to
Speaker 1: give Alex Jones all the glory. So I go into that.
Speaker 1: Uh just think it's a little weird. So I don't
Speaker 1: think you hear that from anybody, because everybody seems to
Speaker 1: have forgot about Bill Cooper, so we like to always
Speaker 1: bring him back up and remind people about him for
Speaker 1: that reason.
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know what's funny. I asked someone who's like
Speaker 2: super into conspiracies the other day. I was like, you
Speaker 2: know who Bill Cooper is? He said, now, who's that?
Speaker 1: It's crazy man? Where it's where you out of everybody? No, No,
Speaker 1: I know so much comes from almost everything he talked about.
Speaker 1: Almost everything he talked about came out right. I mean
Speaker 1: not everything, but there was so many. Like he was
Speaker 1: talking about Waco while it was happening. He was talking
Speaker 1: about militias and how the ATF is trying to register
Speaker 1: you know, everybody, all the milicias. That way, they know
Speaker 1: every gun you have, every you know, ultra restrictions you know,
Speaker 1: and he was calling that out before it became what
Speaker 1: it is today. And now we look at it and
Speaker 1: we're just used to it. But he saw it evolving
Speaker 1: before it as it really started from real freedom to
Speaker 1: kind of what it is today, which, uh, yeah, it's crazy.
Speaker 1: But yeah. So we'll get more into Bill Cooper some
Speaker 1: other time. Hopefully some of our new listeners are enjoying
Speaker 1: and everything, please give us some follows rates, all that
Speaker 1: good stuff, maybe a little comment, give us your feedback,
Speaker 1: what you want to hear more of whatever. But yeah,
Speaker 1: outside of that, I was thinking about getting to some
Speaker 1: DARPA connections with the big tech billionaires that are running
Speaker 1: the world. What are you thinking?
Speaker 2: Justin I like that, let's do it.
Speaker 1: We've been hitting at it for a while, so I
Speaker 1: think it's time to finally do the deep dive. Get
Speaker 1: in there and get gritty, hit it all out.
Speaker 2: There, get into the nitty gritty.
Speaker 1: So a lot of people have heard about the Elon stuff.
Speaker 1: You know, got a lot of defense contracts. I've talked
Speaker 1: about it a few times. We'll get into that one,
Speaker 1: but I think first and foremost we got to get
Speaker 1: into the Facebook and Lifelog connection. Some people have heard
Speaker 1: about it. It's a little weird coincidence that DARPA had
Speaker 1: a kind of project called lifelog. It was ambitious, aimed
Speaker 1: at pretty much creating a comprehensive digital record of an
Speaker 1: individual's life and pretty much capturing data ranging from communications
Speaker 1: of the person to their physical movements. But the project
Speaker 1: was canceled coincidentally on February fourth, two thousand and four,
Speaker 1: which was the same day that Facebook started, launched by
Speaker 1: Mark Zuckerberg as from Harvard. But what's funny is it
Speaker 1: kind of became a company made by a guy from
Speaker 1: a college instead of a project done by the military
Speaker 1: because it was closed because of privacy concerns, and so
Speaker 1: now you weren't worried about privacy concerns as much whenever
Speaker 1: you hand it off to a guy who just looks
Speaker 1: like a regular college student that you know, just knows
Speaker 1: how to code. Well, you see what I'm saying. So
Speaker 1: that's a little weird, you know, because it kind of
Speaker 1: gave us everything that or gave them rather everything that
Speaker 1: they wanted with data collection, social networking, all that good stuff.
Speaker 1: And so a couple days ago, there was a lady
Speaker 1: and her name I can't remember. She was on Joe Rogan.
Speaker 1: Her name was something La mov l Emov, and she
Speaker 1: was talking about how they did a experiment on people
Speaker 1: where they pretty much just gave every Rebecca Lamov, and
Speaker 1: she pretty much gave. She was talking about how in
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen they would mess with people's timelines and make
Speaker 1: half of people pretty much have negative comments and posts,
Speaker 1: and then the other half of people would be positive.
Speaker 1: And then they went and tested to see if there
Speaker 1: was pretty much an emotional contagion is what they called it,
Speaker 1: so seeing if like it could spread a certain emotion
Speaker 1: through just feeding people certain timelines. And yeah, so there's
Speaker 1: been some lawsuits with that. There's a one girl who
Speaker 1: was going to commit suicide I guess during this time,
Speaker 1: and she's trying to figure out if this was from
Speaker 1: them because she thinks that, you know, maybe they were
Speaker 1: like pushing her over the edge. So, yeah, they were
Speaker 1: messing with people. And all I'm talking about right now
Speaker 1: is just the fact that everything we've talked about with
Speaker 1: the whole mind control and social experiments that they're trying
Speaker 1: to do digitally on a mass scale, that is a
Speaker 1: perfect example of like proof that they're doing it, and
Speaker 1: it's with a company hypothetically started by DARPA, so it
Speaker 1: is military connected. So it's very odd. It's almost like
Speaker 1: a modern day digital mk ultra going on through social media.
Speaker 1: And so that's the shit we've been trying to point out.
Speaker 1: And it's so funny because now you have actual people
Speaker 1: with real information coming out talking about it after, you know,
Speaker 1: while we're talking about It's pretty funny. Yeah, there was
Speaker 1: an article from twenty sixteen that you pulled up that
Speaker 1: had that lady who went and worked at Facebook that
Speaker 1: came from the Pentagon. She was working at the Pentagon
Speaker 1: what from two thousand and nine to twenty twelve, and
Speaker 1: she left from the Pentagon defense Regina Dugan. Yeah, and
Speaker 1: then she what was she doing over there? Highly experimental
Speaker 1: arm of the company responsible for developing new hardware and
Speaker 1: software products on a strict two year timetable. That is
Speaker 1: a very vague description of what she did. Huh. Very weird, dude,
Speaker 1: I think that, Yeah, there's you know, maybe an extension
Speaker 1: of some something they'll come out later, I guess, But
Speaker 1: it's weird, dude. They're hiring military Pentagon workers to come
Speaker 1: work for Facebook while they're doing experiments. So I just
Speaker 1: think it kind of backs up this Darper connection that
Speaker 1: we're trying to point out. It doesn't just stop it.
Speaker 1: Mark Zuckerberg either, Jeff Bezos, his grandpa, Lawrence Preston Guys
Speaker 1: held a significant position as a regional director at the
Speaker 1: US Atomic Energy Commission, and this later became part of DARPA.
Speaker 1: There you go, another Darper connection, and this is Jeff Bezos.
Speaker 1: And it's funny because we haven't really talked about the
Speaker 1: Internet of Things. That's kind of what I'm trying to
Speaker 1: get into is that, like the six g Agenda is
Speaker 1: creating the Internet of Things, which is connected to people biometrics.
Speaker 1: You've got, you know, facial recognition. You've got a refrigerator
Speaker 1: that reports what kind of food you're buying, so that
Speaker 1: your health insurance is all this stuff connected. Right you
Speaker 1: got everything. Your whole life is regulated off your thing.
Speaker 1: And right now your things are convenient, but later they're
Speaker 1: going to be used as this kind of regulation control.
Speaker 1: And so what I'm pointing out is this Internet of
Speaker 1: Things is kind of one arm of it is Jeff Bezos,
Speaker 1: because it started with books on Amazon, and then now
Speaker 1: you got Alexa that listens to you. You got you
Speaker 1: know what I'm saying, like the real internet of things
Speaker 1: that actually connect to each other and it's legitimately a
Speaker 1: network system. And then elon what does he have. He's
Speaker 1: got the satellites and kind of the over the head
Speaker 1: surveillance and control system through data. And then on top
Speaker 1: of that, he wants to put a neuralink in your head,
Speaker 1: which is funny. We'll gain to that later. How Curtis
Speaker 1: Jarvin wants to virtualize people and how this is a
Speaker 1: guy that they follow, and so what's funny because when
Speaker 1: we talk about virtualizing people and then you've got a
Speaker 1: guy making a neuralink, that kind of sounds like that's
Speaker 1: the system behind.
Speaker 2: That virtualizing people like.
Speaker 1: You warehouse them, you put them in a pod, some
Speaker 1: kind of cocoon. You plug him in and call it
Speaker 1: a day. And we're talking about people that can't get
Speaker 1: they can't like get with the new society that it becomes,
Speaker 1: whether they're rebellious or whether they're just the underclass or whatever.
Speaker 1: And we'll get into like what Curtis Yarvin, how he
Speaker 1: looks at how society should look. Because all these guys,
Speaker 1: I don't want to get ahead of myself, but all
Speaker 1: these guys are super into how he wants the world
Speaker 1: to be, and they're all backing each other. And now
Speaker 1: they're all in like the new presidency, and I believe
Speaker 1: the JD. Vans is going to be the guy that
Speaker 1: really secures it. And he's supposed to be the guy
Speaker 1: to be the next president in my opinion, and he's
Speaker 1: supposed to be the guy to really bring it home.
Speaker 2: Yeah, he's supposed to be the successor, right.
Speaker 1: Yeah, and uh so yeah, we'll get into who funded him,
Speaker 1: who put him there, and where he came from in
Speaker 1: a little bit not vance. No, Yeah, it's a it's
Speaker 1: a problem. So yeah, uh, no concrete evidence that the
Speaker 1: guys's position to the founding or success. So it's a
Speaker 1: pretty much say and that there's no concrete evidence that
Speaker 1: the the fact that the grandpa was in darker it.
Speaker 1: He's got a connection with DARPA and Amazon, but I'm like,
Speaker 1: I don't know. This is a familial thing a lot
Speaker 1: of times anyway, especially when we talked about Laurel Canyon
Speaker 1: with you know, they use their kids for the hippie
Speaker 1: movement kind of deal. But Elon must interaction with Dharma
Speaker 1: DARPA is very extensive, with SpaceX. You've got his neuralink
Speaker 1: and then you know his Falcon one rocket was funded
Speaker 1: by DARPA. And then also there's been collaborations with them
Speaker 1: who they have been instrumental in his capabilities to getting
Speaker 1: you know, out into outer space. But yeah, must neuralink
Speaker 1: venture aligns with DARPA's interest in brain computer interfaces, which
Speaker 1: is what we talked about. Althentities have invested in research
Speaker 1: to develop technologies that enable direct communication between the brain
Speaker 1: and computers, aiming to treat neurological disorders and enhance computer
Speaker 1: human interaction. But I don't know, you know, I don't
Speaker 1: think it stops there. Of course, you know, it gets
Speaker 1: into X with when it comes to Elon, I'm not sure.
Speaker 1: My problem with it is that, like what we talked
Speaker 1: about before, how like you don't actually own a digital
Speaker 1: coin whenever you have it right, technically it's own. You
Speaker 1: own like a key to it. Just like the switch.
Speaker 1: They're doing that thing where they'll brick it if you
Speaker 1: do something wrong. So you don't own the switch. You
Speaker 1: just pay four hundred and fifty dollars for the key
Speaker 1: to open or use the switch. But Nintendo still owns
Speaker 1: the switch. So my point is when it comes to
Speaker 1: digital things, there's no privacy or actual ownership of that
Speaker 1: said digital item. And so the reason why us moving
Speaker 1: the digital scary is because you won't even own your
Speaker 1: brain if you have a neuralink. Think about it, because
Speaker 1: then now your whole brain is what you wowe it
Speaker 1: to neuralink, and then it could be shut off, shut down.
Speaker 1: What does that even mean? You know, that's where it
Speaker 1: gets Harry.
Speaker 2: You're gonna have access to all your thoughts.
Speaker 1: Hey, well yeah, exactly, and that's a given. So yeah,
Speaker 1: I definitely think that there's some weird interplay interplay with
Speaker 1: DARPA and the tech giants for sure. So we'll get
Speaker 1: into Facebook psychological experiment a little bit deeper. Twenty twelve.
Speaker 1: It did an emotional contagion experiment in twenty fourteen is
Speaker 1: when they pretty much published the proceedings like what they found,
Speaker 1: but they manipulated the news feeds of seven hundred thousand
Speaker 1: approximately users by altering the number of positive or negative
Speaker 1: posts they saw without informing them to see whether the
Speaker 1: exposure to emotional content influenced users posts or were you know,
Speaker 1: emotionally contagious made them more like enraged or you know,
Speaker 1: want to go just go off on somebody in the
Speaker 1: comment section, you know. And so yeah, they partnered with
Speaker 1: Cornell University, University California and San Francisco, which we both
Speaker 1: know is where the MK ultra studies went down back
Speaker 1: in the sixties. And so that's very funny to me.
Speaker 1: No informed consent ethical concerns would be obviously that they're
Speaker 1: manipulating people and their basic human rights, you know, is
Speaker 1: that they should know about, you know, research ethics is like, hey,
Speaker 1: I should know about you experimenting on my emotions, right,
Speaker 1: But yeah, I think that there's a lot of parallels
Speaker 1: with the DARPA experiments, psychological and behavioral modification operations and research,
Speaker 1: which we've talked about extensively, and I think that this
Speaker 1: is just another new age kind of version of mass
Speaker 1: behavioral engineering that we've kind of been getting into and
Speaker 1: this is a great example of it, to be honest.
Speaker 1: So yeah, there's definitely some weird stuff with that, and
Speaker 1: we know that, you know, Elon talked about a technocratic state,
Speaker 1: you know, a couple of times we've talked about that,
Speaker 1: and we'll talk about what that vision actually looks like
Speaker 1: whenever we get into Curtis Jarvin, because I think that
Speaker 1: he really lays it out in a way where you
Speaker 1: can really kind of see what they're looking at, what
Speaker 1: they're really looking forward to, and so I don't sound
Speaker 1: so crazy. So Curtis Jarvin in the patchwork thesis. If
Speaker 1: you can't find it, it's because he wrote it under
Speaker 1: the pen name Mensius mold Bug Mensius old Bug mold Bug.
Speaker 1: And so the core idea is that Western democracies are
Speaker 1: inefficient and should be replaced by a network of city
Speaker 1: state style corporate governments or patches, which is what I
Speaker 1: mentioned before. The government model is that each patch would
Speaker 1: be ruled like a startup by a CEO, with citizens
Speaker 1: as customers. This draws inspiration from kind of a mix
Speaker 1: of monarchy with techno libertarianism authoritarian corporate governance essentially, so
Speaker 1: the corporation that kind of you know, so they run
Speaker 1: it like a corporation. The critique of it is that, well,
Speaker 1: I don't know, we'll get into our critiques, but I
Speaker 1: think that you know, it's weird because I mean, and
Speaker 1: this guy talks about pretty much democracy is an illusion
Speaker 1: and that citizens don't really control the government, which a
Speaker 1: lot of people can agree with that, and bureau carats,
Speaker 1: media and academia are like the cathedral and unelected progressive
Speaker 1: power structure, which I do agree with that, but I
Speaker 1: just don't agree with his answer to it, that's all.
Speaker 1: But anyway, this is his term for the alliance between
Speaker 1: mainstream media, universities and the government agencies, which is the cathedral.
Speaker 1: He believes his secular priesthood indoctrinate society and progressive values
Speaker 1: and perpetuates a decaying status quo, which I do really
Speaker 1: agree with all those things, But then he wants the
Speaker 1: answer is though, that we should be run by a
Speaker 1: CEO like a king or a dictator, complete ownership over
Speaker 1: the territory and its subjects, but citizens become like customers.
Speaker 1: This is what he thinks is a redeeming quality, is
Speaker 1: that if people don't like how the patches run, they
Speaker 1: can leave and subscribe to another patch, creating a thing. Yeah,
Speaker 1: creating a form of governance driven by market competition instead
Speaker 1: of voice votes. But if you think about it, they're
Speaker 1: going to make these patches very undesirable for people without money, right,
Speaker 1: And then I don't know, so, like what level of
Speaker 1: like have and have nots are we talking about? Here
Speaker 1: because you have to be of a certain status for
Speaker 1: patches to care about you leaving or coming, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean, You know what I mean, Like there's
Speaker 1: kind of I don't know, like that's not really fleshed
Speaker 1: out very well, but yeah, pretty much your exit equals
Speaker 1: your voice. Instead of voting to change government, people simply
Speaker 1: move to a better run patch.
Speaker 2: Ye.
Speaker 1: Supposedly this drives better performance. I argue that there will
Speaker 1: be a lot of people who nobody cares about that
Speaker 1: will just be put off to the side, you know,
Speaker 1: like a large number.
Speaker 2: Dude. This makes me think of Viking times where kings
Speaker 2: would be ruling of lands and shit like that quote
Speaker 2: unquote patches of lands, and you know there are people
Speaker 2: come and go and if they if they do wrong,
Speaker 2: then they're like leave and they're banished and they have
Speaker 2: to go to somewhere another land under a new ruler exactly.
Speaker 1: And then you got to hope that they'll accept you,
Speaker 1: right Like if you remember like Lion King and shit,
Speaker 1: you know, like you got the line scar or whatever
Speaker 1: that he's got to leave. I mean, yeah, they accepted
Speaker 1: him and he became cool with him, you know, but
Speaker 1: that doesn't I mean in real life. That's not how
Speaker 1: it goes. If you have standards, most of the patches
Speaker 1: I would imagine will be pretty close to the same
Speaker 1: as each other, you know what I mean, And there
Speaker 1: might be some and if anything, they all will want
Speaker 1: to be worth more money, so they all will want
Speaker 1: to get rid of people that are less desirable or
Speaker 1: let worth less money, you know, So then there will
Speaker 1: be naturally, there'll just be little patches that are run
Speaker 1: like communes and run like factories or you know, workhouses
Speaker 1: or whatever. You know. That's that's the natural evolution of
Speaker 1: something like that, because then those owners will just get
Speaker 1: paid by the big patch owners to take in the
Speaker 1: people that they don't want. That way, they don't have
Speaker 1: to have the desirables. Because we'll also get into what
Speaker 1: he wants to do. Because I mentioned he wants to
Speaker 1: virtualize people. He made a joke about turning people into
Speaker 1: biodiesel fuel, you know what I mean. The man's a joke,
Speaker 1: but it came out putting people in, yeah, turning them
Speaker 1: into dude.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: And then he was like, but the thing is, people
Speaker 1: obviously won't want to you know, know and consciously be
Speaker 1: aware that, you know, the gas is made out of
Speaker 1: the previous underclass of their society. So I'm like, dude,
Speaker 1: this guy is sick and his parents were like fed workers. Like,
Speaker 1: this guy's sick. And the whole reason is because you
Speaker 1: may be like, oh, well, this guy's just a blogger. No, no, no,
Speaker 1: his parents were fed workers. He purposely doesn't have a
Speaker 1: checkpoint on Twitter and shit. But I think it's because
Speaker 1: he actually has a lot of influence. A lot of
Speaker 1: people with more influence you don't see out in the front,
Speaker 1: you know, field. But anytime this guy wants to Time
Speaker 1: magazine article review on him, he can get it. As
Speaker 1: soon as the election happened this year in January, he
Speaker 1: had a big article about what he thinks the future is,
Speaker 1: and you know, he was on Tim Dillon. I mean,
Speaker 1: he could pretty much get wherever he wants. And Peter
Speaker 1: Til jd Vance, all these people literally love his ideas.
Speaker 1: And that's what worries me, because Peter Teal pulled jd
Speaker 1: Vance out of his tech position to become a senator,
Speaker 1: paid for him to become a senator. Peter Thial started
Speaker 1: PayPal with Elon Musk, who we know is like DARPA backed,
Speaker 1: and then we know Peter Teal loves Curtis Jarvin's ideas,
Speaker 1: and jd Vance is pretty much enacting all of his
Speaker 1: ideas with Trump right now. And there's something called like
Speaker 1: the Butterfly Butterfly Report that he gave Trump that literally
Speaker 1: would turn the government into his self ran AI governance
Speaker 1: kind of system. So Patchworks could be made pretty much
Speaker 1: after that. So it's very clear that there is kind
Speaker 1: of a move being made right now. And that's why
Speaker 1: these tech guys were around Trump in the beginning of this.
Speaker 1: And it's people, don't you know, they don't think anything
Speaker 1: of it. They just think, oh cool, they're just getting
Speaker 1: behind him whatever. But no, no, no, who are these tech guys.
Speaker 1: They're all DARPA backed like billionairesn't want to create a
Speaker 1: techno credit system, and we're just watching it happen without
Speaker 1: pointing out what's going on.
Speaker 2: Yeah, Trump's literally a UFC events with the Big three,
Speaker 2: you know exactly, Zuck and Bezos.
Speaker 1: I know. The UFC is funny because the bread and circus,
Speaker 1: the bread and circus arm of this whole technocratic state
Speaker 1: is the UFC. Data White works for Facebook now as
Speaker 1: a promoter, like he's like works doesn't really, Yeah, he's
Speaker 1: on the board now. So that's what I'm saying. Bro.
Speaker 1: It's a self ran like little system that they've created,
Speaker 1: and it's now like taking over, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1: It's very crazy to watch in real time, but it's
Speaker 1: also crazy to know where they wanted to go too.
Speaker 2: And it's one of those things that just happens in
Speaker 2: front of you. You don't even realize it unless you're
Speaker 2: looking for it.
Speaker 1: No, exactly. Yeah, it's a soft, slow, it's like a slow,
Speaker 1: soft like build up. But right now I think they're
Speaker 1: fast tracking it for sure. They're definitely building like what
Speaker 1: would you call the infrastructure for it now. My wife's
Speaker 1: brothers building a meta database center right now. It's super
Speaker 1: super secure, lockdown. He's an electrician, so he's literally building
Speaker 1: like the brain of the this data network that's going
Speaker 1: to be the brain of this part of the brain
Speaker 1: of this technocratic system that I'm talking about, where.
Speaker 2: They're gonna have like nuclear reactors and shit there too.
Speaker 1: Just like the AI data read you know, regulations, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean. They'll be ran through AI, you know,
Speaker 1: So you need a big data center because it's got
Speaker 1: to take all this data in and then you know,
Speaker 1: do stuff with it, regulate it, do whatever it does.
Speaker 1: I don't understand all how you know, it does everything
Speaker 1: that humans want to do to people very well, you
Speaker 1: know what I'm saying, And that's control mostly it doesn't
Speaker 1: just help them. But yeah, so I don't know. We're
Speaker 1: going to see patches could have modular, forkable governance. Each
Speaker 1: could experiment with different social models, libertarian, theocratic, or authoritarians.
Speaker 1: See what I said earlier, So, oh you don't like
Speaker 1: this patch, well good, because we didn't want you to
Speaker 1: like this patch. You're not worth enough. Go over to
Speaker 1: this one. This one's authoritarian, and you're going to hate
Speaker 1: your life and you know, pretty much be scraping rocks
Speaker 1: on the ground all day. Like that's the actual contrast
Speaker 1: that we could be looking at. And nobody's gonna care
Speaker 1: at this patch what's going on over here with you
Speaker 1: at that patch, because there won't be this normal kind
Speaker 1: of transparent like news system, Like even though it's terrible,
Speaker 1: there won't be anything like that in the future.
Speaker 2: I feel like what you said kind of reminded me
Speaker 2: of snow Piercer. Have you ever seen that or read
Speaker 2: that book? I think I saw them so in the
Speaker 2: back of the train, it's like lower class people. And
Speaker 2: then the further you get up the train, it gets
Speaker 2: higher class and more bougie pretty much. And then the
Speaker 2: people in the back of the train they don't get
Speaker 2: They get like these little black tar ingots of shit
Speaker 2: to eat, and what you know. Eventually they revolt and
Speaker 2: they work their way up to the train, up the train,
Speaker 2: and they get to the kitchen and they find out
Speaker 2: that they're just eating bugs in the movie, but in
Speaker 2: the books, they're eating people who died, like people who
Speaker 2: lived in the back of that train. They were eating
Speaker 2: the people who have died.
Speaker 1: Mental conditioning another movie doing really well with mental conditioning.
Speaker 1: Just like I say, Matrix was supposed is supposed to
Speaker 1: be a documentary, you know what I mean. Besides the
Speaker 1: fact that there's a guy named Neo that gets out,
Speaker 1: that's the Hollywood part, you know what I'm saying. That's
Speaker 1: the Hollywood part. You don't actually get out, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean. That's that's the part that like we
Speaker 1: try to express is like listen, there's always the Hollywood aspect. Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: it's usually the part where things work out, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean, Like unless you actually get ahead of it.
Speaker 1: Things may not work out for a long time, you
Speaker 1: know what I mean, It takes a while. But yeah,
Speaker 1: so just to like finish up on like what he
Speaker 1: how he kind of looks at it, is you privatize
Speaker 1: justice enforcement, so courts, police and even immigration policy would
Speaker 1: be administered like services from a tech platform. So it
Speaker 1: just have its policies just like a tech platform does,
Speaker 1: and it would just through AI send out police force,
Speaker 1: you know, according to what AI says it, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean, it's all just boom streamlined, very very weird,
Speaker 1: very inhumane, you know what I mean. Yeah, so you know,
Speaker 1: obviously the Constitution's gone in this situation. You have no
Speaker 1: right of freedom of speech, freedom of liberty, freedom of
Speaker 1: anything in this situation. But he thinks it's better because
Speaker 1: people's freedom of like freedom is what is ruining society
Speaker 1: and his opinion, so that's where it gets like clearly
Speaker 1: we just don't even see eye to either. But yeah,
Speaker 1: so there's been a Silicon Valley. Peter Teel and others
Speaker 1: have promoted similar anti democratic sentiments. Must acquisition of Twitter
Speaker 1: and its transformation into X resembles a patch like governance experiment.
Speaker 1: I agree with that. I think that. That's definitely a Yeah,
Speaker 1: there's a slow roll in it in how it takes
Speaker 1: GARVN system closely resembles a modern neo feudal order, which
Speaker 1: with powerful sovereign lords ruling digital. Yeah, so it's like
Speaker 1: kind of like Game of Thrones, you know where you
Speaker 1: got all these different you know, you got the northern
Speaker 1: you know whatever, and you got the houses, you know,
Speaker 1: but instead it's ran by like corporate corporate patches easy.
Speaker 1: So yeah, it's very anti humanitarian and yeah, corporate tyranny
Speaker 1: is almost like a given with something like this, and
Speaker 1: uh yeah, it's just a dystoping world that I would
Speaker 1: not want to be in. And of course it would be,
Speaker 1: like we've mentioned, a very elitist situation. You know, you
Speaker 1: just got to be you better have your shit together
Speaker 1: before this takes place, because otherwise you're gonna get ground
Speaker 1: up and turn it into the diesel fuel, you know
Speaker 1: what I mean. Yeah, because think about it what I
Speaker 1: said about virtualizing people, Think about if they actually would
Speaker 1: spin the money to put people in the warehouse, pay
Speaker 1: for them to live in a virtual setting. No, why
Speaker 1: would they do that unless they can use you as
Speaker 1: a battery. So like in the matrix, there's no reason
Speaker 1: why they would profitably do it, and that's why he
Speaker 1: said the most profitable, profitable solution would be diesel fuel.
Speaker 1: But in my opinion, I think they would find a
Speaker 1: different way to use us. I think it would be
Speaker 1: just like the matrix, but they use us as a
Speaker 1: battery for this AI system because the human brain can
Speaker 1: produce how much electricity like a battery? Right, Fuck, you
Speaker 1: hook a bunch of them up. Now you're powering at
Speaker 1: least what a quarter of New York, you know, with
Speaker 1: like whatever, all the homeless. I mean, that's crazy, dude,
Speaker 1: But that's really like the kind of I think they
Speaker 1: really are trying to build this system. I think the
Speaker 1: idea behind our breakaway civilization underground shit. Maybe they want
Speaker 1: a nuclear fallout to happen so that way wipes out
Speaker 1: a bunch of people. Anyway, the ones left use them
Speaker 1: as fuel. The ones that are elite, they get to
Speaker 1: take and live in the patches and be great, and
Speaker 1: then you only got a few patches and you don't
Speaker 1: have to worry. But yeah, I think that it's very
Speaker 1: odd that that this guy has so much influence over
Speaker 1: people that are standing in the White House.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: But yeah, so Peter too will get more into him.
Speaker 1: We didn't really cover him too much. He stated that
Speaker 1: he no longer believes that freedom and democracy are compatible,
Speaker 1: and he has fund funded ventures and thinkers that promote
Speaker 1: post democratic governance models, which is jd Vance in my opinion.
Speaker 1: Like I said, he was backed by Teal in his
Speaker 1: Senate run, and he kind of Yeah, he really emphasizes
Speaker 1: themes of Jarvin and NRX playbook, which I haven't checked
Speaker 1: that out. I'll have to check out. The NRX must
Speaker 1: be a similar thing. But yeah, he emphasizes elite decay
Speaker 1: and state failure and the need for a strong leader.
Speaker 1: But yeah, I think that he's the guy that's supposed
Speaker 1: to uh bring us home in a lack of better terms,
Speaker 1: Peter Jadie Vance, Well yeah, Peter Tale put him, yeah exactly,
Speaker 1: But yeah, I mean, what the fuck? Yeah, dude, we
Speaker 1: just end up plugged in. But I just don't I
Speaker 1: just don't see, you know, that's what that half the
Speaker 1: trillion dollars had to have been for, for all that
Speaker 1: AI shit, Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 2: Jd Vance seems like he comes off as a good
Speaker 2: family guy, a family guy, not at all.
Speaker 1: Did you see all those videos, you don't.
Speaker 2: Think so, yeah, I don't think you didn't see him
Speaker 2: on the on his podcast.
Speaker 1: Run he looks contrived. Yeah, yes, he looks contrived in
Speaker 1: my opinion. I don't know. Uh, but you know, I
Speaker 1: mean whatever. You know, he's going to be the future president,
Speaker 1: so you know.
Speaker 2: Sorry, I guess we're gonna find out.
Speaker 1: But you know, I mean, dude, they're really heavy on
Speaker 1: the influencer thing. Like I saw Theovonn. He's out there
Speaker 1: hanging out with a Trump's daughter and uh her husband
Speaker 1: out They're chilling, Like, why is the Levonn hanging out
Speaker 1: with Trump's daughter and her husband?
Speaker 2: I saw that he was in a Qatar, That's.
Speaker 1: What I'm talking about. That's where they were.
Speaker 2: They were together, he was with him.
Speaker 1: He's like, what's going on? It's so weird.
Speaker 2: He was just out there.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Well, you know, kings, Kings used jesterres celebrities what
Speaker 1: we were in modern day celebrities. Gestures were used back
Speaker 1: in the day to kind of get the people to
Speaker 1: kind of like the king more and stuff. They weren't
Speaker 1: just used as like they were using as puppets. You know,
Speaker 1: they were used as puppets a.
Speaker 2: Lot costs due.
Speaker 1: I agree, I know, dude. And you know what's funny
Speaker 1: about this is when you look at the picture, it's
Speaker 1: so clear what's going on. This guy's sitting here, he's
Speaker 1: got he's got he's got a fat ass thing ice cream,
Speaker 1: he's got a big old slice of cake, and he's
Speaker 1: got like some other sweet treat and he's like hunched over,
Speaker 1: kind of like smiling at the camera. And then you
Speaker 1: look over at Trump's daughter and she's even mentioned in
Speaker 1: his post. He's like, man, I got to fix my
Speaker 1: posture because they were all sitting straight and all they
Speaker 1: had in front of them was like a slice of watermelon.
Speaker 1: And I'm like, they're just sitting there looking at this dude,
Speaker 1: like look at this fucking They just look at every
Speaker 1: American like this. They're like, look at this fucking fat slav.
Speaker 1: We're just gonna get this dumb fucker to do whatever
Speaker 1: we want, you know what I mean. Like it's so clear.
Speaker 2: Everything on the table, you all just got a piece
Speaker 2: of water melon.
Speaker 1: No, they were no, all those things were just in
Speaker 1: front of him, the cakes and the and the ice
Speaker 1: cream and the pudding and ship moose or whatever, like
Speaker 1: he had it all right here he had it. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it looked like they were like, come on here, like
Speaker 1: feeding him a butt and he's just sitting there like
Speaker 1: taking it like yeah, you know, and they're honey potting
Speaker 1: the fucking shit out of.
Speaker 2: Him, you know, made a cake for you.
Speaker 1: I'm super hot, smoke shell daughter, and then the antichrist
Speaker 1: husband of hers, Jared Kushner, is sitting right next to her,
Speaker 1: and it's like, you know, you got the intimidation, like
Speaker 1: through the roof, you're not going to be able to
Speaker 1: think straight. You're eating ice cream. Oh yeah, yeah, I'll
Speaker 1: do whatever you say. It's like you can't.
Speaker 2: I don't know.
Speaker 1: I'm obviously throwing out full conjecture, but I just think
Speaker 1: that was a very uh that was a weird picture.
Speaker 2: I bet you're in that situation. When they asked him
Speaker 2: to come out, He's probably like, can I even say no? Right? Exactly?
Speaker 1: What He's like, why would you want to say yes?
Speaker 1: Why would you want me to come that? Iel like exactly,
Speaker 1: And that's kind of the question. But whatever, I mean, whatever,
Speaker 1: who may whatever. But then here's the thing that came
Speaker 1: out of that. So Jared Kushner has a red bracelet
Speaker 1: on on his left hand. And so this is an
Speaker 1: indicator for if you're a part of like the cabal,
Speaker 1: or if you're into the Kabbala. Right. So, the Kabbala
Speaker 1: is what I've mentioned before. It's mystic judaism. It's very
Speaker 1: related to hermeticism, narcissism, freemasonry, it's all the little black
Speaker 1: magic shit that we talk about. Anyway, we'll get deeper
Speaker 1: into that sometime. I'm sure some of my listeners may
Speaker 1: have heard of this, but yeah, that red bracelet cabalistic.
Speaker 1: So then somebody points out that Ian Carroll has a
Speaker 1: red bracelet and this dude's like a conspiracy guy. So
Speaker 1: people are like, he must be controlled opposition. And Tucker
Speaker 1: Carlson has a red bracelet on his left or I
Speaker 1: don't know if it's but here's the thing Ian Carroll
Speaker 1: had on his right hand, and like, I don't know,
Speaker 1: I just think people are getting a little paranoid. But
Speaker 1: Jared Kushner one hundred percent, you know what I'm saying,
Speaker 1: Like that dude, Yeah, yeah, I don't trust him. He's
Speaker 1: literally trying to build like a resort in Gaza. He
Speaker 1: wants to just build like a huge nice real estate
Speaker 1: make billions off of people's death, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: that's what he's out to do, So I don't Yeah,
Speaker 1: he's of course terrible, but yeah, as far as like
Speaker 1: the Tucker Carlson one, maybe I don't know. After the
Speaker 1: out showns thing, that kind of threw me off because
Speaker 1: I really almost trusted the guy. But I think he's
Speaker 1: a part of it, but on a different level, like
Speaker 1: where he's supposed to help guide the right and what
Speaker 1: they're supposed to think and the conspiracy theorists and what
Speaker 1: they're supposed to think. And that's kind of Tucker Carlson's job,
Speaker 1: you know, because it's very clear that a lot of
Speaker 1: people don't trust anything. A lot of people are conspiracy
Speaker 1: theorists by nature now because they just can't trust anything.
Speaker 1: So many things have been wrong. But they know that,
Speaker 1: and they've got that nice and tidy and captured too,
Speaker 1: and so they feed a lot of bullshit and it
Speaker 1: works very well. That's why we are here to fucking
Speaker 1: blow that shit out the water, dude, you know, we
Speaker 1: don't play that shit. Who don't remember, Bill Cooper? How
Speaker 1: do you not remember if you were a newscaster in
Speaker 1: the eighties, as Tucker Carlson was how do you not
Speaker 1: remember Bill Cooper in the nineties who dies from the
Speaker 1: police predicting nine to eleven a few months before it happened,
Speaker 1: Like how and then how do you point out his
Speaker 1: adversary as being the guy that did it when he's
Speaker 1: the only guy alive. And in my opinion, I think
Speaker 1: he's alive because he was the conspiracy guy who was
Speaker 1: allowed to be alive, and he also had fed relation.
Speaker 1: He admits it though, because Alex Jones is smart, he
Speaker 1: gets ahead of it. My grandpa wasn't fed. He told me.
Speaker 1: He told me about everything that goes on in the government,
Speaker 1: and that's why I'm a conspiracy theorists. Like, Okay, maybe
Speaker 1: I don't know, but also he could be fed by
Speaker 1: the intelligence without even knowing it and just be repeating
Speaker 1: with you know, but I'm just saying Bill Cooper didn't
Speaker 1: do that. He went to fucking libraries and like dissected
Speaker 1: their own words and figured it out. Totally different type
Speaker 1: of dude. He didn't have insiders. But yeah, so all right,
Speaker 1: back to Curtis Drevin, just to reiterate, you don't get
Speaker 1: a vote, you get don't get a voice, You just
Speaker 1: exit the patch. If you don't like it, you just
Speaker 1: have a right to leave. And it sounds fine. It
Speaker 1: sounds fine in theory, but again there's no course of
Speaker 1: every patch becomes authoritarian or exploitative, and exit doesn't work
Speaker 1: when there's nowhere safe to go. So governments's corporations. If
Speaker 1: you live under government, they treats you like a customer,
Speaker 1: you also lose any moral or legal claims to rights.
Speaker 1: I just like to reiterate that because America is really
Speaker 1: the only place with rights, and this is a very
Speaker 1: slippery slope, and I'm about to get into how this
Speaker 1: looks exactly like what they're trying to make right now,
Speaker 1: I haven't quite got there yet, so I've kind of
Speaker 1: got there a little bit. But yeah, so anyways, the
Speaker 1: rise of the techno king class would kind of look
Speaker 1: like this. This vision kind of yeah, just unaccountable power
Speaker 1: to corporate elites, not just economic power, but absolute political sovereignty.
Speaker 1: So they kind of just, you know, nobody's electing these people.
Speaker 1: In Jarvins world, Peter Teal could be a king, Elon
Speaker 1: Musk a sovereign, Jeff Bezos a territorial overlord. Though it's
Speaker 1: not really meritocracy, it's an oligarchy dressed as innovation, and
Speaker 1: the most ruthless woke cap realizes technocrats become digital monarchs,
Speaker 1: but with share hold their governance, profit, Trump's morality and
Speaker 1: human rights are externalities, not obligations. So the elimination of
Speaker 1: public goods is very probable as well. In the more
Speaker 1: public education, healthcare, or infrastructure, unless you're local, sovereign decides
Speaker 1: it's cost effective. If you can't pay, you're not competitive,
Speaker 1: and in the patch market may be denied basic survival services.
Speaker 1: But the result is a tiered society of haves and
Speaker 1: have nots, which I've mentioned, where your dignity safety in
Speaker 1: future depends on your productivity. So yeah, I mean we're
Speaker 1: talking served them under a digital crown. That's pretty much
Speaker 1: what it is, you know. So yeah, total surveillance, you know,
Speaker 1: which is why I keep mentioning, you know, all these
Speaker 1: convenient things you're going to interlink one day and become
Speaker 1: one big control grid system. Patchwork cities, which are run
Speaker 1: like smart cities, would inevitably implement total surveillance predictive policing,
Speaker 1: which is Palentier. We can get more into Palenteer and
Speaker 1: what they actually do and how well it works if
Speaker 1: we have time today, but we will assume for sure otherwise.
Speaker 1: But yeah, automated governance is uh yeah, that's where we're
Speaker 1: headed now. And that was kind of part of the
Speaker 1: Doze situation as well. But disobedience isn't just punished, it's
Speaker 1: prevented through behavioral algorithms, digital ID systems, and loyalty scoring.
Speaker 1: So a citizen score is kind of what that is.
Speaker 1: Or your social credit score controls your access to everything, job, travel,
Speaker 1: even maybe water. So that's kind of what the real shit.
Speaker 1: This is why I started a podcast to talk dude.
Speaker 1: This is why I started a podcast to talk about
Speaker 1: this shit because if you haven't noticed, there's been documentaries
Speaker 1: talking about how water, you know, isn't going to be
Speaker 1: available for everybody. You know, They've made articles about how
Speaker 1: water isn't going to be available for long. Yes it will,
Speaker 1: but they want you to think that because they want
Speaker 1: this control over you. And that's what I'm saying, do
Speaker 1: not believe the propaganda. You know, the same thing with
Speaker 1: the carbon They want to do the carbon tax, so
Speaker 1: they can literally tax you for breathing. You breathe carbon,
Speaker 1: so they want to blame it on the cow's methane
Speaker 1: and this and that and carbon and all these different things. Whenever,
Speaker 1: all this carbon is just making the Earth more greener
Speaker 1: than it's ever been. It's literally got more floral like
Speaker 1: life than it's had. So don't believe the hype. I'm
Speaker 1: telling you, it's all just very highly actualized propaganda. But
Speaker 1: there's a big fragmentation of the humanity which will inevitably
Speaker 1: come out of this. And I think they're trying to
Speaker 1: organically engineer it. Not organically but me I make it
Speaker 1: happen now with people where wildly different ideologies, some libertarians,
Speaker 1: some theocratic or fascists just kind of like clash to
Speaker 1: the point where you just got to go on your
Speaker 1: own patch, you know, go to your own patch. You know,
Speaker 1: no universal human values, no common good, just cultural Darwinism,
Speaker 1: and the most efficient, brutal in appearing and appealing will
Speaker 1: be the one that wins. So it's just like the
Speaker 1: idea of business competition, right right, And so that's a
Speaker 1: little fucking scary, you know what I mean. But yeah,
Speaker 1: you don't rise through society, you flee to a better patch.
Speaker 1: It's just kind of once again, I just keep I
Speaker 1: guess reiterating that. But that's just I don't know, that's
Speaker 1: just crazy to me. Yeah, Arvin uses the language of
Speaker 1: tech to sell an ancient idea, feudalism. This is not
Speaker 1: a new idea, but this is just updated for the
Speaker 1: blockchain age. Instead of barons and vassals, we get CEOs
Speaker 1: and customers, and instead of castles we get smart cities.
Speaker 1: That of gulags, we get algorithmic exile.
Speaker 2: What the fuck does that even mean?
Speaker 1: Well, it's pretty much just like if you aren't doing
Speaker 1: hitting all the data points of being a good citizen,
Speaker 1: you don't get any conveniences of life, you don't get
Speaker 1: basic resources, don't get anything. Yeah, exactly. So it promises
Speaker 1: order but delivers voluntary slavery for the docile and exile
Speaker 1: for the disobedient. So people like me I would live
Speaker 1: the worst life in a place like this because I
Speaker 1: don't know how to not point out a unhumane system
Speaker 1: that literally gives no fuck about life. It just cares
Speaker 1: about whatever. I don't even know if it's power or
Speaker 1: control or this idea of a superiority complex over everybody
Speaker 1: else to the point where you want to control even
Speaker 1: the way they live. Very very crazy. I can't wrap
Speaker 1: my head around it. There is no place for an
Speaker 1: unproductive person in Arvin's model. So citizens are customers. You
Speaker 1: exist to contribute value, and if you don't, your liability.
Speaker 1: And there are no welfare systems, no public safety nets.
Speaker 1: The underclass isn't rehabilitated. It's priced out, ejected, or ignored.
Speaker 1: And that's kind of what I was getting at earlier
Speaker 1: with the virtualizing people and biodiesel fuels, all the fun stuff. Well,
Speaker 1: patches complete compete to attract the best users the naturally,
Speaker 1: they'll screen out the poor, the sick, disabled, and rebellious.
Speaker 1: It's just pretty much a terms of service society.
Speaker 2: They don't have any ramps for this new world order.
Speaker 1: They do not, so if yeah, dude, come on, that sucks.
Speaker 1: It's just inconveniences don't work well for companies, and I
Speaker 1: believe they would have the idea of exponential growth and
Speaker 1: profitability in some weird way, some social profitability, you know,
Speaker 1: which is fucking weird too. That freaks me out too,
Speaker 1: because when you look at the way a business interacts
Speaker 1: the lack of humanity leads it to just do things
Speaker 1: that are like yeah, when you when you elaborate to
Speaker 1: a social structure, I just couldn't imagine that going. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, it's just that's weird. But uh yeah, so yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean we're talking about every dystopian movie made. You know,
Speaker 1: police state by default, liberty is a luxury reserved for
Speaker 1: high status, compliant and productive citizens, and it doesn't have
Speaker 1: an obligation to the poor anymore. And if you're a threat,
Speaker 1: you can just get plugged in.
Speaker 2: You may be used as a battery. Yeah, run in
Speaker 2: an old nine vault.
Speaker 1: Yeah. And one can see how a society built off
Speaker 1: of like, oh are you performing well? Like you could
Speaker 1: have people policing other people, because think about the workplace
Speaker 1: where somebody's like working their ass off and then they
Speaker 1: look at somebody not working their ass off and they
Speaker 1: automatically get that resentment. Ye, now elaborate on the social
Speaker 1: structure where the whole society's based off of system like
Speaker 1: that and when you see somebody you just you just
Speaker 1: automatic it turns into a self policing society.
Speaker 2: Well there's gonna be tons of snitches.
Speaker 1: Right, and that's that's the point, you know, And this
Speaker 1: is full on orwell you in nineteen eighty four, shit
Speaker 1: right here, this is you know, it's a classic book.
Speaker 1: I mean a lot of people have heard about it,
Speaker 1: read about it. You got to if you haven't, Yeah,
Speaker 1: do so good. What we want we may even go
Speaker 1: into that book sometimes just to compare it to this episode.
Speaker 1: I mean, we should really the next episode for our
Speaker 1: chill cast, we should really just talk about Orwell in
Speaker 1: his book, in all this Huxley's book, and then just
Speaker 1: show how this is a perfect blend of the two.
Speaker 1: But that's going on. But yeah, so pretty much we're
Speaker 1: talking about a world without mercy. I don't know, let's
Speaker 1: go into the virtualizing the underclass, because I do want
Speaker 1: to quote it. You could take the entire underclass of Washington,
Speaker 1: DC and virtualize them, meaning move them into virtual reality
Speaker 1: and give them something to do there. He's proposing to
Speaker 1: remove them from society, plug them into a matrix like existence,
Speaker 1: and effectively warehouse them in a simulated world where pretty
Speaker 1: much they no longer or interfere with the sovereign patch.
Speaker 1: It's a digital gulag, that's what we're getting at. That's
Speaker 1: what I'm saying.
Speaker 2: We're all stuck in that one game where you're just
Speaker 2: a gorilla.
Speaker 1: Yeah yeah, yeah, dude, I mean, yeahing around we know
Speaker 1: that people are batteries cells. You know, That's why I
Speaker 1: bring up the matrix documentary aspect to this, because yeah,
Speaker 1: that's weird. Yeah, but what's the most efficient thing to
Speaker 1: do with a permanently unproductive turn them into biodiesel question mark?
Speaker 1: In context, it reflects broader ethic of his system, because yeah,
Speaker 1: I get it, it's dark humor. But people are not inherently
Speaker 1: inherently valuable, is what he's saying, And their resources to
Speaker 1: be optimized, neutralized, or consumed. They can't be virtualized, disciplined,
Speaker 1: or expelled. They might as well be converted into energy,
Speaker 1: a final insult in the commodification of life. This echoes
Speaker 1: the logic of genocidal regimes rebranded in postmodern language, human
Speaker 1: beings reduced to inputs in a machine.
Speaker 2: Because what resource have they probably used? I mean a
Speaker 2: ton of they've probably used tons of resources. But what
Speaker 2: resource have they not necessarily gotten too deep into that
Speaker 2: still exists on this planet?
Speaker 1: Oil?
Speaker 2: Us?
Speaker 1: US. Yeah, that's a fact, you're so right about that.
Speaker 1: I mean, they really have just been trying to figure
Speaker 1: out way to resource us. I mean they've really done
Speaker 1: a great job of getting us used to this idea
Speaker 1: of economic slavery through credit card systems. They've done a
Speaker 1: great job where they've normalized that so well that I
Speaker 1: can see this world's coming about because people are okay
Speaker 1: with owing everything for everything they own, quote unquote own
Speaker 1: that they really don't own. So then when you tell
Speaker 1: them you don't really own this digital currency, you just
Speaker 1: have to behave and everything will be fine. But it like, hey,
Speaker 1: I mean, we're just twenty not to kill anybody, right
Speaker 1: at first, that's kind of what we're talking about. But
Speaker 1: when people are used to the fact that, like, you know, oh,
Speaker 1: I got to pay my mortgage and fall the rules
Speaker 1: from my house or I'll lose my house. So this
Speaker 1: is no different. This is the kind of slippery slope
Speaker 1: we're talking about where it's like, okay, we're talking about
Speaker 1: like a whole society that was built off freedom because
Speaker 1: they understand the slippery slopes of what you're playing with,
Speaker 1: and we're only two hundred years away, and it's like
Speaker 1: people just forget, yeah, completely forget. Machiavelianism is a very
Speaker 1: old concept that I'm sure people have heard about, but
Speaker 1: it seems to rear its head again and again because
Speaker 1: in Yarvin's mottol of governance. It's just a belief on efficiency,
Speaker 1: order in hierarchy, trump all moral considerations. And you know,
Speaker 1: you know, like I said, the fate is a mereagerial
Speaker 1: decision and not a societal concern. Your life has no
Speaker 1: intrinsic meaning beyond what the sovereign state can't extract from you.
Speaker 1: So it's just a high tech caste system. Macavelli's ruthlessness,
Speaker 1: a little bit of great man warship, which is like
Speaker 1: this idea of like great thinkers or who we have
Speaker 1: to follow and they should lead us and they should
Speaker 1: be the leaders. Well that is freemasonry one on one,
Speaker 1: and hops in anti democratic libertarianism and as well as
Speaker 1: a dash of the techno fascism that we were talking about.
Speaker 1: But this is uh, some wild shit man. Whenever I
Speaker 1: read the patchwork, I legitimately almost teared up. Yeah legit,
Speaker 1: I don't. I mean, I've it wasn't meant to be
Speaker 1: fucking sad, you know what I'm saying. Like, I legitimately
Speaker 1: read this book or the blog, whatever you want to
Speaker 1: call it, and as I'm reading it, I got to
Speaker 1: the part where he was just, I mean, just the
Speaker 1: way this guy talks and I'm like, man, he's got
Speaker 1: good points, and I understand where he's coming from, and
Speaker 1: I can see why he's so elusive, or not elusive
Speaker 1: that's the wrong word. Why he's so like I don't know.
Speaker 1: He kind of pulls you into, uh, his philosophies. But
Speaker 1: then you just kind of like you can if you
Speaker 1: really look at it from an objective point where you
Speaker 1: don't feel like you're above anybody, and you really look
Speaker 1: at it from a humility standpoint of everybody's equal and
Speaker 1: I love all people. Dude, you'll fucking tear up reading
Speaker 1: what he has to say, because I mean, he clearly
Speaker 1: does not care. It's just so clear, I mean, the
Speaker 1: lack of yeah. And I guess maybe partly why I
Speaker 1: teared up is because I do understand the connection with
Speaker 1: these other people and their position of power, and the
Speaker 1: oddities with the fact that Elon ends up in the
Speaker 1: White House and he's got a book that predicts him
Speaker 1: making a technic, technocratic state on Mars and just weird
Speaker 1: things that when you believe that they make this themselves
Speaker 1: and kind of pre predict their own future and kind
Speaker 1: of make shit. I don't know, it's just like, fuck, man,
Speaker 1: am I really living through the biggest transition of human
Speaker 1: history and do like the one of the largest slavery
Speaker 1: movements probably ever, if not period, you know what I mean?
Speaker 1: Like I just couldn't imagine, Like I don't know, We'll see,
Speaker 1: but it's just gonna look like it's gonna look like
Speaker 1: one where like like Blade Runner, where people feel happy
Speaker 1: and free but they're not, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: And you have this this satisfying synthetic version of love
Speaker 1: with this fake virtual persons, you know what I mean,
Speaker 1: Like that ship. Yeah, dude, I mean that's kind of
Speaker 1: right where we are almost at.
Speaker 2: I hate to do this to you and the listeners,
Speaker 2: but I gotta bring up Transformers again. Transformers three, dude.
Speaker 2: The tire idea is them. I mean, there's a little
Speaker 2: bit more to it with technology like that they that
Speaker 2: they stored on the Moon and stuff like that, but
Speaker 2: the idea was that they were going to bring Cybertron
Speaker 2: here to use humans as slaves to rebuild their planet
Speaker 2: that was war torn.
Speaker 1: Wow. So I wonder, you know, like what are we
Speaker 1: and what do we get into, Like do we get
Speaker 1: into what Transformers is about? I mean, what are they
Speaker 1: talking about.
Speaker 2: As freaking robots coming from Cybertron, and like you know,
Speaker 2: they got to leave with the said. I mean, there's
Speaker 2: a whole lord to it. It is. There's probably could
Speaker 2: be underlying messages, you know what they're trying.
Speaker 1: To check it out. Let's do it.
Speaker 2: What it is on the surface is badass robots. It is.
Speaker 1: It is for sure. So let's do this because I
Speaker 1: do believe that the old gods are going to come
Speaker 1: back through this new technology. I do believe that they're
Speaker 1: trying to manifest it through this way in some weird way.
Speaker 1: I think there's some weird like spiritual aspect to this
Speaker 1: for sure. And so let's look at the occult aspects
Speaker 1: and esoteric messaging and Transformers see if it doesn't match
Speaker 1: up with what we're hunting kind of talking about it
Speaker 1: a little bit, Well maybe not. I'll have to do
Speaker 1: it from that aspect. But anyway, Apertron is a mechanical
Speaker 1: planet home of the Transformers, but it's portrayed as a
Speaker 1: fallen or exiled world much like the Lucifer or Prometheus
Speaker 1: and esoteric lore. It echoes Saturn symbolism, mechanical time, cold
Speaker 1: distant authoritarian rule, especially in its depiction is a dying
Speaker 1: world governed by ancient codes. The all spark divine cube
Speaker 1: parallels the Saturn cube neo cult traditions. Come on, dude,
Speaker 1: this is perfect. Optimist Prime would be the solar Christ archetype, right,
Speaker 1: so you got the you got that Luciferian archetype, and
Speaker 1: then you have the sacrificial savior, the Christ light bearer,
Speaker 1: but not Luciferian archetype of Optimist Prime. That's badass. His
Speaker 1: resurrection mirrors the death rebirth cycle found in the Mystery
Speaker 1: School initiation, Egyptian Osyrus myths and their hermetic traditions.
Speaker 2: Weird that his resurrection happens in the second movie where
Speaker 2: they are fighting in Egypt.
Speaker 1: In the temple, just like an initiation in the temple is.
Speaker 2: A cover up to cover a big ass machine that
Speaker 2: harnesses the sun. Right, the power of the sun to
Speaker 2: then fuel more transformers.
Speaker 1: And yeah, that idea the power of the sun is
Speaker 1: one hundred percent esoteric as well. Prime suggests primordial source
Speaker 1: like logos, the divine word or source to make could
Speaker 1: try and offer rebels against the natural order, mirroring Lucifer's
Speaker 1: rebellion against the divine. Wow, that's crazy anyway, his disciples
Speaker 1: reflect Nephilin archetypes, giants, hybrid beings weren't from forbidden knowledge,
Speaker 1: the all Spark and matrix of leadership, gnostic divine spark.
Speaker 1: The all spark gives life to machines like the Divine Spark.
Speaker 1: And yeah, the major Yeah, that's pretty crazy.
Speaker 2: Transformers goes deep. Man. The lore is wild, and I
Speaker 2: guess it is pretty insane how you can relate it
Speaker 2: to some of this stuff. Like I said, on the surface,
Speaker 2: it's just badass robots fighting and ship exact conflict and stuff,
Speaker 2: you know.
Speaker 1: And I always thought of the Nephilin man or the
Speaker 1: Anunaki or whatever you want to say, whenever it came
Speaker 1: to Transformers. I could always see that for sure. Uh yeah,
Speaker 1: so no, I mean kind of when I was getting
Speaker 1: A's just the fact that no matter where you look,
Speaker 1: you always see this idea of a secret government, cabal
Speaker 1: system and their ideas and their philosophies are always put
Speaker 1: into movies and it's pretty funny. But yeah, so yeah,
Speaker 1: we'll see about the patchwork system if that ends up happening.
Speaker 1: I think that's definitely something to watch for with Dants,
Speaker 1: Definitely something I would check out. If I was you, all,
Speaker 1: everything I've been mentioning definitely worth seeing about. And yeah,
Speaker 1: I'll take the time right now to be like, Yo,
Speaker 1: you wanna comment or anything, it'd be awesome. We do
Speaker 1: need a little bit of love, you know from some people,
Speaker 1: you know, give us a little shout out so we
Speaker 1: can kind of know where to go as far as
Speaker 1: what you're interested in. And also it helps us. We
Speaker 1: did make a little TikTok. We've been like, I've been
Speaker 1: making some little random AI videos just based off like
Speaker 1: what we talk about till we get a camera for
Speaker 1: our pots cast and been trying to get some more
Speaker 1: eyes over here, you know, so you guys can have
Speaker 1: some friends to hang out and talk to in the
Speaker 1: comment section as well. But yeah, so we'll try to
Speaker 1: get We're trying to get it going. Man, We're doing
Speaker 1: our best. But yeah, so Volenteer predictive policing, I think
Speaker 1: we should at least touch on that because I did
Speaker 1: mention it earlier. I don't know if you're familiar with
Speaker 1: volunteer and what it's role in predicted policing is.
Speaker 2: I think we touched on it on the episode that
Speaker 2: got ruined.
Speaker 1: Okay, well this Volunteer company was founded by Peter Teel
Speaker 1: his name comes up again, wow, co founder at PayPal
Speaker 1: and close ideological Outlive. Curtis Jarvin and Elon Muss started
Speaker 1: pay Pal with him. So back early on in in
Speaker 1: q Tel, which is the CIA's venture capital arm. Inqtel
Speaker 1: is also the people who funded the cloning of the
Speaker 1: dire Wolves recently. Just so you know, this is the
Speaker 1: stuff that the CIA has got their venture capitalist funding.
Speaker 1: So developed originally for military grade intelligence operations in Iraq,
Speaker 1: counterinsurgency and pattern recognition lo and behold it's developed for
Speaker 1: terrorists and why wouldn't it be used on us? Later
Speaker 1: exported to domestic law enforcement, government surveillance, and corporate control systems.
Speaker 1: Volunteer's mission is to connect the dots between people, events,
Speaker 1: and data points. What is predictive policing predict where crimes
Speaker 1: will occur, who is likely to commit them, and where
Speaker 1: law enforcement resources should be deployed. Supposedly prevents crime, but
Speaker 1: in practice targets the poor, minorities and marginalized communities, and
Speaker 1: also creates feedback loops where past policing patterns are used
Speaker 1: to justify future crackdowns. And it does enable pre crime surveillance,
Speaker 1: monitoring people before they do anything.
Speaker 2: So essentially how they predict the weather, but with p
Speaker 2: people in crime.
Speaker 1: Yeah, exactly. And Los Angeles lapd us Polentteer's tools with
Speaker 1: a program called Laser which assigned chronic offender scores to
Speaker 1: individuals based on associations and data profiles. And New Orleans
Speaker 1: and Chicago will threaten on this too. Secret Palateer program
Speaker 1: was used to analyze social networks and predict gang activity
Speaker 1: without the public or city council being informed. So currently
Speaker 1: in our day and age, right now, they're doing things
Speaker 1: without telling us, just like they do with mk Ultra.
Speaker 1: So people that like to act like oh they they
Speaker 1: would tell us now, even though you know, as if
Speaker 1: somehow they're just more transparent nowadays, that's just not the case.
Speaker 1: In Chicago. Palanteer tools have been quietly adopted in many
Speaker 1: cities under homeland security grants or counter terrorism initiatives. It's
Speaker 1: always under the guise of national security that they will
Speaker 1: roll out some kind of surveillance technology the same way
Speaker 1: they do with the Patriot Act. We're gonna hammer that
Speaker 1: all the time. We either do pattern recognition, target scoring,
Speaker 1: preemptive action, detaining and modernoring individuals who've done nothing wrong
Speaker 1: based solely on algorithmic forecasts. This is why I'm getting
Speaker 1: out with the whole AI just taking stats and then
Speaker 1: deciding what to do about it and preemptively making terrible
Speaker 1: decisions all the time, dangerous, dystopian, no transparency, no due process,
Speaker 1: built in bias, permanent surveillance state, and people live under
Speaker 1: constant data driven suspicion. So I just think that this
Speaker 1: is just outrageous. I mean, this is one hundred percent
Speaker 1: of the police state for the patch system. They're making
Speaker 1: smart cities for the patch system. They got vans here.
Speaker 1: He's gonna slow roll us into it. He's got Trump,
Speaker 1: the ballsy motherfucker that's willing to get every country on
Speaker 1: board with it. That's clearly what he's doing right now.
Speaker 1: He's making a huge, you know, crusade across the world
Speaker 1: with people making sure that everything is lined up the
Speaker 1: way it needs to be for this new technocratic state.
Speaker 1: And I just think so transparent, so obvious.
Speaker 2: You think the building blocks are already placed or is
Speaker 2: that what they're doing right now? Uh?
Speaker 1: The ones that aren't are being placed now. Yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: fast tracked. It's all fast track, and I think the
Speaker 1: other the last time there was a fast track was COVID.
Speaker 1: This was the last fast track whenever five G came out.
Speaker 1: This was, if you really think about it, project warp speed.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean it's literally the first fast track system to
Speaker 1: this technocratic state. Whenever you look at Trump's first presidency
Speaker 1: under this light from a rejective point of view, yeah,
Speaker 1: he was starting what we're seeing now finally come to fruition.
Speaker 1: He did a great job. Yeah, distract everybody with q
Speaker 1: ANDON and COVID and everything else and roll out this system.
Speaker 1: At the same time, you get everybody on the right
Speaker 1: had left on board with this destabilizing of your current government,
Speaker 1: remaking of it. The right would have been super scared
Speaker 1: to remake the government before q and on and before COVID.
Speaker 1: But because of Trump pointing out fake news, you know,
Speaker 1: all these problems in the government, it made it to
Speaker 1: where you could change it all. And the left already
Speaker 1: wanted it to be changed. Of course they didn't want
Speaker 1: him doing it, but they didn't want changes. And so
Speaker 1: it's kind of perfect because now they have created this
Speaker 1: infrastructure and here we are and now we're figuring it out.
Speaker 1: What eight years later. Took a while, took the minute.
Speaker 2: Took a minute for people to open their eyes or
Speaker 2: at least to start looking.
Speaker 1: And where you and I are some of the first.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't say some of the first. I mean there's
Speaker 1: plenty that have known that are deep into this for
Speaker 1: a very long time. But for the average person, I
Speaker 1: mean most people haven't really. Yeah, I mean they're just
Speaker 1: figuring it out and not exactly this deep with all
Speaker 1: the players and what the system agenda is supposed to
Speaker 1: be and what it's supposed to look like. I mean,
Speaker 1: accelerationism is everything I just described to you, and they're
Speaker 1: doing it right in from of ours. It's actually crazy
Speaker 1: to watch. But what's it look like on the other
Speaker 1: end is my question?
Speaker 2: Yeah? What does it look like when they finally they
Speaker 2: got all the building blocks in place and then they're
Speaker 2: finally building this house around us? What is that gonna
Speaker 2: look like? Really like a boy's home. It's gonna be
Speaker 2: pretty rough out there.
Speaker 1: It's gonna look like a boy's home. You know, it's
Speaker 1: not gonna be it's gonna be like that hard knock
Speaker 1: life song. You know it's yeah, dude, yeah, but you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know, hopefully not. You know, the whole point
Speaker 1: is to get communal, get self sustainable, decentralize, get out
Speaker 1: of this system, don't give in, use cash as much
Speaker 1: as you can, unplug your internet at night, do these
Speaker 1: things to try to help yourself. And that's all we
Speaker 1: can do. We just got to keep talking about it
Speaker 1: and get it out there and shared, like follow all
Speaker 1: that good stuff for this because we definitely want to
Speaker 1: get the word out. We want to keep doing some
Speaker 1: more episodes. We definitely want to get off of this
Speaker 1: topic a little bit, but we did want to lay
Speaker 1: the foundation for what sixty agenda is. I think we've
Speaker 1: done that MK Ultra military Satanism. You got you know,
Speaker 1: generals to go from Satanists to military, and then the
Speaker 1: military goes intelligence and trains them on all this stuff.
Speaker 1: And now we're in a digital world where everything's fully streamlined.
Speaker 1: And here we are now we've explained all that. Now,
Speaker 1: whenever we talk about the next whatever, I think we've
Speaker 1: laid down good foundation for you to really understand like
Speaker 1: where we're coming from. Now we'll probably get into philosophies
Speaker 1: of Freemasons, probably getting to hermeticism. I like to get
Speaker 1: real deep into all that fun secret society philosophy shit
Speaker 1: that they're into. It's very informative, intriguing and lets you
Speaker 1: in their head look forward to that. Thank you so much,
Speaker 1: it's been another episode sixte agenda. They crispy out there,
Speaker 1: put in the putt, putt, putt,