Stay Free - Russel Brand - WOAH! Biden & Musk Go To WAR Over Free Speech - They’re Coming For Us ALL - Stay Free #216

00:00:00.000 So, we're going to go ahead and put that in.

00:00:27.000 And we're going to do that.

00:00:44.000 And we're going to do that.

00:01:01.000 In this video, you're going to see the future.

00:01:13.000 We've got a live shot there.

00:01:19.000 Hello there you Awakening Wonders.

00:01:21.000 Thank you for joining me today.

00:01:22.000 Thank you for not yielding to fear.

00:01:24.000 Thank you for pursuing truth.

00:01:26.000 Thank you for having values and principles that are transcendent of the oscillating vicissitudes of a world of deception that wants to enshrine your entire reality in their simulation.

00:01:39.000 We've got some fantastic facts for you today.

00:01:41.000 We've got an item on Biden versus Musk.

00:01:44.000 It's a free speech piece that you're gonna just love.

00:01:47.000 Biden's trying to shut down Musk on a couple of fronts now.

00:01:50.000 One, misinformation on the platform X. Two, he don't let him use Starlink to bomb opponents of the American hegemony product.

00:02:00.000 Project, it's up to you how you see it now.

00:02:02.000 Is it about commodity?

00:02:03.000 Is it about ideology?

00:02:04.000 Let me know in the chat.

00:02:06.000 Let me know in the comments.

00:02:07.000 If you are in a position to support us, press the red awaken button right now and become an awakened wonder.

00:02:13.000 But if you can't, if it's beyond your means, your attention, your time, your faith, your belief, your fortitude is so much more valuable than your money.

00:02:22.000 I tell you that right now for nothing.

00:02:24.000 Although there would be a small charge, ironically, if you joined.

00:02:26.000 But you recognise now when the government tries to demonetise independent media, you recognise the reality you're in right now, huh?

00:02:34.000 We're not just about telling you facts now.

00:02:36.000 We're about building a movement.

00:02:37.000 You're part of it.

00:02:38.000 You're necessary.

00:02:39.000 We need you.

00:02:41.000 We've got a fantastic guest for you today.

00:02:42.000 We're going to be talking to Richard Hananya about populism, war, politics, and the new splinters and fractures that are appearing in our cultural space.

00:02:52.000 I've spoken to him before.

00:02:53.000 He's fascinating.

00:02:54.000 You're going to love this conversation.

00:02:55.000 Stay with us.

00:02:56.000 For the first part, we'll be on a variety of platforms, but then we have to invite you to join us on Rumble.

00:03:02.000 And if you can come Even deeper into this movement press the red awaken button as I just mentioned.

00:03:08.000 Let's have a look at who's in court today.

00:03:10.000 Let's see who the legacy media and the state machinery have turned their weapons on today.

00:03:15.000 Why it's Donald Trump just like on any other day.

00:03:19.000 He's in court because of his fraud trial and this gives him essentially a chance to communicate.

00:03:26.000 In a minute we're going to be talking about RFK and his announcement.

00:03:29.000 That's pretty fascinating and exciting isn't it?

00:03:32.000 And then we're going to be talking about Chrystia Freeland, the Canadian minister whose name denies how many attachments to Nazis she may or may not have.

00:03:45.000 Let's have a look at Trump orating, doing what he does best, saying sort of non-sequitous, astonishing, baroque and garish stuff in court.

00:03:57.000 Let's have a look at him.

00:03:58.000 I think most people get it.

00:04:00.000 People are getting it.

00:04:01.000 I can tell you the voters are getting it because every time they give me a fake indictment I go up in the polls and that's never happened before.

00:04:09.000 But this is a disgrace.

00:04:11.000 It's astonishing to note that our loathing of the establishment is at such a mutual fever pitch now that the enemies of the establishment are de facto the friends of the people.

00:04:22.000 Do you trust the legacy media?

00:04:24.000 No.

00:04:24.000 Do you trust the government?

00:04:25.000 No.

00:04:26.000 Do you trust the judiciary?

00:04:27.000 No.

00:04:28.000 Who do you trust?

00:04:29.000 People that oppose that stuff?

00:04:31.000 Right, good.

00:04:32.000 So, whatever you think about Donald Trump, the thing that I've come around to believing is, if they don't want him in, he must be doing something right, because they're working pretty hard to keep this guy out of power.

00:04:42.000 And what?

00:04:43.000 Is it because of kindness?

00:04:45.000 Is it because they worry that he might hurt someone's feelings?

00:04:48.000 Yeah, I don't know that that's their priority anymore.

00:04:51.000 What's that based on?

00:04:52.000 Mostly the wars, I'd say.

00:04:53.000 Mostly the wars.

00:04:54.000 I think if one of your priorities was not to hurt people's feelings, you'd probably fund and do less wars.

00:04:59.000 I don't know.

00:05:00.000 Let's see, though, how Donald Trump moves from making a significant point about the rise of populism and anti-establishmentism to sort of sharks.

00:05:09.000 Let's say your boat goes down, and I'm sitting on top of this big, powerful battery, and the boat's going down.

00:05:16.000 Do I get electrocuted?

00:05:18.000 And he said, you know what?

00:05:19.000 Honestly, nobody's ever asked me that question.

00:05:23.000 But if I'm sitting down, and that boat's going down, and I'm on top of a battery, and the water starts flooding in, I'm getting concerned.

00:05:32.000 But then I look 10 yards to my left, and there's a shark over there.

00:05:36.000 So I have a choice of electrocution or a shark.

00:05:38.000 You know what I'm going to take?

00:05:40.000 Electrocution. 0.97

00:05:41.000 I will take electrocution every single time. 0.62

00:05:43.000 Do we agree? 0.54

00:05:45.000 Extraordinary.

00:05:46.000 He's under incredible pressure and he's just doing holiday anecdotes.

00:05:49.000 The presidential election dynamic is about to radically shift if Bobby Kennedy does run as an independent.

00:05:58.000 Is that going to split the Trump vote?

00:06:00.000 Is that going to split the Biden vote?

00:06:02.000 What will be the impact of his candidacy on the dynamics of the election?

00:06:07.000 Let us know what you think in the chat and the comments.

00:06:10.000 Hi, everybody.

00:06:10.000 I'm going to be in Philadelphia on October 9th to make a major announcement.

00:06:14.000 He's got nice eyes, Bobby Kennedy.

00:06:17.000 That's what I mostly think, is he's got a kind face.

00:06:21.000 The very birthplace of our nation.

00:06:23.000 I'm not going to tell you right now exactly what that announcement will be.

00:06:27.000 Also, the voice is improving, I think.

00:06:29.000 Sounds better, doesn't he?

00:06:30.000 I can say, though, that if you've been waiting to come to one of my public events, this will be the one to come to.

00:06:37.000 All that, and he's apparently very good at pull-ups as well.

00:06:40.000 Let's have a look at how the mainstream media are reporting on this.

00:06:44.000 The news website Medii is reporting that RFK Jr.

00:06:48.000 plans to announce he will run as an independent on October 9th in the state of Pennsylvania.

00:06:55.000 Take this at face value if the report is true.

00:06:59.000 First off, you're sitting back going, whoa.

00:07:00.000 That's a huge problem.

00:07:01.000 For?

00:07:02.000 For the president.

00:07:03.000 For President Biden.

00:07:04.000 Why?

00:07:05.000 Listen, any time you have more people in this race that folks have a choice on between Donald

00:07:09.000 Trump and Joe Biden, it's problematic for Joe Biden.

00:07:14.000 Donald Trump activated so many people.

00:07:15.000 We saw the highest turnout election, excuse me, in 100 years, mostly because of Donald Trump, not because of Joe Biden in 2020.

00:07:22.000 That was a reaction to Donald Trump.

00:07:24.000 So, again, if you've got Cornel West running on a party line, if you've got Robert Kennedy running on a party line, that's problematic for Joe Biden.

00:07:30.000 What about the idea maybe that some of his views, he had unfavorable ratings with Democrats, some of his views more aligned with Republicans, so maybe it could actually hurt Donald Trump, you know, pull in that direction?

00:07:41.000 I find it very hard to believe Trump voters right now voting for the son of Bobby Kennedy in American politics.

00:07:48.000 And plus those voters already have a home in the Libertarian Party.

00:07:51.000 So that's what the mainstream think.

00:07:52.000 Let us know what you think in the chat.

00:07:54.000 Do you think RFK is going to hurt Trump or is he going to hurt Biden?

00:07:59.000 Or do you think the whole thing is good for democracy?

00:08:01.000 Or do you feel that the 2024 election is really just going to precipitate some sort of terrible

00:08:06.000 civil war where whoever loses just says, oh, that was an illegitimate election?

00:08:11.000 Now after the Canadian Parliament applauded an actual Nazi last week, Chrystia Freeland,

00:08:16.000 whose name sounds like a freedom fighter in a Tolkien book, but actually her policies 1.00

00:08:20.000 are much more like, well, let's call it what it is.

00:08:22.000 A Nazi tries to, it seems, evade the question of just how many Nazis are living in Canada.

00:08:30.000 Look at her peculiar prevarication.

00:08:33.000 Based on the hand movements, I'm thinking, maybe there are 10 Nazis living in Canada.

00:08:38.000 That weird microphone move makes me think, 50?

00:08:42.000 are 10 Nazis living in Canada.

00:08:44.000 How many veterans who fought with the Nazis are here in our country?

00:08:49.000 Will the government do so and what is your response to that?

00:08:55.000 That weird microphone move makes me think 50?

00:08:58.000 50 to 100 Nazis living in Canada?

00:09:03.000 I think, you know, let me just...

00:09:06.000 The Monty Burns sort of tent finger prayer hands, I'm now thinking, are there like thousands

00:09:12.000 of Nazis just roaming all over?

00:09:16.000 Are the Mounties actually Nazis?

00:09:19.000 Did you change the word Narts to the word Mount?

00:09:24.000 Uh, by reiterating, and I don't think it can be said too many times, uh, It can't be said to me though.

00:09:37.000 Now I'm thinking, is everyone in Canada a Nazi?

00:09:40.000 Is that actually what's happened there?

00:09:42.000 All of the maple syrup and the ice hockey and Quebec and everyone talking French and all that stuff.

00:09:47.000 It's actually just, the whole thing's been an elaborate ruse to cover up the fact that it's a sort of utopia for Nazis. 0.76

00:09:56.000 How hurtful for so many people in Canada and around the world what happened was and has been and continues to be.

00:10:12.000 Does she mean by that, applauding the Nazi, or does she mean Nazism? 0.56

00:10:17.000 Because if she means Nazism itself, saying it was hurtful is an underestimation of the incredible impact of, for example, the Holocaust.

00:10:28.000 She's very hesitant, isn't she?

00:10:33.000 She wasn't this hesitant when it was like, hey, we think these truckers are Nazis.

00:10:37.000 She'd go, well, what's that based on?

00:10:39.000 Let's think for a minute, because we don't want to be guilty of condemning people as Nazis just because they temporarily oppose our hegemonic perspective.

00:10:49.000 She was like, shut that bank account! 1.00

00:10:50.000 It's like that, wouldn't it?

00:10:52.000 She'd... straight away.

00:10:53.000 She'd never see it.

00:10:54.000 It's like she's on a quiz show called Shut That Bank Account. 1.00

00:10:57.000 Shut that bank account! 1.00

00:10:59.000 As MPs, in our capacity as MPs, it's important for appropriate next steps

00:11:13.000 in the House to be taken.

00:11:14.000 And I think that is our immediate focus.

00:11:17.000 That doesn't require strategy and expertise.

00:11:21.000 We're going to take some steps.

00:11:23.000 By steps, do you mean not inviting Nazis into Parliament and then all standing up and clapping at Nazis?

00:11:30.000 Listen, I... Yeah, that is it, actually.

00:11:32.000 Shut that bank account! 1.00

00:11:36.000 And as a government, we're going to be very thoughtful about any further steps that need to be taken.

00:11:45.000 That's so brilliant, because what he's describing there is not applauding Nazis in Parliament.

00:11:50.000 If that takes that level of focus and concentration, is it what, is they're nearly always doing it?

00:11:54.000 Did they nearly do it the day before that?

00:11:56.000 And have they nearly done it a couple of times since?

00:11:57.000 We're going to have to be very careful if we're not going to spend all day every day just applauding Nazis. 0.50

00:12:03.000 This isn't something you can immediately avoid simply by looking at their record in the Oh, no, that person's a Nazi. 0.63

00:12:10.000 Let's not applaud them just yet.

00:12:12.000 That's something like... We've never done it.

00:12:14.000 Perhaps the reason that Chrystia Freeland is so hesitant, or the reasons, include the grandfather of Chrystia Freeland, Canada's Deputy Prime Minister, worked for a Nazi newspaper that recruited for the Galicia division of the Waffen-SS, the same division as Jaroslav Juncker, the Nazi who was recently honoured by Canada's Parliament.

00:12:32.000 She could have probably just looked at a photo album in her own house to see whether he's a... Wait a minute!

00:12:36.000 You're in our Nazi memorabilia book! 0.86

00:12:38.000 Michael Chomiak, Freeland's maternal grandfather, whom she repeatedly cited as a political inspiration... No kidding!

00:12:45.000 ...edited a Nazi newspaper for Ukrainian exiles in occupied Krakow called Kraviskivisti, which was printed on a press seized from a Jewish owner.

00:12:54.000 Oh my god, their whole business model is based on Nazism. 0.90

00:12:57.000 That's not good, is it?

00:12:59.000 How can they call them truckers Nazis?

00:13:01.000 Like me? 0.99

00:13:02.000 Before I called someone a nuts, you are a... Wait a minute, did any of my family ever steal a printing press from Jewish folks during the... Oh yeah, no, we did do that. 1.00

00:13:12.000 You are not a good person in a variety of ways, but I'm not gonna use shorthand to describe how or why I think you're bad.

00:13:21.000 At some point, Freeland decided it was politically useful to present the elder Chomiak as an avowed liberal democrat and the most passionate of Kadian patriots.

00:13:29.000 Look at him.

00:13:29.000 I mean, he's very passionate now.

00:13:31.000 I mean, his hands flinging up in the air.

00:13:32.000 He's stamping his jackboots.

00:13:35.000 I've never seen anyone more enthusiastic about democracy.

00:13:39.000 When Chomiak's history resurfaced in 2017, Freeland claimed it was a bunch of, oh, you guessed it, Russian propaganda.

00:13:45.000 And ironically, the Russians were on our side, against the Nazis, so there you go.

00:13:50.000 Confusing, isn't it, the old world?

00:13:52.000 Okay, we, unlike Christian Freeland, believe in free speech.

00:13:57.000 We believe in freedom, we believe in free speech.

00:13:59.000 and when freedom and free speech meet, you get FREECH.

00:14:03.000 Here's some of your comments and by god have we missed you, you raw beauties, you loyal

00:14:16.000 incredible people.

00:14:17.000 And this is a good opportunity, if you want to support our work, press the red button and join us.

00:14:21.000 But remember, it's much more important that we have your alliance, your loyalty, than your money.

00:14:26.000 But if you can afford both, give us it.

00:14:28.000 This is from Emma Lemon.

00:14:29.000 Amazing episode with Jimmy Dore.

00:14:30.000 So much new information, Russell.

00:14:32.000 Good on you for getting up and getting on.

00:14:34.000 Thanks, Emma Lemon.

00:14:34.000 So proud.

00:14:36.000 I really think you need to get Whitney Webb on your channel.

00:14:36.000 SpaceDream42.

00:14:38.000 Can't think of two people who deliver information so well.

00:14:41.000 Get us some Webb!

00:14:42.000 She'd been on.

00:14:43.000 I'm terrified of Whitney Webb.

00:14:44.000 She's brilliant, but she actually talks quite a lot about stuff where people get killed.

00:14:50.000 She's coming on, though.

00:14:52.000 Opicus.

00:14:52.000 Glad to have you back, Russell.

00:14:53.000 Stay strong, keep broadcasting.

00:14:54.000 Thank you.

00:14:55.000 We will.

00:14:55.000 As long as you support us, we'll be here with you.

00:14:58.000 Thunder 1200 joined your Locals Community Day to support your team and you.

00:15:02.000 And the truth, we are very grateful for you.

00:15:05.000 Thank you very much.

00:15:05.000 It's vital that you support us.

00:15:07.000 I really, really appreciate you.

00:15:09.000 Ashela, how I've missed you, Ashela.

00:15:11.000 Thank you so much for this comment.

00:15:12.000 Yep, Russell.

00:15:13.000 Have Dr. Epstein back, please.

00:15:14.000 I like what he's doing.

00:15:15.000 We need to get behind academics like him before the Singularity hits.

00:15:18.000 If you haven't seen the interview with Robert Epstein yet, Check it out.

00:15:22.000 He explains the extraordinary power to curate and control global narratives that, in particular and specifically, Google have.

00:15:30.000 Watch it.

00:15:31.000 It's amazing.

00:15:32.000 This is about Handsome Lee Fang at Critical Thought goes, Thank you, Lee, for doing your best to keep us informed regarding the suffocating corruption that surrounds us.

00:15:42.000 And Love in Action says, When Lee Fang said no one is advocating for peace, all that about says it all.

00:15:48.000 Stay free!

00:15:49.000 Thanks, Love in Action.

00:15:50.000 What an extraordinary time we live in.

00:15:52.000 Remember, you can send us your comments, become a member of our AwakendWonder community by joining Locals Press.

00:15:58.000 That red button.

00:15:59.000 Join us there.

00:16:00.000 Now, you're going to love this.

00:16:02.000 You know that the state and corporate interests are coming for Rumble.

00:16:05.000 You saw that the government and big tech platforms communicated about the demonetization of our channel.

00:16:10.000 They're coming for Rumble.

00:16:11.000 They're coming for X. There's an amazing interview where Joe Biden talks about his concerns about misinformation, and extraordinarily and amusingly, a book that he nearly wrote once.

00:16:21.000 You're going to love that bit.

00:16:22.000 It's really, really funny.

00:16:23.000 But they also talk about their anger at Elon Musk because he won't bomb people or facilitate the bombing of people, even if it might possibly lead to actual Armageddon.

00:16:32.000 You're going to love this.

00:16:33.000 It's deep.

00:16:34.000 It's brilliant.

00:16:34.000 It's funny.

00:16:35.000 Here's the news. 0.61

00:16:36.000 No, here's the F'ing news.

00:16:50.000 Joe Biden's saying there's a lot of misinformation on X. Also the government are attacking him for not allowing them to use Starlink to bomb Russia.

00:16:59.000 So who's gonna win?

00:17:00.000 The globalist state or Elon Musk?

00:17:03.000 Elon Musk?

00:17:06.000 Elon Musk is being attacked.

00:17:08.000 Oh, why is that?

00:17:09.000 Probably as he said something bad.

00:17:10.000 Is it some moral or ethical reason?

00:17:12.000 Because you know it's moral and ethical.

00:17:14.000 It's the state, isn't it?

00:17:16.000 Let's have a look at this story where Joe Biden is talking about misinformation on X and the appropriation of Starlink technology for perpetuation of a war.

00:17:25.000 In short, Elon Musk did not permit Ukraine to carry out bombing using Starlink technology, literally because it's against their terms and conditions.

00:17:34.000 You know some of the things you have to sign when you manage cookies?

00:17:37.000 Yeah, manage cookies. 0.97

00:17:38.000 Allowed to bomb Crimea? 0.72

00:17:40.000 Oh, I'm going to say no.

00:17:41.000 I'm going to say don't bomb Crimea.

00:17:43.000 So let's have a look at this story and have a look at the fundamental question.

00:17:48.000 Who do you trust?

00:17:50.000 Do you trust the legacy media?

00:17:52.000 Do you trust the state?

00:17:53.000 Do you trust Joe Biden?

00:17:55.000 When they say they're looking after you, just give them a bit more power, do you trust them?

00:18:00.000 What do you think of these new online builds?

00:18:02.000 And let's look at how they're coming for Elon Musk.

00:18:04.000 And let's work out together what will be more beneficial for the planet.

00:18:08.000 A victory for the state or a victory for Elon Musk?

00:18:11.000 What about what Elon Musk has done to Twitter?

00:18:14.000 Lowering guardrails against misinformation.

00:18:16.000 Does that contribute to it?

00:18:17.000 I mean he's changed its name to something more catchy.

00:18:20.000 I like that little bird.

00:18:22.000 Joe Biden's got to have conversations like this where we know his relationship to technology and indeed reality.

00:18:27.000 It's so sort of tenuous.

00:18:28.000 He's not gonna make a Yeah, Elon Musk, this almost incomparable genius coming up with tunnels and spaceships and electronic cars and revivifying Twitter, based on a principle that used to be quite important called free speech.

00:18:42.000 What's Joe Biden going to say, a man who doesn't know how to make it out of a room that he's just entered?

00:18:47.000 Yeah, it does.

00:18:49.000 Look, one of the things, as I said to you, when I thought I wasn't going to run, I was going to write a book about the changes taking place.

00:18:56.000 What kind of book is Joe Biden going to write on misinformation?

00:18:59.000 He's told lies about that fire around his house.

00:19:02.000 he's always banging on about Corn Pop.

00:19:03.000 Misinformation's always been a hatred of mine.

00:19:06.000 When I was in the fire with Corn Pop, as the flames licked up and down Corn Pop's body, 0.98

00:19:11.000 I'd say, you better not misinform me, you son of a gun. 0.97

00:19:14.000 You're a bad dude running with those chains. 0.96

00:19:15.000 Then Hunter came in on his laptop, at least I think it was his laptop.

00:19:19.000 He'd been working for Burisma, all on his own credit, of course.

00:19:22.000 I mean, Burisma needed him.

00:19:23.000 And the three of us just sat around talking about misinformation together.

00:19:28.000 The end.

00:19:29.000 And most of it's directed over the years for these fundamental changes in society

00:19:34.000 by change in technology.

00:19:36.000 Gutenberg printing and the printing press changed the way Europeans could talk to one another all the way to today.

00:19:42.000 I've actually got a history lesson. There was a Guttenberg press, Europeans could talk 0.99

00:19:47.000 to each other different, and now it is today. This book's riveting!

00:19:51.000 Where do people get their news? They go on the internet.

00:19:57.000 They go online.

00:19:59.000 Yeah, that's right.

00:20:00.000 So are you going to try and control that news and information to stop a dissident population rejecting a government that plainly legislates on behalf of elites?

00:20:09.000 Yes.

00:20:10.000 And you have no notion.

00:20:12.000 Whether it's true or not.

00:20:14.000 What, as opposed to the mainstream media and the legacy media where there's never any lies, never any agenda, never any biases?

00:20:21.000 I know that you're a sophisticated audience that are not entirely governed by fear. 0.76

00:20:25.000 What they want is a population that are completely controlled, that only have access to pre-masticated information that's been ground up in Biden's proverbial gob and spat out in front of you as dumb gruel that keeps you Banalized, impotent, castrated and still, never moving, never noticing your change. 0.62

00:20:44.000 Of course you should have access to a variety of information and then decide for yourself what's true.

00:20:48.000 Who else is going to decide?

00:20:49.000 You don't trust the mainstream media, do you?

00:20:51.000 Record low trust in the mainstream media. 0.98

00:20:54.000 Quite right, they're liars.

00:20:55.000 Record low trust in the government. 1.00

00:20:57.000 Quite right, they're liars.

00:20:59.000 Record low trust in the judiciary. 1.00

00:21:00.000 Liars, liars, liars. 0.99

00:21:02.000 And instead of amending those lies, what do they do? 1.00

00:21:04.000 Oh, if we just deny them access to the truth, then the lies won't seem so bad.

00:21:09.000 Brilliant.

00:21:10.000 In an interview with ProPublica released on Sunday, President Joe Biden touched upon the technological advancements and their pivotal role in shaping societal discourse and information sharing.

00:21:20.000 Though that wasn't how he phrased it.

00:21:21.000 This is a book that's worth reading on the subject.

00:21:24.000 Seems like most corn, pop, print and press Europeans talk different to each other. 0.98

00:21:27.000 You don't know what's true on the internet.

00:21:29.000 I see a cat playing the piano.

00:21:31.000 Can cats play piano?

00:21:32.000 I mean, who taught it?

00:21:33.000 And where's its thumbs?

00:21:34.000 Oh, they have the internet on computers now.

00:21:37.000 While discussing Elon Musk's influence over X and its policies, President Biden seems to delve into concerns about misinformation and its prevalence on online platforms.

00:21:45.000 Why are they not concerned about Mark Zuckerberg's influence over meta platforms like Facebook and Instagram?

00:21:51.000 Because they agree with him.

00:21:53.000 That's why.

00:21:54.000 Because there was correspondence between Fauci and Zuckerberg.

00:21:56.000 Because Zuckerberg said they censored information that was true and debatable.

00:22:01.000 That's why that's not a problem.

00:22:02.000 You know, asked for a bunch of things to be censored that in retrospect ended up being more debatable or true.

00:22:07.000 So there you go.

00:22:08.000 You don't need to spend another second debating what this is really about.

00:22:11.000 Is it that they don't want you to get misinformation, or is it that they do want you to get misinformation?

00:22:16.000 Is it that they want a free and fair press, or is it they want an unfree, unfair press?

00:22:21.000 Remember when Joe Biden did that press correspondence dinner?

00:22:24.000 They talk about, oh, it's disgusting that these journalists get executed. 0.89

00:22:27.000 They don't talk about journalists that are in prison.

00:22:29.000 They don't talk about Julian Assange.

00:22:30.000 If they cared about freedom of information, Julian Assange would be swanning about, releasing information about American war crimes now, instead of banged up in Belmont.

00:22:38.000 You don't need to spend any more time working out what the motives of the legacy media and the government are.

00:22:44.000 We already know.

00:22:45.000 Let me know in the chat, let me know in the comments if you agree.

00:22:47.000 While the president, this time at least, stopped short of explicitly calling for censorship, his comments could be interpreted as subtly highlighting concerns around the unregulated nature of online information, potentially opening a gateway to discussions on tighter controls and regulation of internet content.

00:23:02.000 What about regulation of information in the legacy media?

00:23:05.000 You don't think the legacy media lie?

00:23:07.000 You don't think the legacy media have an agenda?

00:23:08.000 You don't think the legacy media compile conjecture, rumour, gossip and create narratives about that?

00:23:14.000 You don't think that happens?

00:23:15.000 You don't think that during the pandemic claims were made that were proven to be distrue?

00:23:18.000 You don't think that they censored information about the Wuhan lab leak that increasingly

00:23:22.000 seems to be utterly valid.

00:23:23.000 You don't think that the mainstream media, the legacy media's primary function is to

00:23:27.000 amplify the message of the state and the elites and the powerful.

00:23:29.000 You don't think that?

00:23:30.000 This is absolute lies, propaganda.

00:23:32.000 All this really is is an opportunity to control and break down potential alternative news sources

00:23:39.000 because it's inevitable.

00:23:41.000 The independent media leads to independent thinking and independent thinking leads to

00:23:45.000 the rejection of the corrupt state.

00:23:48.000 That's what they're trying to prevent.

00:23:50.000 You think they care about morality?

00:23:50.000 Nothing else.

00:23:51.000 You think they care about your feelings?

00:23:53.000 Have a little look at history.

00:23:54.000 This year a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction stopping key Biden administration officials from urging tech firms to suppress protected Despite this ruling, Joe Biden's 2024 presidential campaign plans to continue flagging so-called misinformation to social media platforms, reaching out to social media companies, and working with media outlets to fact-check untruths.

00:24:15.000 According to Politico, Biden's campaign will hire hundreds of staffers and volunteers to monitor online platforms as part of this effort.

00:24:22.000 The Biden campaign plans to focus its misinformation targeting efforts on leading Republican candidates, Well that's interesting.

00:24:28.000 Political opponents.

00:24:29.000 How curious.

00:24:30.000 Right from the beginning, it's already the agenda is relevant.

00:24:34.000 You always have to think, who benefits?

00:24:36.000 Who benefits from this?

00:24:37.000 Well, we're only looking at Republicans.

00:24:39.000 And you are the Democrats.

00:24:40.000 And you're only looking at Republicans.

00:24:41.000 And you are the Democrats.

00:24:43.000 Including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' COVID anti-vaccine rhetoric.

00:24:43.000 Huh.

00:24:47.000 The Biden campaign's admission that it will be flagging so-called misinformation in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election follows a major censorship controversy that erupted in the weeks leading up to the 2020 election.

00:24:58.000 Just three weeks before the 2020 election, a bombshell story alleging that Joe Biden was involved in a corruption scandal was censored by big tech platforms.

00:25:07.000 51 former intelligence officials subsequently signed a letter suggesting the story was part of a Russian disinformation campaign and the Biden campaign used this talking point to downplay the story despite the laptop being real.

00:25:18.000 It's the same way they do everything.

00:25:19.000 Do you remember when Joe Rogan was having the stuff around like what medications he took to deal with his private personal health matters?

00:25:25.000 Like 300 doctors signed a petition, many of whom subsequently were proven to not even actually be doctors.

00:25:32.000 It's a sort of a playbook of like, this is an annoying voice, what should we do?

00:25:36.000 Should we just say something that would mean it would be legitimate to shut that voice down?

00:25:39.000 Yeah, let's do that.

00:25:40.000 The FBI also warned Facebook about a dump of Russian disinfo just before the Hunter Biden laptop story broke.

00:25:46.000 79% of Americans believe truthful coverage of Hunter Biden's laptop would have changed the outcome of the 2020 election.

00:25:52.000 Wow.

00:25:54.000 Nearly everyone thinks that!

00:25:56.000 But it's not just misinformation that Musk is being attacked for, because that is difficult to prove.

00:26:03.000 Because truth is complex.

00:26:04.000 Because there's a complexity about perspective and opinion and what's true and what's not true.

00:26:08.000 Because obviously we could sit here now and in the comments talk about all the ways that Alexei Media have lied throughout the pandemic, throughout the war, throughout history, that that's the function of them, that they censor information that's true, that they amplify and plant information that's not true.

00:26:20.000 We all know that already.

00:26:21.000 I know I'm not telling you anything new.

00:26:22.000 So they have to attack Musk On multiple fronts.

00:26:25.000 And what is one of the other current things that they like to attack people on?

00:26:28.000 Why?

00:26:29.000 It's the war, of course, the humanitarian yet somehow curiously profitable war between Ukraine and Russia.

00:26:35.000 Of course, Elon Musk's Starlink technology, which, you know, I feel like it's his, and isn't he giving Ukraine like a super good deal or something?

00:26:42.000 Well, anyway, he's apparently not doing enough, even though he's doing more than everyone else, and apparently he's prohibiting as many bombings as they'd like to have.

00:26:48.000 So let's have a look at that, because that's another reason they're attacking him.

00:26:50.000 So I just mentioned Elon Musk, one of the tech executives in this space.

00:26:54.000 He's also involved in quite a lot of other things, and there have been some reports recently about his involvement in the war in Ukraine and the way that his control of this Starlink, basically internet technology there, plays a huge role in that war.

00:27:13.000 Does Elon Musk have veto power, basically, in the Ukraine conflict right now?

00:27:19.000 Well, look, no one is supposed to make foreign policy for the United States other than the United States government.

00:27:26.000 And Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon, to a certain extent, and possibly NATO, and the people involved in the 2014 coup, and a set of interests that ultimately control us through the deep state.

00:27:39.000 But I don't think Elon Musk's one... Let me just...

00:27:42.000 No, he's not on there.

00:27:43.000 It is not up to one billionaire to go off in secret.

00:27:46.000 We need several billionaires that have been supporting us for generations now.

00:27:52.000 All come together with a common goal of a unipolar world and depleting our enemies' resources while using Ukraine's legitimate grievances against a historic foe to deplete their own population and set up a BlackRock-sponsored dystopian tech superstate afterwards. 0.85

00:28:07.000 And unless Elon Musk's on board with that, he can just F off.

00:28:10.000 and change our foreign policy. I think we need an investigation, both from the Department

00:28:17.000 of Defense and from Congress, to look into the arrangement with Elon Musk and his company.

00:28:25.000 You need an investigation alright, but you're going to have to prohibit where it goes, because

00:28:30.000 if you actually spend some time investigating the activity of power, the machinations of

00:28:35.000 power, the deals between corporate interests, I think the revelations might necessitate

00:28:39.000 the dismantling of the entire military industrial complex and the whole of the deep state.

00:28:44.000 That would give him the ability to, in effect, turn off or restrict in any way access For Ukraine or anyone else.

00:28:57.000 This is brilliant because Elizabeth Warren is one of those sort of moral politicians, isn't she? 0.98

00:29:01.000 She's one of those ones of like, you know, I'm here helping people but let's deal with these hardships and we need a fairer society. 1.00

00:29:09.000 But literally what she's saying now is we only want deals with tech billionaires.

00:29:13.000 millionaires that will follow the whims of the military-industrial complex. Unless you

00:29:18.000 still believe that the role of the United States military-industrial complex is a humanitarian

00:29:24.000 project. If you think that at Lockheed Martin's quarterly business dealings when they're saying

00:29:28.000 it's looking like a good few years coming up, what they mean is because we're going

00:29:32.000 to help so many children in Kiev. If you think that's what's running Lockheed Martin and

00:29:37.000 Raytheon, then I don't know that this is the channel for you. I'm surprised you've stayed

00:29:40.000 with us this long. If you have grave doubts about even apparently principled and moral

00:29:45.000 politicians like Elizabeth Warren essentially wanting to censor and control Elon Musk,

00:29:50.000 Because he's not quick enough to bomb Russia, potentially leading to a third world war, leading to absolute Armageddon. 0.62

00:29:57.000 I mean, when Musk commented on this, he was like, oh, I was a bit dubious about it, because didn't Putin publicly state that if that happens, they're going to retaliate with nuclear arms?

00:30:05.000 I mean, wouldn't that?

00:30:06.000 This is the news!

00:30:08.000 Why are CNN going, are you not a bit concerned that actually what you're asking Elon Musk to do is use his technology to facilitate an amplification of a conflict that will lead to a war?

00:30:16.000 Did we ever vote on this?

00:30:17.000 I mean, did the American population want this?

00:30:19.000 Do the American population want their tax dollars spent on the Hawaii disaster, their own infrastructure, schools, legal system, education and health?

00:30:25.000 Or do they want to continue to fund this war?

00:30:28.000 And do you think that there's a crisis of trust in institutions like the media and like the government?

00:30:33.000 Now they can't have that conversation because that conversation leads to these conclusions.

00:30:36.000 No, you can't trust the media.

00:30:37.000 No, you can't trust the government.

00:30:38.000 This war is not a humanitarian war.

00:30:39.000 This is a money laundering operation, obviously, because that's what they do.

00:30:43.000 And Elon Musk is bloody inconvenient because he's operating on a different pathway.

00:30:48.000 He's on a different pathway.

00:30:49.000 He's not like, OK, whatever you need.

00:30:50.000 Whereas many of the other billionaires that exist within that Strata are utterly compliant. So the problem with Elon Musk

00:30:57.000 is not, Elon why don't you bomb Crimea when we ask? The problem with Elon Musk is that he

00:31:02.000 will not obey. And contravention of specific policies of the United States of America. How can

00:31:08.000 the news be, here's two people that don't like Elon Musk saying they don't like Elon Musk for a

00:31:13.000 variety of reasons. The legacy media don't like Elon Musk because he represents a free speech platform

00:31:19.000 X that will house counter narratives to the mainstream media who are losing ground radically and

00:31:24.000 rapidly and necessarily. That's why Joe Biden is there saying oh we need to shut down

00:31:28.000 misinformation because people trust online platforms more than they trust legacy media, quite rightly

00:31:33.000 in my opinion. And Elizabeth Warren recognizes that in Elon Musk they have a person that's not

00:31:37.000 being corralled into the mentality of neoliberalist bullshit. 0.98

00:31:41.000 So, you can't just say that's the news. 0.99

00:31:42.000 Hello, here's the news.

00:31:43.000 Now some people who don't like Elon Musk saying they don't like Elon Musk.

00:31:47.000 Firstly, a guy that went to school with Elon Musk.

00:31:49.000 What do you think?

00:31:50.000 Well, I never liked Elon Musk at school. 1.00

00:31:52.000 He spilled a slushie over my legs, that son of a bitch, and now he won't bomb Crimea. 1.00

00:31:56.000 Over here now is another person with a grudge against Elon Musk. 1.00

00:32:00.000 I invented that car, and then Elon Musk got all the money.

00:32:03.000 Anyone else got a grudge against Elon Musk?

00:32:06.000 Here's the weather presented to you by someone who doesn't like Elon Musk. 0.95

00:32:10.000 It's gonna be raining all over Elon Musk today, at least I fucking hope so. 0.73

00:32:13.000 Those foreign policy decisions are not subcontracted off to one billionaire. 0.88

00:32:19.000 They belong to the federal government and the federal government that represents all of the American people.

00:32:25.000 That's right, because that's what the government is, as we all know.

00:32:28.000 It represents the American people.

00:32:29.000 Like when you, the American taxpayer, you were doing your job, weren't you?

00:32:32.000 Whatever it is, you were doing your job, and then you went, what I want for half of this money is to make sure it goes to causing World War 3. 0.82

00:32:39.000 Remember when you voted for that and when you decided it?

00:32:41.000 That's what she just said.

00:32:41.000 She just said that.

00:32:42.000 You watched her say it on the news.

00:32:43.000 And of course, the person doing the news don't go, no one's ever said they wanted this war.

00:32:46.000 There's been a massive campaign, a complete immersive campaign to present you with a reality.

00:32:51.000 And then whenever anyone goes, whoa, whoa, whoa, how did we What about that coup in 2014?

00:32:54.000 What about NATO infringement on former Soviet terrorists?

00:32:57.000 YOU! 0.99

00:32:57.000 ARGH! 0.99

00:32:58.000 MISINFORMATION!

00:32:59.000 MISINFORMATION!

00:33:00.000 And when one billionaire has the pluck, moxie and guts to not bomb Crimea in case it causes Armageddon, he's the problem. 0.69

00:33:07.000 Senator Jack Reed is leading an aggressive probe into Elon Musk and SpaceX's role in the American war industry.

00:33:13.000 Probes already, huh?

00:33:14.000 You don't have to do it aggressively.

00:33:16.000 What's going on in there?

00:33:21.000 The investigation stems from an incident where SpaceX declined a request from the Ukrainian government to extend the range of Starlink for an attack on Russia.

00:33:28.000 That incident has been widely misreported as Musk ordering SpaceX to deactivate Starlink to thwart the Ukrainian attack.

00:33:34.000 When the news don't suit them, they change the news to make it more convenient.

00:33:38.000 Well, he didn't do that, actually.

00:33:39.000 What he did was he said that he's not going to extend it.

00:33:43.000 Well, that doesn't sound that bad.

00:33:44.000 What if we said he sort of switched it off to thwart Ukrainians? 0.63

00:33:47.000 Maybe we could say that he On Thursday, Senator Reid said his committee had launched an aggressive probe of Musk.

00:33:56.000 I don't like hearing aggressive probe of Musk to give it to you because it makes me think of a gland that's going to go... Stop Musk! 0.97

00:34:03.000 Keep probing.

00:34:04.000 Stop Musk!

00:34:05.000 The committee is aggressively probing this issue from every angle.

00:34:09.000 Neither Elon Musk nor any private citizen can have the last word when it comes to US national security.

00:34:09.000 Grow up.

00:34:15.000 What?

00:34:15.000 U.S.

00:34:16.000 national security?

00:34:17.000 I thought it was a humanitarian war in order to aid Ukrainian people who are under a criminal invasion from Russia.

00:34:21.000 When did it become an issue of U.S.

00:34:23.000 national security?

00:34:24.000 It's not the last word, actually.

00:34:26.000 It's an opportunity to have some more words.

00:34:29.000 I think what would more likely be the last word would be this. 0.75

00:34:32.000 Yes, you can bomb Crimea. 0.74

00:34:34.000 That! 0.99

00:34:34.000 The word Crimea! 0.99

00:34:36.000 Oh no, we said don't do that, look, now we use all the buttons.

00:34:38.000 It's not the last word, it's a word, it's a conversation.

00:34:41.000 So do you see how the censorship issue that Joe Biden's talking about, misinformation and X, and the controlling of the facilities that evidently belong to Elon Musk, and he has the right to say you can use it in this way or you can use it in that way, and I'll, you know, let me go on a limb here.

00:34:55.000 I personally think it's a good idea not to provoke Russia into a nuclear war because, you know, we'll all die.

00:35:00.000 So, In a sense, why is that being presented as the issue and the problem?

00:35:05.000 And look at this, like, perfectly reasonable people on CNN.

00:35:08.000 Kind, good-natured, care about people, like one of them soup kitchen politicians, like Elizabeth Warren. 0.99

00:35:14.000 It's Christmas Day and Elizabeth Warren is in the soup kitchen.

00:35:17.000 We better be able to bomb Russia when the hell we like! 0.99

00:35:17.000 What's she got to say? 0.99

00:35:20.000 Oh, okay.

00:35:22.000 Keep the bread roll.

00:35:23.000 Starlink is a product offered by SpaceX that allows users to connect to the internet by connecting to satellites in low orbit.

00:35:29.000 The system was designed to provide internet for civilian uses.

00:35:32.000 However, SpaceX does allow Kiev to use the system to allow for communication with the Ukrainian military.

00:35:37.000 After the Russian invasion of Kiev, Musk provided Starlink to Ukraine free of charge.

00:35:41.000 So he's actually, like, who else is doing that?

00:35:43.000 I mean, he's doing more than anyone.

00:35:45.000 And you can use Starlink free of charge.

00:35:47.000 Boo! 0.83

00:35:48.000 Boo! 1.00

00:35:49.000 I said we want to bomb Crimea, you bastards! 1.00

00:35:52.000 You goddamn Grinch! 1.00

00:35:53.000 You're a goddamn Grinch is what you are! 1.00

00:35:55.000 You're the Grinch who stole Armageddon, you goddamn Grinch! 1.00

00:35:59.000 I said they could have freedom. 1.00

00:35:59.000 Boo! 1.00

00:36:01.000 Boo! 0.83

00:36:02.000 No, they're saying... Boo earns!

00:36:05.000 Boo earns! 0.97

00:36:06.000 In fact, I'm going to use that incident to troll you on... Wait there a minute.

00:36:09.000 On X. Elon Musk.

00:36:10.000 X. Boo! 1.00

00:36:11.000 You bastard! 1.00

00:36:12.000 You don't get the last word on me, you son of a gun! 1.00

00:36:16.000 Still, the media and politicians have used this incident to attack Musk. 0.96

00:36:19.000 You can't trust the government.

00:36:20.000 You can't trust the media.

00:36:22.000 Can you trust the IRS?

00:36:24.000 Do you know that the IRS October 15th tax deadline, well it's right around the corner, you know how numbers work, well maybe you don't, that's why you need help.

00:36:31.000 So if you're scrambling, thinking about those estimated payments, oh no what are they?

00:36:35.000 Expense write-offs and messy deductions, I've got a recommendation for you.

00:36:39.000 The attorneys at Tax Network USA, they've been absolute lifesavers for many and their team has successfully saved clients over 1 billion in tax debts.

00:36:48.000 So whether you're in the hole for $10,000 or staring at a $10,000,000 debt, I hope you're not, they're ready to help you now.

00:36:55.000 And hey, no judgement, even if you haven't filed in one year, five years, or a whole decade, they're equipped to secure the best settlement for you.

00:37:01.000 They literally, they don't mind.

00:37:03.000 They're gonna help you.

00:37:04.000 Judging you!

00:37:05.000 So before the tax law runs out give taxnetworkusa.com forward slash brand a shout.

00:37:10.000 That's taxnetworkusa.com forward slash brand.

00:37:12.000 Link is in the description.

00:37:14.000 Now let's get back to seeing whether we trust the state and the legacy media more than good old Elon Musk.

00:37:21.000 A letter issued by Senators Jean Shaheen, Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Duckworth suggests Musk deactivated Starlink at the behest of the Kremlin.

00:37:28.000 There's no evidence from his account that SpaceX's decision was due to the Kremlin's urging.

00:37:33.000 It's not like the Democrats have ever accused their opponents of being involved with the Kremlin.

00:37:37.000 Oh no, they do that whenever they disagree with anybody.

00:37:41.000 Ah, Russia! 0.86

00:37:42.000 So remember at the beginning of this video we had Joe Biden saying about X and how X and the internet, you know, it's bad, a lot of disinformation.

00:37:49.000 Then there's people just saying, you know why Elon Musk did that?

00:37:51.000 Not because, you know, he never offered that service in the first place and maybe didn't want to facilitate Armageddon.

00:37:56.000 He did it because of Putin, because of the Kremlin.

00:37:58.000 How long before they produced pee tapes?

00:38:01.000 Ah!

00:38:01.000 They'll just say whatever they have to say to achieve whatever they want to achieve.

00:38:05.000 That is misinformation.

00:38:06.000 There's no evidence at all.

00:38:07.000 Why don't we just say Russia made them do it? 0.78

00:38:09.000 Oh, but it's not... Oh, yeah, of course.

00:38:10.000 Yeah, we're not bothered about truth, are we?

00:38:11.000 We're bothered about achieving the ends we want to achieve.

00:38:14.000 SpaceX's terms of service explain that due to US law, Stalin cannot be used to carry out military attacks.

00:38:20.000 You know another word they use for senators and congresspeople?

00:38:23.000 You'd think that a lawmaker would know the law. 0.97

00:38:23.000 Lawmakers. 0.97

00:38:26.000 They go, well obviously it was against the law to ask him to do that.

00:38:29.000 Not jump straight to, the Kremlin made him do that!

00:38:31.000 It was against the law!

00:38:32.000 Don't you know that?

00:38:33.000 Don't you know that it's actually against the law?

00:38:35.000 Why are you even asking Elon Musk to break the law?

00:38:38.000 You're supposed to actually be the people that create the law and then observe it and preserve it.

00:38:43.000 Yeah, but we don't actually do that, do we?

00:38:45.000 Additionally, Musk said that his concern was that Russia would escalate to nuclear war, not that he did not want Russian ships destroyed.

00:38:51.000 The law doesn't want to lead to Armageddon.

00:38:53.000 I mean, who's side are you on?

00:38:54.000 Remember, at the beginning, we asked you.

00:38:55.000 The state?

00:38:56.000 Well, look at the state, and then Elon Musk.

00:38:58.000 It seems like what Elon Musk is saying is, it's against the law, it's not in our terms of services, we never said we were going to do it in the first place, and I'm concerned that it will lead to Armageddon.

00:39:06.000 And what's the counter-argument against, I'm concerned it will lead to Armageddon?

00:39:09.000 It might not lead to Armageddon!

00:39:12.000 Oh yeah, I've not thought about that.

00:39:13.000 By the way, all four senators have suggested reviewing SpaceX's contract with the government as a result of the incident.

00:39:19.000 Let me look at that contract.

00:39:21.000 I can't believe we would do a deal that stopped us starting Armageddon.

00:39:24.000 Let me see the small... Oh no, it does say that.

00:39:26.000 Rewrite that.

00:39:27.000 Rewrite Read said the committee would look at the broader satellite market government contracting and the outsized role Mr. Musk and his company have taken.

00:39:36.000 They want to financially penalize him of course because he won't immediately bomb who they want him to when they say he should.

00:39:42.000 Amazing.

00:39:42.000 Meanwhile, elsewhere, misinformation.

00:39:44.000 Twitter.

00:39:45.000 Do you see how completely untrue realities can be presented to you as entirely truthful just by creating, curating, generating information And then shutting down alternatives.

00:39:56.000 Whoa whoa whoa, that's not true, excuse me, that's not true.

00:39:59.000 Senators Warren, Duckworth and Shaheen suggest SpaceX holding defence contracts pose a threat to national security.

00:40:05.000 It poses grave national security risk if DoD contractors are able to independently act to abrogate their provision of services, the letter says.

00:40:13.000 That would be a reasonable argument, if the roles were flipped.

00:40:15.000 Imagine if Elon Musk was facilitating a bombing that the United States government was saying should not happen because it might escalate a conflict and Elon Musk went I'm doing it anyway.

00:40:24.000 You'd go oh my god this is out of control.

00:40:26.000 Now on this channel we've numerous times let you know about our concerns about the relationship between the state and big tech and these new online security bills are obviously a great apex of this moment where the state are now finally able to use big tech in a way that means that they are going to be able to increase their ability to observe and control You.

00:40:45.000 But this situation here, oddly, is an example of where a big tech billionaire and magnate is making a more sensible, moral, strategic decision for the safety of the world, I would say.

00:40:57.000 I mean, I don't know.

00:40:57.000 Maybe I'm wrong.

00:40:58.000 Maybe you've got a counter argument.

00:40:59.000 No, no, no, you're out of line there, Russell.

00:41:01.000 Because, of course, if you were able to freely bomb Crimea at will, then that would what? 0.89

00:41:06.000 I don't want to be facetious here, but I don't see a reality where Russia are not a nuclear superpower that have a long history of fighting to the bitter end of conflicts. 0.57

00:41:15.000 I just don't see that version, but maybe Elizabeth Warren and CNN can explain that, or at least distract me from it for long enough for us all to just be picking our children's bones out of nuclear ash.

00:41:25.000 We are deeply concerned with the ability and willingness of SpaceX to interrupt their service at Mr. Musk's whim.

00:41:30.000 It's not whimsy to prevent Armageddon.

00:41:32.000 And for the purpose of handcuffing a sovereign country's self-defense, effectively defending Russian interest.

00:41:39.000 I'm astonished by their use of language.

00:41:41.000 A nation's interest.

00:41:43.000 Everything that you can learn from this story unravels the truth of all that has preceded it.

00:41:48.000 Remember, we've been told that all that America is doing is providing aid to an ally, that America don't benefit from this situation, that America aren't trying to deplete Russian resources or create a unipolar world or facilitate profit of the military-industrial complex, or indeed don't have We have relationships with tech or military industrial complex companies that could influence their decisions and abilities.

00:42:09.000 We're only noticing this extraordinarily because they've been countenanced with a view that prevents them from pursuing the trajectory they would like to, i.e.

00:42:17.000 an escalation of conflict, as people have said elsewhere, like Tucker, to a hot war with Russia.

00:42:22.000 It shows you that plainly relationships exist where there is collaboration between deep state, visible government and corporations.

00:42:31.000 We're only talking about this because someone prevented them from doing what they wanted to do.

00:42:35.000 That's why we're having a big disinformation, misinformation debate.

00:42:39.000 That's why independent media channels are being attacked and shut down.

00:42:43.000 Because what they want is complete control over the public sphere so they can just lie and say stuff like, oh, the Kremlin told Elon Musk to do that.

00:42:49.000 And if no one else is able to go, well, is there any evidence of that?

00:42:52.000 And look at what Elon Musk is saying on X or look at what people are saying on Rumble.

00:42:56.000 If you don't have those options, And pretty soon, unless you're careful, unless we're careful, unless we stay awake, that is what they're trying to generate.

00:43:02.000 They're trying to generate a state where dissent is impossible.

00:43:05.000 You saw what's been going on for the last couple of years.

00:43:07.000 Dissent, conversation even, is becoming delegitimized.

00:43:10.000 This is where it takes place.

00:43:12.000 Elon Musk is not being attacked because of misinformation, malinformation, etc.

00:43:16.000 Elon Musk is being attacked because they cannot control him.

00:43:20.000 And if they don't control him, he is a threat.

00:43:22.000 And they have to shut that threat down.

00:43:24.000 So, who do you believe?

00:43:26.000 The state, or Elon Musk?

00:43:28.000 Who, curiously, do you think has your best interests at heart?

00:43:31.000 I mean, I can't even believe I'm actually saying this!

00:43:33.000 The government, or a private billionaire?

00:43:36.000 A privately, independently wealthy billionaire?

00:43:38.000 You're gonna have to decide for yourself, but due to my recent experiences, I've got to tell you, I do not trust the legacy media, I do not trust the state, I know you don't either, and you're right not to trust them because they're liars.

00:43:51.000 But that's just what I think.

00:43:52.000 Let me know what you think in the chat.

00:43:53.000 see you in a second! So there we have it.

00:44:01.000 Who do you trust more?

00:44:02.000 Your taxpayer dollar funded government or an eccentric billionaire who appears not to want to induce an apocalypse?

00:44:11.000 Let us know in the chat.

00:44:12.000 Let us know in the comments.

00:44:14.000 And if it's within your means, press the red button, become a part of this movement.

00:44:18.000 This is the time where we have to gather together in strength, power and unity against the serious threats that are being opposed to our freedom.

00:44:27.000 All of our freedom.

00:44:29.000 And what a perfect time it is to be introducing Richard Hananya.

00:44:33.000 He's been on the show before.

00:44:34.000 He's a writer, researcher, president of the Centre of the Study in Partisanship and Ideology.

00:44:39.000 If you want to see him, you're going to have to join us over on Rumble.

00:44:42.000 Click the link in the description.

00:44:44.000 I'm going to be asking a lot of questions about the culture war, the actual war, censorship, surveillance, and the funding of the policies that shape the world, geopolitically, ideologically, all of it.

00:44:55.000 Thanks again, Richard.

00:44:57.000 It's lovely to see you.

00:44:58.000 Great to be here.

00:44:59.000 Good to see you too, Russell.

00:45:01.000 You've got a new book.

00:45:02.000 This is that book.

00:45:02.000 It's called The Origins of Woke, Civil Rights, Law, Corporate America and the Triumph of Identity Politics.

00:45:11.000 I'm actually interested in this subject because of the, I have to say at this point, superficial connection between woke politics And compassion and kindness and values that I'm actually, broadly speaking, sympathetic towards.

00:45:27.000 One might think at a glance that the woke movement is about permitting people to be who they are, being respectful of people's individual freedom and ability to identify how they want to, and therefore decentralizing power, allowing people more freedom of expression, which would include, of course, Free speech, the ability to openly communicate and openly disagree.

00:45:53.000 So tell me, mate, what is it that, you know, in particular about the origins of woke, and what is your take on how I superficially described what wokeness probably believes itself to be?

00:46:07.000 Yeah, you get at something important, Russell.

00:46:10.000 And one of the things I stress in the book is, first of all, a lot of what we call wokeness today did come from the law.

00:46:17.000 A lot of this stuff was requirements from government that said classify people by race, count the number of men and women you have, even down to what jokes you can tell in the workplace.

00:46:27.000 They could be potentially subject to to lawsuits, how men and women can flirt, you know, what words you can use, how you'd have to walk on eggshells on racial issues.

00:46:36.000 The HR industry in the 1960s and 70s really takes off in response to civil rights law because you needed a full-time cadre of managers just to comply with the law, just to know what you were allowed and not allowed to do.

00:46:50.000 And so, yeah, I mean, you know, if Wokeness sees itself as sort of letting individuality and different communities sort of flourish, it's quite the opposite.

00:46:59.000 I mean, there are there are decrees coming from Washington, D.C.

00:47:02.000 and from, you know, lawyers and courts that are telling people how to behave.

00:47:06.000 This is sort of just a new role for the American government, something that really didn't exist before the 1960s.

00:47:12.000 And the book argues that it's that a lot of the problems we see today culturally are sort of downstream of these laws that are decades old.

00:47:20.000 So in a sense, broadly and certainly personally, I feel that the civil rights movement was

00:47:28.000 important, significant, necessary, powerful.

00:47:32.000 It was for people of color, for people that are gay.

00:47:38.000 It was, in a sense, a real high point, a potential turning point culturally that could have led

00:47:44.000 to more individual and more cultural freedom.

00:47:49.000 I think you need the hardest of hearts not to be somewhat inspired by the anti-war movement

00:47:55.000 around Vietnam, the anti-draft movement, the inspiring figures that emerged, the Kennedys,

00:48:04.000 the Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, powerful advocates for freedom, people that were willing

00:48:10.000 to stand up and, in the cases of those that I just itinerated, die because of their anti-establishment

00:48:17.000 positions and views.

00:48:20.000 How did something that was plainly anti-authoritarian, because it believed authority to be fundamentally

00:48:26.000 corrupt, become pro-authoritarian?

00:48:30.000 you.

00:48:31.000 Yeah, I mean, it's definitely true that we shouldn't see the civil rights movement as all bad.

00:48:36.000 I mean, the Civil Rights Act was a big law that had a major impact on American society.

00:48:41.000 And, you know, first of all, it did some very good things.

00:48:44.000 It ended state-enforced racial discrimination.

00:48:48.000 So the Jim Crow laws in the South that said whites can only go here, blacks can only go there.

00:48:52.000 You know, there was laws on the books in many states where women just couldn't do certain jobs. 1.00

00:48:56.000 It got rid of that.

00:48:57.000 So in many ways, it did expand freedom.

00:49:01.000 Unfortunately, it didn't just stop there.

00:49:04.000 I mean, there was always within the civil rights movement, there was a sort of pro-liberty forces, but there were also communists involved in the civil rights movement.

00:49:11.000 There were also authoritarians.

00:49:13.000 And they adopted sort of a language of colorblindness, the language of freedom as a PR tactic.

00:49:19.000 They went over the country with that.

00:49:20.000 And there was overwhelming support for the Civil Rights Act when it was passed.

00:49:24.000 But most, you know, most Americans looked at that and said, OK, you know, we had a problem.

00:49:28.000 We took care of it.

00:49:30.000 But then, you know, the activists kept going.

00:49:32.000 And there were people basically overnight, just within the next few years, who wanted racial quotas,

00:49:37.000 who wanted to go to private industry and say, you have to hire this many people.

00:49:41.000 We need evidence of statistical discrimination.

00:49:44.000 So yeah, I mean, I don't say the Civil Rights Act was the root of all problems,

00:49:48.000 or civil rights themselves were the root of our problems.

00:49:50.000 I specifically say civil rights law, because there are a series of legal interpretations,

00:49:56.000 executive orders, judicial decisions, that set us on this path to now where basically

00:50:00.000 government is running people's day-to-day lives.

00:50:03.000 In a sense, it's excessive bureaucratic overreach that denies the possibility of individual

00:50:11.000 and communal freedom that's curiously antithetical to the stated and explicit aims

00:50:16.000 of that civil rights movement, certainly before it was formulated and legislated

00:50:22.000 for where one might assume just by glancing at the, Ephemera and culture created at that time that it was about a kind of flowing acceptance of humankind's broad optimism.

00:50:36.000 And in a sense, I suppose, old hippie that I am, that what I still find alluring is that it was a movement predicated on love.

00:50:45.000 Why are we, why ought we regard one another openly?

00:50:49.000 Because of love.

00:50:50.000 Because that the ultimate power in the universe ought be a unity What I suppose is curious is that these ideas of bureaucracy that ostensibly benefits definitely historically and potentially continually persecuted groups or individuals is being used to the advantage of curiously powerful institutions

00:51:21.000 And I sense, and this would be my point, that they don't actually care about the issues that they claim to, that it's in fact a type of smokescreen that allows new legislation, that allows new division, that allows people to be extracted from cultural discourse, that there's no actual legitimacy.

00:51:40.000 In short, I don't think they care about the environment, I don't think they care about gender politics.

00:51:46.000 I don't think they care about identity.

00:51:48.000 I think they care about power.

00:51:49.000 And I think that this is simply a vehicle for views, not views, for legislation and regulation that would otherwise be rejected as overtly authoritarian.

00:52:01.000 Yeah, I mean, there's, you know, a couple of ways to look at it.

00:52:03.000 I do believe that businesses and, you know, venture capital and all these so powerful forces in society do act in their own interests.

00:52:12.000 I guess, you know, you could either classify that as they're doing something to gain power or they're sort of just doing something to avoid, you know, problems with the government.

00:52:21.000 A lot of this stuff was sort of adopted reluctantly.

00:52:24.000 the government came to institutions, for example, the Ivy League universities, and said,

00:52:29.000 we want racial quotas, basically, we want to know if you're hiring enough women and minorities.

00:52:33.000 And a lot of these institutions like Columbia University, the story I tell in my book,

00:52:37.000 says that we don't even collect that data. We're a university. We're not going to go out and start

00:52:42.000 counting people by race and sex. And eventually, they're threatened, they're browbeaten by the

00:52:46.000 government, and then they give in, and then they give into it. So you can't generalize about

00:52:53.000 motives behind everyone who is involved with sort of pushing wilderness.

00:52:56.000 There's some people who certainly are true believers.

00:52:59.000 There's some people who are just doing what they think is in the best interest of their business.

00:53:04.000 I think that, like, one thing I emphasize in the book is the extent to which sort of, you know, our minds have been twisted by this stuff.

00:53:10.000 So, for example, just even the ways we classify race in the United States.

00:53:15.000 There's, you know, like corporations really, really care about how many Hispanics they have, right?

00:53:21.000 But this category of Hispanics really didn't exist before the 1960s, before the mid to late 1960s or 1970s really.

00:53:28.000 You can see that in sort of like use in the English language.

00:53:30.000 The word Hispanic, Latino almost didn't exist, right?

00:53:33.000 They don't care about, you know, number of Catholics versus number of Protestants versus number of Jews versus number of atheists because they don't collect the religious data.

00:53:41.000 You could have imagined, you know, an alternative universe civil rights regime, which was obsessed with religion rather than race.

00:53:46.000 Some countries are, you know, a lot more obsessed with religion and public policy than we are.

00:53:51.000 But just we became obsessed with race and the way, even the ways we classify race and even the ways we think about race, it becomes real.

00:53:57.000 I mean, some people like develop identities based on what government, how government classified them.

00:54:03.000 But the thing to stress here is people have all kinds of mixed motivations at the same time.

00:54:09.000 They're not even realizing the degree to which even their idealism is shaped by decisions made long ago by far-off government officials.

00:54:18.000 Because I feel that, even in the example you gave, that there is an advantage to looking at demographics, and are there economic, historical and social reasons why people from certain communities aren't getting opportunities?

00:54:36.000 It's pretty difficult to argue against that fact.

00:54:39.000 Pretty plain.

00:54:40.000 You look at prison populations, you look at economic considerations.

00:54:44.000 But I suppose one of the things that I query is the goal, the objective and vision that's being served.

00:54:51.000 Is there a vision that is about uniting people?

00:54:54.000 Is there a vision that's about looking for ways that we might form better nations, better communities, overcome differences, live In happy acceptance of one another's distinctions and freedom or does the goal appear to be to exacerbate existing tensions and in a way create opportunity for increased division and therefore the ability, I would say, of certain sectors and institutions to continue to accrue power and influence?

00:55:27.000 Yeah, I think it's I think it's more the latter.

00:55:29.000 I mean, there's no there is no sense in sort of people who are into wokeness, who are into pushing the frontiers of civil rights law, that there is like some steady state we're evolving to.

00:55:41.000 There's no one regulation.

00:55:42.000 Okay, like men, you know, can say this to women, or like, you need this percentage of blacks, and then like, we're done. 0.89

00:55:49.000 Right, there's there's just sort of no end point.

00:55:51.000 So it's always that's why there's always innovation based on top of innovation.

00:55:55.000 So first, it's you can't discriminate and so you can't hire blacks, you can't refuse to hire blacks, then it becomes statistical discrimination.

00:56:02.000 Okay, you know, if you, you know, if you give a test, and one group does better than the other, that's also a problem.

00:56:08.000 First, you want parity.

00:56:10.000 Even if you do achieve parity, like for example, women are more likely to graduate from college 1.00

00:56:17.000 in the United States, and I think in the UK too, than men are.

00:56:19.000 Women are still oppressed on college campuses. 1.00

00:56:22.000 We still need all these laws against, these regulations against flirting, 1.00

00:56:29.000 the broad definition of sexual assault.

00:56:31.000 These, you know, campus tribunals, women are treated as oppressed because they, you know, they don't play as many sports because they're not interested in sports. 1.00

00:56:38.000 So, like, civil rights law, like, really tries to get women, you know, more women playing sports or, you know, leading to the cancellation of certain men's sports. 0.95

00:56:46.000 The fact that women do better and more likely to graduate than men or, you know, they're actually overrepresented in things like student government and, like, music and other areas of life.

00:56:55.000 It doesn't matter.

00:56:56.000 There is a narrative being pushed by law, which is that whites, men, are the advantaged ones.

00:57:03.000 And basically, they're going to keep going and expanding the definition of discrimination.

00:57:10.000 And you can't even ask them for a vision.

00:57:13.000 What does it look like when it's all over?

00:57:15.000 When are we done with this thing?

00:57:17.000 So yeah, it's a very bleak outlook.

00:57:22.000 It divides the country, and that's why I wrote the book.

00:57:26.000 I want people to sort of see the roots of this stuff in law, and that's the way potentially to push back on it too.

00:57:33.000 I wonder if it's possible to derive from a materialistic and rationalist perspective that is guided by principles of bureaucracy and top-down control.

00:57:46.000 I wonder if this is a paradigm that can deliver a better society because it seems to be devoided of actual moral principle.

00:57:58.000 Whilst there is this sort of rhetorical inference of fairness and equality and redressing historic wrongs, all things that appear and seem to me, these are the aspects of wokeness that I feel like, oh yeah, that's beneficial, there should be, yeah, God, absolutely, of course the world should be as fair and as just and as open as possible.

00:58:20.000 What I sense is that there aren't Spiritual principles at the core of perhaps either wokeness or anti-wokeness.

00:58:27.000 What concerns me is that there isn't a... What's the prognosis?

00:58:34.000 And I recognize that this is what your book is in part about, Richard.

00:58:39.000 In a way, what is it in human evolution that tells us that we should be living in centrally organized communities of 300 million people trying to Bustle along according to a set of ideals that are plainly now no longer applicable.

00:58:58.000 Let me take it to a sort of very obvious and macro argument that, you know, in 2024, will it be Trump versus Biden?

00:59:07.000 Will it be Gavin Newsom versus Vivek Ramaswamy?

00:59:10.000 Who knows?

00:59:10.000 But it's very difficult to envisage an election where, on the day after, there is a happy and mutual celebration Of a democracy's job well done, it's likely to be, you stole the election, it was Russian interference.

00:59:26.000 No, you stole the election, it was because of 40-vote emissions.

00:59:31.000 So, in a way, do you not feel that, in a sense, what we are observing are the symptoms of a model that no longer can function?

00:59:40.000 What is the advantage for the ordinary American The ordinary French person, Senegalese person, English person, Finnish person of living in a centralised state where you are heavily taxed, heavily controlled by sets of institutions that plainly now no longer represent your interests.

01:00:03.000 Yeah, I mean there's a lot there.

01:00:04.000 I think, you know, you'd like the last chapter of my book where I talk really about, you know, sort of the decentralization of social policy.

01:00:12.000 Look, you know, I wouldn't go so as far to say sort of the nation-state, you know, is too big and it's failed.

01:00:17.000 I think it has many advantages that you really, you know, don't notice until it's gone.

01:00:22.000 Like, you know, the fact that, you know, we can You know, we can trade with, you know, all these people, you know, there's wealth advantages, there's economies of scale.

01:00:30.000 But there is a sense where we don't need and, you know, it's sort of becoming dysfunctional to have a centralized government to this extent.

01:00:38.000 And that is, you know, like in social engineering.

01:00:41.000 I mean, I think it's clear that you ask any conservative or any liberal, anybody on either side of the culture war, Like, do you believe there is coming one day where you can just defeat your enemies?

01:00:51.000 Like, one day, you know, liberals will have, you know, trans, you know, you know, complete trans acceptance, or the conservatives believe they're going to set up, like, a Christian theocracy or anything like that.

01:00:59.000 I think both sides know that, like, things are getting just more bitter and more divided.

01:01:03.000 And, like, even if one side wins the next election, gets 51% of the vote, The other side's going to be in control of other states and other locales, and they're going to push back, and we're going to fight these things out in the courts, and we're going to fight these things out in the media.

01:01:16.000 It's just sort of a pessimistic vision if you assume that we have to have a national culture where basically social policy and all these other things come from Washington.

01:01:27.000 It's sort of a winner-take-all system.

01:01:29.000 And what pushing back against civil rights law is about is, you know, I'm not giving people like, you know, a theology or telling them, you know, this is the way you live.

01:01:37.000 You know, I say very explicitly, like, I don't like what civil rights law does.

01:01:41.000 It says, you know, this is how you date.

01:01:42.000 This is how you flirt.

01:01:43.000 This is the kinds of tests you can use for employment.

01:01:45.000 These are the kinds of tests you can't use.

01:01:48.000 This is the kind of work environment you can have.

01:01:49.000 Maybe some of them you can, you know, you can have this sort of like club, like festive atmosphere.

01:01:54.000 Maybe some of them could be buttoned down.

01:01:55.000 You know, people can make these choices.

01:01:57.000 That's all I want.

01:01:58.000 Right.

01:01:58.000 And, you know, I think we, I think, you know, we get there.

01:02:00.000 I think that will take just a lot of the sort of the anger and the hatred out of public life.

01:02:05.000 It's curious because metropolitanism and cosmopolitanism include the idea, I think even in their most general understanding, of actually different cultures living harmoniously in acceptance of those differences.

01:02:20.000 And when you think of the broad archetypes that might be presented through fantasy fiction, like Tolkien or sci-fi, The idea that there are different, distinct communities with entirely different foods and values and these people believe this very strongly and these people believe this.

01:02:37.000 We find it kind of delightful.

01:02:39.000 In a sense, this is, I believe, a problem of globalism.

01:02:43.000 suddenly the requirements of globalism, which might ultimately be argued to be economic

01:02:50.000 considerations and considerations of dominion, demand a kind of hegemonic space in order

01:02:56.000 to function. So suddenly if you have a World Cup in Qatar, where it's economically apocyte

01:03:03.000 to hold it there, I'm talking about the soccer World Cup, you know, hold it in the winter,

01:03:07.000 we're going to hold it there. Now we have to look at Qatar's human rights record and

01:03:12.000 the number of people that died constructing the stadia and indeed this tolerated, this

01:03:18.000 fated tolerance and this idea of actual diversity. If at some point you don't, as you have said,

01:03:25.000 say whether it's a nation or a workplace, say, well, it appears that these people eat

01:03:29.000 this food and don't eat this food and believe in these values and worship this God or don't

01:03:34.000 worship God, unless you arrive at that point, what is what's going to happen?

01:03:38.000 War?

01:03:40.000 Yeah, right.

01:03:41.000 I mean, I love the sci-fi point.

01:03:44.000 I mean, these sort of fantasy worlds, they get at something deep in human nature.

01:03:47.000 And the way multiculturalism is sold is also sort of, you know, harkens to that, right?

01:03:52.000 It's like, you know, we have these people wear these costumes and they have these different foods.

01:03:56.000 But then civil rights law comes along and says sort of, OK, on relations between like fundamental stuff, relations between the sexes, like whether you can prefer your own ethnic group or whatever, we're going to say all these things.

01:04:06.000 These are rules that everyone has to apply the same way.

01:04:11.000 You know, it's an interesting question, because, you know, the decentralization, and you bring up the example of Qatar, you know, I would differentiate, because what Qatar, I think, or what some of these countries do in the developing world, or in Qatar's case in the rich world, is that they sort of, you know, they're doing sort of their version of civil rights law, but they're imposing it on their own society, right?

01:04:30.000 So, you know, I'm not the kind of person, I'm not a complete cultural relativist, right?

01:04:34.000 I don't think, like, if you stone women to death or something, you know, that's just your culture.

01:04:37.000 That's fine.

01:04:38.000 Doesn't mean we should go to war with these people.

01:04:40.000 But, you know, I am comfortable saying that, you know, there is, we can criticize that.

01:04:45.000 But when it comes to, like, yeah, I think the right to exit is very important to me.

01:04:50.000 Right, living in our own society, right?

01:04:52.000 If you have this Amish community, and they want to have, you know, very, very traditional gender roles, and you know, people can theoretically, and it's not like society has to go out of its way, okay, we're going to give you if you leave, you know, you have to sort of, it has to be sort of on your own, we can't just have like, you know, we leave, we, you know, we pay for everything, we take care of you.

01:05:07.000 But as long as you know, as long as you have sort of some degree of choice, and you're not bothering anyone else, and you're not forcing people into it, Yeah, I mean, this is what we should be aiming for because, you know what, we are different.

01:05:19.000 I mean, I think that's what we've learned.

01:05:20.000 I think that's what the culture war teaches us.

01:05:22.000 We have deeply, deeply different instincts and just beating someone over the head and saying, you know, you're a bigot and we're going to censor your views and, you know, you're not allowed to speak these things or, you know, talk like that.

01:05:33.000 It doesn't work.

01:05:34.000 That's the lesson of the last, you know, 20 years, 20 years or more of the culture war.

01:05:39.000 And yeah, we just need creative thinking into how to move to something better.

01:05:43.000 In a way, it suggests to me, and this sort of helps us conveniently, almost like I know what I'm doing for a living, segue into another aspect of your writing and your purview, seems to me that what is required is something that I was discussing when I was recently in the United States and I went on shows like Ben Shapiro's, who's obviously orthodox in his religious perspective and conservative in

01:06:11.000 his social views and Tucker Carlson who again seems to me just to be sort of an ultra

01:06:16.000 kind of liberal man with a spiritual perspective of anything on social issues. What I said to

01:06:25.000 them both was are you would you be and do you advocate for social systems with the condition

01:06:32.000 that you just outlined Richard of like no one should be held in a community they don't want to be

01:06:38.000 in obviously where if you take the views that you most organize around and say an obvious one

01:06:46.000 being their position on pro-life and pro-choice in the you know in particular with Ben Shapiro.

01:06:52.000 I said, like, would you be willing to advocate for decentralized power, community democracy, and almost be on a platform with people that were pro-choice, even though he's sort of avowedly pro-life?

01:07:08.000 If you recognize that what you ultimately would have is when it comes to sort of cultural social issues is democracy the ability to determine locally as locally as possible what the policies would be.

01:07:20.000 I recognize there are sort of points where that might get become an issue because gosh,

01:07:26.000 I guess any of us would want some sort of intervention in the advent of a child being

01:07:30.000 at risk or in danger or anyone being at risk or in danger.

01:07:33.000 But I suppose we have laws for child abuse and violence.

01:07:37.000 Those laws are already in place.

01:07:39.000 And I guess in a sense, we've already tackled that.

01:07:42.000 But what I feel like I'm trying to say, mate, is that you have to maximize democracy and

01:07:49.000 let go of the idea that there's going to be some sort of central ideology that's going

01:07:53.000 to be imposed on people.

01:07:54.000 Otherwise, you're in some forever war.

01:07:56.000 And it seems that forever wars, whether they're military or cultural, are advantageous to

01:08:01.000 elites.

01:08:03.000 So that's something I'm going to leave on the table.

01:08:05.000 But are you willing, for example, with your most cherished beliefs, to say, I fully accept that elsewhere people may oppose them and choose to vote against them?

01:08:19.000 Yeah, I mean, I, you know, understand that my preferences are not everyone's preferences.

01:08:23.000 And I understand that there's going to be different communities that adopt different things.

01:08:27.000 You know, I also believe, you know, one of the one of the things about this is that I believe my ideas are right.

01:08:32.000 So I believe that like, when you have freedom, like you can sort of learn from history, right?

01:08:36.000 Like, you know, I'm not a communist, I think markets are good.

01:08:39.000 So if you want to have a local, you know, area that, you know, has some kind of, you know, socialist system, I think that people are going to see that that doesn't work and that people are going to want to either move to something else or move to other areas, or they're going to want to change their system.

01:08:50.000 This happens all the time.

01:08:52.000 This is, you know, cultural evolution.

01:08:54.000 I saw the story that Chicago was thinking about, they don't have, because they won't take care

01:08:59.000 of their crime problem.

01:09:01.000 Walmart and all these stores are closing down, so there are no grocery stores.

01:09:04.000 So the city's going and saying, well, let's open our own city-run grocery stores.

01:09:09.000 And I'm like, OK, this experiment has been tried before.

01:09:12.000 Maybe we need reminders.

01:09:13.000 Maybe it's been too long since the Soviet Union collapsed.

01:09:16.000 Maybe they'll prove me wrong.

01:09:16.000 And who knows?

01:09:18.000 Maybe state-run grocery stores will be better than Walmart, and people will see that, and then other cities

01:09:23.000 I doubt it.

01:09:24.000 You know, I have confidence that, you know, the market system is better at delivering groceries.

01:09:28.000 But no, it's not a, you know, it's not a, you know, it's not a great crime against humanity or a great problem if they try it because, like always, we just learn from these things.

01:09:37.000 I suppose in the Walmart and State Run store example is kind of one of the points I imagine in Wokeness that say woke folk would say that The culture is built on all sorts of unquestioned assumptions around whiteness and maleness that have not been investigated or interrogated and have inbuilt in them prejudices and biases that are never properly evaluated and therefore having those those values interrogated

01:10:11.000 is important and valuable and if you take the example there of sort of walmart and the sort of inbuilt advantages that walmart have because of their sort of purchasing power their ability to pay relatively low wages and sort of i'm assuming opposed to sort of meaningful union movements and sort of sort of the built-in obsolescence models and the kind of my these are not investigated ideas but my assumption is that walmart in order to keep prices low engage in some practices that are probably ultimately not that beneficial if you look at your role, if

01:10:42.000 your relationship with Walmart as one beyond a consumer of their products. And in a way,

01:10:47.000 why would you want anything else from Walmart except Walmart do not exist in a vacuum and their

01:10:52.000 practices have an impact. And I suppose that I will not a sort of super pro regulation person, but

01:10:59.000 what I feel like is there already is regulation and that regulation where it's tax breaks,

01:11:03.000 the abilities of corporations to transcend national borders to evade sort of paying for the

01:11:09.000 way that the true cost of their businesses means that there is already regulation, even if it's

01:11:15.000 regulation, that's the lack of regulation to give you slightly paradoxical

01:11:20.000 perspective.

01:11:23.000 Yeah, I think we've come sort of full circle.

01:11:25.000 I think this goes back to what I was saying at the beginning, in that, like, there are advantages of the nation state.

01:11:30.000 We might disagree on the specifics of, like, what regulation, Walmart, you know, what are the good tax rates, you know, what are the good regulations to deal with externalities, which any big, you know, business will inflict on society.

01:11:42.000 Yeah, you know, we can discuss these things.

01:11:45.000 This is why I think we can't just be completely, you know, anarcho-capitalist, utopian, you know, abolish the state.

01:11:51.000 We're going to need the state for some things.

01:11:53.000 We're going to need something even as big as the United States of America.

01:11:56.000 We'll even need a global system.

01:11:57.000 We'll need international treaties and organizations.

01:12:00.000 But the stuff, you know, by God, the stuff that really doesn't affect other people, you know, the flirting, the friendships, the, you know, like who you associate with, what kind of environment you have at work.

01:12:13.000 Just leave people alone.

01:12:14.000 And, you know, our world will be a lot more peaceful.

01:12:16.000 Certainly, I feel like that.

01:12:19.000 Most people want to be left alone.

01:12:21.000 Most people want to be left alone.

01:12:22.000 There's a kind of weariness, I sense, like having zeal and evangelism in secular spaces when there are no deep principles that undergird the zeal that you might expect to find in a religious environment is odd.

01:12:39.000 It's like it's unbalanced and certainly it's something that, you know, I'm sort of aware of.

01:12:46.000 Mate, what's your point with the populism there?

01:12:48.000 Do you feel like sort of, because I was reading one of your Substack articles

01:12:52.000 and enjoying it, and it seemed that sort of what you're saying is that many people have kind of

01:12:56.000 almost frivolously downloaded perspectives that they've acquired from the sort of

01:13:01.000 the dispenser of political perspectives, like whether that's a legacy media outlet

01:13:07.000 or some online outlet, and they've just sort of acquired, oh, this is what I believe in,

01:13:11.000 and it's not being investigated correctly, and what is your point about populism?

01:13:15.000 because I've sort of seen advantages myself in populism.

01:13:19.000 And I was thinking about when I saw Steve Bannon some years ago say, you know, the future is going to be populist.

01:13:25.000 All we're discussing now is whether it's left or right wing populism that succeeds.

01:13:29.000 Is it going to be a kind of Sanders or, you know, whatever the next iteration of that type of leftism, if it can be even called that?

01:13:36.000 Or is it going to be sort of like a Brexit Trump type, you know, right wing progressivism?

01:13:41.000 What's your thoughts on that then?

01:13:44.000 Yeah, unquestionably what you're getting at.

01:13:46.000 There are healthy aspects of populism.

01:13:48.000 I think populism is unavoidable in a sort of mass democracy with communications technology and, you know, we're not, you know, we're not going to a dictatorship or, you know, a monarchy or anything anytime soon.

01:13:59.000 It's going to be there.

01:14:00.000 It's going to be part of our world.

01:14:01.000 It should be channeled in the right direction.

01:14:04.000 I think during COVID, I mean, I think we, you know, I'm sure you agree, a lot of the experts just went crazy.

01:14:09.000 And a lot of the populist backlash was just like, you know, people didn't have the most sophisticated ideas about epidemiology or the disease.

01:14:15.000 But, you know, they saw that, like, people were, you know, the government was really, really interfering with their lives.

01:14:20.000 And they pushed back and they said, no, less of this.

01:14:22.000 And, you know, you don't have that.

01:14:24.000 I think you have something like China, where they did zero COVID for years and years.

01:14:27.000 And they finally, you know, when protests came years later, they stopped locking people in their houses whenever there was, you know, even a small outbreak.

01:14:33.000 So, you know, I'm glad we have a democracy.

01:14:35.000 I'm glad we have some degree of populism that people push back on that and, you know, at least limited how long it was.

01:14:42.000 But my point about populism making people's worse is I think that what a lot of populists do, and this is for the right and the left, there's a sort of elite thing where you can have this elitist perspective where people shouldn't have any opinions or any information and they're better to just sort of run their lives.

01:14:59.000 There is sort of like another end of the spectrum where you go to the masses and you say, you should become super politicized and like your politics should be part of your identity.

01:15:08.000 And both sides will, you know, and it's actually divisive, but both sides will pretend like, you know, they speak for the people.

01:15:12.000 So like you have, you know, the right-wing populists who think everyone agrees with them on, you know, transgender issues and critical race theory, which is not true.

01:15:19.000 Like they want to ban this stuff.

01:15:20.000 It's going to have like a huge, you know, impact.

01:15:23.000 You have the left-wing populists who think everyone wants sort of, you know, socialist

01:15:26.000 economics and to fight the elites, which is also not true.

01:15:29.000 A lot of people are horrified by these things.

01:15:31.000 And that's fine.

01:15:33.000 People have different opinions.

01:15:34.000 I think that when you sort of, when you take these sort of narrow positions and then you

01:15:40.000 claim that, like, you know, you are speaking for the people and like, you know, and it

01:15:45.000 doesn't, and often doesn't leave room for like, okay, let's compartmentalize our politics.

01:15:49.000 You think this or you think I think that on the economics.

01:15:52.000 But, you know, my politics is not the main thing of who I am.

01:15:55.000 It sort of is for me because, you know, I do this for a living.

01:15:58.000 But for ninety nine point something percent of people, their politics is a very small part of their life.

01:16:03.000 And, you know, and they can they can deal with other people who have different values as long as they're not talking about, you know, whether the 2020 election was stolen or the vaccine or something like that.

01:16:13.000 They can just get along and they can have happy, healthy relationships.

01:16:16.000 I don't think it's a coincidence that, you know, you've probably seen the charts where like the, you know, number of people getting married, the number of people like young people, you know, hanging out with friends, seeing people in person, you know, even drinking, getting into fights, like anything that involves a human to human contact has been going down in the last 30 years, um, at least for young people.

01:16:35.000 And then the, uh, you know, like interest in politics has sort of become more intense over the, over that time period.

01:16:41.000 And I don't think that's a coincidence.

01:16:43.000 I think it's become sort of a substitute for life, for relationships, for work, for accomplishing things in your life, for starting families, for having kids, to having meaningful friendships.

01:16:56.000 And maybe I'm generalizing too much to put that under the umbrella of populism, but I do see it as related.

01:17:01.000 I do see it as making politics central to who people are, and that's what I'm arguing against.

01:17:06.000 I feel like a lot of the populism you were describing, a lot of the anti-lockdown populism and everyone suddenly needing to become an expert in epidemiology or whatever, it was a kind of a response, as you've indicated, to government overreach.

01:17:21.000 And I was thinking the problem is, in his mind, perspective on this Richard is not necessarily an over-politicization

01:17:29.000 of a population but this curious polarity that exists between very atomized and

01:17:33.000 individualized lives where actually your role really is to fulfill some economic obligations

01:17:40.000 generally speaking in a job that you wouldn't do if you didn't have to and then sort of being an online

01:17:46.000 commentator or a conversational pundit participant in cultural issues rather than what

01:17:53.000 might be a meaningful type of political engagement for an average person and I'll include myself in

01:17:59.000 this is how am I involved in the organization of my community and my family

01:18:05.000 What's my role and what's my purpose?

01:18:08.000 And I sometimes take recourse to, for hundreds of thousands of years, from For the pre-agricultural incarnation of our kind, we lived necessarily harmoniously in groups of 30 to 100 people, where it was explicit to the point where it needn't be stated that our survival was tethered to cooperation with one another, that our relationship to our environment was evident and necessary for our survival, whether that's through hunting or gathering or small-scale agriculture.

01:18:41.000 And I feel that, of course, what I am... I'm not proposing some arcane Rousseauian bounce back to some Neolithic version of life.

01:18:52.000 I am so grateful for technology and for medicine and for all of the advances we have.

01:18:57.000 But when it's like looking at this kind of hardware of a human being and the kind of cultural groups that we might form, I feel like, are we not neglecting millennia of evidence of like people ought be involved in the

01:19:11.000 organization of their lives and when people are totally disenfranchised just sloshing about in some nihilistic

01:19:17.000 oh this week we really care about Ukraine that's over now we care about this this week 0.99

01:19:21.000 right now you've got to have an opinion on this now this is what we're doing like what the fuck's 0.97

01:19:25.000 it got to do with me I don't even live in this world I don't know 0.96

01:19:28.000 It's abstract.

01:19:30.000 We live in this community. 0.99

01:19:31.000 These are the 75 relationships that I can fucking handle. 0.98

01:19:34.000 These are the resources. 0.97

01:19:35.000 And everything's become so, again, needlessly translocated elsewhere that you're irrelevant.

01:19:44.000 And increasingly likely to be irrelevant as culture becomes more and more technologized. 0.98

01:19:48.000 Technologized to the point where we're just redundant little pods that get shit food pumped in one end and then pharma pumped in at the other end of your life. 1.00

01:19:57.000 Fuck off to the graveyard. 1.00

01:19:58.000 You know, there's no actual... Who are you in your life? 1.00

01:20:02.000 How are you participating in your life?

01:20:04.000 What is your value?

01:20:05.000 Not some impersonation of a life, but a life that has meaning, you know?

01:20:10.000 Yeah, I mean, you know, the outdated hardware problem, you know, that you point to is real.

01:20:16.000 You know, it's a sort of consequence, you know, a natural consequence of sort of technological advancement.

01:20:22.000 I mean, and, you know, it's, you know, like you can't, you know, you have to Is this the temptation to say, you know, we can only go back just because it's not possible?

01:20:29.000 I mean, it's clear people want the modern science, the modern medicine, you know, modern technology, you know, the small groups where, you know, you know, 60 people your whole lives that can be, you can imagine that could be very suffocating.

01:20:40.000 Some people like to move to the big city, you know, where they, you know, they can sort of start over, they can have new relationships, they're not, you know, limited by their reputation or what's happened in the past.

01:20:50.000 And so, yeah, I mean, there, you know, there is like, there has to be a way to sort of I wonder.

01:20:54.000 these things and there has to be a way to sort of, you know, not, you know, some

01:21:00.000 groups do reject technology, I mean you have the Amish and stuff, I mean, but

01:21:03.000 they're, you know, a small minority and it'll be a very small number of people

01:21:06.000 who will ever do that. The rest of us have to sort of, you know, hopefully use

01:21:10.000 the tools of technology to maybe create something more consistent.

01:21:15.000 But what I consider it, Richard, is that technology is a subset of an economic ideology that biases its trajectory

01:21:20.000 continually and And perhaps we needn't look any further than diet for an example of what happens if you have exaggerated access to sugar and fat and seed oils.

01:21:29.000 Oh, you're not evolved for that.

01:21:31.000 It's ruined you.

01:21:32.000 So it's not like that you ban sugar and fat.

01:21:35.000 You just tell people you're not evolved for that.

01:21:38.000 And if you want to live in a metropolis or live entirely a life online, you are out of step with what your hardware is

01:21:46.000 and you're likely to suffer severe psychological consequences.

01:21:49.000 And we are going to create models that are without like suddenly pretending that, you know, Alexander Graham Bell

01:21:57.000 and Logie Baird were never born.

01:21:58.000 We're going to build communities that use technology, but we are not used by that technology.

01:22:06.000 The technology is a tool for furthering our culture.

01:22:09.000 And when we look at some of the unqueried myths of our time, i.e.

01:22:12.000 progressivism, which I believe, because of the false markers of technology and medicine, we consider that we are continually, oh look, we're off into space, oh my god, there's a vaccine for that and a tablet for that.

01:22:22.000 Well actually, elsewhere, we are atrophying and perhaps receding, you know, that this is perhaps a kind of dark age, that we're not In connection with subtler ideas that are not so easy to materialistically appreciate and I think that to sort of just like you know your example of a metropolis is a good one I think because I think that you could say of course who hasn't been drunk on life in New Orleans or Manhattan or Gideon Berlin and the sort of what can be offered the entertainment the sort of mad and pleasurable cataclysm of a city is a joy of course but

01:22:58.000 I feel that the carnival is something that human beings have always tended towards.

01:23:02.000 Temporary stepping out of being in step and harmony with what we are evolved for.

01:23:09.000 Again, actually mate, to refer to some earlier parts of our conversation, it's not something that I would imagine being imposed from the top down.

01:23:16.000 You lot, buttons are banned and you're going to wear this wide brimmed hat.

01:23:19.000 It's more like, One of the reasons you might be suffering the same way that people like we if you eat sugar the whole time now you know that it's likely to be detrimental and I wonder if there are behavioral components that might be similar to that?

01:23:34.000 Yeah I think you're right and I think we see a little bit of that like with social media you know there's been a lot of talk of social media and you know it's a new thing and you know causing mental damage to young people particularly young girls But now, I've noticed a lot more, like you'll go to an

01:23:48.000 event and they'll say, just no phones, just absolutely keep your phone off.

01:23:52.000 There does seem to be sort of an adjustment where people aren't just not naively buying,

01:23:56.000 okay, it feels good to check the iPad right now, just do it.

01:23:59.000 I think there's more of a sense of like, okay, this technology is good, but you need to limit

01:24:04.000 it in certain ways.

01:24:06.000 I think we see that with others.

01:24:07.000 When you talk about the food example, I mean, it's just so hard.

01:24:10.000 I don't think you've ever struggled with your weight, but I've been fat at different periods

01:24:14.000 my life and it just tastes good.

01:24:17.000 It is tasty.

01:24:20.000 Without the hard bands or without these other things, I don't know.

01:24:24.000 I think I might be a little bit more open to technology than you.

01:24:27.000 We have fat pills now, right?

01:24:29.000 We have these pills that you take and you probably think, well, that's just pharma coming in and trying to solve our problems.

01:24:35.000 I'm pessimistic that you're just going to tell people, well, you know, put down those Doritos, put down that cake, man.

01:24:40.000 You go to an American supermarket.

01:24:42.000 I can see, you know, I just don't think human nature is meant to deal with that.

01:24:45.000 And, you know, maybe, maybe pharma is, you know, the least bad outcome.

01:24:49.000 Yeah.

01:24:50.000 Mate, we could talk for a long time.

01:24:51.000 I find you really easy to talk to and enjoyable to communicate with.

01:24:55.000 Thank you, Richard.

01:24:57.000 It's brilliant to talk to you again.

01:25:00.000 This is Richard's book.

01:25:01.000 Thank you, Russell.

01:25:01.000 Thank you, man.

01:25:02.000 The Origins of Woke.

01:25:03.000 It's available now.

01:25:04.000 We'll post a link to that in the description.

01:25:07.000 Also, you can follow Richard's writing on Substack as well.

01:25:11.000 I was referencing some of those articles in our conversation just then.

01:25:14.000 Thanks for joining us, Richard.

01:25:15.000 I'll see you again soon, I hope.

01:25:17.000 Yeah, it's been a pleasure, Russell.

01:25:18.000 Thank you.

01:25:19.000 Take it easy my friend.

01:25:20.000 Thank you.

01:25:21.000 Well, what a fantastic show it's been today.

01:25:23.000 Thank you so much for joining us and supporting us.

01:25:25.000 If you want to support us further, press the red button, become an Awakened Wonder.

01:25:29.000 We need your support more than ever, particularly if we are going to create these kind of independent

01:25:32.000 communities that Richard and I were continually discussing.

01:25:36.000 Elsewise we may be lost in yet another deluge.

01:25:39.000 A second flood is upon the earth.

01:25:41.000 A flood of ignorance and annihilation.

01:25:44.000 But we can build rafts together.

01:25:46.000 We can awaken in true unity together.

01:25:49.000 Hey, guess who we've got on the show tomorrow?

01:25:50.000 We've got Scott Adams, the fellow that created Dilbert.

01:25:52.000 He's got himself in awe.

01:25:54.000 Sorts of controversy, I believe.

01:25:55.000 He talks a lot about Trump and the impact of Trump and Trump's abilities as a master persuader.

01:26:00.000 It will be a fantastic conversation.

01:26:02.000 Join us for that tomorrow.

01:26:04.000 We've also got guests like Tim Pool coming up soon.

01:26:06.000 Join us for that conversation.

01:26:08.000 And remember, we need you now more than ever.

01:26:10.000 We need you to support our voice.

01:26:12.000 I love you.

01:26:13.000 See you tomorrow.

01:26:14.000 Not for more of the same.

01:26:15.000 I'd never insult you with that, but for more of the different.

01:26:18.000 Until then, if you can, stay free.

Stay Free - Russel Brand - October 04, 2023

WOAH! Biden & Musk Go To WAR Over Free Speech - They’re Coming For Us ALL - Stay Free #216

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript