Latest / Quantum Bombs / Why Voting Furthers Corruption & Wastes Our Time — Founding Fathers Left Us a Way Out 💥
Transcript
- The Constitution. Our rule book has been amended 27 times by Washington. We the people have a way to rewrite our own constitution and it's through article five. We've used it zero times, which is the peaceful way out. Our founding fathers literally wrote in for us to do when shit hits the fan, yet no one's talking about it in the media, bitching about moaning and complaining about our corrupt government and not once have we ever organized enough, paid attention to what the founding fathers put together for us so we could change our constitution instead of voting our way out of it. We could vote our way out of it as the ball just goes back and forth. Physics keeps doing what physics does. We've never pulled the lever and the lever's been here the whole time because you're being fed a bill of lies and being told that voting is the solution and we the people would no longer be taxed on our income. Maximum freedom allows maximum corruption. So there are actually treasonous groups. Quantum bombs. Welcome to Quantum Bombs, a commentary show on the human condition through metaphysics and freedom. Certainly you've lived long enough in life to have a recollection, a moment where you realize that everything around us, everything that things are built on, our institutions, things that you've been taught your whole life that you believe in, that it's just a farce. There is money and power behind it's programming and it's all really just a facade. I hope you've had those moments of clarity on things. But oh no, could she actually be saying it's something as easy and kosher and well-packaged, easy to swallow, very easy for you to understand that the only way you could be a good person is just repeat and tote the line. Go out and vote, that's it. I kind of wonder how, yes, normies get it, but even the intellectual minds, the people that think a little bit more like myself, a lot of you guys are just, that's the solution. Just go out and vote the most ideological person closest to your values and give yourself a gold star, you're being a good citizen. Reminds me of those pictures where there's the fork in the road and you have all the people going in one direction and there's the one guy and all of you looking at this meme, understand and know that the one person walking on the other fork in the road has the better idea, right? In the end, it's the better choice. So what could I be saying? I'm gonna provide you the solution around voting because we all know that it isn't really working out in our favor. Do you vote? Do I vote? Yeah, I vote, once every four years, why? That's cute, he still believes in the politicians. What? You don't choose them, you choose from them. What do you mean? It means that we pick them first. Then we give you a nice little menu. Left, right, vegan, gluten-free, fascism, hell. Whatever makes you feel involved. And you may not like hearing that, right? Because we're all geared up for this election coming, yes. But this is a philosophical show and I'm gonna say my philosophical thesis at the top is that by voting, you're just saying, I agree to further corruption. I agree to further the farce. If that is even a thing that you could further a farce. We're furthering a farce. I am participating in the problem versus being the solution which is what I will provide for you today on the show. I'm gonna give you two peaceful ways out of this matrix, of this crap show, of the one bastion of all the countries that should be the saving grace that's turned into a pile of dog poo. I'm gonna give you two ways to fix it. Of three, two being peaceful, one being not. So before we get started, the point being is it's a trick, guys. How do I go out and vote for a country that is taxing my income? It's not how it was set up. The very taxation on my income proves that I am indeed 100% a slave and I am not free because I don't even own my own labor. A percentage of what I do is already owned by a government. And that's what I mean. It's all about the framing. That's the trick. You're out there framing questions in the media saying, how much should we be taxed? Who should be taxed? The real framing of the question is, how is our government even allowed to tax us? So again, we're just sheeple walking into the wrong directions, continuing into this election cycle with these dumb questions given to us by the propped up media because the media is hiding the one thing that I'm gonna introduce to you today that'll get us out of our poop show. So let's get started. All right, I'm gonna walk us through this with something that we can all understand because I really wanna paint this for you. We can all agree 90% of Republicans and 86% of Democrats say, we want term limits for both the House and the Senate. 79% of us want age limits. We don't need Mitch McConnell being wheeled in by caretakers while he's wearing a diaper and drooling and going, as a vote, right? So we can now agree that the will of the people never happens. This is something that has always bothered me is specifically it came up to my brain in a strong way in COVID when they were making rules that I'm like, but this isn't what we want. Like, wait, who's asking us what we want? My premise, my thesis is that this is all about the seat. The seat says, just imagine an auditorium with some empty seats and you're voting in the people to sit into the seat. The seat has a white piece of paper and it says corruption and it's taped to the seat. And all you are doing is filling the seat that no matter who assumes the seat will be corrupt. You are voting on who is going to sit in the seat instead of the rules that dictate what the seat can do. I wanna bring up Tulsi Gabbard when she, I think she was on Rogan and she was saying that when she first got into office, she was a Democrat and she went to across the aisle to talk to some of her Republican friends and she was berated and scolded by the Democrat saying, you will never do that again. You will be out, we do not converse with them. How horrible was it for me to hear that our politicians, it's a rule, a standing rule, that we're actually treated like the enemy as opposed to being one country working together and that diversity and thought and ideology is our strength for us to sit out and actually, you know how most things can be solved with communication? We're actually gonna communicate and figure out like, ah, you're right, you're right across the aisle. You did have the better way to put on that. Another interesting thing is Matthew McConaughey was in the media just this last two weeks. So they've been telling us for years that an independent vote is a wasted vote. Well, a great question for our times is, how's that unwaisted vote been working out for you? And I was interested to hear the take because we're all looking for something different, which is what I'm gonna give you. But what he's proposing after I thought about it is just supporting the problem. He basically brought up that the independent party is probably the largest party and that we just need to start backing the independent and then we would have three party system. And so we'd have a middle ground to our far left and far right. I'm like, we don't need more middle. Everything we've been getting is middle because all we do is go back between right and left, right and left. Debt grows, corruption grows, debt grows, corruption grows, fraud grows, fraud, fraud. That doesn't help anything. I mean, I logic through this to make this show for you with AI about 15 minutes in conversation to come up with the premise of my show. So I would like to think Matthew McConaughey is smarter than that, but apparently, yes, I'm putting in my rocks right now that I bet my idea is better than his. Back to Thomas Massey at the top, is that this year in May, 2026, he lost a primary election to Trump's endorsed challenger. He forgot his name because it doesn't matter, but he had a ton of money coming in from Israel and other backers to had backed somebody we've never heard of before to outvote probably the last standing non-corrupt politician in politics today, which was Thomas Massey, who was happy to reach across the aisle and work with the Democrats, who was happy to call out pedophiles, who was happy to say, why are we spending money? The point being is that you're not gonna argue my logic when I say power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Well, Beth, we didn't give our politicians absolute power via our constitution. Yes, we didn't, correct. Over time, we have been bad stewards and we're gonna get with that, meaning we've allowed them to have absolute power that has been corrupted. So why the House and Senate won't fix it? Let's go back to our term limits. The will of the people were as high as 90%. Why aren't we fixing it? Because they'd be voting to limit themselves. I mean, that's the best answer I have. In 1995, Arkansas said, well, hey, we don't wanna keep sending people to Washington and let them live out in diapers. This is embarrassing. We wanna fix the problem. But in 95, the Supreme Court said, well, actually no, you the state can't amend what's happening at a federal level. It would need to be done a different way. Which brings me to, there's three ways out of this poop show of the United States failed government. Number one is a revolution. That's the non-peaceful route that our founding fathers said it is our duty to do. We'll go over it shortly and quickly. Two, the Velvet Revolution will go over shortly and quickly and it is a peaceful way out. And the third is article five, which is the peaceful way out. Our founding fathers literally wrote in for us to do when shit hits the fan, yet no one's talking about it in the media or at all. And we've never done it before. Quickly for our revolution. We know that Thomas Jefferson wrote our Declaration of Independence. 56 people signed it. There is a quote on screen that is basically reiterating, a government only has its power because the people agree to it. Meaning we're consenting the government to have some power. When the government turns on us, we have the power to take the power back. We have the duty to take the power back. The founders called throwing off a corrupt government our duty and today's laws call it a crime. What I mean by that is in 1861, the Yankees and the Confederacy were beefing. They were fearful that they were using force to come in and overthrow the government. And so they created this law in the books. And it's equals organizing to do it by force, to overthrow the government with force equals seditious conspiracy and you get up to 20 years in prison. So we have that big contradiction. Our founding fathers saying it's necessary. It's your duty to overthrow the government. But then we made a law saying, oh, you can't do it with force, right? But it's still a good standing law because you could say, let's just say you have a group of people that could be bad and wanna overthrow a government that everybody loves and it's working quite fine for no reason. Or they could also be legitimate cause, right? That we don't have a good government. But let's go back quickly. I wanna make note of what it says. It is their right, it is their duty to throw off such government and to provide new guards for their future security. So our founding fathers always mentioned that when we're overthrowing a government, you would already have a new government in place. Well, for them, it was quite easy to form their new government before they kicked off with the king across the ocean because they had an ocean that required months of a journey to travel the three to 4,000 miles it would take. Whereas now our government's all around us. Can we do that? And that leads me to slide number two, velvet revolution for lack of a better term. That's what I'm gonna call it. This allows us, it is legal for us to meet, organize and write a new government on paper. And I can sign up millions to my proposed new perfect government. The only time I could get in trouble and it would be unlawful would be if I started to create, if I acted like a government and started taxing the people that liked my ideas, if I created laws for you guys or gave you some type of ID, which is quite interesting, right? Because where do you draw the line with ID? Can I give you a membership card? Can you pay a membership due? Or is that due a tax? You know, it's tricky. But this was actually brought up in 1969, the Supreme Court even calling for the overthrow protected speech unless it's meant to start violence right then. So it's like you've got, you could form this perfect coalition of people to back this perfect new government that we are writing down on paper and meeting about. We just can never call for any type of violence or any type of physical movement. And the part that grants us this, it says Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or the right of the people to peacefully assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. This has happened before in history, 1989 in Czechoslovakia, millions protested general strike. So it's against communism. The government stepped down in about six weeks. So to be clear, guys, the Velvet Revolution is your right to organize, write down and create the most perfect government that you want us all to switch to by choice, not force. And it's possible, it's been done before. Moving on to the oh crap lever that our founding fathers wrote in. This is our oh poop switch. It's article five, huh? We wrote the constitution 11 years after the declaration and this is our rules that we live by, right? The constitution, when they were making it, George Mason speculated that if we had an oppressive government, they won't let us change it. He even wrote it, says no amendments of the proper kind would ever be obtained by the people if the government should become oppressive. So he already speculated on that and that is why the same day he wrote in article five into our constitution. The numbers you see on screen are the scoreboard. 27 times Washington, our House and Senate has voted to change our constitution. We the people have voted zero times to change their own constitution. So we're bitching about moaning and complaining about our corrupt government and not once have we ever organized enough, paid attention to what the founding fathers put together for us so we could change our constitution instead of voting our way out of it. We could vote our way out of it as the ball just goes back and forth. Physics keeps doing what physics does. We've never pulled the lever and the lever's been here the whole time. So that's why I say we've been bad stewards and citizens for over 113 years. Why 113 years? Because in 1913 is when we decided we would create an income tax. You know, we left our prior country because we were being taxed on goods too much. They weren't even taxing our income yet. Now you could say, well Beth in 1913 when they proposed the income tax as they do most things, it was just, we're gonna break the law and we know we're gonna break the law. We're gonna break the constitution. We're gonna amend the constitution but we're just gonna do it a little bit guys. So let us do it, right? Because we're only going to tax one to 7% of the, and it's only the rich people. Well then fast forward to today. It's now been adopted around the world, our poor practice. And it's up to 37% and we, you know, the rest is history. So we are bad stewards. We're lazy citizens. Why? Because we are as human beings, the human condition is reactive, not proactive. So I'm proactively saying, why don't we just look back at the lever that the founding fathers gave us to get out of this crap situation because you're being fed a bill of lies and being told that voting is the solution. On to the numbers. What is this magic lever you talk about? My AI producing assistant boned me on my header. It should say the numbers, two thirds and three quarters. That's what you gotta remember. What the founding fathers said is, if the states, so this means our local governments, can agree that there's an issue or something that the people wanna change, all you have to do is get enough states, two thirds to sign on to say, we want to meet up federally at the federal level and change this federal law. Two thirds of you need to say it, three quarters of them are needed to approve it. And then that law is changed. All the things you're bitching about that's wrong with government, all the things that helps it stays corrupt could be overwritten and simple as a weekend with a convention. But for some reason in our history, we've never thought to do it. Well, the reason I have on screen, the difference between 1787 and today, because I don't think the founding fathers thought it through to the point of the capacity of the states we have today. My argument is that back then, it was easier to get people, 13 people to pay attention and listen. Whereas today, I relate it to something like an RSVP to a party. When I heard this, I was just like kind of, also kind of irate and annoyed because this also wasn't the perfect solution because I already knew the answer. All politicians do what they do best. They don't do anything. They gaslight you, they lie to you. In this situation, they just don't RSVP at all. And that's what a lot of people do, right? It's the ghosting. Oh, I didn't ghost you. You didn't, you're right. You didn't do anything, but you can't say I did anything wrong because I didn't do anything. But again, I think we do have a big problem. Let's look at some of the current situations. So then first off, the problem I'm facing with you right now making the show is the problem I'm gonna name at the top. There's no language formed around this. Like why isn't the media teaching you about Article 5, State of Conventions? The media is not telling you because they're 100% corrupt. Topic, I'm literally creating it as we're speaking, there's a topic you wanna change, like term limits. And the, so the topic is called a campaign. So I, Beth Hagendorf, am now campaigning on the topic to change term limits. And I'm now gonna get my state representative from Texas to sign on that this is it. So let's go through four examples we have of topics that have been proposed. Starting on the bottom, money out of politics. This is gonna limit how much corporations and groups spending getting candidates elected. There's five states, surprising California is one of them, that is saying they want money out of politics. So what other treasonous states basically and representatives haven't signed on to remove money out of politics, right? That one's a bit of a trippy slippery slope. It's a tough topic to sell, we'll talk about why later. But term limits, only 12 states have signed on to say we want 12, we want term limits. So do you see what I'm saying? You're being told to vote this week right now when the very candidates you're voting on could be saying, I support Article 5 and term limits vote for me. But you don't even know the language. If someone even told you Article 5, you don't even know what it means. But I indeed, if we're voting, would ask them in a town hall right away. Why aren't you supporting Article 5 on term limits? Tell me why you wanna serve me in a diaper drooling. Tell me, like seriously, you owe it to me. I'm supposed to vote for you. We don't hold people to the fire. Balance budget, this is the closest one in our history. From 1975 to 1983, we got up to 32 states. This is state representatives guys. This could be anybody that represents your state, for Texas would be the house of the Senate. Any one of those people can sign up saying, aha, I'm signing up the state of Texas that I want to balance the budget. And I think it's important our federal government do so. We almost got it. We only needed to get to 34 states, but it never happened. And then what happens over time? They're lobbied in their ear to, hey, remove yourself off. We don't need to balance this budget. We're fixing to send you millions of dollars if you vote this way. So just remove your name off that balance budget. So it disappeared. Convention of states. That's the biggest one of today that we have. We have 20 brave states asking for three things. Yes guys, they bundled it. Limit federal spending. That's balancing the budgets, spending caps, how much they're taxing us, or if taxes should happen at all. Number two, limit federal power. Shrink what Washington controls. And number three, it wants to revisit term limits for house and Senate. So 20 states today has said that they want to meet and change the literal constitution on those three things. Wouldn't that be really important your states on that list? How many of you even know about this? So going on, okay, the rehearsal. This has happened before by cosplay. And in September, 2016, 137 delegates from all 50 of our states, actual real lawmakers, went to Virginia and they held a mock convention. What was on the table? They voted two major things. They voted to change the term limits, maximum of 12 years for both house and Senate. And also they voted Congress shall not impose taxes or other exactions upon incomes, gifts, or estates. So they actually voted in that we will no longer be taxed on our future income and gifts or estates. So if this actually happened, you already have representatives that are real and live and breathing that would have voted to change this and we the people would no longer be taxed on our income. I wanted to bring up bundling. I thought it was also quite frustrating researching article five, that while we are providing a solution, they're already doing the old habit of politicians by bundling it, and I'm gonna call bungling it. Bungling, bundling and bungling, baby, bundling and bungling, just keep on going with it. Even the exit is bundled. Convention of states packs three topics into one. And I'm sure you're aware, this is why most bills don't get passed. This is why the physics ball's always on my side. Right, left, right, left. You're just buying into the hype. Perfect example in September of this year, we had it on the table that Congress shall no longer be allowed to buy stocks. But we also put in the voter photo voter ID is required. Well, we already know that the Democrats call it a poison pill. So of course it failed. 53 to 47, we needed 60 votes. So till this day, Congress can still buy stocks. So are the Republicans to blame to put up a messy bill knowing that the Democrats are gonna vote against it? You see, so you can't just blame the Democrats. The Republicans are completely also the ones putting up a dumb bundled bill. So this, I would actually make a case in point now that it's by design that our bills don't get passed. And also Republicans have all the power, right? Well, not really. It's still set up that even if we won all three things, they're telling you it matters. We've gotta get the house and the Senate. No, it doesn't. We have it right now and they haven't done anything that we've asked or that MAGA had asked to do. We haven't done any of those things besides hold the border. That's about it. Everything else has not been of the will of the people. Okay, the will of the MAGA, I should say. So there are actually treasonous groups, is my name for them. They are groups that actively call up your state representatives and say, do not get on a campaign to change the topic of X, Y, or Z. The right has two, John Birch Society, Eagle and the Eagle Forum. And these have been around for decades, guys. And then the left has the common cause. They lobby these representatives and they ask them, hey, I see your signatures on the term limits. Can you take it off? Or they ask them, please don't sign any future ones. So why does our state representatives fear this? They fear that if they called a convention, we could rewrite more than what the convention was originally called for. You dang right. We're going in there to argue out term limits. I'd be stoked. Let it be the Wild West that they start writing in, let's just take income tax off, right? Let's relook at money being allowed into politics. Let's revisit the first a minute regarding money and politics and lobbying. Once the delegates are in the room, nothing guarantees that they're gonna stick to the topics. Yes, let them run wild, baby. Let it be the Wild West is my point. So the biggest treachery of all time, I would say, was in 2017, the first year of Trump's first term in office, 230 treasonous groups, including the left's group, Common Cause, signed a statement urging every state that had asked for a convention on any topic that it takes its request back. How dare you consider giving the power to the people? How dare you govern to the will of people? They don't even know it exists. Just just remove your name. I put that it was in, I noticed that it was Trump's first term. I found that timing quite interesting because it could be my theory, maybe why, like why then was that in Trump's first term, he truly was a candidate wild for the people possibly and that for the deep state, they had no control of him, right? He was not a puppet like he 100% is 100% a puppet today. The deep state, Israel, the cabal, the Rothfellers, the rock child, whatever, the rich families of the world, whoever the people are turning the buttons didn't have a hold on him. And maybe this was their way to get it back. Like, holy crap, Trump could actually change something. And he, they might even do an article five guys. Let's pull it back. I don't know, that's just my theory. The Supreme Court in 2010, spending money on politics is protected free speech. So we decided that you could basically spend billions as long as it's through your super PACs, et cetera, and it's not directly related to the campaign. There's no capping the money isn't a law fix. It's a constitution fix. So what I'm getting at is if we wanna stop lobbying, if we wanna basically stop meeting with a politician and be like, hey, if you vote this way, we're gonna send you millions to make sure you're still working, right? That can only be fixed if the constitution has changed. And how do you change the constitution? Well, we know that they won't fix it. They've proved that with term limits. We, the people have to fix it through article five. So I realized I named this title, this slide I was set out loud, like maximum freedom allows maximum corruption. So as a libertarian, I find this as a beautiful crossroads of philosophical thought. There's no way around it. Giving the freedom allows the maximum amount of money and corruption to be involved in our politics. So my solution is do both. I mean, I've stated it at the top, so I haven't tried to hide that because I really wanted y'all to listen till the end, write the new government, invite people in until it's our own velvet revolution like Czechoslovakia had. That's a peaceful way to assemble. Article five is also a beautiful way to assemble. But I do feel like article five is hard because you already have state politicians. It's basically saying, well, the state politicians aren't corrupt and they're gonna help you with article five when the federal politicians are corrupt. So yeah, the article five is really tough because while our founding fathers took in the oppressive nature of our politicians, they should have realized the same oppressive nature would be present in our state level politicians. So a peaceful assembly is also a velvet revolution also seems quite likely. We need to become article five experts is my point and more velvet revolution experts. Plato did not like democracy because he said too much freedom leads to tyranny if you follow it down the road. And that's kind of where I've led us to, right? I've proven to you that our maximum freedom has led to maximum corruption. Socrates, I believe also doesn't like democracy because he makes the point that people will always vote for what feels good versus what is logical and what is needed. And I have often said, I don't believe that everybody should have the right to vote. I've made that case strongly in other videos that I've compared it to children at the table, your own dinner table voting and then people get upset with me in the comments and then I push back like, have you not seen the average IQ of the general population? They will most indeed vote for ice cream. They will vote for the most convenient soft sounding sweet thing versus the life raft and the life jacket required for the boat to operate in the first place. You know, I'm getting it. So yeah, I guess that's my anti-voting sentiment today, but I didn't want to create an anti-voting sentiment video without providing an actual solution. Cause otherwise you're just, you know, you're like a little cute Chihuahua barking in the wind with no real resolution. So I guess, you know, I'm not Matthew McConaughey with a massive platform, but what if someone like him actually did know what article five was and really, and every single time we started talking about voting, the only thing we pressured our state representatives on is how many topics are you signed up for article five? How many topics have you? Because we, the people are ready to start changing our constitution to create it, to have less corruption in government. So we can then go back to arguing about voting. I hope that came full circle and it makes sense. Whew, that's a heavy cerebral one, but please comment, tell me what you do and don't agree on because it definitely helps share the video with others. Commenting is the number one way to help support me. So thank you, stay free, stay human, and stay velvet, baby. Bye-bye.