Latest / UK Column Radio / Understanding Psychological Warfare

Transcript

Understanding Psychological Warfare · UK Column Radio

0:38
David Hughes, thank you for joining me in the trenches.
0:41
Well, thank you for having me back and congratulations on your
0:44
new UK column slot. I participated in a 9/11
0:49
symposium back in 2020 I think it was, which went out on UK
0:54
columns, so not my first time. I'm glad to be back.
0:58
Gee, there's a really good starting point 911.
1:04
I mean, if we're talking about psyops and mind control, that is
1:08
a gem, isn't it? It's, well, it's one of the very
1:12
biggest, isn't it? I mean, I was struck when I
1:15
first woke up and inverted commas and realized the extent
1:20
of the lie. I was struck very much by the
1:24
question, why is it that most people don't see it when
1:26
actually it's blindingly obvious.
1:29
And that has to do very much with the power of psychological
1:33
operations, with propaganda, with the use of the term
1:36
conspiracy theorist and so on. And it's absolutely vital that
1:40
the public understands how these operations work.
1:43
So much of my research since then has been devoted to
1:47
exposing the various techniques that they use to get away with
1:51
it. Essentially.
1:52
Like what? Well, I mean, in my COVID book,
1:56
I cover all kinds of different techniques of psychological
2:00
warfare that were involved. But I mean, returning to 911,
2:06
some of the techniques are very crude in terms of shock the
2:09
population with a traumatic event and then just use
2:12
propaganda to beat them around the head with every nightly news
2:18
broadcast talking about terrorism and and and so on and
2:21
Al Qaeda that that's really all there was for years after the
2:24
event. But then of course, there are
2:27
deeper levels. I think there's a a kind of
2:31
something called it a mainstream alternative media position.
2:35
I, I call it Camp 2 in my 3 camps framework, but the idea is
2:41
that there's a, a group of people out there I'm sure
2:44
probably has military intelligence connections whose
2:47
role it is to deliberately mislead even the skeptics.
2:52
And so in my view, that is very much the case with the Nano
2:56
Thermite narrative which has been proposed down the years,
3:00
which I and many others think is bogus.
3:04
We find that the characters who promote that narrative to be
3:09
untrustworthy and dishonest. And there's certainly a
3:14
groundswell, a growing group of people out there now who think
3:19
that the truth lies neither with the official explanation nor
3:23
with the Nano thermite explanation, but broadly in the
3:27
direction of the work of Judy Wood.
3:30
I had the great privilege of interviewing her, I think back
3:33
in 2021 and I found her work mind blowing, utterly mind
3:39
blowing. Her book is something like I've
3:42
never seen in terms of an investigation into into 911 yet
3:48
David speak to the average person around you about what she
3:54
concluded, which is effectively directed energy weapons and
3:58
people will the eyes will glaze over and they'll call you a
4:01
clown. Yeah, and this is precisely what
4:04
I'm talking about in terms of the power of the psychological
4:07
operations to cover up the truth.
4:12
I mean, in the case of Doctor Wood, she's never been allowed
4:16
to have a Wikipedia page. Now, this is quite interesting
4:19
because it's often the case that Wikipedia will give people pages
4:23
just in order to promote misinformation about them.
4:27
But obviously Wood's ideas are so dangerous actually to the
4:31
establishment that she's never been allowed even to have a page
4:34
of that nature. And I've seen very few people
4:39
smeared and attacked and ridiculed to the extent that she
4:45
has been down the years. And again, I think that says
4:48
something very significant. And obviously people then, you
4:54
know, if they fall for that, they don't want to be associated
4:58
with someone who's been painted in those terms.
5:02
But all of this is about making sure that the very important
5:07
evidence that is presented in Where Did the Towers Go doesn't
5:12
come to light or isn't taken seriously.
5:15
And one of the important points that Doctor Wood makes in that
5:19
book is that she's not trying to present a, a hard theory per SE,
5:23
but she is presenting the evidence.
5:25
And there's 500 pages of evidence in that book.
5:28
And it's a, a high quality production.
5:30
It contains all kinds of photographs and, and, and
5:34
diagrams and much else besides. There's, there's a whole
5:37
treasure trove for readers to delve into there.
5:43
And some of that evidence, I'm not sure would ever have come to
5:46
light or ever have been taken seriously were it not for Doctor
5:50
Wood. Some of it is quite
5:52
extraordinary when you take, for example, what she calls the
5:55
toasted cars. I mean, what on earth would
6:00
cause this to happen? So for anyone who's not familiar
6:03
with it, I'm sure virtually all of your audience is.
6:06
But many cars in the in the vicinity of the Twin towers were
6:11
found apparently burned out, certainly very peculiar kind of
6:16
what, what appear to be burn patterns on them.
6:20
And yet you have to ask, well, why would 2 collapsing
6:23
buildings? Of course the buildings didn't
6:26
collapse per SE, but you know, officially, why would 2
6:29
collapsing buildings 'cause that kind of damage to cars.
6:32
And in particular, there was a car park a few blocks away from
6:37
the few blocks northwest of the of the towers.
6:41
And you can find photographs before and after the event
6:45
occurred. Whatever did this to the cars,
6:47
and you can see there in pristine condition beforehand
6:49
and then afterwards most but not all strangely, of the cars are
6:53
badly damaged. So what caused that?
6:56
And in a sense, these are still open questions, but the evidence
7:00
itself is undeniable and we really must look at it.
7:07
You talk about various camps and this doesn't only apply to 911
7:12
and it applies to psychological, psychological warfare as a
7:16
whole, doesn't it? Yes, it does, absolutely.
7:19
And particularly during the COVID era.
7:23
I mean, one of the unfortunate realizations that I personally
7:26
have come to over the last 12 months or so is that those in
7:32
what I call Camp 2, which is it's designed for skeptics of
7:40
official narratives. They've, they, they learn to
7:42
question the official version of events and then they enter Camp
7:45
2 and they are greeted there by a battalion of fake dissidents,
7:51
essentially people whose role it is to mislead, distract pied
7:55
pipers essentially that will provide them with plenty of
7:59
truth, plenty of relevant facts, but will fundamentally mislead
8:04
them about the most important truths.
8:07
It takes an awful lot of work actually to get out of Camp 2,
8:11
both in terms of research and also psychologically and, and
8:15
emotionally and to find one's way into what I call Camp 3,
8:19
which is essentially the truth. And it's a, it's an ugly and
8:23
difficult place to be and it's a very small place to be.
8:27
And the, the unfortunate realization I've come to is that
8:30
Camp 2 relative to Camp 3 is enormous.
8:35
So when fighting the, the, the battle for ideas, unless I join
8:41
you in the trenches, it's for me, it's really all about trying
8:43
to, to find your way into Camp 3 and it's, it's extremely,
8:47
extremely difficult. So a more contemporary example
8:53
of what you're speaking about, if I may, would be the COVID
8:56
era. And Kid Knightley from Off
8:59
Guardian refers to something similar as fake binaries or the
9:03
sort of false dichotomy of, of A&B thinking.
9:06
So let's look at the COVID era. So you've got the the Biden
9:12
camp, so to speak, that will argue that there was a pandemic
9:15
and it came from a wet market in in China.
9:19
You'll get the Trump camp that will argue there was a pandemic,
9:23
but it comes from a lab in China.
9:27
Both are arguing that there was a pandemic and both are arguing
9:30
that China was involved. So they're ultimately arguing
9:34
the same thing, which means that there's still space for the
9:39
third option, which is what you refer to as Camp C, which is
9:42
that there wasn't a pandemic and the whole thing was a
9:44
psychological operation. Yes, and I get into that in
9:48
chapter 6 of my book COVID-19, Psychological Operations and the
9:53
War for Technocracy. And Mike Eden also proposed this
9:59
argument, which I agree with, which is very much as you've
10:04
you've outlined, did the virus escape from a lab?
10:08
Was it natural? It doesn't matter which side you
10:12
take. Ultimately, you are subscribing
10:14
to the idea that there was, in fact, a novel virus.
10:19
Yeah. When really, I mean, the kinds
10:23
of questions you should be asking is, is that, is that
10:26
true? And I argue in the book that the
10:29
onus was on the authorities to provide irrefusable evidence
10:32
that it was true. And to my mind, they didn't do
10:35
so. But even separate from that
10:39
question, even if there had of been such a virus, could the
10:44
measures that were taken ever have been justified?
10:50
You know, shutting down the most of the economy, locking people
10:55
in their houses, creating incredible levels of
10:59
psychological stress, which of course then led to physical
11:02
debility in many cases. I mean, the effects on so many
11:05
people's lives were so bad, depriving children of their
11:12
education, putting people in masks, etcetera.
11:15
I mean, it was an awful time by design.
11:18
Now, could any of that really have been justified even if
11:22
there were a virus? No, because the whole point here
11:26
is that it wasn't about a public health crisis.
11:30
That's the camouflage, that's the facade, that's the decoy.
11:34
And I'm using military language on purpose here because this, as
11:37
I argue in the book, the whole thing was a psychological
11:40
operation. And the purpose of that
11:43
operation as we move towards the truth, in my view, was to
11:51
initiate what I have called the war for technocracy.
11:55
And so there is a much broader project going on here which
11:59
involves the gradual dismantlement of liberal
12:02
democracy and its replacement with a novel form of
12:05
totalitarianism, which, as Patrick Wood has amply
12:10
demonstrated over the years, goes by the name of technocracy.
12:16
And so all of this business about virus, no virus, public
12:20
health, science, the science trademark, etcetera, the whole
12:24
thing is 1 massive distraction. And I was very pleased recently
12:28
to, to watch Sasha Latapova's latest presentation.
12:33
And she's pulled no punches over the years about this being a
12:36
military operation. And it's a military operation,
12:39
which is essentially ongoing because we still have the same
12:43
transnational deep state that was behind this, that was behind
12:48
9/11 and behind so much else is still active and is still
12:54
pushing towards technocracy regardless.
12:57
And this is what the public really has to get wise to now,
13:02
because if this technocratic system is brought in, well, I
13:08
mean, it's not just the end of democracy, as far as I can tell,
13:11
it would be the end of, of human freedom.
13:14
I think it was around 2016 when I effectively swallowed my first
13:20
red pull, and then around 2020 I think I swallowed a whole bottle
13:26
of red pulls. Yeah.
13:29
When did you start opening your eyes and why?
13:34
Strangely enough, exactly the same time frame, really in
13:39
exactly the same ways. So that's a strange coincidence.
13:42
Yeah. I mean, for me it was December
13:44
2016 and and and my wake up in inverted commas was 911 and it
13:49
was the destruction of the Twin towers.
13:51
It came in the context of of teaching US foreign policy.
13:54
Wait, wait, wait, wait. On the day 2001, you, you, you,
13:58
you woke up. No 2016.
14:01
Oh, I beg your point. OK, so so so but but but the
14:05
9/11 was. The trick was the yes was the
14:08
trick, exactly. So I gotcha.
14:10
Yeah. So I'd been teaching US foreign
14:12
policy to my students, and we've been dealing with the war in
14:17
Vietnam and the war in Afghanistan.
14:20
And I've been reflecting on some of the parallels and
14:22
continuities between those two wars, very long wars, very
14:25
costly wars, PTSD for the soldiers, and so on.
14:30
And I thought, well, we know that the major escalation in the
14:34
the Vietnam War came about as a result of the Gulf of Tonkin
14:37
incident, which we now know to have been a lie and to have been
14:40
a false flag. And then, you know, you think to
14:43
the war in Afghanistan and the War on Terror.
14:45
How did that all kick off 911? Well, surely, surely that was
14:49
everybody knows that, you know, conspiracy theory rights.
14:52
I think that 911 was a a false flag.
14:54
But I thought, well, I better just check.
14:57
And of course, it doesn't take very long, does it, for anyone
15:00
who's honest about this to actually look at that evidence
15:04
and to very quickly realize that that the manner in which the
15:07
buildings were destroyed could not possibly have had to do with
15:11
jet fuel. 911 was a big moment. I mean, it was pivotal, but it
15:19
wasn't really global in the sense that COVID was.
15:25
Yeah, I, I think it shows that over the intervening years, what
15:32
I have called the transnational deep state has become
15:36
increasingly global. And I mean, maybe it was already
15:41
before this, but what COVID showed with the extremely high
15:45
degree of transnational cooperation all over the world
15:52
and the apparent assassination of the, the few African leaders
15:55
who dissented, is that really the, the power structure that
15:59
we're looking at now is a global power structure which has
16:04
managed to capture seemingly all states, all governments, all
16:09
major institutions, all of the major media outlets, the banks,
16:14
and you name it. All of the major institutions in
16:17
society now seem to be captured by and aligned with a
16:23
transnational deep state, which is working on behalf of a
16:28
transnational ruling class to replace liberal democracy with
16:34
global technocracy and thereby to subjugate the entire global
16:39
population. So when I refer to a war for
16:43
technocracy in the title of my book, I mean that in a very
16:47
literal sense, because you cannot achieve social
16:50
engineering on that scale historically without World War.
16:57
And So what we're looking at now is a third World War, in my
17:01
opinion, which was initiated, though undeclared, in 2020.
17:06
It's a war being waged by the few against the many.
17:11
It's a war being waged by a numerically miniscule proportion
17:17
of the world's population, essentially the ruling class
17:21
that owns the means of production.
17:23
It can manipulate the financial system.
17:26
It can manipulate the the propaganda.
17:28
It can manipulate what happens in the skies.
17:30
It's a war that is being waged from the cell to the
17:33
stratosphere by this tiny but very powerful group against the
17:38
rest of humanity. And I've referred to this as an
17:42
Omni war because it the very logic of that war means that it
17:45
has to take on its own peculiar characteristics.
17:50
And so it has to be waged by stealth, because if the public
17:54
gets wise to what's going on, there could be revolution
17:58
overnight. And it's a war which is waged
18:00
across every conceivable domain of human life.
18:05
And as indeed it it has to be if you are trying to subjugate the
18:10
entire of humanity. So these are really
18:15
extraordinary times that we are living through.
18:18
I mean, this is a, a, a moment of world historical
18:21
transformation. And we don't know at this stage
18:25
what direction it's going to go in.
18:27
But what's interesting about this is that for decades this
18:32
very powerful group of people has tried to do things
18:35
incrementally. It's tried to remain hidden in
18:37
the shadows so that it can effect change slowly, gradually,
18:42
in a way which isn't noticed. But with 2020, it really to some
18:47
extent came out of the shadows. And it was so major and so
18:50
massive what happened that for anyone paying attention, it's,
18:53
it's impossible to ignore. So they're pushing hard now for
18:59
Technocracy. And we see it in all kinds of
19:02
different respects from the, you know, the digital currency drive
19:07
to facial recognition software to AI technologies being tested
19:13
in war in places like Ukraine and and Gaza.
19:17
All of this is, is, is going on. And unfortunately it's coming
19:23
for us if we don't resist and if we don't if if if what?
19:28
What's required is mass non compliance essentially with with
19:31
all aspects of this technocracy. The whole thing relies on
19:35
technologies for subjugation purposes.
19:39
And what the public has to do is to learn to recognize those
19:42
technologies and to reject. Them Mathias Desmet has written
19:47
a lot about totalitarianism and and I I tend to agree with with
19:52
some of what he says, particularly around the idea
19:55
that approximately 30% of people at any given time will will
20:00
reject or push back. Yeah, I mean, I don't think that
20:04
it was Desmond's idea per SE. It is in his book.
20:07
But I mean, for example, you can go back to Aldous Huxley's
20:10
writings in the in the 1950s and and find similar claims.
20:14
So I don't think there's anything terribly original in
20:16
that claim, but nevertheless it seems to be true.
20:19
And you can see it also in, for example, the the vaccination in
20:24
inverted commas data from the UK Health Security Agency from July
20:29
2022 after the rollout of the injections was mostly complete.
20:33
And when you analyze that data, you find that in terms of the
20:36
adult population in the UK, 23% of the UK adult population
20:41
refused to take a single shot. So again, that's kind of in line
20:45
with what we're talking about, you know, roughly 1/5 or 1/4 or
20:49
so of the population for whatever reason, and we don't
20:53
know necessarily does seem to be immune to the hypnosis, the
20:58
programming, the, the, the propaganda.
21:01
I mean, the good news is I, I think that that percentage is
21:05
slowly growing over time. I think more and more people are
21:09
in inverse of Commons waking up. And once you see these things,
21:13
there is no going back. You seem skeptical.
21:15
Are you sure? Are you sure?
21:17
I don't know. I'm I'm noticing people going
21:19
backwards. Well, the as I, as I argue in
21:24
the book, the that the COVID operation, as I call it,
21:27
military operation, one key element of it did involve trauma
21:32
based mind control. And as Mary Holland has stated,
21:40
populations at one level could be forgiven for feeling as
21:45
though they experienced or they're living through a kind of
21:48
PTSD en masse because of what happened and because of what was
21:52
done to them. And, and therefore the traumatic
21:55
aspect of it means that people are psychologically disinclined
22:00
to revisit what happened. And one of the reasons that I
22:04
wrote my book, as I put in chapter 1, is precisely to
22:09
revisit it. And it's a form of anamnesis.
22:12
It's all about remembering in granular detail exactly what
22:15
happened and exactly what was done because there are
22:19
perpetrators here. This was done by design for very
22:23
nefarious purposes. So it's important that we don't
22:26
forget that now. Yes, I am confident actually
22:30
that more and more people are seeing through this.
22:34
I mean, it's very interesting that it will probably be in the
22:37
next few days that my book will will pass a quarter of a million
22:40
accesses and downloads on the publishers official website
22:44
alone, which for an academic book is, is almost unheard of.
22:48
So what that shows is that there is a public interest and
22:52
appetite for this information. People do want to know.
22:56
I've had plenty of people now telling me that I, for whatever
23:00
reason, you know, I don't know manner of delivery, the nature
23:03
of the information I'm presenting or whatever, but that
23:06
I've been able to reach some of their friends and family that
23:08
they've not been able to reach and to help them to, to see
23:11
things. I think that the, I mean, it
23:15
might be a painstakingly slow process from our perspective,
23:19
but I think more and more people are very gradually starting to
23:24
come round. And I've seen this even in my
23:27
own family. You know, even certain people
23:30
who I thought would never in a million years be able to
23:35
psychologically process this information are now starting to.
23:39
So I'm still hopeful in that regard.
23:42
And I mean, ultimately the truth is the truth.
23:44
I mean, it always comes out in the end.
23:47
And just coming back to those percentages that you mentioned a
23:50
few minutes ago, I mean, if we're looking at 1/4 of the
23:54
population being immune to this stuff anyway, you've only really
23:58
got to get to 51% for things to start to swing.
24:02
You know, we don't need to be able to convince everybody or
24:05
even a large majority if we could just get another, you
24:10
know, 30% or so, maybe not even that, then things could start
24:16
changing very, very quickly. You know, there could, there
24:18
could be a tipping point. So I remain optimistic.
24:23
I think you actually make some good points there and maybe I
24:27
should rephrase what I was asking a little bit, because
24:32
it's not A or B in the sense, you know, when I say waking up,
24:36
I'm not talking about every aspect of every conceivable
24:41
talking point. You know, some people, for
24:43
example, will, will agree that there was no pandemic, but they
24:49
won't agree that Direct Energy weapons were used on 9/11, for
24:52
example. And I think this is the nature
24:55
of the human condition that we can compartmentalize various
25:00
vectors. So, So when we say waking up or
25:06
opening our eyes, I guess it depends on what we're talking
25:09
about. Yeah, I mean, in a sense, it's a
25:12
process, isn't it? And it's about learning to
25:14
identify the mechanisms that are involved.
25:17
And I mean, I don't expect everyone to agree on everything,
25:22
and I don't expect everyone to agree with everything that I or
25:24
anyone else has to say. That's not what it's about.
25:27
You know, you're right, it's not an A or B thing.
25:30
But it is about people learning to distrust the information
25:36
that's provided by mainstream sources and to develop a sense
25:41
that the authorities which are ostensibly there to serve and
25:47
protect them are doing nothing of the kind and, as COVID amply
25:54
demonstrated, are in fact now attacking them and are, in my
26:00
view, at war with them. It's about understanding that
26:05
even once you've developed that consciousness, there are levels
26:09
of perception and levels of awareness and that once you
26:13
start to ask the questions, there will be even more
26:17
challenges put in your way in terms of the fake dissident
26:21
camp, two kind of characters that I have mentioned.
26:26
And it's about learning that, you know, this is a, a difficult
26:29
and painstaking process. It involves, I mean,
26:34
psychologically you have to abandon some fundamental ideas
26:39
that you've been propagandized with really ever since birth
26:43
that the inherent virtue of Western liberal democracies, you
26:48
know, the idea that vaccines are safe and effective and so on.
26:53
The idea that we're fighting a virtuous War on Terror against,
26:57
you know, foreign non state actors that are that are out to
26:59
get us all of these things, which we've really been
27:04
conditioned just to accept go out the window.
27:08
And that that's quite difficult because it's a very
27:11
disorientating process And it's it's a scary process.
27:17
It's a frightening process. It removes the kind of
27:20
psychological security that you you may may have had.
27:24
So it's not about getting people to believe XY or Z, but it's
27:29
about getting them to engage in that process, to understand that
27:34
process and to actually have the the courage and the integrity to
27:39
to start treading that path. The problem, David, though, is
27:44
the pendulum always seems to swing in a really wonky fashion
27:50
because we'll talk about Camp A and Cam B, right?
27:55
And Cam B would be opposition to the official narrative in many
28:01
respects. So let's say 911.
28:02
OK, so Cam B would be argue that, I don't know, there was
28:06
demolition and all sorts of other things going on, right?
28:09
And on the face of it, it's great to see the rejection of
28:13
the mainstream narrative. But now what happens is you have
28:21
you have arguments within Camp B and Camp C about what the actual
28:28
truth is, and it weakens the overall opposition, which would
28:33
be B + C And so now you have Camp A looking at B&C and
28:38
laughing going, well, they're just a bunch of clowns because
28:42
they don't even know what's going on.
28:43
And yeah, we are maintaining the official narrative.
28:47
Everything that you've just described is by design.
28:51
If you go back to a 2009 paper by Cass Sunstein and Adrian
28:56
Vermeul, they, this is an academic journal paper and they
29:00
call in that and, and you know, these are Harvard professors, by
29:03
the way, and they call in that paper for government agents to
29:09
infiltrate chat rooms, particularly in the context of
29:13
those asking critical questions about the events of 9/11 and
29:18
essentially to sow disruption. So we know that this is by
29:23
design. We know that these bad actors
29:25
are out there. We know that their task is to
29:28
create confusion, to turn people against one another, to promote
29:34
silly or ludicrous narratives, to promote more credible sounded
29:39
but false narratives. We know that this has been going
29:44
on and it was incredibly effective in the so-called 911
29:51
truth community. I mean, as you say, there is no
29:53
community. It's, it's been completely
29:55
shattered and disparate. And in that sense, the the the
29:59
perception management operations were successful.
30:03
However, again, I think more and more people are starting to
30:07
understand how the game works now.
30:09
And in the case of COVID, for example, or in the case of the
30:14
kind of the bots on X or Twitter as it used to be, more and more
30:19
people are realizing that, for example, in the UK, there are
30:24
things like the 77th Brigade whose role is precisely to do
30:32
with perception management through online means that was
30:37
specifically deployed to enforce the COVID narrative in various
30:42
ways. And I forget what was his name,
30:46
was it Mike Williams? I may have got that wrong.
30:49
But anyway, as one of the senior generals in relation to the 77th
30:54
Brigade came out back in March, April 2020 and said, yeah, we've
30:57
got, you know, 3000 of our members working on this and we,
31:02
you know, we could call up 20,000 if we want.
31:04
So when I'm talking about battalions of kind of
31:08
misinformers, I, I mean that in a quite literal military sense,
31:12
because we know that this is what's going on.
31:13
And of course, a lot of people now do refer to the 77th Brigade
31:20
online, you know, or, or when they're being trolled by bots
31:27
and, and, and so on, which apparently now is most Internet
31:31
traffic. People are starting to
31:33
understand the scale of the misinformation and the
31:37
deception. And I think people are becoming
31:39
more critical and more discerning in terms of the kind
31:42
of information that they're looking for.
31:44
But I don't underestimate the scale of the challenge.
31:46
And of course, it's getting even worse now with AI and deep fakes
31:51
and so on, where soon it may become virtually impossible to
31:56
distinguish what's what's real and what's not real online.
31:59
And that is a particular concern.
32:02
I mean, you could imagine a podcast of this nature going out
32:07
with you and I looking and sounding exactly as we do, but
32:11
saying all kinds of different things.
32:12
Now that's a that's a huge concern.
32:16
And it, you know, could lead to a kind of mass psychosis where
32:18
no one really knows what's real or not.
32:21
But nevertheless, I do think that more and more people are
32:24
starting to to understand how the game works and to become a
32:28
bit more discerning about the way in which they take in their
32:30
information. I think it was Noam Chomsky who
32:34
said that one of the most. Effective ways to control people
32:40
is to create the parameters of discourse and then encourage
32:45
very vigilant and even aggressive heated debate within
32:50
those parameters so that there would be the, excuse me, there
32:54
would be the appearance of opposing views, but they're
32:57
still within the parameters and those parameters are are.
33:01
Given yeah, you're right, that's that was Chomsky that said that.
33:06
And in a sense that's a an apartment description of
33:09
mainstream politics, isn't it? You can have as much fierce
33:13
debate as you like between red and blue, Labour and
33:15
Conservative, etcetera, but provided you don't talk about
33:20
the incoming technocracy, that's fine.
33:23
Keep all of the attention, all of the perception, etcetera
33:27
focused over there and don't mention what's really going on.
33:30
That's exactly how it works. OK.
33:33
So let me push back a little bit for the sake of this
33:35
conversation, David. There is this, we're talking
33:41
about perception management, but there is this perception that
33:44
the perception managers are very advanced and very smart people.
33:49
Could it also be argued with the sense of nuance that there is a
33:53
lot of stupidity going on above? Yes, I mean, a couple of things
33:59
to say on that. Firstly, I think that the people
34:01
running these operations are extremely intelligent.
34:04
A lot of it of course centres around intelligence in the sense
34:10
of British intelligence or or CIA and it's called that for a
34:13
reason. And they do recruit some of the
34:16
most intelligent people, typically people who have a,
34:22
shall we say, a criminal bent. You know, they, they're
34:25
intelligent, but they get a kick out of being able to get away
34:28
with things that they shouldn't be able to, to get away with
34:31
breaking the law and, and so on. Now, that said, in Chapter 8 of
34:38
my COVID book, I've got a section called Urgency and
34:42
Desperation in which I argue that in many ways, the rollout
34:48
of the COVID operation was rushed and botched.
34:53
I think that although those behind it had been planning it
34:58
for many, many years, they, they must have been given the
35:01
granular level of detail that was involved in the rollout.
35:06
But the rollout of the psychological operation, I don't
35:08
mean the injections it. Yeah, I'm convinced it was well
35:13
planned long in advance, but the actual way in which it was done
35:18
in many ways blew their cover in many ways, made people wake up
35:23
at a faster rate than ever before.
35:26
They didn't succeed in getting the injections into everyone.
35:32
Technocracy is being talked about now in a way which it
35:36
never used to be before. And I think that it was very
35:41
interesting in January 2022 when to my mind, the, the operation
35:49
was seemingly pushing ahead at full force.
35:53
In December 2021 in the UK, there was talk about NHS
35:59
workers, the, the, the shop being being mandated for NHS
36:03
workers. I mean, that's, I think it's the
36:05
5th largest employer in the world.
36:06
If that had gone ahead, that would have set such a strong
36:09
precedent for other employers to follow.
36:11
And I was so worried in December 2021 and then all of a sudden in
36:17
January 2022, the whole thing as it had been taking place since
36:22
the spring of 2020 was suddenly wound down and, and put to bed.
36:27
And, and then in February, it all became about Ukraine.
36:30
And that was an extraordinary moment because it was an
36:33
obvious. It was a.
36:34
Coincidence, David. It moved swiftly from one to the
36:37
other. And again, I'm sure that that
36:39
was non accidental. But the, the, the key point here
36:44
is that as successful as the drive was seeming at the time to
36:50
just keep this injection campaign rolling on and on and
36:53
on, they must have known that they'd reached their limit
36:57
because they then stopped it and moved on to different forms of,
37:01
of operation. So we must never overestimate
37:06
their power. And I think the, the fact that
37:08
they stopped and again, this was around the time of the Canadian
37:11
truckers convoy, right, you know, signs of mass resistance
37:15
on the ground. So I think it's important to, to
37:17
keep an eye on that and to, to remember our strength and the,
37:21
the, the level of resistance that there is, because it was
37:23
sufficient to stop the COVID operation and it can be
37:27
sufficient again in future to stop whatever they have planned
37:30
for us. You talk about our strength, OK,
37:32
So do we not run the risk by constantly pointing the finger
37:40
at them, taking away our own responsibility and basically
37:47
feeding into perpetual victimhood?
37:51
Well, I do the opposite in my work.
37:54
I mean, I'm essentially trying to spread awareness and
37:58
enlightenment of of what's happening.
38:00
And I've said repeatedly that once you see this, there is a
38:05
moral responsibility and indeed a strategic responsibility to
38:10
take action. And one of the lessons of
38:12
totalitarianism from the past, if you read the works of
38:16
Solzhenitsyn for example, is that staying silent is not an
38:21
option. Doing nothing is not an option.
38:23
Burying your head in the sand is not an option.
38:27
And actually the very nature of the Omni war, as I've called it,
38:31
means that this is being directed specifically against
38:34
you personally and your family. So you have to fight, you have
38:41
to get up and find ways of adding to the resistance.
38:44
And of course what we do have on our side is numbers, 8 billion
38:50
people approximately stand to assuming the estimates are
38:54
correct, but stand to stand to lose from what is taking place.
39:01
And so actually, if enough people would get up and active,
39:06
I think this could be rolled back very, very quickly.
39:09
But it is about taking that personal responsibility.
39:12
So, yeah, I mean, I'm anything but defeatist in this.
39:16
You know, I can, I can see a way out.
39:18
And that's why I'm encouraging people to take action, do what
39:22
they can. I mean, the fact that this Omni
39:24
war is being fought in so many different domains means that
39:28
there must be something that you can do what?
39:30
Whatever your gift is, there must be something that you can
39:32
do. Find that thing and do it.
39:35
Isn't that also a danger of the whole Q thing?
39:38
You know it's the white hats are coming to save us, so don't do
39:41
anything. It's all 55D chess.
39:44
Well, that certainly is what the purpose was, right?
39:48
And the whole kind of fall of the cabal idea that, yes, you
39:53
know, you can abdicate personal responsibility because the white
39:58
hats are out there and they're already saving you.
40:02
They're already doing it for you.
40:04
I mean, it's an extremely successful song opera.
40:06
I mean, I don't know how many millions of people in the US
40:09
alone bought into that. Thankfully, I think the wheels
40:13
have have come off that one now and more and more people are are
40:17
seeing through that. But again, This is why it's
40:20
important to just understand the fundamentals of what's taking
40:23
place. This is a war.
40:25
It's a war that's being waged against you and its ultimate
40:28
purpose is to subjugate and enslave you through technocratic
40:31
means. It's happening now.
40:33
It's happening fast. The technocrats have already
40:35
moved into the White House with Doge and Teal and Musk, etcetera
40:39
and Palantir. The technologies are already
40:43
being experimented in a military within the military capacity in
40:46
in Ukraine and Gaza and elsewhere.
40:48
This is all happening now. Are you going to allow it?
40:53
You know, with you? Do you consent?
40:56
Do you acquiesce to this path continuing?
41:01
Because if you don't, then you must resist.
41:03
You must do something. But what is that something?
41:09
Well, I offer a whole range of solutions at the end of my
41:12
Solari report titled Omni War, Exposing and Ending the
41:17
Invisible War Against Humanity. I mean, I'm not going to
41:23
prescribe a, you know, kind of a set thing, set series of things
41:26
that everybody must do. But the key point that I always
41:29
emphasize is that you need to look inside yourself.
41:32
You need to look inside your conscience and you need to look
41:35
inside your heart. And you need to ask yourself
41:36
honestly, what is it that you can do?
41:39
You know, what is it that you see?
41:40
What difference can you make? And that's going to be different
41:42
for everybody. Some people might be good at
41:44
monkey wrenching technologies. Some people might be good at
41:47
going down to the local councils and trying to effect put
41:51
pressure on locally because a lot of these global agendas are
41:54
actually enacted at a local level.
41:57
Some people might be good at doing the kind of thing that you
42:00
and I do, podcasting and so on, spreading messages.
42:03
Some people might be able to write books, some people hold
42:06
yellow boards. Whatever it may be, there is an
42:09
absolute raft of things that you can do.
42:13
Ditching your smartphone would probably be one of the most
42:15
important things that you can do.
42:17
Withdrawing from all forms of smart technologies is certainly
42:21
highly recommended in the context of this war.
42:25
Not putting up with ideas that you know to be wrong, having the
42:29
courage to speak out about things.
42:32
I mean, there's so much actually that can be done.
42:35
But you know, it's, it's you have to have a mindset of
42:39
wanting to adopt those ideas, to take them forward and to find
42:44
ways of making that difference in your own life.
42:47
Again, I can't prescribe what that's going to be for each
42:49
individual person, but each one of us has to take that
42:52
responsibility now. But David, we all know Donald
42:56
Trump is going to save us. Well, Donald Trump promised to
43:00
drain the swamp in his first administration and then
43:03
proceeded to do the opposite. He said that he was going to
43:08
arrest Hillary Clinton and then he had his assembled dinner
43:13
audience applaud her. We know that the guy is a
43:16
charlatan and a misleader, and it's incredible how many people
43:21
don't see this and have fallen for it a second time.
43:25
So he's back now and you know, day one.
43:30
Well, that looks OK. You know, we're going to the US
43:33
is going to withdraw from the The Who tick war against woke
43:37
tick. All right, good day 2 mRNA AI
43:42
powered mRNA cancer vaccines. So, you know, you can see these
43:47
kind of agendas just roll on regardless.
43:49
You know, the 1st 90 days, you know all about doge.
43:54
The you know, I dread to think how much data about the US
43:58
population has now been hoovered up by Palantir.
44:02
I mean, it must have had so much data before then.
44:05
But you know, the integration now of this technocracy with
44:08
government, I mean, that's incredible power that that
44:12
company and someone like Peter Thiel now now has.
44:16
It's very, very frightening. And as I say, those kinds of
44:19
companies and they're plenty kind of AI, venture capital
44:22
start-ups, all linked to what's called accelerationism.
44:27
The frightening thing about all of that is the military
44:30
connections and the fact that they are involved essentially in
44:34
creating this control grid where they can know where everybody
44:42
is, what they're doing, who they're friends and family are,
44:47
all of the psychographic profiling, you know, where they
44:50
like to shop, sexual preferences, you name it, a
44:53
granular level of detail about everyone.
44:56
And these same companies are also developing military
44:59
technologies like the facial recognition software like AI
45:02
powered drones, which can be used to hunt down and kill
45:06
people. It doesn't take a genius, does
45:08
it, to work out where this is going, which is a long standing
45:12
project. You can, you could even trace it
45:14
back to IBM and the Holocaust. You can trace it back to
45:16
Operation Phoenix using information and computing power
45:22
to be able to identify, locate and ultimately eliminate
45:28
dissidence. So again, this is taking place
45:32
now on a transnational, if not global level.
45:35
It's so dystopian, it's so dark, it has to be stopped.
45:40
It's weird, though, because people get so caught up in the
45:44
binary of the electoral process, For example, I mean, I think
45:49
any, any sane person will agree that that Biden was not pulling
45:54
the strings, yet somehow they think that now Trump is pulling
45:57
the string strings. And the funniest part is that
45:59
Trump is against the deep state. He's going to pull it apart.
46:03
I mean, how do you how do you get to the point where you think
46:07
that you become president of the country and somehow you are not
46:11
part of the system? Well, again, none of it makes
46:16
sense when you really think about it.
46:19
But the whole thing is about misleading the masses.
46:23
So Trump has made himself the figurehead of this so-called
46:28
techno populism movement. And when, you know, hundreds of
46:34
millions of people are buying into him as this kind of savior
46:37
type figure, and he is marching them straight into technocracy,
46:44
and they don't see it and they don't understand what's going
46:47
on. I mean, you know, Elon Musk
46:49
openly said, you know, I'm not just MAGA, I'm dark MAGA.
46:54
And the whole crowd cheers and goes wild.
46:57
And they've no idea what he's talking about.
46:58
You know, this is reference to something called the Dark
47:01
Enlightenment. I won't get into the details
47:04
here. I did a, a roundtable on this
47:06
with. That's the one.
47:09
I'm glad. I'm glad, you know.
47:10
Yeah, Curtis Yavin, his, his, his, his real name.
47:13
You know, these are neo reactionary figures which have
47:18
kind of produced a a philosophy, if you like, which serves as an
47:24
intellectual legitimization of what these technocrats are
47:28
trying to do. And what Ian Davis and I both we
47:32
both reach the same conclusion, having read some of this work
47:35
first hand, that intellectually it's tremendously flimsy.
47:39
I mean, it's just dreadful that the ideas are awful, the
47:42
arguments are terrible, doesn't hang together.
47:45
But Musk and others are perfectly happy to allude to it,
47:51
to legitimize what they're trying to do.
47:53
And again, seeing as that you've you've just mentioned Yavin
47:57
there in 2008, Curtis Yavin came out with what he called, and I
48:04
quote, a humane alternative to genocide.
48:10
And he was arguing back in 2008 that the advancing technologies
48:16
would render more and more people unemployed and redundant.
48:21
And So what do you do with this mass of people?
48:24
And he came out of this horrific idea.
48:26
He referred to the kind of a lava, a cocoon that you wrap
48:30
them in. And he invoked Ray Kurzweil's
48:32
idea of fully immersive virtual reality.
48:35
And so essentially you, you, you put them in this state where
48:39
they're living in a, you call it a fake reality.
48:42
You know, it seems real to them, but it's 100% fake.
48:44
And, and this is, this is his idea of morality.
48:46
You know, this is better than just exterminating them.
48:48
He said, I mean, these are the kind of characters and ideas
48:51
that we're dealing with. But again, you see, this comes
48:53
back at us in 2020 with Yuval Noah Harari, and he's talking
48:59
about what he calls the useless class.
49:01
You know what? What are we going to do with all
49:03
these people once, once the AI takes their jobs?
49:05
And what did he say? Drugs and video games.
49:09
I mean, these are horrendous, horrendous.
49:12
People and horrendous ideas. Can I jump in there?
49:15
I've I've thought about this and I've asked a few people those
49:18
questions I'll ask you also. I don't think I've ever heard,
49:23
and I'm not in any way taking their side, but I've not in any
49:28
way ever heard Ferrari or Javan or Schwab would ever say I would
49:33
like to see this. Are they not merely projecting
49:38
what they think is coming? No, I, I, what they're trying to
49:49
do is to find ways of legitimizing the kind of plans
49:56
that they have in place. And ultimately this is what
50:00
technocracy entails. It is about taking away personal
50:05
liberty and control over 1's life and placing it in the hands
50:09
of the technocrats, which is a very small group of people which
50:13
are at the controls. They have the joysticks, they
50:16
are in charge of the scientific management of society.
50:19
They get to decide what resources you are allocated and
50:23
how far you can straight from your 15 minute city and so on.
50:27
It is ultimately a, a slavery system.
50:32
And so even though they might not openly come out and say,
50:36
yes, this is what I want to see, I'm pretty confident that it is.
50:40
It's, it's a necessary part of what they're trying to achieve.
50:44
Now, one of the rhetorical devices that they use is to talk
50:50
about things as though they're inevitable.
50:53
So technological determinism is a key part of this, quite apart
50:57
from politics and society, et cetera, technology just has its
51:00
own logic and it just kind of advances regardless, and it
51:03
always has done. And it's the technology that
51:05
drives history. And that's a very kind of
51:07
convenient position if you're one of them.
51:11
But of course, it's not true. I mean, if you think about
51:13
nanotechnology and all of the nefarious purposes to which that
51:17
could be put, this didn't just happen.
51:20
You know, technology just didn't kind of naturally evolve in this
51:23
way. There were deliberate political
51:25
decisions taking taken around the turn of the Millennium to
51:29
start investing massive amounts of money into nanotechnology
51:32
research. There were agendas behind this.
51:35
In other words, it was by design.
51:38
And so they can hide all they like behind these narratives
51:42
about, oh, this is just happening, we can't stop the
51:44
March of AI, we can't etcetera, etcetera.
51:47
But actually it's all planned and it's all part of the attempt
51:51
to place all power globally in the hands of very, very few
51:55
people. But then is is the inevitable
52:03
outcome inevitable? No, absolutely not.
52:07
The outcome is always determined in the struggle.
52:09
And This is why I am very keen in my work to always reiterate
52:14
the class relations behind this. And of course they've, you know,
52:20
they, they do all they can to deflect away from thinking in
52:24
class terms through kind of woke and gender politics, identity
52:30
politics and, and all of this kind of stuff so that people
52:33
think of themselves kind of individualistic terms.
52:36
But fundamentally, as I say in the 1st 5 words of my book, this
52:40
is a global class war that is now happening.
52:43
And there is the the the the capitalist system has become
52:47
disproportionately skewed so that a tiny proportion of the
52:52
world's population controls the vast majority of its wealth.
52:56
And it's skewed almost exponentially as you go up
52:58
towards the top 1%, the top nought .1%, nought point nought
53:02
1% and so on. So, so much of the wealth now is
53:06
contained in just the hands of those very few people, and
53:10
they're trying to subjugate everybody else.
53:13
So the outcome is far from determined.
53:17
They want us to think that it is.
53:19
They want us to think that it's hopeless.
53:20
This is all part of the psychological operations.
53:24
Again, I've got sections on this in my work on COVID.
53:28
You know, at the time, one of the things that they kept doing
53:30
is to just try and convince us. It was, it was endless.
53:32
It was never going to, it was never going to stop.
53:34
You know, was it Susan Mickey, for example, when she was asked
53:38
in an interview, how long do you think the public should keep
53:40
wearing masks? And she just said, oh, forever.
53:44
These kinds of tricks were were used repeatedly to create this
53:48
demoralization, the sense of despair, the sense that things
53:50
are never going to end. And it's always this way, you
53:54
know, to create the sense that we can't win, that we are like
53:57
children. They use a lot of infantilizing
53:59
rhetoric. And meanwhile, they're kind of
54:02
like these omnipotent gods that have the power to just shut down
54:05
most of the world's economy overnight.
54:08
This is what they want us to believe.
54:10
But actually the the objective reality is completely different
54:14
that you have a bunch of very desperate people trying to pull
54:20
off something which is so audacious.
54:22
I mean, trying to collapse liberal democracy and replace it
54:24
with technocracy. I mean, you are attacking human
54:29
freedom. You're attacking nation, you're
54:31
attacking family, you're attacking all of the values that
54:35
both left and right stand for. I mean, nobody has anything to
54:39
gain from this. So I think that the more people
54:43
see it, the more pushback there will be and the more futile
54:46
these these technocratic agendas will become.
54:49
So again. I'm optimistic, but you've
54:53
mentioned liberal democracy a few Times Now.
54:56
I personally am not a fan of democracy at all.
55:01
Why do you think the destruction of liberal democracy is a bad
55:06
thing? Well, that's a a really
55:10
interesting question, and I agree that liberal democracy as
55:14
it has developed over the course of the 20th century has
55:18
essentially been a cover for capitalist relations, which are
55:24
tremendously exploitative and predatory and legitimized also.
55:29
Voting. Voting is just theatre.
55:31
Yes, it is. Yeah, I I agree.
55:34
I mean, yeah, I mean, it's, it's far from an ideal system.
55:40
It's certainly a lot better than than Technocracy.
55:43
Either way. I, I think it's finished
55:46
because, I mean, the powers that be have, have have used liberal
55:52
democracy as their their chosen kind of form of political regime
55:55
for for many decades. And even they are now trying to
55:58
dismantle it. So quite apart from the fact
56:01
that it's really always been a sham and it's always been, you
56:04
know, the, the manufacturing of consent, you know, these ideas
56:07
were around 100 years ago. It's amazing, you know, just how
56:11
successful this has been over the course of a century to
56:13
persuade people that this is really in their interests.
56:17
But either way, it's, it's on its way out now.
56:19
The, the, the big question is what comes next?
56:23
And this could go in multiple different directions.
56:26
I mean, yes, the the the dystopian hellish vision of a
56:29
global technocracy is 1 outcome chaos as as things spiral out of
56:35
control is, is another option. I would like to think that
56:40
collectively we are able to come up with a more positive vision
56:45
towards which we can build and work.
56:48
And that is what I think is sadly lacking at the moment.
56:52
There's so much talk about the darker aspects, what they are
56:56
doing about their psychological operations, etcetera.
56:59
What's really needed is a positive narrative of our own.
57:04
I mean, if you think about Bob Moran's picture, the good Reset,
57:07
yeah. I mean, that's an example of, of
57:10
of trying to do this, imagining what the world could look like,
57:13
providing some kind of positive vision for us to aspire to.
57:18
So if I were to kind of, you know, be thinking strategically
57:21
about what's needed next, you know, I, I think that we need
57:24
the best thinkers out there to be actually coming up with that
57:27
kind of a vision and something that people can really, really
57:30
buy into because there's too much negativity, There's too
57:32
much kind of. Blackpilling.
57:36
Blackpilling, Exactly. But again, you know, you think
57:38
about what we've got here. The technologies that exist in
57:41
the world today, even though they are being put to very
57:46
nefarious purposes, could do a tremendous amount of good.
57:49
I mean, if you have that amount of information about everybody,
57:53
surely it becomes possible to distribute wealth more equitably
57:57
among society. You know, what need is there
58:00
for, for, for wars, really, if, if this technology were to be
58:05
expropriated from the hands of this kind of minuscule, very
58:08
nefarious group, the world could be so much better, unimaginably
58:13
better. You know, there'd be an
58:14
abundance of wealth. I mean, Katherine Austin Fitz
58:16
has talked about this very often that the lengths that they go
58:20
to, to suppressors, I mean, just the amount of money it must
58:24
cost, just maintain this, you know, these relentless
58:27
propaganda campaigns and the psychological operations and and
58:30
so on. You know, they have to go to so
58:33
much effort and cost to keep the global population in check.
58:40
Imagine what we could do without all of those constraints.
58:43
I mean, the future could be incredible, but how many people
58:48
ever really think that way? I think we need to start
58:51
adopting a much more positive mindset if we're to bring people
58:54
with us. I think it was Yuri Besmanov in
58:58
his interview with G Edward Griffin back and was it 83 or
59:00
8484? We spoke about various
59:06
characteristics of, of of control mechanisms, which I
59:09
think you've echoed in your work, things like demoralization
59:13
and destabilization and disorientating people and that
59:15
sort of thing. So one obvious way to look at
59:20
this is to make sure that you are not demoralized and that
59:23
you're not disorientated. Know who you are, know what your
59:28
meaning and purpose is when you wake up in the morning.
59:30
And for goodness sake, don't doom scroll.
59:33
You know, get fit, go into the sun, eat healthy, strengthen
59:39
your your family connections and your friendships and your
59:42
networks. It seems pretty obvious.
59:46
Yeah, it does. And again, they've done their
59:48
best to make sure that we do none of those things.
59:52
I mean, you know, the whole lockdown idea, you know, stay
59:55
indoors, don't see the sun, don't exercise, don't see your
59:58
family. I mean, you know, it's
1:00:00
horrendous what they tried to do, the addictive power of
1:00:04
social media. Highly, highly problematic.
1:00:07
I mean, I don't know how much time the average person spends
1:00:10
on social media per day instead of real social connections.
1:00:15
And the doom scrolling is a, is a, is a terrible phenomenon.
1:00:18
I mean, this is all known to have, you know, bad effects on
1:00:21
people's mental health. And even worse than that, you
1:00:26
are essentially trapping yourself in their technocratic
1:00:30
system because the news feeds that you see, etcetera on
1:00:33
Facebook and X or what you know, wherever you're getting in news,
1:00:36
they're all manipulated through algorithms.
1:00:40
Whatever tweets or whatever you put out, you've no idea how many
1:00:44
people they're reaching. And indeed, it's becoming pretty
1:00:47
obvious now, you know, with the Linda Yacarino principle of
1:00:51
freedom of speech, but not reach.
1:00:53
You can say whatever you like. Yeah, free speech go, man, but
1:00:57
no one's going to hear you. So why?
1:00:59
You know, why would you deliberately put yourself in
1:01:01
that kind of digital prison space?
1:01:03
I mean, I'm deliberately not on social media for that very
1:01:07
reason. The amount of time that people
1:01:10
spend on their smartphones and the fact that people, you can't
1:01:14
live without them. I mean, this is a form of
1:01:16
addiction. You know, if you can't drive
1:01:19
from A to B without using a sat NAV, you, you've got a problem.
1:01:25
You know, if you can't go to bed without taking your phone with
1:01:28
you, you've got a problem. If you can't lead your life
1:01:31
without using multiple apps all the time, you've got a problem.
1:01:35
Because you are increasingly you are consenting and acquiescing
1:01:39
and integrating yourself into that technocratic system.
1:01:43
And the more you do so, the more easier it becomes to manage you.
1:01:47
And that's before we get into the, the whole area of, of
1:01:50
technologies going under the skin and, and intercorporeal
1:01:53
technologies. So people have to take that
1:01:56
responsibility again and withdraw from the everything
1:02:01
that that points towards technocracy and do the kind of
1:02:03
things that you were just describing.
1:02:07
David, how can I follow you? Best place is on sub stack D
1:02:11
hughes.substack.com or David A hughes.net.
1:02:17
David A Hughes, thank you for joining me in the trenches.
1:02:21
Pleasure, Joe. Thanks very much.