Badlands Media - Devolution Power Hour Ep. 490: The Black Wall Metaphor and Reality Prime

Episode Date: September 6, 2026

Jon Herold and Chris Paul kick off with a Netflix documentary tangent about decoy planes and disguised operatives before shifting into one of the more philosophical episodes in recent memory. The centerpiece is a metaphor about a wall everyone secretly knows is black but publicly agrees is white, used to explain how Trump operates inside a collectively accepted false consensus and slowly walks people back toward what's actually true. From there the conversation goes deep into logos, divine order, and the idea that inversion, presenting things as their opposite, is the core mechanism of deception at every level, from elections to spiritual reality itself. The hosts connect it to cognitive warfare and flag the whole segment as one worth revisiting later. It's less news roundup and more philosophy hour this time around, for listeners who like their politics with a side of metaphysics.

The Badlands, what are the Badlands? Explain those Badlands. That's a hell of their name. Well, good evening, everybody, and welcome to the Saturday edition of the Devolution Power Hour. As always, I am joined by Chris Paul. Chris, how you doing, man? How's the weekend going? I'm doing great, John.

I didn't know it was the weekend because every day just runs into the next. And it doesn't make a lot of sense anymore. You have to know, like, it's not a Tuesday, right? Yeah, I was just kidding. I know it's the weekend. Okay. It just doesn't really feel like one in my world. You know what's funny is you can't see, you can't see the bad land sign is right there.

And maybe you can see the, hold on, I got to do this backwards. Yeah, you know, you can see the little peak. Can't see. There of the, you know. Might be the. Then that right there is Troy Polamala. Oh, that's unfortunate. Actually, he was really good.

Vikings just, uh, Harrison Smith just came out of retirement. I guess he didn't technically retire yet, but the Vikings just signed him again, so that's cool. He's our, uh, Palomalu. Is he? Well, basically. Weird. I've never heard of it. Well, let's say, oh, bologna. I mean, I bet.

Who hears of members of the Vikings defense? How do you spell Palomalu? P-O-L-A-M-A-L-U. I mean, but for real, no offense to Harrison Smith, but nobody knows who anyone on the Vikings defense is. Maybe that maybe that's fair like they don't play enough national games they haven't really been like relevant in a playoff sense in a while Let me read some stats for you not a huge national audience Troy Paula Malu versus Harrison Smith stats solo tackles

Paula Malu has 577 Harrison Smith has 859 Assisted tackles 196 to 321 sacks 12 to 21 half interceptions 32 to 32 to 325 receptions 32 to 39 fumble recovery seven to 10 so are you saying that Harrison Smith beats Polamalo in those statistical categories in everything but probably a number of dandra flakes in the hair oh wow your Palamalu's like got great hair yeah yeah um yeah that maybe maybe that's true i have no idea about uh stats he i mean it is with two more seasons so two more seasons well Troy was one of the most electric defenders to ever play the game I would agree with that.

And his highlight films are unbelievable. Yeah. It's because Harrison Smith is white. That's why you don't care about him. Isn't that true? Is that true, Chris? That, I guess. Are you asking me if it's true that he's white or if it's true that that's why I don't like him?

Both of them. Yeah, I only like Samoans. Samoan, okay. All right, man. I'm excited about tonight's episode. We're going to talk about a few pretty fun things. things, I think. We are going to have a brief discussion to start the show about why the word fake is so dangerous.

Oh. And if we say fake about too many things, especially a certain one thing, then you're automatically a CIA agent and you are here to disrupt the movement. And Chris, you're probably going to feel like we're picking on you. And it's because we are. Like, we finally decided that you are the Fed and we're going to have a discussion about it tonight. All right. That's number one. And then we're going to get into the welfare state and why. we love welfare states now everything about the welfare state the fraud all of it we want it you want to keep paying taxes as long as they keep creating programs to benefit people who don't work and that's good thing so we're going to get into that too and i hope that people can tell that this is dripping with sarcasm if you're new to the show by chance that this is very sarcastic me but then we're going to get into a topic that we've been kind of kicking back and forth i think you're the one who found some articles somewhere

don't remember where but it's about cognitive warfare and it's super interesting and I'm very excited to talk about that once we get there so should be a fun one man um and who know I feel like there's other things that were going on that throughout the week I was like we're going to talk about that oh we should get into go ahead I think you're to say the the article where the left and the mainstream media is kind of acknowledging now that why why is Trump not care about the midterms anymore yeah yeah we can do that one but also the the CNN documentary or not the CNN was it CNN documentary it was a Netflix one Netflix documentary sorry yeah the Trump decoy plane just the decoy plane not even the Trump

decoy plan oh sorry they have this new thing it's like Instadocs where they do an entire like 30 minute documentary about something that just happened and it's hilarious what they did was take news clips and then go around to quote unquote journalists and and film them in very dramatic, like, composition, and they answered some really dumb questions, and then they laced this thing together and called it a documentary. Yeah.

It's just garbage. Yeah, man, it's my thought watching that, and I don't know if I'm going to be able to, like, say this the right way, but, like, the mainstream media has become, like, the trans community of the information warfare. What I mean by that is, like, they get so mad at you if you don't call, them by like their pronouns they're you know like we're super serious take us seriously like we're

a real thing believe what we say but then also like they're they're victims to a fault and like the way they portrayed them in this documentary of how like they were the like why didn't trump tell us about this like why didn't we why were we not made aware of of what was going on here like the victim's it's just so pathetic and that's the way i see the trans community so it's it's It's funny that they took the White House correspondence dinner that way, too. They made themselves like, oh, my gosh, we might not have made it out. And I think that they're upset that, like, Trump knew that that plane was going to be hit by a missile. And he's like, well, who should we leave on that one?

JD Vance, Marco Rubio, and the White House press corps. They, or press pool, sorry. they can they can stay on the dead plane well the best part about it too is like when they get to I think it was the army base or whatever and he comes back in the plane and he's like goes to take questions from the reporters

and he's like well if I go down you go down with me or whatever and he wasn't even on the deco plane it was so funny man the thing about the thing with the lady that who'd been who'd been and gosh I can't speak right now

the lady who'd been a waitress on Air Force One for many, many years. He's the original Bush administration. And then at the end of her little bio and segment, she's like, no, there ain't no way there'd be a catering truck coming around. We went and did all the grocery shopping. Yeah, that seems like ridiculous. That's the most secure way to do it is for me to go personally shopping and civilian clothing. We don't trust anybody.

to bring the foods up to the plane and a catering cart so yeah me and martha go down to like the local the the rural Thai markets where we land when we're traveling around the world because there's no way anybody could like compromise the groceries it shows them like picking out fruit they're like yeah we uh we go in disguise in our civilian clothes oh so good it's It is, if you have Netflix, guys, it is worth the watch. Go look up the decoy plane. We were having a grand old time watch nothing. We should play a couple clips of it.

The ending is probably my favorite, but I'm sure we'll get copyrighting. I was thinking I was going to clip it. And then I was like, eh, it's not entertaining enough. Yeah, it's not. But I think just the ending of it, like the super serious nature of how, I don't know, it's just, it's hilarious. I'm with you. There are some moments. Yeah.

Okay. Let's get a quick word from a couple sponsors. and then we will get to it. And we're going to start off with some Labor Day. Soft Disclosure. Labor Day is tomorrow. Or no, sorry, Monday, everybody. So make sure you guys get yourself some Labor Day lotion.

These are the hands that built America. Hands that hammered. Hands that welded. Hands that carried the weight of a nation. Soft disclosure offers healing for the hands. Good Lord Randy. Working hands take a beating. Soft disclosure gives rough, dry skin, lightweight hydration that absorbs fast without leaving your hands greasy.

Every purchase supports six small American businesses. Take care of the hands that take care of everything else. Softdisclosure.com. Promo code Labor Day, everybody. Get to it. Let's also real quick do... Let me do the Guard Vegas promo. And we'll do...

We have Rumble Wallet and Keat tonight yet. So we'll get to both of those in a little bit. But first, Guard Vegas. Patriots, the fight for truth doesn't stop at the screen. It's hitting the road again. Badlands Media is coming to Las Vegas, September 17th through 19. for the next stop on the Great American Restoration Tour.

Join your favorite Badlands hosts and like-minded Americans for three powerful days of unfiltered conversations with deep-dive panels. I understand this is an emotional town. Real debates and tough questions. No topic is too hot, no question too bold. Tickets are on sale now at badlandsmedia.tv slash garden. Can't make it to Vegas, grab a virtual pass, and watch from home question the narratives fight for america's future

Vegas is calling the restoration continues get your passes today we'll see you in Vegas patriots all right guys badlands media.media tv slash offense slash events get yourself some tickets to join us in Vegas it's going to be a great old time um okay let's talk about the concept of of the using the word fake and stuff and why we're not allowed to use this anymore there's these struggle sessions that come up i mean sometimes it's more more persistent than other times and um we kind of went through a little lull there where people like weren't they didn't care about the whole fake thing and then all of a sudden the last couple days again i know we're 60 days out from an election so it kind

of makes sense but yeah um we're starting to get more more commentary on this and we just wanted to to talk about it because the people are clearly talking about about us and that's so stupid i don't know if you want to say anything to this i forgot to get that video up so i'll do that now yeah i don't know it's it's hardly worth it at this point i don't know what argument they think they're having or who they think they're having it with they are protecting a part of the narrative that cannot do anything other than protect the system as it exists i thought about running a poll on this today actually and just saying is is a voting part of the beast system or how we oppose the beast system because a lot of people who talk about the beast system are still highly invested

in voting for some reason as though it's not a function of that system like that's not it's not the way out say whatever you want about elections if they were if if they were perfectly legitimate and real in every way and verifiable and by everyone and totally transparent and we were able to check the activity of the the officers installed by these elections throughout their term in office well maybe then we could have a discussion about something that would be meaningful but none of those things are true okay and so at that point we're not talking about the same thing you cannot get out that way and so the fact that we're still talking about this is i think insulting to thinking people and it is a testament to to the effectiveness of gatekeepers over the last six years

yeah i think what i don't get is like these same people like they're apparently I missed the meeting somewhere where we went over the words that you're allowed to say. Yeah, right. You can call the election stolen and that is totally acceptable. You can call it fraudulent. You can call it rigged. You can call it all these things. But if you call it fake, then all of a sudden you're a deep state asset.

And the reasons they give for this are so stupid. It's like demoralizing all that stuff. But all that stuff means the same thing. Whether it's fake or not, like there's not some magical linguistic boundary that you all of a sudden cross. And all of a sudden that makes you like now you're qualified as a deep state. It's ridiculous me. I wanted to prove this point because Trump himself over the years has called it fake. We're describing the same thing.

Whether you call it stolen, fake, fraudulent. Even Trump himself uses that word, fake with other words like fraudulent or rigged in the same sentence. It all means the same thing. And so the semantic game is so stupid. And it's targeting a specific group of people. And I think you very directly. And I don't think it's fair.

It's real retarded. So let me just play this quick. A quick sampling of Trump's use of the word fake election. over the years. Over the past several weeks, we've amassed overwhelming evidence about a fake election. This is the presidential election. It's a disgrace what's happening. And I don't think the country's going to stand for it much longer.

They're disgusted. You have a fake election, you have an election with voter abuse and with voter fraud like nobody's ever seen before. We can never let another thing happen like what happened to us with a fact. fake election with a rigged election where a guy like Joe Biden assumes the presidency. This fake election can no longer stand. Yeah. And then I just sent the Brett Baer interview from the Super Bowl in early 2025 when he sat down with Fox News.

Which has always been something that Americans rally around to come together. They really do. You won the popular vote. You won all the swing states. But still, Kamala Harris got 75 million votes in the country. Well, if you believe the whole thing. Okay, let's just say, let's just say that the election was it was a ridiculous. Excuse me. There are seven swing states. I won them all. You did, but let me just get to the dismount here. And I won the popular. Have you thought about how to try to bring the country together? If you believe that whole thing. Yeah, and the whole thing is ridiculous. I was saying in the chat today, if the people who run the election system, the people who run in elections and the people who vote in the elections all know that the elections

are rigged and stolen, then they are all participating in a system that they know cannot deliver a legitimate result when the only purpose of the system is to deliver a legitimate result. That is what an election is. If an election doesn't actually conform to the definition of what, an election is, then it is not an election. It is something that is not an election presented as an election. That is a fake election. There's nothing else that you need to say about. There's not any other qualifications. There's not emotional appeals about getting the people involved in their government. None of that matters. It's a fake election. And that is what we have

in this country, we have fake elections. The results are decided by something other than the people voting and those votes being counted. Then the people are put into office where they don't actually have the power that we're attempting to delegate to them through our vote. Every element of it, every level of it, every aspect of it is fake. It's not a real election. It's a fake election, which means it's a self-deluding sciop that we participate in. you nailed it. And the reason we talk about this, I know we talked about this many times in the past. I'm hoping we won't talk about it too much in the future.

But it's bound to come up because you're going to see these, you're going to see more posts like this, vague posts, all these stupid struggle sessions, people just saying anybody using that word, fake election is deep state outside. I think it's just the dumbest fucking coping mechanism. Pardon my French out there. It's so stupid. Okay, let's move on from that.

I think I said my piece. I mean, there's plenty more. One more thing. Okay. Someone in the chat who I've never seen before ever just said, uh, what's that? Yeah. Jolly. Yeah.

And maybe that's a person who's here all the time and I've just never noticed. But, uh, Chris, do you know all elections are fake? And I responded, do you know any elections that are real? Nailed it. And the answer, of course, is no, of course you don't. And so I know that some elections are fake. All of them are run on. systems that cannot reliably produce an accurate record of the vote.

Okay. And everybody knows that going in. So they can't be verified. They're not transparent. Nobody can check to see if they got the right results. So actually, no one can verify that any elections are real. And we are just supposed to pretend that they are all real and then give our power

to whatever government they tell us the elections have produced. It's a fake election. The government is illegitimate. That's the end of the story. And that's the thing. Like so many people are okay with like, yeah, the government's illegitimate.

The election was stolen, fraudulent, all these things. For whatever reason, it's just the word fake that they lean on. That's the one that they have a problem with. And I literally do not understand why that is. Because everything you said in your entire article,

like the Joe Biden was never present, all that stuff. It's very well reasoned. Like you explain your point of view perfectly. Nobody ever actually tries to discuss the merits of that. They just like it's these false equivalencies and these they try to the red herring arguments too. Like they'll they'll attack the fake election narrative using talking points that you or anybody here has never even said. That's definitely true.

And I have listened attentively to every single argument that people have made to me about this subject. And I've addressed every single one of those arguments to completion. and anyone who wants to can read it online. And, you know, I will keep having this discussion because I know it's important for people to go through the process of having these thoughts and come to terms with it themselves because it is a total departure from how we've been conditioned to see our relationship with the government in this country. Okay.

But at the end of that conversation, you have to admit that you don't have any points. And I've been debated about this subject in public. public, people can watch those debates. Were there any points coming in? No, zero. And it was to the point where people were jumping out of their seats attempting to make the argument that my debating counterpart was totally unable and unequipped to make. So I don't know where else the conversation can go at this point, except for people making emotional claims about the things I'm saying that they can't actually argue it. It's pathetic. Yeah, totally agree, man. And again, I, I, we'll move on from this now.

Yeah, but sorry. No, no, no. I think everything you said was well said. Just, I don't know, every now and then, you see something online and you like want to ignore the stuff. And it's like, again, seriously, this is so stupid. It's stupider than last time even. Let's address it. And we did.

But we'll move on here. Let's, let's talk about the new form of socialism. Actually, no one. Let's go into this. Let's do the story from, where is my guardian article? there it is this was great share my screen you know how we've been talking chris you know maybe maybe trump doesn't care as much about the midterms as everybody else and we've been talking about this for gosh how long two years ever since the last election maybe i mean yeah i i yeah i'm trying

to think about what how far we were in 2022 leading up to that election but uh I don't know. I can't say decisively at that point that I was definitely like, these are totally fake. I don't remember. Yeah. Well, a lot of times you'll see this. Like we'll be, we'll talk about a theory or something we believe that's going on and why we believe it. And then over time, you'll see the mainstream media acknowledge the thing that you said would come based on, you know, your your analysis of current events or whatever. The thing that you think this is going heading towards, they'll see that happening. And then they'll try to explain it through their filters and why they think that's actually taking place.

And it's normally very, you know, establishment or very, a very normy explanation for it, which is what we're about to go through. But this is about a subject that we've been talking about for a while. How much does Donald Trump care about winning the midterms? Apparently not much at all. And this is an opinion piece from the Guardian.

Left is dragged. Totally acknowledged that. But again, this is exactly what I'm talking about. Like we see this and saw this. They're starting to see it now too. their explanations are different than ours, but at the end of the day, they're seeing the same thing, and so they're trying to conceptualize why that is, and this stuff is super interesting. So we probably won't read the whole thing, but there's a few key parts in here.

I think we should get in. What is Donald Trump playing at? If it's true that the best way of understanding the behavior of an organization is to assume it's controlled by a secret cabal of its enemies, perhaps that same logic extends to the current conduct of the president of the United States. Maybe he secretly wants Republicans to lose the looming midterm elections that will decide the balance of power in the U.S. for the next two years and for which the first postal ballots were sent out today. And this was yesterday that he wrote this. So yesterday they got sent out. That's not as mad a theory as it sounds.

Indeed, there are at least two reasons why Trump might either be unbothered by Republican defeat in November or even covertly desire it. We'll come to those, but let's start with a pattern of behavior that is hard to explain as anything other than calculated self-sabotage. and he goes through like the Iran War and why it's so devastating the rising costs of all sorts of things credit cards, mortgages given that Trump was elected in November 2024 and a promise to bring down inflation

it's hard to think of a worse environment for a governing party about to face the voter's verdict and that's before you consider the disenchantment of the mega faithful who thought the whole point of Trump was an end to the forever wars in the Middle East and then that might not even be the most

damaging um talks about potential war with canada and the lake ontario to link lake america stuff and then um let's go let's go so we get we get a full um we get a full retelling of the official story about why americans don't like donald trump they have to do that part first and just let everybody know the polls say everyone hates trump the narrative is sure trying to be at home. And we know they do that so that they can, you know, line up that narrative with an electoral outcome through the fake election system. Still, perhaps the most egregious illustration of Trump's apparent determination

to ruin Republican chances in the midterms is his support for data centers. Few issues have seen their salience rise so quickly and in such a clear direction, almost overnight. They've become objects of fear and loathing across the country and across the political spectrum with seven and ten Americans saying they would not want one anywhere near where they live. Even among Republicans, there is deep concern over the environmental impact, energy consumption, and water use. For others, data centers have become a lightning rod for a broader anxiety over AI and what it may do to our jobs and our lives.

Either way, they are a kryptonite to voters. It's where does Trump stand? The only reason that communities throughout the USA should not want data centers is if they want to end up being backwards and poor. He posted on Monday. And in that remark, he not only put himself at odds with the most U.S. voters, he insulted them to, And then this quote is great. It's almost a talent. This ability of Trump's to land on the wrong side of so-called 80-20 issues,

siding with one-fifth of the electorate against the rest. Chris, that made me think of was way back when he first started talking about this, and you called Trump the lightning rod and how he'd like, he'll take both sides of an issue like over a period of time. And at the end of the day, like people, one, they kind of trap themselves into being hypocrites. but at some point the issue is just there on its like on its own left to to be debated and and figured out however that may be um and if you want to comment on this you can but i thought this quote was just amazing because it hits at that i agree i that's exactly what i thought as well and

that's so with most of with all the inversions that we have been conditioned to believe and by that i mean when a thing is identified as itself in its natural form and then layered over that is a definition of that thing that is actually the opposite of what that thing is, right? So black is black and white is white. And these two things are opposite. Now, and you can see, this is perfect, actually. This wall is black. Okay. This wall is totally black. It's not any other color than black. It's only black. But if I told you that on next week's DPA, I was going to paint this wall white in front of your eyes. And you said, okay, cool.

That sounds like a really great stunt. I bet a lot of people will love to watch you paint that wall and then watch it dry. And I came in next week and took a roller of paint up and down my wall. And it was, there was no paint on it or it was clear paint or it was just more black paint or whatever. And the wall looked exactly the same after. And I was like, there it is. it's white now. And everyone was like, no, it's not.

And they started arguing about it. And next week after that, I came back. And I was like, okay, fine. It's just one coat of white. Here's another coat of white. And it still looks totally black. And we did this a number of times. And then it started attaching social and material and financial incentives to people saying

that it actually is white now and kept doing that and doing that over iteration after iteration after iteration. the color of the wall could change not at all and there would still be a large population of people willing to say that black was white and so it's not that they really believe it but they'll say it in certain condition under certain conditions which means that it is now acceptable society wide to say that black is white and white is black because they have now taken these two opposite things layer them on top of one another and then effectively conflated them so that they can use whatever definition they want for that word anytime in any situation they choose. If they need it to be white at a certain moment, then it's white. Otherwise, it's black. And so if somebody wants to argue with them and they want to play the power game and not argue, then they're like, yes, fine.

Of course, I agree that it's black. And then the liberal or whatever comes over. And they're like, you know, I think this wall is really white. Like, okay, well, now, yeah, yeah, you're right too. It's white now. And so they just, they define everything as everything else. And let's, let me, let me just pause there and we can kind of loop back into it. Well, I mean, that's a great metaphor.

And maybe if you could tie it to how, like, give an example, compare that to what this guy's doing with, with Trump here. So the 80, the 80, 20 thing, all right? Okay. So, um, if society has accepted that this wall is white and Donald Trump, pops onto the scene. Everybody knows ultimately that this wall is black, but virtually everyone is willing to agree that it's white. It's like our elections, for instance.

Yes. Everybody pretty much knows that the elections are fake, but some people cannot tolerate emotionally, considering the world as the product of fake elections. So they agree to claim that the elections are real. Okay. And so what Trump does is he like takes the, false claim and owns that and then gets the backlash from the people who he's supposed to be

like bringing the truth to. And they're like, wait a second, Trump, that's not true. So you get that wave of backlash. And then he takes the other position. And he says, oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah, that wall's definitely black. Everybody knows that wall's black. And occasionally now and then he'll say it's white just to appease people. But he knows it's black. And over time, people are like, wait a second. Well, if Trump's willing to say it's black, I guess I can say it's black. new. And over time, you get everybody saying it's black again. And so Trump is rebranding the reality back to the natural form, removing that layer of inversion from our conceptual reality. And if you do that on everything, we all move out of that conceptual false reality and back into

what I call reality prime, which is that more natural form, the form that actually comports to the way I talk about it now is just logos like Jesus Christ as logos. Jesus Christ as the capital W word of God, the worldly embodiment of the Holy Spirit. And this is the divine order. This is what God's order says. These are the way things are. And then we have this layer of distortion on top of everything. And that's what the devil does is invert things.

And so this is how we get out of that system. And we can only take ourselves out of it. And we just have to, I guess, learn that lesson. And so the reason I talk about it in this manner is because we have been conditioned to be materialists and we require materialist and empiricist explanations for everything. And so this is the, this is that. Yeah. I mean, that's brilliant.

I think we need to clip that and get that shared around. I love that metaphor. And this actually ties into the cognitive warfare, I think, almost better than the socialist welfare or state stuff that we were going to talk about next. So I think we should get into that now because I think it ties right in. Is there anything else you want to say on this article about them like noticing Trump, hey, maybe he doesn't want to win the elections? No, no.

I mean, I think that's good. I think it's important to understand that Trump does not care about the results of the midterm. They don't matter at all. The Republican Congress and Republican Senate have not done anything for Donald Trump in two years. In fact, they haven't done anything for him in 10 years. And he pushes these things through. and then the Republican House and Senate, when they are in the majority,

attempt to figure out ways that they can claim credit for the things Donald Trump is doing because they are illegitimate bodies that cannot actually do anything. He doesn't need their help. This election, this fake election, is going to narratively set up, it seems likely now,

an impeachment attempt of Donald Trump. And the people who aren't getting it are the ones who are voting the hardest. And these are the people who are, the the the the Trump project is being and I mean retarded in its literal form the project is being retarded because of these people's inability to emotionally move on from the idea that pressing little buttons on an iPad down at their high school cafeteria is going to get the uh the global adversary to relinquish the control over the most powerful country that has ever existed and all it took

was a couple stickers man that's right power of stickers I understand why my daughter loves them so much. But yeah, okay, let's transition to this article. I know you have it saved on your computer with highlights and stuff. So you should pull that up. And while you're doing it, I'm going to do a quick Rumble Wallet read. My favorite one, guys. All right, this is a paid advertisement for Rumble Wallet.

They're sponsoring this portion of the show. All right, chat, real talk. If you actually want our attention, there's now a clear line to it. Here's how it works. We're prioritizing rants sent through Rumble Wallet. If you send one, we see it, and we respond, simple as that. For limited time, you can start your wallet with $20 in US stable coin for tipping Rumble creators like me and Chris and Badlands. Directly, all you got to do is use that promo code, DPH20 when you sign up now, whether it's questions, hot take, stuff you really want us to react to.

Don't bury it in the chat. Put it in a rant. Because let's be honest, the regular chat just flies by. But when you use Rumble wallet, it cuts through everything. So here's the move. You scan the QR code or use the link in the description of this video, download Rumble Wallet and try it for yourself. And just don't forget to use that code DPH20 and claim that free 20. in tipping with U.S. Stablecoin.

This is basically the VIP lane, but restrictions apply. There are a limited number of entries available. Terms and conditions also apply. See the description below or visit rumble.com slash promo official rules for details. All right. So I don't know how to preface the article here. We talk a lot about the generational warfare, like Cy War, narrative warfare, warfare or cyber warfare you go on and on and on like what there's five you know

generations of warfare fifth generation warfare is the siops and stuff well there's this new concept that is being talked about and written about and it's it's almost it's an evolution it goes it takes a combination of like the siops and the the technology and cyber warfare and kind of combines them into this what they call cognitive warfare and that is what we're going to go through here, probably for a good portion of the rest of the show. And it's super interesting. Let me just check something out here and see if it pulls.

Okay, good. It pulls up my highlights. So this will work. Okay, so I, I don't know if it was in like Nick Land, something to do with Nick Land, who I think is a very interesting thinker, and we don't have to get into him right now. But so this is, gosh, hold on.

Let me just pull up my own. I want to pull up his, the description of this man. So that, okay, so Jeremiah Lumpy Lombaka, PhD, is a retired U.S. Army Green Beret and current professor of irregular warfare, counterterrorism, and special operations with the Department of Defense. He can be found on ex-formally Twitter at Lumpy. Asia. Okay. So that's who wrote this paper. I stumbled upon this paper last weekend. And this is from

the end of September. It's almost a year old. End of September. Oh, sorry, November 2025, cognitive warfare to dominate and redefine adversary realities, implications for U.S. Special Operations Forces. And so I just immediately saw adversary realities. and was like, oh, yeah, that's what I'm talking. Like, I've been writing about this stuff all the time. And I know that I'm kind of publishing way less content than I used to. And that is terrible. I'm not pleased with that.

But these subjects are like, they take me a long time to think about and to understand exactly what I want to say, but I can communicate what I'm trying to communicate in the way that I actually see these things. But I talk about the adversary all the time. And it's all about the creation of false realities. And Donald Trump actually described, he said false reality, specifically yesterday, on truth social and even, I mean, capitalized it the same way. But I'm not saying that there's anything extra to take from that. I just thought it was interesting that he pointed out specifically the false reality that was created by wrong information.

Yeah. So anyway. I think that's great. Let's start. Let's start reading through it. And I think you guys will get an understanding of why we think this is so interesting. Okay. So cognitive warfare foundations, we could probably read every bit of this paper. And it's all very interesting.

I'm going to go through the highlights. If you have stuff, John, stop me. I guess maybe I'll let's do this whole. Let's do this whole first. Yeah, yeah. Yeah. Maybe we can do even more than that. I don't know.

So part one, cognitive warfare foundations. Consider the power to dictate who is perceived as right or wrong in conflicts, like the Russia-Ukraine war or Israeli-Gazin conflict, or to reshape the outcome of a nation's election in the mind of its citizens. Imagine the U.S. and its allies, not merely swaying opinions, but restructuring the very reality in which adversaries like North Korea, the Chinese Communist Party, Iran, or violent extremists, make judgments, aligning their perceptions, with U.S. strategic objectives. In an era of strategic competition where gray zone conflict and hybrid warfare tactics are now commonplace, the human mind has emerged as a distinct and critical domain of conflict. There are differing definitions of the term cognitive warfare. Bernard Claverie and Francois de Clouzell define it as an unconventional form of warfare that uses cyber tools to alter enemy cognitive processes, exploit mental biases, or reflexive thinking, provoke thought distortions, influence decision-making, and hinder actions with negative effects,

both at the individual and collective levels. And that was a quote. NATO's Strategic Warfare Development Command, known as Allied Command Transformation, notes that cognitive warfare includes, quote, activities conducted in in synchronization with other instruments of power to affect attitudes and behaviors by influencing, protecting, or disrupting individual group or population level cognition to gain an advantage over an adversary. Whole of society manipulation is a new norm. Okay?

So I can pause right there. Yeah. Well, this is where it starts to get really interesting. Obviously, that last sentence there is huge. And like when I was first reading through this, and I'm sure the audience, is thinking of this too it's like it sounds like he's just describing siops and like psychological operations the next part of this gets into the distinction there um but when you really look at this and how it compares to that and what the goal of cognitive warfare actually is and then you start to map it on to

things we see take place on a day-to-day basis on social media it's hard to ignore it's like hard to unsee it you know what i mean yeah yeah shall i um just continue right here should we skip forward. I don't know if you read it. I should read this next part. And I can read it too. Yeah, go ahead. But I'm going to pull up on my side here. It is necessary to differentiate cognitive warfare from established concepts such as psychological operations, sciops sometimes referred to in defense circles as military information support operations, information warfare, cyber warfare, and hybrid warfare. Cleverie and du Kluzell right. Cognitive warfare is where all the elements of information warfare, including the operational aspects

of psychology and neurosciences based on systemics and complexity combined for military action. It sits at the intersection of two operational fields that hitherto were managed separately. Sciops and influence operations soft power on one hand and cyber operations, cyber defense, intended to degrade or destroy physical information assets on the other. This intersection makes it possible to unite concepts and points of view from different scientific military or intelligence communities of interests, bringing about an interdisciplinary approach on how technologies impact humankind. It's fascinating.

In this sense, cognitive warfare may be thought of as a strategic discipline that directly targets the way individuals and groups think, perceive, process information, and ultimately act. Generating cognitive effects as the primary objective distinguishes it from the mere information dissemination or information warfare. See figure two for a graphic representation of the conceptual relationships between these types of warfare, as these two French hard to say name said, this new type of warfare is waged by means of disinformation,

propaganda, influence operations, and hostile information campaigns all at the same time. Above all, this new type of warfare is waged in a completely changed communication and information ecosystem where every major issue in a society can be weaponized thanks to the very connectivity of that new ecosystem. Inceptualizing cognitive warfare as a new technology-driven phenomenon has implications for research and for policymaking. So I highlighted the next paragraph. Technological advancements are consistently highlighted as a key enabler.

You have a scroll down. Oh, sorry. Where are we? Oh, yeah, yeah, you can just click to the next. Yeah, we can click slide to slide on there. Yeah. The pervasive influence of social media and digital platforms is a recurring focus, illustrating how these channels facilitate the rapid and mass dissemination of narratives,

enabling precise manipulation of public opinion. And that is a part that people often miss. The narrative, the algorithm, all of these things change in real time in response to whether or not people are attaching to the narratives and believing them to the point that they are incentivized to go and behave in such a way that the purpose of the narrative is achieved in the real world. implemented by the audience for that narrative. And I know that that's a few steps in there. But the idea is the story creates the belief, which creates a behavior, and that behavior is the point of telling the story. And so the story comes, the story is designed to create that behavior.

And if the story cannot be believed without real world evidence for the story, that real world evidence is created for the purpose of the story. Okay. If they need to stage events in full, including killing people, they will absolutely do it for the purposes of that story. And that's what my article, Chicken Egg Chicken is basically about. Yeah, which is a great article, by the way. I encourage you all to read that as well.

Where I think it's interesting is like the way, you know, this community especially, everybody's heard of MK Ultra and like how back in the day the CIA was trying to, you you know, use all sorts of drugs and chemicals and all these things trying to brainwash people to control them. Well, this is like the advanced, super advanced technology driven approach to that without using drugs and without people even being aware of what's going on. And, you know, we definitely, or maybe I'm when I say I'm using weed too broadly, like I personally, I'll talk about myself, I know for a fact, even though I'm doing this all day long and reading stuff all day long. I know that I underestimate the capability of these people's ability to manipulate the

information that we see. Like they can do it on a micro level. They can control what any individual person sees on a day-to-day basis, whether it's on social media or first in internet searches or or anything. They can control it all. And with AI becoming more and more prevalent, it's only going to be easier for them to do that. And so like if they want to get a group of people to start seeing the world a certain way, and this is my understanding of how they would use cognitive warfare using technology. Let's say there's a group of people and a good chunk of that group of people watches a certain influencer or something. They could probably target that influencer specifically, and maybe even just every individual person, I don't know, but you could start with somebody like

that and target what they see on a day-to-day basis on social media, which will slowly warp and change their worldview of the way they see things, which will they will then translate to their audience and it will just go down and down the line like that. And so all they have to do is target one person and you can see how the trickle down effect would affect multiple other people. And it's probably even like, they're probably even much more capable than that. That's the part that's scary is they might not just be targeting big influences. They could target anybody they want at any time.

And they probably already are. Oh, 100% they are. Yeah, there's no doubt about it. The entire time you were speaking, all I could think about was the Jack Nicholson meme where he's just like, yeah. But yeah, that's what it is. The algorithm can feed you whatever it wants to feed you all the time. And if you happen to be Tim Poole, for instance, right,

where you're on Twitter all day long, every day, memorizing everything everyone on Twitter says and making sure that you have an appropriate opinion on Twitter, finally tuning everything just so that your audience will still like you and the platforms won't get offended and you can keep your spot. And you are getting fed Elon Musk news all day and then shooting it out of a Tim Poole mouth to 30,000 people over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. Over time, all of those people live in a false reality.

And then they will go out into their normal lives, argue that their false reality is the only true reality when it's confronting someone else's false reality. and they'll begin to build that false reality into reality. And that is how our conceptual reality, at least, is being constructed. And we have to understand that that's what's going on so that we can begin to build defenses, cognitive defenses, so that the Tim Pool voice doesn't get in. Yeah. I think another way to kind of make this more easy to understand, like if I was going to explain it,

or maybe not a five-year-old, but like, subliminal messaging, right? Everybody knows about that concept too. It's a similar version of that. Like if you see a Coke can flash on the screen really quickly and they do that enough times, like you may not even be aware of it, you may not even see it, but the theory is that it will make you want to Coke after a certain amount of time and then you'll go buy a Coke and they make money that way. They can do that with other things. It doesn't just have to be product placements. It can be ideas. It could be it's like this AI micro-targeting. I think that's what I already described it as. That's the technology that I think I'm, you know, I'm, I'm

building out this Grockbot business stuff. Like I have one guy who's tasking a bunch of other guys to do a whole bunch of other things. You're slaves. Yeah, they're my slaves. Yes, that's right. I was, so I have, I created a separate Twitter account and I gave this thing access to it. And I've already tried a version of this in the past. But like, I can be like, hey, go to a Twitter profile and search it for these things.

And it will go and it will search it. And now imagine if like you had a bunch of bots like that and you could have it, okay, go to a Twitter or go search for Twitter for any accounts with over 50,000 followers or whatever that has these in their bio and that are saying these type of things. And I want you to go and respond to every single one of those with this phrase over and over again until the end of time. And you just keep doing that targeting, targeting, targeting, and people will see that over time.

Like, it's to that scale, that micro targeted that they can do this stuff that we're not even aware of. And this is why when we talk about, like, even in the past, when I've talked about bots and the pervasive like bot problem, I was just talking about this this week on rumble like i'm not even conceptualizing how how nefarious it can be you know what i mean yeah let's yeah there on that part because there are actually people innovating in that field to figure out how to make these bots more influential for some purpose and the purpose is usually to steal your attention or to create some form of monetization um brian and i yesterday on daily

We're talking about this article from the Columbia Journalism, I think it's called the Columbia Journalism Review or Journal Review, about the paid influencer campaigns. And they were talking about micro-targeting and micro-influencers, and they even have something now that they call nano-influencers, like under a thousand followers. And then micro is 1,000 to 100,000. Or I think it was 100 to 100,000, or 1,200,000, or 1,200,000.

Maybe it was lower than that. But so they're going after even influencers of that level of popularity and influence and still sending paid campaigns their way to manipulate people's opinions. So people that you would never even think could possibly be professional influencers are still being, and it's so far beyond nudged if they're getting paid, they are being incentivized. to pretend to believe things and to tell you those things in an authentic seeming way, despite the messaging not being authentic. And in most parts, they call that lying. Yeah. There's this other great article where they talk about how they do this that I thought was really good,

but I don't know if we're ready to like, it was just like two paragraphs I want to read from this. Yeah, cool. Let's get your screen. We'll come back. Okay. Let me do this just real quick because this is another great way to describe it when we're talking about technology and stuff.

Means of action over the past, over the last 20 years or so, the design of digital tools has taken into account the differences and characteristics of users in order to encourage their spontaneous use. This has led some to think about how these guided approaches can be manipulated to allow for greater integration of human users within the system.

The intention has gone from facilitating the user experience to instigating or even dictating how they behave. And here, from the attacker's point of view, the most efficient action, albeit the hardest to execute, is to encourage the use of digital tools that can disrupt or affect all levels of the enemy's cognitive processes. The various decision-making stages are targeted, starting with how information is taken in, which can be overwhelmed, how it is then filtered, which can be sidestepped,

by altering how representations are constructed, by influencing memory storage, leading to inadequate decisions, or by paralyzing the taking of action, and making it difficult to alter objectives. Each of these phases now understood, codified, or even replaced, by digital tools, they can therefore all be targeted. And like, so their goal is to get people to use social media apps and other apps that can hijack their thinking. Isn't that nuts?

It's nuts. There's actually a list of, you keep going. No, I was just going to say. And the, the observation behind the intellectual kids table thing, the way I talk about Twitter is that we know that that's what Twitter is. And we still allow Twitter to build our conceptual reality. And we know that Twitter builds other people's conceptual reality. And we pay attention to them while they build ours. So it's, it is a very precarious information environment. There should be zero trust for anything in the information environment, which means that we need to form our beliefs

in a different way. And so that's what I'm again, trying to like write about and think about. I was talking to John Drake about this the other day. Like, I believe that there is a way, I believe that through consistent practice, we can rid ourselves of that conditioning and realign our belief formation, which is to say our epistemology with Jesus Christ as logos. And I call it an ordered epistemology. Like, we need to align our formation of beliefs with order. So if we see something out there and we're trying to decide like, oh, should I believe that?

Well, does it comport with order? And one of the first ways to judge for yourself, whether or not it does is, are you pretending to know things that you don't know? Like if someone on MSNBC or someone, I guess that's not a channel anymore, or CNN or the Daily Wire or whatever, they tell you a thing and you're like, okay, well, they wouldn't lie to me. There's no way that they would get something like that wrong. The underlying event has to be real, even if they're confused,

about their opinion and you believe that thing and you represent it as though you know it to be true personally, even though you don't. Well, you've already diverged from order by misrepresenting something that you clearly don't know as something that you do know. Okay. So if I'm going to say, for instance, that I know the United States struck three Iranian tankers today and treat that as a known, something we all know, and then begin to form opinions on that and advise people, oh, we have to kill this guy and this guy and this guy because of these three tankers being hit. Well, I'm all the way around the bend at that point. I don't know that three tankers got hit.

I know that someone's telling me that. I don't believe those people. I have no reason to believe those people. But they're telling me, and that's as far as I know it. I can't take that and pretend it's my direct knowledge. I can't interact with that as though it's my. direct knowledge and still be comporting to logos. It doesn't make any sense. But Chris, we can't let Iran have nukes.

That's true. And that's actually a much easier mission than most people believe it to be. Yeah. And to your point, if you like so, if if you personally don't believe nukes are real, which is a lot of people out there that do, then obviously the the justification for war being we can't let Iran have nukes does not hold very much water. Zero water, yes. Yeah, minimal to zero water. Okay, but let's keep going through this. Let me get down to, or you want to skip down to part two, maybe?

Hold on soon. Let me see what I got here. Oh, it's funny because the next thing was the use for micro-targeting, generating hyper-realistic disinformation. For instance, deep fakes, analyzing psychological profiles, and automating influence campaigns on an unprecedented scale. So that is all just algorithmic dictation of every brand of influence they can thrust upon you. It's just all out assault on our brains all the time on these platforms.

Yeah, and it's not just on the information itself. That's part of it. But it's on everything from like how you get your information and how you decide what to do with that information. and down and down and down. Part two, I thought this was all, a lot of this is pretty good. Cognitive warfare penetrates the processes

of perception, judgment, and belief formation at its most sophisticated, this could involve the deployment of cognitive contagions, ideologically charged constructs that spread virally across digital and social networks, influencing beliefs, emotional reactions, and ultimately behavior. The ultimate result of effective cognitive warfare

may be that after these operations take place over long periods of time using cognitive biases, they modify the thinking habits of the target. As a couple of French people wrote, they have lasting even irreversible effects on the cognitive personality, the way in which an individual processes information. It's a great paragraph.

Do you want to add anything to that? No, let's keep going. Okay. Unlike traditional disinformation campaigns, which rely on pushing falsehoods or misleading narratives, cognitive contagions embed particular patterns of thinking. They may include logical fallacies, emotionally charged heuristics, and cognitive shortcuts that allow the contagions to self-propagate within communities.

Rather than transmitting standalone messages, they act more like ideological malware, replicating and adapting to embed themselves in the mental frameworks of individuals or groups. For example, emotionally resonant slogans such as those that stoke fear or indignation, can bypass rational analysis and lodge deeply within a person's worldview, such as you're not allowed to say if elections are fake or trust the plan or stuff like that. With repetition and social reinforcement, meaning if you don't adhere to those principles, you are excommunicated and called a deep state asset. Such beliefs can

become difficult to dislodge leading to what scholars describe as epistemic closure, where new information is rejected if it contradicts the engineered narrative. And again, that's exactly what we have. Yes, and the logical fallacies, let's focus in on that for a second, because it is a logical fallacy to make an appeal to authority, okay, to suggest that something is true because this person said it was true. And it's not only that that is, so that is a logical fallacy in the course of arguments, but it is also like embedding that logical fallacy in one's foundational knowledge when we. again, place as foundational knowledge, something that we can't possibly know directly and that we don't possibly know directly, something that we only know from authority. We say, oh, this is definitely true and then go from there. You have incorporated a logical fallacy into your actual knowledge base at that point. And we don't realize we're doing it because no attention is paid to that

sort of thing. But if you, if you go through all the things you believe and you think, how do I know this thing? And for every one of those things, it's because, oh, well, I read it in this book or this person told me, or I heard a college professor say that, or this senator said that, or a judge ruled. All of those are appeals to an authority that has, that you, that's something you can't justify logically in any way. And that is how, Again, that's how we build our reality. Well, I think it's even more retarded than that, man, because it's not like, oh, I read that in a book or it's, I talked to a professor. It's typically like, oh, Katterd said that on Twitter.

And so now it's true. You know what I mean? Like it's much more retarded than the way you described it. But I mean, the way you described it was accurate. If that makes. Yeah. You distracted by the chat? I am distracted by the chat and also reading ahead in our document.

Okay, let's do this next one's really good too. Because I know that we're kind of moving through this at a snail's pace and I'm like, what stuff do we have to jump to? Well, I think this is, I think it's worth it. I think it's interesting. I think it's a good discussion. So yeah, cool. Let's,

let's keep going. No, this section in particular is really good too. Yeah. These contagions thrive in digital environments where information overload pushes users toward mental shortcuts where echo chambers reinforce existing views and social media algorithms, prioritize engagement over accuracy. What could we be describing right there? I feel like we've talked about that before.

Psychographic targeting, enabled by troves of user data, allows these cognitive viruses to be tailored with precision to individual psychological profiles. The result is a potent blend of personalization, repetition, and emotional provocation that erodes critical thinking and reshapes the architecture of public perception.

Wow. Let me skip here. actually hold on i like the next sentence there because it's talking about narrative superposition and uh i was just skipping the page on the screen first oh sorry i can see it oh okay then go ahead yep drawing inspiration from quantum mechanics one might consider a state of narrative superposition uh where multiple contradictory narratives exist simultaneously the the collapse of the shared reality forcing the adoption of a dominant desired reality this parallels work in quantum cognition. Manipulating perception itself can occur through virtual reality, augmented

reality, or even targeted neurostimulation, while theoretical these sensory override realities could directly influence an individual's experience and understanding of the world. Wow. It's like you, it's like your black paint, white paint story. Yeah. Yes. And it annoys me that this is published before I published my black paint white paint thing, which I do have. When you talk about, publish it then no well no it's for the book oh i have like i have like a hundred thousand words that i've written and not published which is really annoying well which you got to be careful because if if bbby sees this episode he is going to publish the white paint black paint thing before you get a chance to so oh be careful bro just kidding um let's keep going though

because this i think this next section is i mean this whole i love this whole thing yeah so i'm gonna just keep reading. Proactive measures include the widespread dissemination of advanced psychological inoculation and pre-bunking programs. These efforts would likely leverage digital games and interactive simulations designed to build robust mental resistance against cognitive contagions, moving beyond simple fact-checking. Currently, deep cognitive hygiene education should be integrated into national curricula, equipping citizens with the ability to deconstruct complex manipulation tactics, understand their own cognitive biases, and critically evaluate the emotional and logical underpinnings of information.

Something that people really struggle with, especially the emotional part, or at least the appeals to emotion they use. To address vulnerabilities, efforts must focus on algorithmic recalibration and counteramplification, advocating for and developing technologies that incentivize social media platforms to prioritize accuracy and diverse viewpoints over sensationalism. This could involve white hat. I love how we use that. Algorithmic interventions that subtly disrupt the virality of harmful cognitive contagions.

Finally, advanced inauthentic actor detection and disruption require public-private partnerships, leveraging AI and machine learning to identify and neutralize bot nets, synthetic media, and coordinated inauthentic behavior. This would also involve the deployment of cognitive antibodies, automated systems that intellectually, intelligently detect, and flag manipulated content or suspicious narrative patterns in real time. This is kind of why we harp on the bot problem we see on platforms, even like Rumble. I've gone to rumble like numerous times over the years and been like, dude, please do something about the bots.

And I'm not necessarily just talking about bots on other programs. I'm like, look at these numbers. This is on my channel and these do not look real to me. Like what is going on here? I finally have their attention. They're finally like looking into it. But it's this kind of stuff right here. Like even the appearance of a popularity for a certain talking point or narrative or a group

of people, that is a form of like them. subverting your cognition. And like, I see how that fits into like cognitive warfare. Like influencers use this even if they don't even realize they're doing it. Because it's like it. Yeah. Or it gets used on their behalf. And we see that.

We see it pop up in the chats. People are in chats attempting to sway whoever's paying attention to chat, away from the content or whatever in whatever direction. They always try to do personal attacks. Oh, you're breaking unity. Oh, you were so. mean with the thing you said, all that bullshit. And then you've got the fact that people can buy likes and follows and comments on Rumble. And so there are like shows that no one's really

watching, no one's really chatting in. And they have like 3,000 likes on 60,000 views, like just impossible numbers. And they just keep happening again and again. And it's always, you know, certain subject matter. that gets the paid boosts behind it, and it puts it up on the leaderboard, and it tells people, hey, this is popular program. It's crazy. It's absolutely crazy.

But so to divert from that, unless you want to continue, if you have anything else to say about that, the bottom system. I think this next section might be really good too. Okay, cool. And let me just say one thing about that pink highlight there. This could involve white hat algorithmic interventions that subtly disrupt the virality of harmful cognitive contagions. Okay, I have no doubt that that is possible. I have no doubt that that happens. But the problem is calling it white hat.

And this is one of the problems I have with this paper. And I would love to talk to this guy. I really would. I don't know anything about his character or his attentions or anything like that. I think that this is a very interesting paper. I think he's describing a real phenomenon. But whenever these things are addressed in a nation-state military context, It's always about like how do our sciops defeat Chinese siops and like how do we hoodwink our people into not being hoodwinked by China or how do we hoodwink the Chinese people so that they'll stop hoodwinking our people. The point is not getting hoodwinked at all. And so what we need to actually do is figure out a way to make people resilient so that they can resist hoodwinking. And that is not the same thing as doing all of these like advanced cognitive warfare tactics. And I appreciate that they're fighting the battle on all the levels it could be fought on, but this is not the important one.

Yeah, I would agree with you there, inoculating people by, like, not by like counter programming them, but breaking them free from any programming at all. That's right. Yeah, and I've actually, I was thinking about that this week, and I think maybe a better way to describe it even better than withholding belief, which is something that we can do intentionally. but what we are aiming to do on a more widespread basis is to cultivate disagreeability. And that is not like saying that everything in the world is wrong or fake or any of that, which people accuse me. That's obviously not what I do. The point is like exercising extreme skepticism and becoming a person who is comfortable with being

disagreeable, which means that you do not feel the constant pull of conforming with consensus as part of your epistemology, your belief formation. Yeah. And not like, I was going to say something about like fighting with people online or probably not even real people. Oh, that's, that's crazy. And this is coming from someone who, dude, I used to do, I did that for 20 years. Like, I was an early adopter to like AOL and would go on like message boards for sports teams.

and talk shit to people and argue with people because I thought it was interesting and fun. Because I, you know, I was always kind of headed for law school and then didn't end up going. But, but that, like, I found that enjoyable. And so I did it for many, many years. And I wanted to engage the arguments. And eventually you realize, wait a second, this is pointless. Like, I'm actually just wasting my time doing this. Yeah.

Okay. I'm going to keep reading here. Strategic manipulation may not necessarily target societies broadly or groups generic rather individual specifically. This form of warfare could rely on constructing detailed psychographic profiles drawn from exhaustive data online behaviors, biometric indicators,

purchase histories, sleep patterns, even vocal tonality. These profiles would then be used to tailor ideological messaging in ways that bypass conscious resistance, tapping into subconscious vulnerabilities, emotional needs, and cognitive biases. How often do we get a story

of data leaking online? How often do we get... I mean, the this part this is the part where we don't even understand what we've done to ourselves with some of the technology and i i love my technology guys like grok bots can manipulate me all day long but it could be a problem and i don't know if um this next one this kind of gets in the counter stuff which i don't really care for let me let me scan yeah i didn't do much there either but um proactive strategies down at the bottom of six so see i have a different my mind's laid out differently than yours. Well, I just mean like it says six at the bottom of this slide, even though it's slide 10.

I just going to find that. So anyway, it's like a one long webpage article. Oh, gotcha. Proactive strategies could include the strategic erosion of adversary cognitive resilience, actively identifying and exploiting weaknesses in their defense mechanisms. This could involve saturating their information environment with rapidly evolving and novel forms of influence that overwhelm their detection systems or introducing subtle, continuous cognitive stressors designed to erode a target population's capacity for critical thinking over time. And you can even just take something as simple as the nonstop onslaught of the news cycle. It's like one highly detailed political issue and then a trauma event and then a war event and then a celebrity death.

And it's just one thing after the next. And then sports, sports, sports. You know, it's, it's just this cycle online that no one can possibly keep up with. You're like drinking from a garden hose.

And there's nothing in there that you actually need or want. Anyway, I don't know if I'm ranting, but let me finish the paragraph and then I'll send it back to you. More audacious approach would involve the gradual introduction of narratives and quote unquote, cognitive anchors that predispose target audiences to interpretations of events favorable to U.S. interests even before critical events unfold.

The goal here is to proactively shape their perceptual framework. And again, this is one of those things that makes people really uncomfortable. They are planning on how to shape your reaction with the story they're about to tell, even though they haven't told it yet. And because they tell you that the stories they're telling reflect events occurring in real time, they are shaping your perception for the story they haven't told about an event that hasn't happened yet, that they know is going to happen. I wish we could come up with a real time example of this,

like something that's happened recently where they've, it might take a little time to dig into it. But if we could find a story where we kind of caught them seeding narratives only to follow through with the real story, later. I don't know. Well, the real story later is also a questionable part of it. But you mean the narrative deployment later or whatever. Yeah. So like when they when they try to get to, they try to get to change the way you think, right? How did they say proactively shape? Well, they did that. They did that with the top gun maverick two thing that we did last year in Iran. You know, And they, the funny thing is, I don't know if you and I talked about this, but I just watched that show, The Agency.

Maybe I talked about it with Bernie Brightfield. Is that good? It's, uh, it's not like the greatest TV show. It's very typical television where it just gives you episode to episode. There's a lot of good things about it. Performances are good. The writing's, okay. I don't know.

There's a lot there. And if you like spy stuff, it's, it's worth watching. Have you seen the lioness? How would you compare it to that? Oh, I was talking about it with CanCon. He just reminded me because he loves the Linus. I haven't seen that. Yeah, so I do enjoy it.

I think I saw Cancun post something about it on Twitter. I was like, oh, we should watch this. And we did. And we've liked it. Oh, cool. Okay, good. Well, yeah, I'll check that out. But anyhow, so this second season of the agency is about trying to stop the Iranians

from developing nuclear weapons in, Fordo and Natanz. And at the same time, a Russian like military contractor, paramilitary organization is taking over Central Africa. And so the character that they're going to take out

is this guy that they call Viking, who is the Yvgeny Progogian of their military unit, which is called Valhalla instead of Wagner. And so they take these two storylines that are now like major geopolitical news of the last three years in the, you know, in the bullshit that we're getting about war events.

And they present it in scripted television. So there's all sorts of ways that they condition us to these things. But I would suggest that example of the 2025 stuff in Iran. They were talking about a bunch of Iran stuff leading up to Trump declaring that they had just attacked. Yeah. So Linus is very similar in that regard. Maybe you've already had this conversation with Cancom. But like the first season was about trying to.

take out this oil baron who's funded all the terrorism and stuff in the in the Middle East and then it transitioned to they wanted to get a cartel leader so they were like going after you know this war with the cartels at the border I think that was like in 2023 or something so it was before or 2024 maybe before Trump got back in and then the current season it's it's very much about the Russians and like Cold War stuff you the Ukraine Wars in there they'd even have a a scene where they're at like the front line of the ukraine war with russia and there's drones fighting everywhere and it's like the newest form of like you know space wars and star wars type stuff like it

it's just it's very fitting i think you i think you'd enjoy it man okay yeah i'm just just like a subtle narrative if you can get over the the heavy lesbianism that is in portions of it it's uh it's pretty good i uh how would you define heavy lesbianism john are they heavy lesbians lesbians themselves are not heavy it's just the the presence of the lesbianism is heavy this is one one person who's just always trying to scissor another character in the show wow basically aggressive yeah those those those those those man-hating women are certainly very aggressive hashtag not all lesbians but but really hashtag all lesbians totally um okay i want to go down to how's this one part of just

read that was really good my next important part I think is there in the pink on uh i think it's the cognitive geopolitics part okay then that's let me skip back a page and you do your part um i just wanted to talk like this whole first paragraph and maybe even some of the second paragraph i thought we're pretty good as information flows identity narratives and cognitive infrastructures become strategic assets and a new domain of geopolitical contestation emerges the ability to shape global perceptions increasingly translates into tangible geopolitical advantage states that dominate the information ecosystem can influence elections shape diplomatic discourse and frame conflicts in ways that legitimize their actions while delegitimizing their

adversaries control over cognitive infrastructure such as search engines news aggregators and social media platforms becomes a tool for soft power and at times hybrid warfare this is particularly evident in global information campaigns conducted by state actors where where disinformation is not simply about spreading falsehoods, but about undermining shared truth and eroding democratic consensus. I thought those are a lot of words that we've used over the years, which I think why I like that. Yeah.

That paragraph. These dynamics raise the specter of a cognitive arms race, where states begin to invest heavily in both offensive and defensive cognitive capabilities, just as nuclear and cyber weapons prompted the development of deterrence doctrines and red lines. So too might we see the emergence of doctrines around cognitive, sovereignty, disinformation deterrence, and psychological countermeasures. In this scenario, state and non-state actors engage in escalating contests to manipulate, protect, or destabilize the mental framework of target populations, both foreign and domestic. I think that's crazy. Like, there's going to be

potentially future doctrines about whether or not our cognition can be sovereign, like whether we're allowed to, like, think without people trying to influence it. It's nuts. Yeah. Well, the problem is when people are thinking for themselves, they reject the plan of these global status. And that's really the whole war. And I hope that at some point we really reckon with that and understand that. Like the war is for the collective consciousness. And our belief is the target and the goal. If we believe the things they want us to believe, we will happily sit by and work

to build the society in the image of the adversary. That is the intent. That is the goal. And so it is all about our belief. And if we are giving our belief over, if we are just handing our belief away and surrendering it to the machine, anytime the machine tells us what to think or tells us that an event is so emotional or so disturbing or,

you know, so anything, we are literally surrendering the war at that point. You know, this next paragraph has a great line. at the end that I think you'll like as AI and neuro technology advance it is reasonable to assume that the tools available for manipulating perception will become increasingly powerful the ability to simulate convincing yet deceptive realities will increase exponentially that's the part that is

scary because I feel like we don't even do a good enough job at that now like what is what are we going to do when it's everywhere I don't know and it pretty much is everywhere by the way because the AI thing is accelerating at an incredible pace, which is fine and good because it already exists, and it's good for us to know about it. It's good for us to get used to it. It's good for us to contend with it. It's just going to be part of life,

and we're going to have to deal with it. And so the more quickly we can get better at understanding it, I think the better we are served by doing that. Yeah. I'm skipping down a little bit. Hold on. I want to do the proactive epistemic sovereignty. Okay. Oh, yeah. That's the next question, right? Yeah, this is what I'm talking about, really, with the cultivating disagreeability.

Proactive epistemic sovereignty safeguards are crucial and involve the implementation of national policies and investment in domestic epistemic infrastructures, such as public broadcasters and independent research institutions. Now, again, I don't think that this infrastructure is the important part. It's the concept. Simultaneously, international norm development for cognitive security will become increasingly necessary, aiming to establish clear norms, agreements, and red lines for acceptable and unacceptable cognitive influence operations, including developing shared attribution mechanisms for malign activities. So that means the people controlling the two sides of this war will negotiate exactly which ways they are allowed to use cognitive influence

on the populations. Who are the populations? Well, that's us. So someone else is going to decide and then encode the ways that they deem it morally acceptable to mess with our heads. That's so dumb. Yeah. Well, I mean, but then it's also important to remember it is already happening.

And it has happened throughout our lives through less sophisticated means, like just television and newspapers. Where did you read that on here? I can't find it. So the page number is eight. It's above the box quote. Hold on. Let me just put it up.

Yeah, it's right there, the pink part. Okay. Okay. So I'm going to skip ahead to the green and blue paragraph. A more aggressive strategy includes implementing cognitive colonialism, imperialism or slash imperialism reversal in regions where adversarial worldviews have been imposed. This means the use of. of carefully crafted culturally resonant information campaigns that promote alternative perspectives,

empower local epistemologies, and subtly challenge the foundational assumptions of adversary-imposed realities, the foundational assumptions of adversary-imposed realities. Concurrently, aggressive narrative dominance and framing will be needed to, we'll be needed to. to establish and maintain control over key geopolitical issues, proactively framing conflicts and events in ways that legitimize U.S. actions and delegitimize adversary behavior on the global stage. And from the good twin evil twin perspective, that looks like controlled opposition. Yeah, it's brilliant, man.

I love this so much. I love having a new concept to dig into when it describes like the word worldview we've been trying to describe for the past few years. Yeah. And I think it's, I think, you know, on one hand, it gets very depressing to see that like this much work has been done on these subjects that we weren't aware of, because it's important to engage with these ideas. But on the other hand, like, we've intuitive most of this stuff.

And that is, that is, I think, better. Yes. And it makes sense that if we've like, you know, if we've been able to kind of figure this out, even though we didn't directly define it or whatever, it makes sense that they would be much more aware of this. Like obviously they're ahead of us. They're doing this stuff to other people. There's actually a Senate. What was this? Let me show you this real quick. I was digging through the NDA for fiscal year 2026. So this was last years. This was the report from the committee on the armed armed services. Like they put together stuff that, okay, in this bill, this is what we've, want you to use the money for specifically. And if you go to page 200, almost there, hold on, there's a whole section on cognitive warfare and how they want like the secretary of defense to like start, start digging into this and talking about it. Okay, narrative intelligence and cognitive warfare. It's just like two paragraphs. I'm going to read through this really quick.

The committee recognizes that the rapidly evolving global security landscape and the increasing sophistication of information-centric threats pose significant strategic challenges, particularly as the peer and near-peer competitors increasingly prioritize efforts and investments in this domain of warfare. The committee notes that the People's Republic of China, for example, is actively engaged in developing what it terms informatized warfare and intelligentized warfare with strong emphasis on cognitive domain operations, involving the integration of information warfare across military and civilian sectors, and doing information as a critical domain for achieving strategic advantage in great power competition.

The committee believes that there is an urgent need for a coherent understanding of an investment in cognitive warfare to address these challenges. Committee notes that despite multiple congressional actions, there remain ambiguities, blah, blah, blah. I'm going to skip down to... So they essentially, they're tasking the Secretary of Defense. He's supposed to come up with a report

detailing cognitive warfare and how they're using it, how they plan to use it, they want to build out a framework. That was due March 31st, 2026. There wasn't anything that I saw publicly. So who knows? This probably went nowhere. But it is interesting that it was even being talked about, like for sure within, you know, the armed services, the NDA, the military and whatnot.

You know they're talking about it. I think that this subject is as important as subjects get. Yeah, I would agree. Okay. I just want to highlight a quick thing. I think on the next page. Let me see. Where are we here?

So right here, down the yellow part down there, if you are looking. So it just notes, well, maybe I should just go through the whole paragraph. Operational teams deploy with state-of-the-art satellite communications equipment to relay battlefield information across continents, yet they do not possess the equivalent cognitive toolkits, such as advanced brain computer interfaces, intelligence psychological monitoring systems like smart sensor bracelets that track emotional states in real time, or tools to disrupt adversarial narratives. This personal erosion of objectivity mirrors broader vulnerabilities,

where cognitive warfare exploits human biases. And I think this is incredibly interesting, such as the U.S. is weird, Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic, psychological profile. So the U.S., they use an acronym for, this, but the acronym is weird. The U.S. is weird psychological profile. We have a weird psychological profile, huh?

What is that? And how did that, how was that made? Was that made through malign influence of this global entity that has essentially used us as a labor and police state for global enforcement? Or is it the American mythology and the tales of the founders? And the rest of it that have shaped a collective American consciousness that rejects the rest of it. And I don't know which way to take that. Yeah, I don't know if this is this like, did the world give us this?

Or like, where did this come from? The weird acronym? I don't know. Yeah. So they have the footnotes down at the bottom. So that is footnote number 41. And I can find that. I'm looking up right now too.

The weirdest people in the world, how the West became psychologically peculiar. and particularly prosperous. And so that's a paper from 2020, it looks like, or a book perhaps. Yeah, here. So it comes from a 2010 critique of mainstream psychology by anthropologist Joseph Heinrich and psychologist Stephen Hiney and Ara Norenzayan. They coined weird, Western educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic to identify the populations from which psychology had drawn a disproportionate share of its participants,

especially U.S. college students. The central claim was methodological, not an insult, or a clinical profile. They're just making a broad claims about how a narrow set of affluent Western samples have brought about a lot of the discussions on human psychology. It's interesting. The United States became central to the idea because it supplied an outsized share of behavioral science participants, particularly undergraduates for Kula universities. The contemporary American Psychological Association summary reported that weird populations made up as much as 80% of study participants

of representing about 12% of the world population. 12% is not small. So back to this paragraph. So basically exploiting the human biases within this psychological profile to sow doubt in division, he says a small special operations forces team deployed overseas, might find itself unknowingly outmaneuvered by malign narratives, deep fake videos, portraying U.S. troops committing atrocities, viral rumors discrediting local leaders aligned with the U.S. or psychological campaigns designed to fracture trust within allied forces.

And so I just thought it was so interesting, these deep fake videos portraying U.S. troops committing atrocities. Well, we sure get a lot of atrocity videos out of the Israel and God. of the Gaza thing. We get atrocity videos out of the Russia, Ukraine thing. We get atrocity videos from Black Lives Matter stuff. You could argue the George Floyd video was an atrocity video. And this is saying that those things can be faked. Gosh, that is so strange. Do you remember when Netanyahu's bathhouse burned down? I didn't remember a bathhouse thing, but I remember him being dead for a while or something. video and put it on the Twitter webs.

Oh, that's right. Sorry, I forgot about that. I totally stomped on your joke thinking you were talking about a real thing. That's okay. Well, that's a thing. I could have been. I could be. You never know. That's true. There's another example I was going to bring up about that too. Oh, the latest video of the, you see the fat lady in New York with the two. My God, dude, that video is so nice. That video is so far. She goes to try to stab the guy and it's like, okay, I understand she has a weapon, but.

She tried to make herself a vortex. Yeah, but I have it. I mean, I could easily pull that up. Yeah, yeah. I know I downloaded it, so I can find this as well. I'm going to just type in New York Knives and it comes right up. I got that dude just filmed her in the background. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Somebody said, I think, that the, the taxis, I guess the idea was that the entire. video is AI, but somebody actually went and looked at one of the taxi's license plates and matched it with the cab number on the top and found that they were the same, which is something that like doesn't happen, I guess. Yeah. The whole thing's so weird. Yeah. Yo, yo, back up, back up.

I mean, give me a break. I mean, look how slowly she moves here. If you think that's real, I don't know what to tell you. Like seven big dudes couldn't have restrained her somehow and the blood spot on the shirt. I mean, have people discovered that the video is just totally fake? I have no idea. There was a real news cycle about this thing, right? And people having emotional reactions and figuring out who the perpetrator was.

I just saw this like all of my Twitter feed and I had the same response as you did like they couldn't just tackle that bitch like how does this how does this happen? Oh it could be real could be fake. Who knows, man? I just thought it was ridiculous and yeah. Anyway, but the reason I brought that up was because the you kept talking about the trauma videos we see all the time. There are videos like that all up and down Twitter like all the time. Yep. It's terrible.

They love it. People on Twitter love that shit because they love. like to emote about things and these things are designed to divide them into competing sides. And so if what they're arguing about, like Bernie Bray will tell you, the comic book fans, when they make a comic book movie, the comic book fans will divide into sides and go to war with one another over whether or not the representations in the movie accurately reflected the fictional story in the comic books. The entire thing is fiction. They're arguing about their emotion. They're expressing their emotions about what they're seeing in a book or on a screen.

And that is the entirety of what they're doing. And we're doing the same here when we see or even read or follow these stories about these various atrocities. It's always very dumb. Yeah. That's hilarious to think about fighting over fake stories, which is essentially what we do. Yeah. Yeah, we are memorizing the details of complete and total fictions. and then we are using those to wage these little ideological proxy wars

often against our loved ones, our friends and our family who like won't agree with us that we are watching the right channel and they are watching the wrong channel. Yeah. It's crazy. Oh, stupid. So we're almost to the end of this report. There's not a whole lot left.

It's just recommendations. But he, I was trying to find that there's one section in one of these papers where where they talk about like they go through the, example of our technology and how they're able to like they've they've created technology for every aspect of how we you know process information and that's what I can't I can't find it I don't know which one of it is but I thought it was a really good explanation so you can go ahead and talk while I try to figure this out so okay so I'll just go through this uh this one last little segment to defend

against malign cognitive warfare SOF must first secure its own personnel and operations from manipulation. This goes beyond traditional operational security to include cognitive resilience. Cognitive immunotherapy programs can build a high level of epistemic self-awareness, enabling operators to recognize and resist manipulative tactics in real time, even when these tactics are designed to exploit personal biases and values. And this is the practice that we should be engaged in. It is possible to achieve it, And everyone should be focused on doing it. Figure out how to make it so that no matter what you see in your feed, no matter who's arguing

about it, no matter how much it like upsets you to see someone having the wrong opinion about it, you just allow it to pass over you. Just information among other information. You can engage with it for what it is, something that you don't know, something that you're being told. It's just some information, something I'm seeing on the screen. screen. It's no better because it appeals to me emotionally, then the stuff you know is total bullshit. So treat it the same way. We can actually, we can practice doing that and get better at doing that. It's totally possible. Yeah, I'm going to, I'm going to switch to this other

article and just read a couple of sections here quick. I didn't find it yet, but I think it's in this one. The stated objective is to attack, exploit, degrade, or even destroy how someone builds, their own reality, their mental self-confidence, their trust in the processes or and the approaches required for the efficient functioning of group societies or even nations. Although its technical aspects, cyber are somewhat different. It is the companions of psychological operations. I just want to find this one, because I thought it was such a good way to describe it. And I hate myself for not screenshoting this. It's, it's just a comment while you're looking. It's funny in in the description like these people are trying to erode the foundation of belief that supports

the function of this society now i have no doubt that that is a real thing that can be seen as a threat when we are engaged in nation state competition and one faction wants to defeat another faction within the controlled opposition dynamic which is what this is ultimately discussing but to get outside of that belief formation system altogether and to adopt what I would call, again, in order to epistemology, that doesn't actually shake the foundations of society. It just makes people stop believing in the bullshit. And if multiple layers of the foundation and the operational structure of a society is based on nothing but bullshit, well, we're probably better off at some point confronting that fact,

allowing that thing to collapse and then building on the basis of truth, whatever needs to replace it, if anything. And a lot of the time, nothing needs to replace it. So they are very, very cautious when you're hearing like the military or formal approach to these subjects, they're very cautious to like not destabilize anything unless it's being destabilized in the right direction. And if you're saying that destabilization is, the problem, but only because it's happening in the wrong direction, well, then you're just

admitting that destabilization isn't the concern. You're fine with destabilization if it's replaced with the thing you want it replaced with. So I don't know, man, there's always something just a little disingenuous about the processes that are up for discussion here. Maybe some of that is, maybe I'm being too hypercritical because it's the military and this is their domain. They can't affect it in every domain. But if they're engaged with these questions, I think that they could be geared toward better outcomes than figuring out how to use the machines to exploit people in the quote unquote good way rather than the bad way. Yeah. I mean, I don't disagree with you. I don't think you're like over anything with this. It's a new concept, first of all. I mean, it's not really new concept,

but at least a new we're finally like seeing other people talking about this stuff, maybe even on a much more intellectual level certainly than than me anyway man i found another really good article out here we should we should do a collection like send all these out uh or post these somewhere maybe we will just like a the series of links to all these papers yeah did did you ever end up reading this like 20 page one no and that's the one that i really wanted to read too yeah because i now i'm thinking this is the one where i found well maybe we can commit to doing to going through this we've already done it but i can commit to going through this this week and we can discuss next week yeah we can do it again next week i'm down with that because i do want to talk about the welfare state and how it's awesome

oh yeah yeah okay well let's get to that and then we'll do rants okay sounds good so let's let me let me show you guys a story that's been floating around um let me so i know what we do have one more sponsor to get to. Maybe I should do that real quick as well. Yeah, let's do that. We'll do Keat and then we'll get into the final story and get into our rants. Think about what passes through your family group chat in a normal week. School pickups, vacation plans, photos of your children, medical updates, home addresses, and financial decisions. You trust the people in that group, but how much should you have to trust the company operating the app? And that's where Keat comes in. Keat gives families another option. It's a free

messaging and video calling app built peer to peer with end-to-end encryption and no centralized company database holding the family conversation. Keat doesn't track metadata and nobody needs to provide a phone number or email to join. You can create a family group, share files and photos and make audio or video calls all without turning your home life into another corporate data profile. Visit keet.io slash badlandsdph. That's k-eet.io forward slash badlandsdpH. You can download it for free. You can invite somebody. You can even add me on there at John Badlands 22.

And you can get that conversation started. We already have a pretty good Badlands group rolling. But a company not selling your metadata, that is one way to protect yourself from the cognitive warfare that we see going on. Heat.io slash Badlands DPH. Check it out. All right. So this story started circulating today, I believe. and this is in the New York Times.

Trump officials draft a plan to pay at-home parents using funds for working ones. The proposed benefit at top policy priority for Vice President J.D. Vance would apply only to married couples and tap a fund intended to provide federal child care subsidies to working parents. So I went out there and I made a post and I want to show you guys this because the response is just hilarious. I said this. I said, J.D. Vance, there is a nationwide fraud ring that's rooted in illegal aliens and others taking advantage of the American welfare system. I can show you that exact quote, by the way. Why don't we do that? Jesse, we're going to have some very big announcements on this stuff in the next couple of days. I don't want to get ahead of the president on anything, but we believe that there is a nationwide fraud ring that's rooted in Americans, or excuse me,

rooted in illegal aliens and others taking advantage of the American welfare system. We're going to get to the root of it. And anybody who's involved is going to get prosecuted. Yeah. So this is like when he first came out and was made the face of fighting fraud. The fraud czar because Doge worked out super well. They wanted to do another version of it, but J.D. Vance in charge of it. He's been making the rounds talking about all this great fraud fighting discovery they've been doing,

taking down people who are abusing the welfare system. And so he's the face of that. And then this story comes out where he is also the face of a new program in the welfare system that he is supposedly fighting fraud on. Like the goal here, in my opinion, the goal has always been, like, let's get to a point where we discover so much fraud in the welfare system that we realize like, oh, wait, why do we even have a welfare system? Maybe we can get away with, like, get away from that.

And that was like the mentality of a lot of people in mega too. like let's stop giving money away in these social welfare programs. Let's stop paying taxes. If we didn't have, if we didn't have these programs, we wouldn't have to pay taxes. I'm still of that mindset. But if you go through the responses on Twitter to this post that I made, there it's, it's just cope. Well, not just cope, but there's a lot of people that like, well, I'm okay with this.

I'd rather give it to a stay-at-home mom than an illegal immigrant. And I want this person. which tweaked you because of your generalized, well-documented misogyny. That was a great response. I mean, God, that's so dumb. Yeah, but there's a lot of these. It's like, I'm cool with it. If we can get Browns out of America, we should be predominantly a white nation, all this stuff.

Like, a lot of people are okay with keeping a welfare program as long as it's not going to illegal aliens. But guys, the whole problem is the system is fraudulent. As long as the system exists, it's going to be abused. And why is the frauds are allowing another program to be created that will, inevitably be abused and steal more money from you guys. Well, J.D. is attracting the middle. He's trying to make himself seem like the kind of MAGA-oriented populist, but without all of those Trump problems, which is a model they've tried a number of times.

It's crazy to me that people are, that people will rush to the defense of that dude. I mean, it's like this mentoring candidate, this Uniparty right, Barack Obama, is stuck in front of us and we are told oh just wait he's going to become president in twenty twenty eight years then marco rubio can be there for eight years we're going to rule forever oh cool yeah all this all this so that we could put the republican establishment in charge of the great reset yeah i would encourage you guys to go through the the last few posts i had on this and go some of the responses because there's a lot of rationalization going on and none of which actually fixes or addresses the problem like this is just to increase the birth rate and incentivize marriage and all

these other things our currency has been inflated so much that there's no other option for most families to have both spouses working and it's got long lasting term benefits all these things like yeah i totally understand all that but no one else fixes the problem not another welfare program paying people to stay home that is going to keep us in the problem and only make the problem worse long term. At some point, we have to acknowledge the actual issue here and rib that bandaid off without like these these stupid other band-aids on top of it to try to keep it in place and keep us from bleeding out. I don't know, man, I just, I don't like that mentality. Band-aids all the way down. I like that. But then I had this old Trump post that I found as well. We have to combat

the welfare mentality that says individuals are entitled to live off taxpayers. You didn't just say that about illegals. You just said generally. This was back in 2011 based Trump before he became the SIOP king. Man, it's so weird that people want the government's money. And I don't mean that the government owns the money, just want to receive money from the government. That's not even the weird part to me. Like, people want free money. Like, I'll take free money if you're going to give me free money. I'm not going to do anything for it, but if you just want give me money. I stay at home. I have kids. I can be considered stay at home dad. I'll take $9,000 a year or whatever it is. But no, my issue is with like the back and forth of the

principles, and you mostly see this with cheerleaders, but I think it bleeds into a lot of other people's behavior where this is something that they would have been totally against had the Biden administration been the ones promoting this. If they're like, if the Biden administration came out and said, we were going to create a welfare program to pay, take taxpayer dollars from one group, or just people generally and pay people to stay home. I do not think that the mega coalition or whatever would have been in favor of it. But because it's coming out now, that we have to, like, defend it for some reason. And I just, I've never believed that's how we have to operate.

And I think we've proven that time and time again. Like, you can operate based on your first principles. You're not always going to agree with what the TV tells you to is a good thing. Like the cheerleading stuff. That's the part that drives me nuts, that we're still doing this. this far into it. Yeah, and you don't have to agree with that stuff. That's like that's the best part.

Like just have your own positions and maybe more people will agree with you because they see you willing to defend your positions and to tell them, hey, this is how this thing actually works. This is how I think about it. Because most people don't think about any of these issues. They just accept all the answers that they were given and that they have been given throughout their lives. And it's not it's not that big a leap to make them break away from things. that they never really had any reason to believe in the first place. Yeah, man. What I'm saying is we can get there.

And, you know, I... I agree. Talk about accomplishing a much more difficult project than convincing people to vote who have always voted. That is the easiest, dumbest project to ever complete, and everybody acts like they are giving the greatest self-sacrifice imaginable to the United States of America by telling other people to vote.

It's crazy. Um, but we could actually potentially change our minds and we could develop, uh, uh, better epistemology. Those things are possible. And I'm actually extremely hopeful about our ability to accomplish those things. It's just a harder project. And so to talk about that project and say, no, actually, we don't just have to accomplish this really easy projects. We have to accomplish the harder one. People are like, you're black filling. Like actually no, I'm hoping that we can go way, way, way beyond where you think we can go. Yep.

But it's okay. We'll get misquoted and misrepresented. The sun comes up. Yep. People will get the hose again. We'll be like, I told you so. And they'll be like,

ah, see, these guys are celebrating in the midterm loss of the Republicans. Like, no, we're just celebrating. And you guys all being retarded again. We told you this was coming. Okay,

let's do ransom boost and stuff. Let's do it. 1027.js gifted $20. My fellow North Dakota and Joe, hope you're well and said, thanks. Thank you as well. And then we got a lot of activity over here in the Rumble side.

Whoever, who's the show before me? Cam, they rated the stream. Snowcat operator gifted a subscription. Thank you, Snowcat. The boom, diggedy left a $100 rant and said, elections are Wonderland because they have functioned as a reverse world where logic fails, riddles have no answers, and sense becomes nonsense. sense. They reflect when logic breaks down just like the media.

I like that. I'm very generous of you on the rant. Boomdiggity. We appreciate you. Restored Republic News rated the stream. Thomas Time, 76. Hey John, I DM'd you on Keat. And yeah, so I know I've been saying this for a while that I'm going to go through and message everybody who's messaged me back. I'm going to be in my car stuck driving for a period of time tomorrow. And I plan to be the passenger and to do some of that.

I will hit you all up tomorrow. Peace Dea BC rated the stream. So did gothpop. It's pretty cool. Thanks, guys. Darlene McCassel says Dr. Robert Duncan, former DARDA DOD-NATO Harvard computer scientist in neuro-AI

mind control and virus weapons. Research him. Okay. We'll do that. Keith O'Higgins, FYI, the phrase, The Real Story Later, has 17 letters in it. Also, cues heavy letters.

lesbian drops are the big beaver jam up has 17 letters as well did you actually sit down and count out the big beaver jam up to make sure it has 17 words that's hilarious if we actually did that somebody better do gematra on that yeah um dan write 717 says hey guys the last few d p h's i've been unable to rewind live broadcast i think it's a setting unless it's intentional I love to be able to start from the beginning. I appreciate you. Yeah, I think it's a setting. Sometimes Rumble, like they reset or they make us update stuff on the back end.

And when that happens, we forget to go back in and click the settings as we had them before. So it happens from time. Time. We try to fix it. Babufio for $5 says, definitely, John, my cousin doesn't marry or get a job because they lose the welfare. Yeah, it's unfortunate. Yeah. The final demand for $100. Thank you so much.

Says that paper is written like stereo instructions and uses a term white hat came from silent movies to tell you who the hero was. Bad guys wore black. Hop along, Cassidy reframed that visual cue black equals good. That's awesome. Counterinsurgent, John, I downloaded Keat, but can't find you. Do I need your QR code to find Badlands? Yes. Guys, add me at the at sign, J-O-N.

Badlands, 22, just like the numbers, two twos, and you should be able to like add me there. And I'll get back to you guys all tomorrow. And Keith O'Higgins, Chris with lesbians,

it's Jamatria, it's clamatria. That's good. All right. I'll keep that in mind. Yeah, I just not know that. All right.

And then outros. I think you sent me a couple of videos earlier that were great. Did I? I did, right? Yeah, and they fit in with kind of what we've been talking about a little bit too. Well, the AI had a big week. All the LLMs crashed at the same time the other day. Now, chat GPT's Astra is out, and apparently their next model, their next big model release,

which will be in like two to three months is supposed to be artificial general intelligence. And it might come out right after our fake elections, right? When everything is going crazy, we're going to have a policy. crisis. The financial world is going to collapse. Everything's just going to fall apart. The Iran war, the Ukraine war, Israel, whatever, it's all coming in an AGI.

We're going to blame it all on artificial intelligence. I can't wait, man. Yeah. I can't wait. What are the thing to do when, like, the story comes out that an AI machine or AI program broke out and hacked an election machine. Like, that narrative is going to be hilarious.

That's a good point, John. Yeah, I cannot wait for that story. You know what's coming. I can see that. We're going to do back-to-back AI videos here as our outroes. Be sure to hit the thumbs up, everybody. And Chris, what's the movie for next week? The movie for next week is The Siege starring Denzel Washington. Oh, yeah.

That's a good movie. That should be fun. They're trying to avoid terrorist attacks. They declare martial law. Yeah, that's cool. I'm pretty sure I've seen that one. Yeah, we can just talk about the insurrection act the whole time. Oh, yeah, that's a good movie.

I definitely have seen that. Okay. All right. Thanks, everybody. Hit the thumbs up on all the platforms, YouTube included, and we will see you next time. We see you. Thanks, Chris.

Good night. Do you like making things, being creative, solving problems, getting good at something? Well, now you don't have to. Introducing Nader. Anything you can do, Nader can do for you. you instantly. I just had an inspiration for a new song.

It's like... Here's the song. I went with the bridge you were about to think of. It knows you better than you know yourself. So let it do you. Can you write a book I would write? Sure thing. Writing now.

Can you make a movie about all the things I didn't do with Lydia? Of course, Harold. Rendering now. My boss's AI assistant sent a list. assistant sent a list. Can you do it and send it back to his AI assistant? Yep, done. Also, we're a little hungry. Mom? Take care of all of my kids' needs. Of course. I'll handle bedtime. Timmy is not doing well in school. Well, can you fix it? Take me on a journey. Happy to. Dosing now, you'll feel one with everything in about four seconds. I'll dim the light. It's so much more intelligent than you. Let's face. Let's face it.

It you'll never catch up, so give in. By 2030, almost 80% of people had lost their jobs. They had no money, no purpose, but they had a lot of time on their hands. The less people actually did physical work, the more they wanted to appear as if they did. What if we could use the energy of humans to power the machines that took away their jobs? jobs. Energem solved our need for energy and your need for purpose.