Stay Free - Russel Brand - September 18, 2025


Faith, Power & Chaos: My Conversation With Nick Fuentes - SF636


Episode Stats


Length

53 minutes

Words per minute

173.53305

Word count

9,365

Sentence count

435

Harmful content

Misogyny

3

sentences flagged

Toxicity

21

sentences flagged

Hate speech

11

sentences flagged


Summary

Summaries generated with gmurro/bart-large-finetuned-filtered-spotify-podcast-summ .

Nick Fuentes joins Russell Brand to discuss the death of Charlie Kirk, the protests in the UK over the weekend, and the possibility of divine intervention by the Jewish state in the case of the murder of a prominent American journalist.

Transcript

Transcripts from "Stay Free - Russel Brand" are sourced from the Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool. Explore them interactively here.
Misogyny classifications generated with MilaNLProc/bert-base-uncased-ear-misogyny .
Toxicity classifications generated with s-nlp/roberta_toxicity_classifier .
Hate speech classifications generated with facebook/roberta-hate-speech-dynabench-r4-target .
00:00:07.000 Ladies and gentlemen, Russell Brandon.
00:00:10.000 Russell conspiracy theory.
00:00:12.000 Trying to bring real journalism to the American people.
00:00:16.000 Hello, you awakening wonders.
00:00:18.000 Thanks for joining me today for Stay Free with Russell Brand.
00:00:21.000 I'll be talking to Nick Fuentes.
00:00:22.000 Don't think I'm not self-conscious about not having a shirt on.
00:00:25.000 I am a bit, but I don't know, man.
00:00:27.000 I favor authenticity over a lot of other values.
00:00:30.000 That doesn't mean I'm not sometimes duplicitous, disingenuous and dishonest.
00:00:34.000 Of course I am.
00:00:35.000 I'm fallen and I fall into dishonesty frequently.
00:00:37.000 But today, in my conversation with Nick Fuentes, I tried my best to follow the line.
00:00:42.000 Indeed, if there's a moment that defined that interview, it's the one where I say to Nick Fuentes, I want to be, I don't want to be like some kind of Mrs. Doubtfire, where over here I'm talking to people that are Jewish and I'm saying, yes, no, well, of course, after all, of course you deserve a homeland. 0.99
00:00:57.000 And yes, and I don't want to be over here saying like, um, oh, it's terrible what's going on in Gaza.
00:01:02.000 Isn't that what integrity means?
00:01:04.000 That we are integrated, that we are fully integrated with ourselves and with our Lord, and please God, with one another.
00:01:11.000 So we have a pretty good conversation.
00:01:12.000 We talk about the significance, obviously of Charlie Kirk's death.
00:01:15.000 We talk about the uh protests in the UK over the weekend.
00:01:19.000 Indeed, if I may be so bold, I think that in this conversation with agitator Nick Fuentes, who I've seen described in liberal and sort of leftist circles in the most um discriminatory and um condemnatory terms.
00:01:33.000 I tried to have a good faith conversation, and I think that we discovered in it some important points about how modern media is impacting power, and that the defining attribute of modern media, using Malcolm McLuhan's famous edict, which Nick Fuentes cited,
00:01:49.000 the medium is a message, is that if the medium is the message in the old days meant the medium is print media and TV, that means it's centralized and it's controlled, either state or commercial, and these days we have diffuse decentralized media, then we're living in a time of pivotal change,
00:02:06.000 and Charlie Kirk's murder is an indicator of those changing power dynamics, ongoing attempts to centralize, control and sanitize information, regardless of whether you think what qualities or uh assets, attributes you assign to his murderer.
00:02:25.000 The fact, the absolute fact, the key fact, the important fact, is that he, Charlie Kirk, among others, is a modern phenomena of new technology, primarily, even though Charlie Kirk's views are sort of very traditional in a bunch of ways.
00:02:42.000 He's a modern phenomena.
00:02:44.000 I think you'll like this conversation.
00:02:45.000 If you're watching us on YouTube, my understanding is that Nick Fuente's content is heavily censored there.
00:02:51.000 And I must say, I don't think that's right at all.
00:02:54.000 I don't think that's right at all, but I would think that whoever I was talking to, unless they were shirtlessly screaming obscenities about one ethnicity or a particular ideology or an individual.
00:03:07.000 I really am learning that there is only one authority.
00:03:12.000 That authority is not human, nor can it be.
00:03:16.000 Okay, so here's the conversation.
00:03:17.000 If you're watching this anywhere other than uh Rumble, click over and join us on Rumble because it's uh too hotly contested and controversial to put anywhere else.
00:03:25.000 And if you don't have Rumble Premium yet, get Rumble Premium now because I financially benefit from that, as well as in a more general sense, it consolidates my audience and means that I have some uh ongoing influence even as I face criminal trials in the United Kingdom, civil trials in the United States, spiritual trials, every second of my waking life, but we rejoice when we face trials of any kind.
00:03:54.000 Here's me talking to Nick Fuentes.
00:03:59.000 I'm joined by Nick Fuentes.
00:04:01.000 Hello, Nick.
00:04:02.000 Hello.
00:04:04.000 Thanks for thanks for uh coming on here today.
00:04:07.000 I suppose the uh the main things that I'll want to talk about is our mutual and shared love of our Saviour Jesus.
00:04:16.000 I'll if he's okay with you, I'll want to talk about some people um connecting the uh assassin of Charlie Kirk to your work, but I've only seen that in particular places on the left.
00:04:28.000 You're um very, I thought, dignified uh uh uh obituary or acknowledgement, rather, of uh Charlie Kirk's death.
00:04:40.000 Perhaps we'll very s I suppose with a whatever level of sensitivity we consider to be appropriate, discuss what Candace Owens has been saying about the potential attempt to intervention into Charlie Kirk's life by uh what do we say powers or connected to Israel?
00:05:00.000 And then I I reckon it'll probably naturally lead to us talking about uh the political and religious entity of Israel, uh, so that I can sort of better understand it and we'll just see what comes out of that naturally, shall we?
00:05:16.000 All right, mate.
00:05:16.000 So we'll fully, yeah, sounds good.
00:05:19.000 Well, thanks, Nick Fuentes.
00:05:20.000 Well, look, one of the things I know about you is that you are very, very uh overt and passionate and clear about what you believe in, and certainly that seems to succeed in the media space that we all operate in now.
00:05:34.000 I've got to say that uh when um even actually prior to Charlie Kirk's assassination, that very day, in fact, I was doing a live stream, and I felt like I can't keep doing this.
00:05:44.000 I can't keep having these kind of conversations and endlessly pontificate in on cyclical, a cyclical news agenda, whether it's Putin meeting G, I don't know whether a sort of near-peer alliances across the world, if that is good or bad for people in general when compared to American imperialism.
00:06:02.000 Then, like um Israel had killed some Hamas leadership in Qatar, I think, and uh Russia had bombed Poland a little bit, or at least some missiles are gonna publish territory.
00:06:12.000 And I felt like, look, this is also complicated.
00:06:15.000 I don't know, I don't know what to say.
00:06:16.000 And uh and then married to that, Nick, I was thinking about like everything that gets thrown into the maelstrom of our culture, whether it's cracker barrel change in its logo or things that are more impactful and significant, is so divisive and utilized, and I felt a little bit exhausted by it.
00:06:31.000 How do you feel like do you think that like Charlie Kirk is almost a princess Diana moment of like a sort of a sort of in some places unearned sentimentality, in other places very real grief, in other places exploitation, in other places more division?
00:06:46.000 Does this feel to you um as objectively as you can be to be a sort of a significant moment, an epochal moment even?
00:06:54.000 And do you feel um emboldened by it, uh encouraged in some way by the response, or does it make you feel kind of exhausted?
00:07:05.000 Well, it's it's always difficult to say so soon after it happens because in the moment it feels like the biggest thing, and it seems that the world will never be the same.
00:07:16.000 Uh, but of course, we've seen a lot of things like that over the years, and we hardly even remember them years later.
00:07:21.000 I think about like the pandemic as an example.
00:07:23.000 Some days I wake up, you forget that even happened.
00:07:26.000 And that was such a and obviously had ripple effects, but um, you know, do they have a grip on us sentimentally years later?
00:07:33.000 Not as much, but I do think it is um a truly significant moment in politics.
00:07:40.000 I think that for political people, especially for young people, I think it is going to have a chain reaction.
00:07:46.000 And the question is whether that's going to be good or bad.
00:07:49.000 I think this is part of a larger trend of uh political violence on the left.
00:07:54.000 Um, and usually I'm not that guy.
00:07:56.000 I'm not the right-left guy.
00:07:58.000 I try to be a little bit more um profound than the the partisan kind of thing.
00:08:03.000 But you of course it draws obvious comparisons to the Luigi Mangione shooting, to the Trump shooting last year, um, and as well to the school shootings by many uh similar individuals, you know, whether they're trans or whether they're um, you know, other kinds of extremists, weird spirituality kind of stuff.
00:08:23.000 Um so I I think what people are saying about this, maybe the big picture on all of it, is what is happening to the young people online and with politics.
00:08:33.000 And this is kind of like the it's like a violent assertion of the nihilism that we see on the internet in the real world.
00:08:42.000 It's something that is like unseen.
00:08:44.000 A lot of older people don't understand it.
00:08:46.000 Uh, but there's something really wrong here.
00:08:49.000 Um and so I think this is maybe a visible and profound expression of it where it entered the real world.
00:08:55.000 Maybe that's gonna be the legacy here.
00:08:58.000 I think that's an excellent assessment, Yes, something that we've all become accustomed to online, vitriol, invective, somehow safely contained within the screen, a kind of like methadone rage that's not gonna really hurt anyone except for maybe your feelings if you read too much of it has now had real life consequences, I would agree.
00:09:18.000 Now, uh, do you how do you connect it to what seems to be a broader trend?
00:09:22.000 The online media pundits, commentators, influencers, and activists, a category that would include to varying degrees, certainly Charlie Kirk, yourself, and even me, perhaps, uh, and the direct impact of these voices on meaningful political outcomes.
00:09:41.000 Do you feel, Nick, that in part the big sh uh one of the larger struggles that may be defining our culture is this attempt to manage and continue to centralize information as technology affords a kind of information the aspora?
00:10:00.000 Do you think this do you think in short, aside from your assessment that it's likely by your analysis, although we've mentioned that other people are saying it's like literally a fan of yours?
00:10:09.000 I mean, I don't know, because I like, you know, I don't trust no one, basically really.
00:10:12.000 Um so I'm not like I'm not trying to push that on you, and I don't figure you'd care.
00:10:16.000 You seem like a pretty bold man.
00:10:17.000 Um do you feel that Charlie Kirk's murder is in a way part of this sort of somewhat nebulous, but also general struggle to control information that leads sometimes to outliers,
00:10:37.000 again, that would include you, me and Charlie, being either smeared, attacked, or shut down, because whether you agree with you on things, and certainly I'm sure we'll discuss some of the things that you and I disagree on, that the people that have most the institutions that have most to lose from this cut new discourse are old systems of authority that are struggling to cope with a new information landscape.
00:10:59.000 I I absolutely do, and it's it's interesting that you say that because who is being blamed for the murder?
00:11:06.000 Let's set aside for a moment who actually did it and people's thoughts on it.
00:11:10.000 What is the perception of the public?
00:11:13.000 People think on the right that it was a radical leftist on Discord, uh sexual deviant, you know, transgender, a furry, uh, someone from anti-fi, anti-fascist, a communist.
00:11:24.000 What do people on the left believe? 0.92
00:11:26.000 It's the Nazis. 0.84
00:11:27.000 They think it's people further to the right than Charlie Kirk, who hated him for being too moderate.
00:11:32.000 And if you look at the polling, the young people are very convinced.
00:11:36.000 The right's convinced it's the far left, the left is convinced it's the far right.
00:11:40.000 And I can't help but notice that when people blamed me, it was so effective.
00:11:47.000 It's possible that it was organic, but it seemed to me like it came from the top down.
00:11:52.000 It seemed to me like this was a narrative that was pushed in an organized way, just based on how quickly and how how much saturation it achieved in a short time.
00:12:02.000 Although it's possible it's the madness of the crowds and a crisis like this.
00:12:06.000 And you have to wonder, when you look at society, it's not static, it's dynamic.
00:12:12.000 People talk about a pendulum swinging back and forth or a dialectic.
00:12:15.000 There's sort of a thesis, an antithesis.
00:12:17.000 What is on the other side of what we're seeing now?
00:12:21.000 Who is being blamed?
00:12:22.000 The far right, the far left, foreign powers.
00:12:25.000 On the other side of that conversation is a call for something like digital ID, something like censorship, central I. We can't let radical political thought fester.
00:12:36.000 We can't let foreign intel manipulate us. 0.93
00:12:39.000 So what's the answer?
00:12:40.000 There needs to be a regulated media environment.
00:12:43.000 So I do suspect that there is something very dark and sinister happening.
00:12:48.000 And you hit the nail on the head.
00:12:50.000 It actually does have to do with information and who controls the dissemination of information.
00:12:55.000 So that that's spot on, and that's like next level.
00:12:58.000 Um that that's gotta be the next conversation on this.
00:13:01.000 We can't make this content without the support of our financial partners.
00:13:04.000 That's simply the nature of the deal that we have with Rumble.
00:13:07.000 I have a minimum guarantee.
00:13:08.000 We sell advertising space on the channel, and that goes towards the money that I get from Rumble.
00:13:14.000 That don't mean though that I don't believe in these messages.
00:13:17.000 Indeed, I have commercial relationships with partners whose products I believe and I pray will be of some benefit to you if they are.
00:13:26.000 Buy them, do me a favor.
00:13:29.000 You poor, and you've got to do something about it.
00:13:32.000 Getting rich in 2025 is actually simpler than most people think.
00:13:35.000 Is it?
00:13:35.000 You don't need years of experience or a fancy degree from Harvard that leaves you in debt.
00:13:39.000 You can actually start earning in a few weeks.
00:13:41.000 Whether it's a high paying job or you just want to launch on your own.
00:13:44.000 AI isn't just helpful anymore, it's required.
00:13:46.000 Nearly all jobs today demand AI skills.
00:13:49.000 Yes, they do.
00:13:50.000 A chance of people who are skilled with AI is 130% more than the rest.
00:13:53.000 Worry not, I've got good news for you.
00:13:55.000 This is an AI course to help you get adept using AI.
00:13:58.000 The robots haven't taken over yet.
00:14:00.000 They're about to. 1.00
00:14:01.000 You better learn and be friends with them robots, or they are gonna unemploy your ass. 0.99
00:14:05.000 This weekend, you can join the two-day AI mastermind workshop by Outskill, the world's first AI focused education platform, is happening this Saturday and Sunday from 10 pm to 7 pm on both days. 0.99
00:14:15.000 By attending 16 hours with expert mentors, learners from Outskill have built and shipped over a hundred AI products, all with zero code and working revenue models of 3,000 to 4,000.
00:14:25.000 Now, this training normally costs 895, but I've partnered with Outskill to give away a thousand free seats exclusively for my viewers.
00:14:32.000 This is a brilliant opportunity for you.
00:14:33.000 If you're one of my viewers, you can get an $895 seat for nothing.
00:14:37.000 Become an AI expert, then serve the revolution.
00:14:39.000 However, this is only available for the next 72 hours.
00:14:42.000 That's three days in old money.
00:14:43.000 That's nearly $900,000 worth of training completely free.
00:14:48.000 $900,000.
00:14:49.000 Although that's spread across the people.
00:14:51.000 I mean, no one person's getting that, are they?
00:14:53.000 That's like saying, like that we've between us, we've got free wives.
00:14:57.000 I mean, but you've got yours, Isaac, yourself got mine, and unless something crazy happens, that's the way it's staying.
00:15:04.000 During the two-day live training, this is live, by the way, you'll get 10 powerful AI tools, prompt engineering, automating your workflows and building AI products without code.
00:15:12.000 I can't stress enough.
00:15:13.000 This is without code.
00:15:15.000 Thank the Lord for that.
00:15:15.000 Limited seats are available and they're feeling fast.
00:15:18.000 Grab yours now via the link in the description.
00:15:23.000 You're quite right to um, I hope I'm saying this right, direct us towards the kind of co-bone quo bono argument.
00:15:31.000 Who benefits from this?
00:15:33.000 And and from that perspective, Nick, left and right become kind of almost um sort of tepid adjectives.
00:15:42.000 Left, right, who cares?
00:15:44.000 As long as it's an extreme person, we can legitimise ID, online control, surveillance, censorship, and that's plainly the agenda.
00:15:52.000 As soon as information became um uh uh the distributable in the manner that it has done, a requ the legitimization of control became very important.
00:16:02.000 And I'm looking at the significant markers uh that are concomitant with this type of technology.
00:16:08.000 They include obviously 9-11 and the Patriot Act, 2008 and the and uh and the sort of social movements, whether it's like the Tea Party or Occupy that came out of that, and then COVID, which we touched upon, and you're right that COVID has already been beautifully neglected and sort of consumed by our cultural amnesia.
00:16:29.000 And I I and I feel almost because it was such a um it was so um general and ubiquitous that it somehow actually becomes more forgettable.
00:16:39.000 Uh, this is like such a spike that I feel functionally this is gonna ha uh be a clearer marker because when I was trying to look for a precedent, Nick, I had to look at the political assassinations, I suppose, of the kind of 60s and Charlie Kirk in so many ways couldn't be more different from Martin Luther King,
00:17:01.000 Malcolm X, the Kennedys, and the people that most or you know gosh, even if you think of a pop cultural figure like John Lennon say, it Charlie Kirk is a product of his time, even though he's very traditional and conservative and all of those things that are sort of at the forefront of Charlie Kirk's public identity as a as a sort of a phenomenon.
00:17:23.000 He's part of a movement that's primarily, I would say, connected to the near the the the as yet not fully realized potential of these new information resources to affect real life outcomes.
00:17:38.000 And the fact that he, as you said, is like an a uh a spilling over of online social dynamics into real life through violence, I reckon that might be an indicator of the broader dialectic here.
00:17:52.000 We are experiencing old institutions realizing that they cannot robustly control in the way that they once did information.
00:18:02.000 So whether you're saying, hey, everyone should be trans or uh rights for Palestinians, or there's the kind of content that you're more commonly associated with or that I'm more commonly associated with, the thing that we all have in common, even where we disagree, is we're sort of arguing for, and this is interesting, I think, Nick, because I think it's essential.
00:18:21.000 The ultimate argument, would you agree, is centralized power versus decentralized power.
00:18:28.000 Even though a lot of the time it's presented as a tribal argument for who controls the center, perhaps the solution is you there is no center now.
00:18:36.000 There isn't a center in the same way.
00:18:39.000 You can't aggregate power in the way that you once did.
00:18:43.000 So I suppose that's in a way, um, just a further exploration of some of the things that we'd we'd already said.
00:18:50.000 If that's true, do you think that we should be exploring ways of seeking truces, alliances, or at least less um combatative discourse with our opponents?
00:19:04.000 Absolutely.
00:19:05.000 And it's it's, you know, it's so funny.
00:19:07.000 I feel like we're very aligned on this.
00:19:09.000 Maybe we had this a similar reaction to it because, you know, I it's not lost on people that there are real cleavages in society. 0.99
00:19:17.000 There is real tension between the races, the religions, the genders, the partisan sides.
00:19:23.000 And so the the powers that be did not create those tensions, but they do exacerbate them all the time.
00:19:31.000 And they exacerbate those tensions for, you know, that that's where the word conspiracy comes from, for a sort of unseen, concealed agenda which is convoluted and sophisticated, it's not easily accessible.
00:19:44.000 And I got the sneaking suspicion that that is what this provided, which was an opportunity to drive the right against the left, especially when there does seem to be uh maybe some consensus forming.
00:19:58.000 I know a lot of my clips were becoming popular among liberals and left-wing people because of my criticisms of the Trump administration, of the conduct in Israel, and to the extent that there's a horseshoe, you know, or a far right, far left, you know, maybe realising they have something in common, this gets in the middle of that process and says, no, we're gonna see now a rerun of the right versus the left.
00:20:21.000 And now the right has got to puff up their chest and get angry at the far left.
00:20:25.000 And so on my show on Thursday, I said, like, we actually need to not take the bait and not lean into our first instinct, which is to get angry at all leftists or all liberals or demonize the other side.
00:20:40.000 And we should really isolate it out and say, obviously, people that want political violence, that's unacceptable.
00:20:47.000 People that encourage or incite terrorism, that that can't be allowed in a free society.
00:20:51.000 That's antithetical to a free society.
00:20:54.000 And we should take the opportunity actually to show magnanimity and benevolence to the other side and really kind of stand against any forces that would try to use this to manipulate us, because they really count on people because it is so sensational to get whipped up in the moment and then become irrational.
00:21:13.000 You know, maybe a week ago, people realized right and left might be an artificial divide that they kind of exacerbate when it's convenient.
00:21:22.000 When you see someone get their neck exploded like that, it suspends reason people forget and they just want to see the other side pay.
00:21:29.000 So I do think it's an opportunity to, and although it's difficult for the right, find some consensus, not necessarily with the people that want to shoot us in the head or disrespect a vigil or something like that, but with people that that want to see America succeed.
00:21:45.000 And they exist on the left also.
00:21:47.000 I've been surprised in the last five years, in particular, how ideals that had strong affiliations with one side of that presumed divide have mobilized and transferred.
00:22:03.000 Like even now, I've seen several very highly regarded people that are on the right who prior to the election of Trump I would have found natural affinity with when it came to the subject of free speech, say, saying people that have said appalling, appalling things about Charlie Kirk posthumously, ought be punished in some way.
00:22:27.000 And it's difficult for Me as a person that I'm really trying my best and obviously failing to observe principles and I suppose it's not a principle if it can't withstand the vicissitudes of a culture.
00:22:41.000 That's not a principle then.
00:22:43.000 Now we're dealing with utility.
00:22:44.000 I agree with free speech over here, but not over here.
00:22:47.000 Like, and I was sort of surprised, you know, because I think someone on the left that I watched said, Well, when we were saying you oughtn't be able to criticize trans people or whatever, you were saying there's no such thing as hate speech.
00:23:03.000 And now people are saying pretty disgusting stuff about uh Charlie Kirk, God rest his so-you're saying that um, you know, you th they should be punished.
00:23:16.000 So, like, how do you find how do you have challenges in observing principles when you must be aware as we all are about what aspect of your um you know content is successful?
00:23:30.000 How do you resist uh and how are you impacted by what you know to be effective about your online content and work?
00:23:39.000 Well, I have to say that there's always a temptation uh because the crowd goes one way, and always based on instinct, always based on emotion, and even in my case, it wasn't even so much against the left with my audience, they wanted to rush and blame Israel.
00:23:56.000 That was the first gut reaction of my audience.
00:23:59.000 And in this case, I said, uh, I'm certainly not reluctant to blame Israel for for one thing or another if there's evidence.
00:24:06.000 I mean, be based on who I am.
00:24:08.000 I said, But you know, he was a pro-Israel guy.
00:24:11.000 So I mean that that would be like saying a Ben Shapiro got taken out, God forbid, and people said Israel did it.
00:24:18.000 I I don't, that would be pretty far-fetched, you know.
00:24:20.000 Um, but that was kind of the rush to judgment on our side was it it's the same suspect, it's always the same culprit.
00:24:28.000 And um I guess for me, it always just goes back to you have to tell the truth.
00:24:35.000 You know, I think that a lot of people, and that seems obvious, but what a lot of people find themselves doing when they talk about these things is they want to satisfy an emotional craving or an emotional state.
00:24:48.000 And you really need to be careful.
00:24:49.000 Am I telling the truth?
00:24:51.000 Am I being objective?
00:24:52.000 Am I looking at the facts?
00:24:54.000 Or am I saying these things to satisfy something that I'm feeling right now?
00:24:59.000 Because I think that's what a lot of people are doing.
00:25:01.000 Um, another thing that they do is they tend to fall back on this kind of heuristic level thinking or like a rule way of thinking where they say something bad happens, oh well, Israel is implicated when bad things happen, or oh, uh a right wing person got shot, it came from the left.
00:25:18.000 We have to get away from that kind of heuristic based thinking and think more in terms of maybe zoom out and get a broader sense of perspective.
00:25:27.000 And and I think think in terms of second and third order effects.
00:25:32.000 We have to be a little bit smarter than just kind of like our first gut reaction.
00:25:36.000 It's like we just said a moment ago, you know, yes, everybody's everybody's first impulse is people are making us unhappy, punish them.
00:25:44.000 People are saying these things, we gotta go after them.
00:25:47.000 We have to think, though, what what is the knock-on effect?
00:25:50.000 What's the chain reaction?
00:25:51.000 Okay, we punish these people.
00:25:53.000 What do they do next?
00:25:54.000 What do they do in a year?
00:25:56.000 What do they do in two years?
00:25:57.000 What is the government takeaway from this?
00:25:59.000 What could be justified down the road?
00:26:01.000 We always have to be a little bit smarter than we want to be in a moment like that.
00:26:05.000 Uh, but that that takes some patience.
00:26:07.000 It takes time to develop that sense.
00:26:09.000 When I saw um Bob Villain, who's like a British kind of garage or drill hip-hop artist after Charlie Kirk's assassination, like be so sort of delighted in profanity that I actually I feel like I might have like a old lady, I may have gasped, I'm going, oh, like I may have like clutched my pearls, literally, you know.
00:26:33.000 I then sort of tried to think, what uh how can I be, you know, how can I have a reaction that's even interesting or useful?
00:26:40.000 Forget content making, I mean actually, actually, in the real essence of who I'm am and who I want to be and who I'm trying to be.
00:26:46.000 And I thought, do you know what came to me when I even invited such a perspective that in 2001 on the 12th of September, I dressed as Osama Bin Laden just because I was aware of how much sort of tumult there was In the culture.
00:27:00.000 I wasn't famous yet.
00:27:01.000 I was like uh hosting on MTV, but it was the same as being on local radio, really.
00:27:04.000 It wasn't it was no kind of big deal.
00:27:06.000 But I was sort of full of appetite for fame and attention.
00:27:09.000 And when I saw Bob Villain doing that, I was like, oh, that's I know that.
00:27:12.000 That's that thing where just because something big is happening, you want to kind of move into it in some way.
00:27:17.000 And either you can move into it with sanctimony or you can move in it like a vandal, tossing stones at it.
00:27:24.000 Um now I guess what I'm trying to do, like you're saying, is what be authentic and truthful and be of some use and some value.
00:27:32.000 And I'll be honest with you, I don't find that easy.
00:27:34.000 And I found it harder still, since in uh, you know, like you know, I got accused and charged, in fact, with rape in my country.
00:27:43.000 And when after that, I'm still dealing with it and I gotta go to trial next year in June for it, the the sort of real life consequences of, of course, you know, very sort of promiscuous past and a very selfish and sinful and in many ways exploitative past,
00:28:01.000 I think alloyed to my current position in online media and the impact of that, particularly probably around COVID and subjects like war, although I don't have a full understanding, although I have a better understanding than I once did, of as you say, how these conspiracies are somewhat diffuse, uh multivalent, not immediately obvious, and probably participants that aren't even aware of their own participants.
00:28:25.000 Do you know the reference I always use here, Nick?
00:28:27.000 And I wonder if it's a reference you're familiar with is somewhat interesting because it's already sort of like tinged in nostalgia.
00:28:34.000 Uh probably about 30, maybe 40 years ago, Andrew Ma, a British journalist for the BBC was interviewing Noam Chomsky, probably Noam Chomsky at the height of his esteem and excellence.
00:28:46.000 He's probably thinking about it now, promoting the manufacture of dissent.
00:28:51.000 Although that seems like a excuse me, the manufacture of consent, which seems like a ridiculous idea because it's such a sort of an important book, but to imagine it being on a book tour or whatever.
00:28:59.000 But when he's doing the BBC interview, Andrew Ma, the now yet more esteemed BBC TV journalist said, you know, in your book Manufacturer Consent, you say that all journalists are told what to say and that we've all been conditioned and we're all participating and manipulating the public.
00:29:14.000 Well, I'm a journalist and I'm not doing that.
00:29:17.000 No one's told me what to say today.
00:29:18.000 I'm saying what I want to say.
00:29:20.000 And Noam Trump's says, no, you've misunderstood.
00:29:22.000 What I'm saying is if you weren't saying what they wanted you to say, you wouldn't be sitting in that chair.
00:29:28.000 And people don't know the way that institutional media functions and what the complexity of those relationships are, and how the sort of channels of what seems to me now to be a pretty extremist ideology, even if you separate religion, even though I do consider this to be spiritual war.
00:29:45.000 In fact, that's one thing that I'm increasingly certain of.
00:29:48.000 The organized power behind these various institutional actions is described in scripture.
00:29:56.000 That's what I believe in, and I'd love to know what you think about that.
00:29:59.000 But the way that media, state, global corporations operate together to essentially maintain and increase control is an organized planned intelligence, and I think you could basically call it the devil or evil or Satan or whatever term, you know, seemed most appropriate to you.
00:30:20.000 So I am um I recognize how diffuse and complex it can be.
00:30:24.000 That said, Nick, like, you know, I'd love your response just to, you know, that great barrage of language I hurled your way, and you know, the fact that some of it was kind of personal, of course.
00:30:33.000 Um, but also I'd like to add to that, do you we'll move in the direction of talking about personal responsibility and love when commentating on issues that can generate a lot of vitriol.
00:30:41.000 So you'll, I guess you'll know where I'm going based on that.
00:30:45.000 Yeah, I um, well, I mean, you're describing the survivorship bias, you know, which is that everybody that's in media, everybody that's it's sort of like what you see versus what you don't see.
00:30:56.000 Everybody that's in media has been kept around, uh, and that's for a reason.
00:31:00.000 It's because, you know, either they're um a conventional thinker or they're not uh rebellious or what, you know, they're predictable or something like that.
00:31:08.000 And I think that you're right, people just don't understand the dynamics of how and where the power actually comes from.
00:31:16.000 I don't think they actually, because it is a complex dynamic, the interplay between media, state, military, and something that I've been really in on or really focused on over the past few years, is how it seems that everything is downstream from the national security state in particular.
00:31:36.000 A lot of people like to think in terms of everything's about profits, you know, like left-wing types.
00:31:42.000 Uh At one time they talked a lot more about the CIA and about the Pentagon and the military.
00:31:47.000 Now I feel like all they talk about is the billionaires and the wealthy and the one percent.
00:31:52.000 The more that I look at the media environment, and the longer that I've been doing this and analyzing it, the more it seems that everything in the society proceeds from the interests and the needs of the security state.
00:32:06.000 And in particular, its posture towards foreign countries, its posture towards Russia, its posture, um, and then necessarily towards its allies, because it needs its allies as a bulwark against its enemies.
00:32:19.000 And um, and then of course, how that reflects the domestic conversation.
00:32:23.000 So for example, if there is chaos in America, let's say there's days of lead in America, political violence, chaos.
00:32:31.000 Who does that benefit?
00:32:32.000 You know, the Klibono. 1.00
00:32:34.000 That benefits America's adversaries, uh, necessarily. 0.64
00:32:37.000 So does it behoove America's adversaries that want to see us fall to lean into that kind of division?
00:32:44.000 Conversely, it benefits the American security state for there to be stability.
00:32:49.000 Because there's 350 million people, how many soldiers, a million, how many cops?
00:32:54.000 In order to keep everything stable and everything orderly, they need people to actually choose stability, choose lawfulness, etc.
00:33:04.000 And so there is more that rests on the stability of the society than the force of the state.
00:33:10.000 It's also the belief of the people in the political order.
00:33:14.000 They have to believe it's legitimate.
00:33:16.000 And if they don't, then they don't follow the laws.
00:33:19.000 There's there's maybe they take some of the government's power from the government.
00:33:24.000 They start to manage their own affairs.
00:33:26.000 Society starts to federalize or confederate.
00:33:29.000 Umce you think like this, you realize things have to be a very specific way.
00:33:36.000 And the media has to condition enforce that, education has to condition and enforce that, entertainment has to condition and enforce that.
00:33:43.000 And that then a lot of how things are starts to make a lot more sense.
00:33:48.000 And uh, in some sense, we have to live with that.
00:33:50.000 I guess that's how it'll always be.
00:33:51.000 Here's a quick break now while we go to one of our partners.
00:33:57.000 Whoever you are, you might consider yourself a businessman or woman or person, or I don't know, maybe you don't have a gender or don't want one.
00:34:06.000 That's not the key issue here, though.
00:34:07.000 The key issue is 1770, a delicious coffee.
00:34:10.000 Let's be honest. 0.95
00:34:11.000 Most coffee, all it does is it helps you to organize a stool in that inward back pocket you call the butt.
00:34:18.000 What does it also do?
00:34:20.000 It leaves you feeling all down, jeary, foggy, and needing another cup of coffee.
00:34:24.000 You can only trust 1775, the one true coffee of revolution.
00:34:28.000 Rejuvenate coffee is science-backed coffee.
00:34:32.000 Coffee backed by science.
00:34:33.000 And not Anthony Fauci says, Oh, I made up some sad stuff.
00:34:39.000 I was giving people, hey, so I've got a beagle in a cage. 0.99
00:34:42.000 I put my fingers up their butt. 1.00
00:34:44.000 That is something Anthony Fauci has admitted to. 0.98
00:34:46.000 Have you read the real Anthony Fauci by Bobby Kennedy?
00:34:49.000 Yeah, yeah, it's understood that Anthony Fauci. 0.98
00:34:52.000 He keeps Beagles in this yard and he puts stuff up there, but they shit all over the cage. 0.97
00:34:57.000 Fauci doesn't care, he makes wallow in it. 0.96
00:34:59.000 Anthony Fauci cannot be trusted, but rejuvenate, science-backed coffee can.
00:35:04.000 It's real Arabic abides, Araba Kadabra, I say, because it makes me feel absolutely magic, is infused with C A K G, which is a kind of like a rifle, you know, like an assault rifle, but it's assault in your central nervous system with delicious beans, baby. 1.00
00:35:18.000 A compound shown to support cellular energy, metabolism, and even healthy aging.
00:35:23.000 You don't want to sit deteriorating in a chair, shitting yourself, drinking Starbucks.
00:35:27.000 You need rejuvenation.
00:35:29.000 It's built for people who take their health seriously, who want to show up with focus and strength every single day, like me.
00:35:35.000 If you care about how you feel now and how you'll feel 10 years from now, this is your coffee. 0.98
00:35:40.000 Go 70 set of five coffee.com forward slash me, probably, and order rejuvenate coffee today, fuel your body, protect your future, rejuvenate, you sick perverts. 0.99
00:35:54.000 I don't know. 0.97
00:35:55.000 I mean, that sort of seems to me to be very accurate uh uh uh analysis, Nick.
00:36:00.000 The the Consider just taking two examples, how radically, as we've touched upon already, uh technological advancement has altered the world of communications in the way that we have discussed.
00:36:15.000 And some plain examples of its impact beyond just cultural comms say might be Napster's impact on the record industry, the online media's impact on the outcome of Trump 2016, let alone last time Trump and Brexit 2015 or whenever that was.
00:36:38.000 Additionally, the emergence of something like Uber and the impact that would make on an industry like minicabs wherever you are in the world, or Airbnb on the way that the hotel and rent or short-term rental industry would operate.
00:36:51.000 That technology has radicalized, revolutionized, I think every one of those areas that I've listed.
00:36:56.000 And yet there is an attempt to uh maintain rigidly stasis within the most important systems of power.
00:37:06.000 And I would agree with you that, in a sense, a billionaire is merely symptomatic of the types of permanent powers that you allude to with the, you know, the sort of the free-letter agencies and whatever they're an expression of, whatever they are an expression of.
00:37:20.000 So earlier on, we touched on the need to resist our first reaction, resist the uh temptation to participate, because even though you said there is a requirement domestically for stability, within that stability, of course, it would be uh, you know, the you want healthy, not healthy debate, you want actually vitriolic debate within that window to ensure that the the sort of that polarization in itself ensures an energized stability.
00:37:45.000 What you don't want is people to say, look, do you know what actually?
00:37:49.000 If people are that concerned that Texas is run this way, let people run Texas that way.
00:37:54.000 And in fact, we have such a good example of this outside of your country, my own country, the UK.
00:37:58.000 We um like there's that massive Tommy Robinson march, I'm sure you're aware, of the weekend.
00:38:02.000 And what was fascinating, um we had um a correspondent, I'm gonna call him, even though another way of describing it would be my mate Joe, my mate Joe Wen, who, you know, he was corresponding, we corresponded.
00:38:11.000 Uh, he said that when he was talking to the sort of patriotic British folk that were all about, you know, uh but let's face it, it was a lot of it was motivated by migration.
00:38:20.000 But I see migration as symptomatic of a deeper problem, as a matter of fact, and focusing on Islam and uh migration, I think distracts us from whoever it is that benefits from that kind of um hostility uh towards migrants, not that I'm saying if people don't want migration, if you live in a democracy, that's the end of that conversation, let people have a referendum, the job done.
00:38:40.000 But he was saying that when he was speaking to the masked antifa pallid and demonic, that that's my uh definition of them, because I've seen the footage, um, they l they loathed Keystarmer as well.
00:38:54.000 Now, the thing that's interesting about Kirstama, and Lord alone knows it's not easy to find something.
00:38:58.000 The thing that's interesting about Keir Starmer is that he is exactly that type of bureaucratic managerial neo-liberal WEF Davos type politician that has been annihilated through the rise of MAGA populism and Trump in your country.
00:39:18.000 There is no consensus around I don't know how the UK government can survive if the people on the left detest you, if the people on the right, and even the right is now a broader category, even though they try to bolster with further adjectives, far right, hard right, smelly disgusting right, you know, they try whatever they can, but it just seemed like normal British people at this point.
00:39:39.000 Like I wonder if what we're being informed by this is that were we able to legitimately deploy the communication technology that has revolutionized the industries that I uh iterate at the top there, Nick, in a political sphere, power would fundamentally and radically change, and a precursor to that change might be the type of truces and alliances that we touched on at the top of this.
00:40:03.000 I wonder what we think about all that.
00:40:05.000 I totally agree.
00:40:07.000 I think that, you know, a lot of people don't realize that the technological revolutions have have actually taken place in waves in the past 30 years.
00:40:15.000 And what a lot of people, this is something I've talked about on my show before.
00:40:19.000 You have the internet, you have email, and people think that the internet is synonymous with the later developments like social media or smartphones, but they're not.
00:40:28.000 They're distinct.
00:40:29.000 We've had internet, email, personal computers for a long time, but smartphones and social media, that achieved mass adoption way later than you think.
00:40:39.000 It happened around 2012.
00:40:40.000 And I I always think, is it any coincidence that I think uh the adoption of smartphone and social media hit more than the majority around about 2012 or 2013?
00:40:50.000 Is it a coincidence that it was in the very next election in 2016 that you saw the rise of right wing populism?
00:40:58.000 Because they are distinct.
00:40:59.000 It's like you got iPhone in 2009, Twitter, YouTube, around about the same time.
00:41:04.000 They reach this adoption about five years later, then you get populism.
00:41:08.000 Then you get Occupy very soon after you get right-wing populism.
00:41:11.000 And what happened right after Trump won?
00:41:14.000 You had the antithesis.
00:41:16.000 You had censorship.
00:41:17.000 You had a government attempt to cool off a very hot technology.
00:41:21.000 And they did it through things like this.
00:41:23.000 It was Christchurch, it was uh, you know, the various other mass shootings, Dylan Roof, among others.
00:41:29.000 It was not even just the social media, they tried to get the telecom companies involved, the domain registrars.
00:41:35.000 There was like a full-fledged attempt to basically undo the development of this like very hot medium of information.
00:41:43.000 You know, the medium is the message.
00:41:46.000 And uh what you've seen in reverse, that's not mine, by the way.
00:41:49.000 That's borrowing.
00:41:52.000 I was thinking about it today.
00:41:53.000 I was thinking about it today.
00:41:54.000 Carry on, please.
00:41:55.000 Well, absolutely.
00:41:57.000 Um, but uh and what you've seen now in the past five years, what's really interesting to me, this is yet to me unresolved.
00:42:05.000 All of that has now been reversed.
00:42:07.000 Elon acquired Twitter in 2022.
00:42:10.000 TikTok coming from China has different regulations than American social media, because it's they don't they don't have the same kind of um, you know, NGOs and nonprofits advising them about political speech.
00:42:23.000 So between TikTok and Twitter, you now have a liberalized social media.
00:42:29.000 Then you have others like YouTube, Instagram, they're following suit.
00:42:32.000 Why is it that social media is opening up?
00:42:35.000 Could it be that AI models are being trained on social media because to get the best LLMs, they need the most data, and the data comes from the posts of as many people as possible?
00:42:48.000 That that's one postulate.
00:42:49.000 Maybe it's political, but clearly, you know, the convulsions of the past 10 years, they're taking place on social media from an open social media to a censored social media back to an open social media.
00:43:02.000 You can map political events onto that, the rise of populism, the pandemic in the Ukraine war, the kind of second wave of populism.
00:43:11.000 You could also map onto it the rise of these even next, the fifth generation, which is AI, and all the rest of it that's going to come down the pike later.
00:43:20.000 And so that to me, that's sort of we're in a unique cultural moment now in just the past three or four years that has not been analyzed enough that we're still trying to figure out, you know, kind of the why and what's happening just right now with all with what you just said, Keir Starmer and the rest of it.
00:43:36.000 It amounts to a kind of temporal warping, Nick.
00:43:40.000 How can we even regard temporality as being consistent?
00:43:45.000 If if you measure, you know, we understand by the way, pretty imperfectly, how we would measure velocity.
00:43:53.000 If the density of available information has is altering inconceivably to almost a point where you can't it's beyond human conception, then we're not really in the same reality anymore.
00:44:07.000 So the fact that the analytics can't keep up with the progress is not surprising.
00:44:12.000 Is Malcolm McLuhan, isn't it that said the medium is the message?
00:44:14.000 And I suppose he was making that point in a bunch of ways.
00:44:19.000 But what strikes me about that is the type of media that would have been prevalent then would have been TV and print journalism.
00:44:28.000 And that is centralized and controlled, and therefore it's an indication of the interests and agenda of the people, whether they are commercial partners or sort of old school media barons that own those interests, that would be the message.
00:44:44.000 The media is the message.
00:44:46.000 Now, of course, because of you know, people like you and even me and other people in this space, we're now having to deal with the discordant, sometimes cacophonous, definitely conflict-oriented because of the kind of algorithmic uh biases that we've touched upon.
00:45:06.000 And they're probably actually have a are ultimately resourced from a human palate.
00:45:11.000 You know, we probably we respond organically and humane uh from a biologically to highly um consequential stimulus, I suppose might be one way of saying it.
00:45:25.000 But if the medium is the missing message meant that once a centralized set uh or cadre could dictate info the the way the information was conveyed and the type of information that was conveyed, now we have this giddying diaspora,
00:45:42.000 this sort of blizzard of information, and of course that requires early on an ability to uh categorize and create hierarchies and even eliminate, amplify and eliminate different types of information.
00:45:55.000 And the COVID period that I agree with you has been too easily discarded, showed us with the brilliant example of Joe Rogan, they were not ready for someone that had that amount of power and reach to not be on board.
00:46:12.000 The one of the challenges is with centralized media, and I wonder if these challenges will still exist with these evolving uh forms, is that people get co-opted.
00:46:21.000 I was a pretty radical little dude when I made it into Hollywood.
00:46:24.000 I was I'd already been a drug addict and got clean, took a bunch of acid, been exposed to poverty because of my just sort of environmental and social conditions.
00:46:34.000 Like I was a little bit uh radical, one might regard, you know, and as somewhat of a peripheral figure in a bunch of ways.
00:46:41.000 Anyway, once I get into people rewarding me and celebrating me and telling me I'm fantastic and giving me a bunch of money and having access to sort of lots of sex and stuff, you know, it's difficult.
00:46:52.000 You're not gonna it's gonna take a lot of fortitude, and and I would argue simply a connection to God, actually.
00:46:58.000 If you're not connected to God, if the culture is your God, then the the God is feeding you, the God is feeding you, you're cool.
00:47:04.000 The false idol is proving to be you know, somewhat truthful in that moment, at least it's fulfilling your pagan needs. 1.00
00:47:13.000 No, I wonder if um in this instance, you know, how easily co-opted and biased and controlled we will be, because if the medium is, as you say, as he, you know, there's citing Malcolm McLuhan, is that right?
00:47:26.000 You'll tell me in your answer, I hope.
00:47:27.000 Um, like then the the if the medium is the message, then the message is you can't centralize power in the same way anymore.
00:47:35.000 You're gonna have to yield power.
00:47:37.000 You're gonna have to find ways of devolving power, and probably the country that's most likely to be able to accommodate that due to his sort of relatively recent origins and perhaps the robustness, but hopefully the degree of flexibility in your constitution might be your country, might be your country.
00:47:51.000 You can't see happening in China, Russia, and the Britain's resisting it pretty heavily.
00:47:55.000 And yet that does seem to be the central dynamic.
00:47:59.000 So I wonder, but obviously the people that least want that message to be received are those with most to lose, and that is centralized media, the government, the sets of corporal and commercial interests, and if there is some sort of dark occultist power behind that, presumably that too doesn't want it.
00:48:13.000 So how then do you think we promote those ideals if you agree that they are ideals worth promoting?
00:48:21.000 Well, it's it's difficult to say because there's that is obviously one perspective on it, and that that could be the um idealistic, the aspirational idea, which is and certainly that's what I thought for most of my life, for most of my adult life is that uh Trump is on Twitter, and that means he can talk to us directly.
00:48:42.000 So there's no gatekeepers, no mods, no censorship, like he's connected to us.
00:48:48.000 There's no kind of gatekeeping institution that stands in between and mediates between elected officials and people.
00:48:56.000 But then you think about things like what they said after he won.
00:48:59.000 They said, well, uh, you may think that that was the case, but really the Russians were involved.
00:49:06.000 That was the answer from the government.
00:49:07.000 As the Russians manipulated the conversation. 0.97
00:49:10.000 And, you know, for the longest time, I said, that's ridiculous. 0.94
00:49:14.000 There's no we love Trump because of what he was, and that was true for myself. 0.79
00:49:18.000 But you also think about things like the Arab Spring.
00:49:21.000 You also think about the the first time that social media was deployed in a political context was by Western NGOs, Was by the American Empire against these Muslim countries.
00:49:34.000 And it was aspirational.
00:49:35.000 The younger generation demanding change, democracy.
00:49:40.000 But what did it turn into?
00:49:41.000 It turned into Islamism. 0.94
00:49:43.000 You know, Hazni Mubarak was replaced by the Muslim Brotherhood.
00:49:47.000 It led to the rise of ISIS in some cases.
00:49:50.000 It certainly benefited Israel in many ways, benefited the American state.
00:49:54.000 And so even especially over the past five years, you have to wonder the things that you see on Twitter, is it even real?
00:50:03.000 And we before we even figured out what was even you could say authentic or legitimate on social media, we didn't even have time to figure out that conversation.
00:50:13.000 Now you have AI.
00:50:15.000 Now you have AI, which is deploying their own agents on social media in an automated way, creating images, deep fakes, manipulated images, like with this assassin.
00:50:26.000 You know, one of the things that uh people say is a discrepancy about the person that's in custody is that he does not resemble the photo that the FBI gave.
00:50:36.000 And the FBI said, well, that's because we AI enhanced and upscaled the resolution of the photo.
00:50:42.000 So it's like I I think that there was maybe this early aspiration that yes, it would lead to freedom and decentralization.
00:50:51.000 At the same time, though, it I think it's even maybe bigger than control and freedom.
00:50:56.000 It's it's order and chaos.
00:50:58.000 And I think that truly we're getting chaos. 0.95
00:51:01.000 Truly, we're getting, and everything that comes with it deception, a lack of accountability, people pretending to be someone other than they are, sinister forces manipulating people, preying on the vulnerable, the the dumb. 0.91
00:51:16.000 Um, and so you know, the and by dumb, I mean the the deaf and blind. 1.00
00:51:21.000 I mean, people that are, you know, in uh in a deeper sense, they're they're not able to critically think. 0.54
00:51:26.000 They're yeah, I think about like my parents, you know, my mom texts me all the time, Nicholas, is this real?
00:51:32.000 I saw this on Twitter.
00:51:33.000 That's that they're not ready for this, you know, they're just not ready for that kind of stuff.
00:51:37.000 And so I think what we're seeing is a destabilization.
00:51:42.000 And to call it uh freedom is is a way to interpret it.
00:51:47.000 But I think in terms of the physical, I like that you said velocity and density, because you can use the physical language to describe these things.
00:51:55.000 It's a destabilization, it's a disintegration, it's an atomization, it's things coming apart.
00:52:01.000 And whenever things come apart in the atomic age, nuclear explosions occur.
00:52:07.000 You know, energy is unleashed, and on the other side of it is destruction, you know.
00:52:12.000 But in the quantum age, which is the age we're in, a deeper unity is discovered.
00:52:18.000 Now, the idea that there is that much energy entailed and compounded atomically is the miracle that defines the industrial, late industrial um age.
00:52:28.000 But the quantum age is that beneath apparent separateness, there is a unity, perhaps the detectable outskirts of our Lord are felt there.
00:52:42.000 So your point about the um Islamic brotherhood that benefited from the Arab Spring Revolutions, one of my friends, I hope he's still my friend.
00:52:49.000 Some people don't survive all of this stuff.
00:52:52.000 Adam Curtis, the filmmaker, said you know, they were ready to go with an idea.
00:52:57.000 Though, you know, like while there's all this sort of chaos of, oh, how should we run it?
00:53:02.000 Who's gonna be in charge?
00:53:03.000 We have a new assembly, we'll vote for this.
00:53:05.000 In come the Muslim Brotherhood, we got an idea, let's go. 1.00
00:53:08.000 You know, like um, you know, and I I wonder if there is I'm a Christian.
00:53:14.000 So that means at the forefront, like the you know, like whether you like when C.S. Lewis says, do you think when C.S. Lewis says, you know, we won't all be trying to create some kind of theocracy.
00:53:24.000 What we should be doing is you are you have a Christian accountant, as I'm listing this, I'm from I'm bearing in mind I'm talking to Nick Fuentes.
00:53:32.000 So see if you get this joke because it's coming down the line.
00:53:34.000 You have a Christian accountant, a Christian lawyer, a Christian movie mogul.
00:53:39.000 Um like so I wonder like the Christian banker and goldsmith.
00:53:45.000 Um like I'm thinking like that.
00:53:47.000 I'm thinking that, you know, that if we find Christ, we must find Christ.
00:53:54.000 And we must live uh as allow him to live through us.