Decoding the Gurus - Blindboy, Part 2: Where Have All the Good Men Gone?

Episode Date: March 14, 2026

In Part 2, Matt and Chris return to Blindboy, now broadcasting from a solar-powered podcast and therefore morally unimpeachable. The darkness, however, remains. Having established in Part 1 that the global elite are a vampiric class of depraved blackmailers who traffic children and delight in cruelty, in Part 2, Blindboy offers us some welcome relief in the form of answering the question of what it looks like to be one of the good ones. You may be surprised to learn that it involves a missing dressing room, muddy socks, and a loyalty to small-time promoters that some might call heroic.The episode also traces an ambitious historical arc: from street gangs in 1800s Limerick to the New York underworld, Meyer Lansky, Roy Cohn, CIA brothels and LSD interrogation programmes, and eventually to Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein. The connecting thread is a continuous tradition of sexual blackmail passed from master to apprentice that has, apparently, been quietly guiding Western (criminal) civilisation for the better part of two centuries. Matt and Chris sift through the historical material, examine the leaps required to keep the chain intact, and consider whether a conspiracy hypothesis that explains quite so much, quite so neatly, might deserve a small dose of skepticism. As you might anticipate, the episode features discussions of many of our old friends, including strategic disclaimers, moral grandstanding, and layered preemptive defences. Finally, get ready to learn who the real villain is, when the mask is finally removed.... spoiler: it's neoliberal capitalism. A revelation that some listeners may have suspected from the very beginning.LinksBlindboy: A Deep Dive into Jeffrey EpsteinThe Rest is Classified: Was Epstein a Russian Spy?Epstein Files Declassified: Mossad, Israel, and Ghislaine MaxwellEpstein Files Declassified: Was he a Spy?The Saville Inquiry Report on Bloody Sunday (2010)BBC Panorama reporting on the British Army’s Military Reaction Force (MRF)Popular Mechanics article on Operation Midnight ClimaxUS Senate Church Committee report on MK-Ultra and CIA covert experimentation and the archived reportNY Times: What Donald Trump Learned From Joseph McCarthy’s Right-Hand ManA less conspiratorial but more sympathetic perspective on Epstein's influence by Taylor Lorenz and Ryan BroderickAn in-depth critical review of Whitney Webb's book (by an academic who might be a little conspiracy-prone themselves)Webb, W. A. (2022). One Nation Under Blackmail-Vol. 1: The Sordid Union Between Intelligence and Crime That Gave Rise to Jeffrey Epstein, VOL. 1. Trine Day

Hello and welcome back to Decoding the Gurus, a podcast. We're an anthropologist and psychologists listen to the greatest finds the world has to offer. And we try to understand what they're talking about. And today is the first episode where Decoding the Gurus has become a fully solar powered podcast. I am producing huge amounts of solar energy, Chris. I'm offsetting any emissions you may be making. So, you know, jointly, we are. we are making the change. Are we being the change we want to be? We're more than carbon neutral. We're carbon negative. Wow. Yeah. I mean, you're not.

You're not, but I'll upset them. I'll upset your emissions. Look, we are a collective unit here, Matt. We combine our carbon output together. So whatever you're taking away, that back goes into my,

yeah, my registration of carbon activities. Yep. That's a deal. You can really smash your queries on those AI platforms with the guilt-free. Good. That's great news. Because I already was doing that.

But now that I get added in an extra layer of permission and lack of guilt, there will be even more guilt-free engagement. So that's fantastic. And this is, of course, because Matthew Brown over there has gone solar punk, right, installing various gadgets and gizmos, which harness the energy of the sun, feed it into his house, into like a grid and go back out into the grid and it goes around. And it's, yeah, that's the way it is now. That's right.

That's right. And I forgot to say to the start, you're like the inverter to my solar panels, Chris. That's how I think. And the inverter? Yeah. Oh, I see. Right. That was supposed to be that.

I was like, well, I. That's how I meant to begin. I mean, I forgot about that bit. Well, I also think the fact that you introduced this as part one, the first episode. And you didn't then go on to explain that this is actually part two of our Blind Boy episode. I think that's going to confuse people. But welcome to part one of the solar forecast, which is actually part two of the Blind Boy episode. But, you know, what can we do, Matt?

I did get a bit sidetracked by my solar install. But yes, you are correct. This is a part two, and I'm glad we had a break. You know, I was thinking Christmas. Yeah, I know. When you've been recording for more than an hour, you can get a bit tired and grumpy, a little bit surly. True.

I'm worried. I'm worried that, you know. Charityne of L.D. Feards. It does. It does. The soul gets weary. And, but, you know, that's not what I want to be. I'm not that kind of guy.

Is that what we're both here? No. I don't want to be a surly old get. So I'm fresh, I'm refreshed. I'm back to the pool. I've had my snack. The solar panels are humming and I'm going to be, you know, I'm going to approach this with a fresh positive lens.

I'm sure part two will be much better. Blind boy is going to surprise us. So to recap for the listeners, last time we met, we were talking about the Irish podcaster slash philosopher slash cultural critic. but what's a word for the essays that he does like spoken word reflective

stream of consciousness I don't know yeah there's a specific word but there always is a specific word and it's not it's not there you know I could do it I could say you know you know that feeling when there's a word on the tip of your tongue and it just you can almost taste it but in any case blind boy is the subject Irish comedy hip-hop artist previously, now

online audio essayist, producer of reflective monologues and stream of conscious commentary, left wing pundit, right, various other things, documentary, filmmaker, so on, Matt. It's a blind boy. He's a veritable jack-of-all-treats.

So last we left him off, he was advancing a number of conspiracy hypotheses, quite a few. And we had some issues with them, despite like the disclaimers that were offered or proffered, they still did seem to be advanced with some vigor. There's quite a ghoulish collection of individuals. And, you know, if you think that is how the world operates, you know, you might be more sympathetic to Blind Boy's message. But

there are some people in Blind Boar's stories that come off better that are presented generally as doing good in the world and having good motivations. principally blind boy. Principal. I do want to point this out because we often make the point, Matt, that self-deprecation, right, coming from Northern Ireland and Australia,

come from cultures that value self-deprecation. There's actually even this debate in the cross-cultural psychology literature about the universality of positive self-regard. And this is questioned by the fact that when they do studies in East Asia and some other countries, they tend to find that people are self-deprecating

to the point where they seem to have no positive self-regard. And this led some people to say, positive self-esteem is not a universal thing. And other people counter that actually in self-deprecating cultures, this is how you create positive self-regard by saying that you are the most humble out of the other. So this is to be it. But Blind Boy comes from partly my culture, right?

the Irish culture. So I feel like you and I are in a position to examine self-deprecation genuinely presented and when it is perhaps self-serving self-deprecation in other ways. So I'm going to play you a little story and see what you think. See if you pick up. I know I've loaded the dice right in a particular way. But yeah, I think it's worth examining this, especially in contrast to what we just covered. Like I work in the entertainment. industry and certain parts of the entertainment industry can be a little bit like that. Now, I've never seen anything Epstein adjacent or anything like that, but something as simple as, so I did a big international tour a couple of years back. I don't want to say the

territory, but an international tour in another continent. So if you're an artist and you want to do a tour in another continent, you need to have a promoter, a promoter. A promoter. A promoter. promoter is the person or organization who will put that tour on, who will book the venues, bring you over and make sure the gigs go ahead. So that's what you need if you want to do an international tour. So I wanted to do a podcast tour in this continent. So my agent approached a big huge massive promoter, one of these massive companies that promote tours. And my agent says, look, blind boy, he's got listeners in this continent. he'd like to do a few gigs in different cities.

Will you promote this tour? The big giant company said, no, we don't want to take the risk. We don't think that Blind Boy will sell out all the gigs. We're not interested, we won't take that risk. So it's like, okay, fine. But then a tiny promoter gets in touch. Just two lads, tiny, tiny little promotion company.

And they say, we'll bring Blind Boy for a tour. We'll promote his tour. We'll take that risk. We'll bring him over. So I said, fuck it, great. So I went and did the tour with this tiny company.

Now, they took a huge risk. They're booking the gigs. If those gigs don't sell out, they can lose their arses. But that didn't happen. The tour was every gig sold out. It was really successful. Everyone was happy.

Great story. Was he leading to a point? Are we partway through? Well, I partway through. So far, this section reminded me of the thing that you often reference about Patrick Stewart, you know, talking on extras and that scene. How do I act, right? And he just describes the process.

Oh, no, sorry, it was Ian McKellen. Ian McKellon, right? How do I act? How do I do a tour overseas? Well, it requires a promoter. It really took it through. What do they do at these promoters? Well, it's very simple.

They promote the tour. He booked the kids. Yeah, he definitely walked us through that with tiny little baby steps. But I followed. I could follow pretty easily. You followed that in this story. And I don't know why he doesn't want to mention the continent. I looked up as tourists and it seems to be in Australia and New Zealand.

So I presume there was a tour like in 2024. So I presume that's what he's talking about there. But for whatever reason, he doesn't want to mention the name of the continent. Well, the framing was that there was. terrible, well, not terrible, but not terrible, but not episode, but, you know, things happen. You see things in the entertainment industry. So I was kind of assuming that. Oh, you think it's going to be that's going to come?

No, no. No, he's saying, he said he didn't really see that, right? Like, you know, he's in the entertainment industry. He's seen things, but he hasn't seen that. Oh, right. But it's just a given that he said he didn't want to name names or give any identifying thing. I assumed that's where it's going to go.

No, it's not going to go to. I assume there's going to be a butt, an implicit but. Well, there is a bot, but it's not that. So, okay, in any case, the scene where we are now is that there is a small company that took a risk and it was a huge success because Blind Boy is so popular that he sold out to everything. And the big company, which died at him, looks like they were wrong. Needless to say, he had the last. Wow.

So that's the first part of the story. Okay, now, let's continue on. And this tiny company, these promoters made up with two people, they were lovely, they were kind to me, they were so accommodating, they were nice people, they were nice, they were decent, honest people, they were fans of the podcast, they really wanted to put this tour on for me. And they said, fuck it, if you don't sell, we'll take that risk. We really want to do this because we love your podcast. But you know what, their gut feeling was right. All the tour sold out 100% everyone was happy. And then they said,

will you come back? Will you come back again to this continent for another tour? And let us be your promoters for the next tour. And of course I said, yes, of course. The tour sold out, your lovely people. I love working with you. Of course. Next time I want to do this continent, I'm going to do it with you.

But then I get back to Ireland. And the huge company, the big massive company that had initially said, no, we won't take you on tour, they were watching. And this huge touring company saw the risk that this tiny promoter took. And then they went to me and my agent and said, sorry, we were wrong. We're going to take you out for the next tour and we're going to make it massive and you're going to play all these venues and we'll put all our promotion behind you. and we're going to make you massive in this continent. Will you do that? And I said, no, I won't do that.

Because that would be horrible to the two lads who took the risk and who were so nice to me. I'd hate to do that. I'd feel like shit. I couldn't possibly do that. No, I'm going to do the next tour with those two lads who took the risk because they're lovely people. That's who I'm going to do the next tour with.

This is a fantastic story. I mean, what is your main takeaway from this map that you're hearing? Like, what would you take away from what you've learned so far? I feel like the subtext of this story is that Blind Boy is a pretty good guy. He's a loyal. He's a loyal guy. He's very loyal. Yeah, he's extremely loyal.

And also, worth mentioning, everybody loved the tour. It sold out everything. And successful. That's right. Loyal and successful. It was so successful. that the company were watching it and we're like Jesus, we can next

out on this. We've got to get in there next time. I do like how we just kept repeating those points, just to make sure we didn't miss those points. But it's quite a segue, isn't it? Because he goes from discussing billionaires

trafficking children to maintain power to this. And I'm not quite sure of the reason, but is he highlighting the The Delta, perhaps. Well, you're going to get to that, Matt. So here we go.

This is the end of this story. The last part. And the big company said, are you fucking sure? Because we'll make you massive. Because you see, the big companies, the big touring companies, they can put you on newspapers, television, do all that shit in a new territory. And I said, no, sorry, I'd feel like shit. I would feel like shit.

I'd rather stay at this level of success and feel like a good person. then move up and be a prick. And that big touring, they didn't even respond to that email. Didn't even respond. Just like, what the fuck is up with this little prick from Limerick? Now, I'm not performatively trying to tell you that I'm a good person. I'm just saying, that's a no-brainer for me. That's how I operate.

Treating people the way that I'd like to be treated and then feeling like a good person. That's more important to me than having a... more success. Legitimately, I wouldn't be able to enjoy more success. If I got that success by being cruel or mean or dishonest, and I only work with people who are kind, like I've had the same agent for 16 years, my agent, Mark, one of the kindest, most decent people I've ever met in my life, so honest in how he deals with everybody and that's why I've been with him for fucking ages

and I have a tiny amount of people who I work with and it's long-term relationships because they're all kind, honest people and that's important to me and I can't work with people who are dishonest or cruel or mean or who are bullies or any of that shit or who expect that from me

and just no, not interested. again really hammering that point home um hold on he's not performatively saying he's a good person he's just saying it would be absolutely impossible for him to you know have success at the cost of doing it the wine would turn to vinegar in his mouth it like like like ashes yes and that's why him and all the people he's surrounded himself with are also good people like everybody's, everybody's good. All the people he works with are good.

And that's a reflection of his values. Now, you might say, that's him saying he's a good person. But he said, Matt, that's not what he's saying. That's not the point. The point is, this is just, it's just like the air he breathes. Yeah, it's just too he is. I'm glad it's just not empty virtue singly because he's a bloody, he's got his head screwed on straight.

I'll tell you that. That's, that's looking from this. Well, it reminds me, Matt. of when I heard John Verviki explained to Jordan Peterson what an incredible person he is. How nice he is to everyone behind the scenes, you know, that he's so considerate,

he's just constantly the consummate people pleaser. You know, the way he attends to his staff and everything, it's just unlike anyone else. So just they're doing a parallel to here, except this is Blind Boy, so he didn't mind himself, as opposed to John Verviki. But, yeah.

So I understand that this is being presented as a story about, you know, the kind of corrupt evil business trying to come in and like, you can actually be more successful by being a bastard. And if you're not a bastard, maybe you won't have that level of theme and that success. But if you're an authentic, you know, fair, honest person, that won't matter. even though, just to remind you, did sell out the tour, it was a huge success. So, you know, but it could have been even more successful, is the thing like, you know. Yeah. Now, you know, so, yeah, this anecdote is meant to serve, to illustrate how, you know, the system rewards ruthlessness and punishes decency.

And good people, like him, he's just an example. he say no to that, don't rise to the top. So that's the purported reason. But it's just a big, a big leap, a big leap from the thesis to this very detailed and emphatic story of what a really, really great guy. He's a good guy. But I forgot, Matt, I did cut off the ending, which is the contrast, right? So Blind Boy is a good guy. And, you know, cares of what the people that were nice to him and has to see a manager.

and so on and so forth. The other kind of people in the industry. And I can't work with people who are dishonest or cruel or mean or who are bullies or any of that shit or who expect that for me and just no, not interested. The problem is in my industry, conducting yourself in that way often means that you plateau. You can plateau.

But if you're willing to be like a really selfish prick, you climb higher and then you interact with other people that are that way and then it spirals into this toxicity at the top like it could even work against you

well there you go Matt there's a cost there's a cost associated with it right yeah yeah with being good and kind and decent yes you go

you can have the success but you say no thank you no thank you you you say no to the golden crown and you go into the west Yep. I'm down with that. Yeah. Unfortunately, you know, Blind Boy, as he reminds us repeatedly, he's not somebody that is concerned with, like, reaching ever larger audiences

or having these big, huge tours. He's very content, you know, with where he is and stuff. So it's not a big issue. And he gives an illustration, a story to make this point clear. I know we just had a story, but there's another elaboration. And this one was pretty striking to me. So this is about him being at a festival and the treatment he received. So let's hear about that. Like a couple of years back, I was gigging. I was headlining a very large tent at one of the big Irish festivals.

And I ended up having to change at the side of that tent with no dressing room. And now that's not supposed to happen. And it doesn't matter. I fucking, threw my bag on, I threw my clothes on, I changed in the field who gives a shit. But you know why that happened? Because my agent was like, that's not the butt. Your headline in a fucking giant tent. Why didn't you have a dressing room?

How the fuck does that happen? It happened because everyone at the festival knew Oshar Blind Boys sound, he doesn't mind. You see, there might have been other performers who were kicking up a fuss, who were being mean to people, who were being more. demanding. I need this. I need this. If I don't have this, the show, I'm not going on stage. I need that. Where's my this? Where's my that? So then the organizers are frightened, attending to the needs of performers that are being very demanding. And then when it comes to me,

they go, I sure he doesn't mind. A blind voice sound. No, no, no. He's grand. He's grand. Yeah, yeah. So if the subtext of the first one was that he is loyal, he is principled, he could have access to greater success but refused it because of his just such a great guy then I guess the subtext of the second one and this is not a criticism I'm just describing the subtext that is he is so humble and undemanding

that even to the extent that he might sometimes take it advantage of a little bit he'll play to a massive crowd but doesn't act like a huge crowd it was the biggest tent at the festival at a huge festival I've just said carry you on. Yeah.

So it's connected to the thesis that the system rewards demanding type behavior, selfish behavior. But once again, he himself is the example for a good and decent person. Not only that, but he's known to be signed. Like the thing is that people are like, he's so sound. He wouldn't mind at all. We could treat him badly because he doesn't mind. right? And I like the notion here. Okay, so far, you might agree with him. Like, he doesn't, he wasn't really bothered by not having a changing room. You know, he did say, how the fuck does that happen? And his manager

somehow heard about it, right? And was also seemingly a little bit miffed. But he says, you know, it doesn't, who cares, right? It's just getting, just getting changed. How much space do you need to put a bag on your head? You know, it's fine. It's fine. Right. But, but, but is it, thing. So let's hear a little bit more of this story. And that then spiraled into me not having a changing room at the side of stage. And there was,

I went out to about 12,000 people. Like it was a big gig. And it meant my agent. I spoke to my agent about it then and then he went, fuck. I'm going to have to be a bit more of a prick next year and it'd be a bit more demanding because we can't have that. Now, the thing is, I didn't really mind

changing in a field. It was inconvenient because my socks, my socks, my socks got all wet because I had to stand in mud so that's not ideal but no one it wasn't the organiser's fault no one was being mean it's just everyone said

blind boys sound he doesn't mind attend to that other entertainers needs first because they're throwing a tantrum and what piss me off about it was it wasn't that I had to change in a field it was that the system meant that I have to be I'm forced into being a little bit

demanding of people in order to get my needs met because that's the way the system is and that pissed me off oh okay so you know it does it does sound like he's a bit pissed off about it i mean we got to hear that i mean it didn't annoy me it didn't it doesn't matter i don't give a shit i don't care but i did speak i did speak to my manager and i did go and talk to them about it and my socks got muddy but you know i mean It's fine. I didn't care. Because I don't care about socks. But what makes me angry? It's the system, man. Like, it's not me.

I don't care. It's not for myself. I wouldn't complain. I wouldn't want to complain. It's not like I want the changing room. That's not the moral of this story. You know, the moral of the story is everybody said, I'm too signed. And to help all the people, he has to request. He has to complain to fight the system. And request like a bigger changing room.

He has to be. He has to do that. Otherwise, you know, it's to fight the system. The good people will get taken advantage of. Exactly. Not for himself. He doesn't mind. No, he didn't mind.

He doesn't mind. He doesn't mind. I mean, it actually does sound like a fantastic Alan Partridge sketch. But you can actually imagine that in Partridge telling his story. I like that.

Anyway. Yeah. I like that. I enjoyed that. Yes. So this, you know, I'm somebody, a connoisseur of people engaging in self-deprecation here. And I can detect the subtle undertones when someone is using a self-deprecated tone,

but are actually in certain ways saying self-aggrandizing things. And I detected a note. You did detect a note. Would you be describing humble bragging, perhaps? Is that the term? That's part of it. That's part of it. Yes.

You know, like, I don't know. I mean, hitting the key points from that story, Blind Boy will never sell out because he's too genuine, and he could even be more successful. These big companies want him because his success is so big that it's unexpected, and then, you know, the capitalist want in on it. But he's too loyal to allow that. He surrounds himself only with good people, the best people,

to the extent that he's known across the industry as the soundest person that you can mistreat. about any fear of reprisal. And even worse, because there's so many bastards in the system taking advantage of good people, he's forced to complain about things that he doesn't care about, like having a changing room. It's a burden. It's a crusty has to bear, Chris. I did, I have to admit, after hearing these stories, I did do a little bit of online research to see whether there was a bit of a pattern there. And look, I don't, yeah, it was a casual search, but I, you know, I did see a theme. I think a little bit of moral grandstanding and

humble bragging kind of, yeah, there's a bit of a theme there. These are not isolated anecdotes. Yes, and there was, there's another episode that came out recently where there were two, like, Irish, I think once a comedian and once a talk show host or whatever, but they were talking about autism diagnoses and the prevalence and the kind of prominence that this has reached in recent years with people getting adult autism diagnosis, right, where the guy involved, I think, has had autism since he was a kid, right? And in that exchange, they make reference to Blind Boy, who is somebody that has had an adult autism diagnosis, right? And it was a little bit disparaging because they made reference to, like, the person's Mueller saying, you know, an offhand

kind of comment. And Blind Boy mentioned that on his podcast, played the clip and was very clear to say he's not mad, he's not annoyed at them. This is just people having banther. You know, he knows this guy. This is the clip. Something and we're all the same. We're all neurodiviricversion. And we're not.

Some people have different levels. So I just wonder about that. And that's your call. When you see someone going, yes, I'm so neurodiverse, you going, are you? You know, do you get, did you get bothered? Everyone's got their idea of it. Right. And do you get, I wonder, do you get bothered when certain people say they've got certain

things going on? Did you say, no, that's your thing. like recently when like Blind Boy, the podcaster, he came out as a neurodiviricam and I said, when I said that to my mom, he says he's autistic now and she's like, don't let them take that away for you. They're all saying it.

They're all saying it. So that's the audio, right? Now first I want to say, both Phil and Ryan Tuberty, they're just having crack. What they're saying there is pretty harmless. If I heard it in a pub, I wouldn't blink an eyelid.

Neither of them. are being nasty, mean, anything like that. And I really don't want anyone to be pissed off with either of them. And he doesn't want anybody to go and, you know, call them out for this and whatnot. But he did get quite irid about the clip being shared. And again, the issue was the system. When I got a diagnosis, I did get a tiny bit of pushback from some artistic people. Like there was one fella on Twitter.

that this fellow was also a long-term begrudger of me like very very jealous a Twitter user always being my mentions with jealousy but he was autistic and when I got diagnosed he goes unlike you I got diagnosed in childhood

ridiculous but when you live under fucking capitalism people will try and hoard anything and maintain the scarcity of that thing to increase its value. So for some people, a minority, if they're ADHD, if they're autistic and this becomes their identity

in a bit of a fucked up way, it can feel like a threat to their identity when autism becomes mainstream. The hipsterification of autism. People can hoard and defend autism like it's a cool band that they don't want the armies to find out about. That exists.

I've encountered it. It's rare, but it exists. But somebody had used this clip to promote the podcast. And that is not about him. He doesn't really care if people doubt his like diagnosis or whatever. You know, what he cares about is that other people might be badly affected by people calling people's diagnosis into doubt. And I'm saying it because if any of you listening were pissed off by that clip, I'm asking you to please not take it out on either of those two people.

I'm pissed off with Virgin Media they should not have broadcast that that flies in the fucking face like this is a TV show the Assembly where they're trying to centre autistic voices raise awareness about autism what autism can be

the entirety of the autistic spectrum not editing that bit out flies in the fucking face of that mission statement here's the facts the facts are I'm a diagnosed autistic person and Virgin Media aired a clip where the legitimacy of my autism diagnosis is called into question. It's in the form of a harmless anecdotal joke.

So that bit's grand, like I said. But the context, the editorial context now is very different. You fucking can't do that. I came across that clip for also. they were using that clip on TikTok and Instagram, Virgin Media were using that clip on TikTok on Instagram to advertise the fucking show, to advertise. Someone thought it was a good idea that a good advertisement for a show that raises awareness around autism is to broadcast a clip and the entire context of that clip is two people calling

into question whether or not a public figure is actually autistic or not. I complained about it on Instagram in my stories. And loads of people were pissed off. So they went to the comments underneath Virgin Media's video on both TikTok and Instagram. And people were very pissed off, just going, what the fuck? What are you bringing Blindby into this for? Are you saying he's not autistic? What are you doing?

There was hundreds of comments. I commented as well, just basically asking him, but like, why are you doing this? And they deleted the videos, which, means they know they're wrong. And then when they deleted the videos, I thought, right, okay, the episode hasn't actually gone out. It's due to go out on Monday night. Maybe because they deleted these clips from Instagram and TikTok, they know that they fucked up and they're going to edit that out from the final episode. And they didn't do that either. It's really irresponsible. I, like, I'm saying this not just as an autistic person, but I'm saying it as, I make television.

And to be clear, we're not calling his diagnosis into doubt. I'm just reporting that this fits the theme of, I'm not really bothered about this thing, but I am going to spend a significant segment highlighting I am not bothered. And I do sign. It is deeply problematic, not because of its impact on me, but because of, you know, society, the system, et cetera.

Yeah, I get it. Yeah, so that's it. So, you know, as we said, there is a significant dichotomy that's set up here, which is like those vampiric capitalist bloodsuckers in the Epstein files, Bond, bond, bond, bond, blind boy, good. Good. Good, good, right? He's good.

He's good. So we've got that. We've clarified that. That is the clear subtext. I mean, it's meant to serve a role in the sort of analytic or argument that he's developing, but it is a long boater draw like going from, you know, child trafficking and sex trafficking, whatever, to hear some anecdotes about me and touring and being a good guy. It's a bit of a lurch. But then he moves on, doesn't he, to, you know, historical stuff.

Hey, Chris. Oh, yes. There is a section on historical stuff. And this is a very common feature within his podcast. He actually does do, you know, deep dives on historical topics. And on a positive note, I will say, Matt, that oftentimes he is giving, you know, potted histories of the type that you see in a Ller podcast. And he covers the stuff reasonably well. Now, there are also mixed into it oftentimes inaccuracies or whatnot.

But he's not a professional historian, right? So he's more like of a storyteller. So in this case, he talked a little bit, for example, about Bloody Sunday. You have in 1972 Bloody Sunday. 30th of January, right? The anniversary was a couple of days ago. Catholic civilians were marching for their civil rights in Derry, unarmed Catholic civilians marching for their civil rights,

and British paratroopers opened fire on them, and peaceful civilians marching for their civil rights. Paratroopers opened fire on them. They killed 13 people and injured 15, okay? The injustice and barbarity of that exploded into what we'd call the troubles in the north of Ireland. The IRA starts to take their war against British military presence in the north of Ireland. So Frank Kitson, Kittson goes, right, this doesn't look good. The eyes of the world are upon us.

or after shooting a lot of innocent civilians this doesn't look good. How are we going to stop this? Okay, what we need is chaos. We need chaos. The British Army can't just take on the IRA. We need fucking chaos. So here's what I'm going to do.

So Frank Kitts informed the Military Reaction Unit. This isn't conspiracy theory. It was conspiracy then. Now this is all out in the open. The military reaction unit were British Army soldiers plane closed. And what they did is this. they murdered civilians indiscriminately.

Protestant civilians and Catholic civilians. Why? To create violent sectarian conflict. To create chaos. So now there's civilians randomly being shot in Catholic areas, civilians randomly being shot in Protestant areas. It's the British military doing it in plain close. Either side think, you did it, you did it.

Now you have chaos. Now you have sectarian war and the British army go, should we have to be here? Look at the patties. They're killing themselves. They're killing each other. That was what Frank Kitsen did in the 70s. It was a very novel form of control.

Destabilize. Destabilization. Don't just go in and colonize. That's the old way of doing things. Get in there and fucking destabilize it. Get them fighting amongst each other. Then nothing can get solved. Did you know about death history?

Well, I knew some of it. I knew about Bloody Sunday, of course, and so on. But you, you were our authority on all things, Catholic and Northern Irish. I will defer to your evaluation of that one. Well, I don't know that I consider myself an authority, more just somebody that, you know, happens to be in... Yeah, that was there, right, for some portion of the troubles. But yeah, so I think he outlines the events of Bloody Sunday pretty accurately.

And you can quibble about that that caused the troubles, right? The troubles already were in effect before that. But it is true that that event, you know, helped to propel the response and support for the IRA. But the military reaction force that he mentions, right? So there he's why he's mentioning this, apart from, you know, just giving me. historical things. He wants to link it to this thesis that he has about, you know, as we discussed in the first episode, that the elites are setting up conflict. They're feaking attacks from different sides and they're, you know, like Gillian Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein with the slash ball and

Reddit boards, right? Or the collapse of the Ukraine. Created the culture wars so that they could destabilize the Occupy movement. This is the theme, right? Yes, but here's the thing. And it's actually a little bit surprising to me, because he described it as the military reaction force were out-murdering people from both sides, both communities in order to increase the conflict.

And as far as I knew and as far as I researched, there's no evidence of that. Like the evidence is that they targeted Catholic communities. And in particular, they were trying, you know, they justified the attacks by saying that they were targeting, you know, suspected paramilitaries and so on. But they did open fire on like unarmed civilians. And they would in some occasions like flee towards Protestant areas, you know, in order to give the impression that that's where they were coming from. But they weren't terrorizing unionists communities. So it's kind of odd that that was slid in because they were a very partisan force, right,

against the Catholic communities. And I say that might, you know, being a Catholic person. But it's not, I'm not saying it because I want to diminish, you know, the suffering of the people in loyalist or unionist communities. It's just in this specific instance, the evidence isn't there for this being a. Yeah, it's an interesting thing to get wrong because he does cover, a lot of historical things with this. And, you know, it'd be kind of more understandable, perhaps, to get the other stuff wrong.

But that seems like, I was surprised to hear that too. I was like, really? Like, that's quite outrageous to be doing both with the purpose of inciting more sectarian conflict. And yeah, so it's interesting got that fact wrong because that seems like it should be something you would know much better than some of the other topics he covers. Yeah. And to be clear, there's evidence of covert operations, right? Evidence of unlawful shootings of civilians. And there's plenty of evidence around collusions, including, you know, leader in it that's

well documented between the police and the loyalist paramilitaries. But there again, it's not collusion between the IRA and the police force, right? Because the police and the army are very much on the side of the pro-British. I mean, the specific point you're debating, or not debating, the specific point you're challenging. Challenging, thank you, is that they were assassinating Protestants with the intent of giving the impression that it was the Catholics who did it, right? Yeah, like it was a regime of terror against both sides, like there were terror at both sides,

but not by this particular group. So, yeah, that was just, it's just a surprising thing. But I think it might be that, you know, he's mostly focused on building his narrative and he's sliding things in. And so this, this like a kind of gets a little bit mangled. Yeah. It's something I might hallucinate if who is building an argument for something. But that's fine. Okay.

But that's right. But that's an argument he's looking to build, which is that there's these false flag operations essentially. What do the Weinstein's like to call it? There's various phrases for this kind of. K. Fabi. Kfaby, that's it. Yeah. that this is an ongoing thing that has been used regularly, historically, and is happening now.

Yeah, and to give a bit more flavor of the kind of historical stuff, does. So this is him talking about Irish gangs and, you know, whenever they immigrated to the states and the impact there. So just a little bit of flavor. You get gangs called like the dead rabbits who beat the living shit out of each other, the same as they did back in Limerick, back in. Tipperary. Now their kids are doing it and you've got gang culture in New York City, in the slums of Chicago. It's like 1850, 1860 now. A lot of those Irish, they turned on their African American neighbours and lynched them because some of those Irish were sent to fight in the civil war

and they blamed their African American neighbours for the reason for that. They turned against them. Really, it was the rich, wealthy fucking Yang. going, here's some poor Irish, send them down to fight. I don't want to go down and fight. I was escaping war back home in Ireland. I'm here in New York. I don't want to go to the fight for the fucking union or against the Confederates.

I don't even know what that is. Oh, you're fighting for those black people over there, for their freedom. And then the Irish turned against their African-American neighbors instead of going to the rich people and saying, fuck you. Anyway, the Irish bring gang culture to New York City, to Chicago, to Boston,

the whole shebang. There you go. This is gangs of New York type stuff, right? Yeah. And again, I mean, I think it's broadly accurate what he's describing. But I think he's overplaying the extent to which the Irish immigrants were, I guess, the victims of wealthy, you know, American kind of things. Yeah, the reality is it was pretty ugly. Like there was targeted systematic racial violence where they hunted black people through the streets. and lynched them. And, you know, a lot of it was just straight up, like a racist program with very enthusiastic participants because there was direct economic competition between, you know, they saw the black

African-Americans as competitors, like, which they were for a lot of the similar jobs, you know. And also just genuine visual animosity. Yeah, straight up, simple racism. Yeah. Like, so, I mean, at least to his credit, he is acknowledging. there that Irish people, like they weren't all, you know, freedom fighters fighting for the rights of black people or whatever. He kind of suggests that like even the ones that were

fighting for the north, we're reluctant about it, which again, I think it varies. But yeah, so I played that not to cripple with all the historical things, but kind of point out, this is what I think a lot of his listeners enjoy, that he's going through these different deep parks and historical stories and linking them into. you know, a broader thesis. And for the most part, like, it often is a reasonable recounting of the broad swifts of the history. Yeah, like, I think if you, at a certain level, I agree, like, it is, it is nice to have this tour and be reminded of a lot of historical events that most people probably haven't heard about or don't think about very often. That part I, I like.

But the thing that's very common, not just in blind boy, but in some strands of left-wing analysis, which is that you reduce everything to class conflict, essentially. And when the bad thing happens, that seemingly is not mainly about class, it might seemingly be mostly about racism, actually is interpreted as a kind of, that were manipulated into racism, that were given false consciousness and so on. And, you know, I just, just being aware that there's a, there is selective emphasis and a certain spin that's getting applied. Yeah, and he goes through a bunch of other things. He talks about Jewish immigration, right, and the mafia, the Italian crime families, right? Their immigration and the kind of effects, right, of these criminal elements, right, coming into society and importing their approach to things, right? And it links into the broader thesis as things go on along these lines. taking techniques from

Meyer Lansky and the Jewish mafia and the Italian mafia the CIA were running brothels now but in these brothels they had two-way mirrors and they were

see you'd have middle class family men turning up to these brothels then the CIA would emerge from the two-way mirror with photographs and say we have you know there's photographs and they would doss these men with LSD without their consent to see if they could control their minds.

I know that sounds insane. Look it up. Operation Midnight Climax and Operation M.K. Ultra. Do you know about Operation Midnight Climax and Operation M.K. Ultramat? I did not. I did not. Well, he is correct about this. It was a programme. And in this specific case, it wasn't a... by extracting blackmail material, which is what it will go on to.

It was mostly about seeing if they can use LSD and other such things and sex in order to make people give out sensitive information when they're in a suggestive seat. So that's what it was about. It wasn't like collecting information on high-ranking senators in order to blackmail them. it was more like a program to like to see if they could hold that kind of truth serum. But it's the kind of shit that like in the 70s, the CIA was doing a lot of this shit. Yeah. Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Well, so okay.

You have that. And then as he mentioned, the narrative is these groups came in. They engaged in these ways to control, you know, politicians and so on. because there were criminal elements that had ways to manage, you know, getting permission, getting access and all these kind of things. Often involved blackmail, often involved criminal undertakings, right? The CIA were copying from their playbook to learn how to extract information and manipulate people and so on. And then...

So if a judge comes down on a member of the Gambino family or Meyerlansky, right Kohn steps in and meets the judge and says, here's photographs of you in a brothel. Are you sure you want to pursue my client? And then it disappears. Roy Cohn then becomes the mentor and lawyer of young Donald Trump in the 1970s. He began, Trump at this point is Trump's dad was rich.

It was real estate. Roy Cohn is instrumental to the rise of young Donald Trump in the 1970s through these techniques of extortion. and blackmail of people in power, all sexual blackmail. Donald Trump wants to build a building. He can't get money for it. Or there's legislation in place that he says he doesn't have to do it. Then Roy Cohn gets blackmail on whatever judge or politician is standing in the way and then it happens.

If you want to see that in detail, there's a fucking brilliant film by the name of, it's called The Apprentice. It came out last year. And the actor Jeremy Strong plays Roy Cohn. Jeremy Strong is Kendall from Succession. Amazing fucking film. Roy Cohn, a historical figure with a documented

connection to young Donald Trump and his follower and also somebody that had connections with the FBI and the CIA. Right? Now, there, it is true

that like Cohn was connected with Joseph McCartney relationships with prosecutors and politicians and so on, but there isn't the evidence that he was like an official CIA FBI operative. He was an aggressive picture, more of adjacent connections, mentored Trump, but the key claim is that he systematically used sexual blackmail with judges and people in power, and by implication that Trump learned that. And then that's how he came to power for using these same techniques, potentially for Epstein.

But that is the bit that's not well supported. Cohn is a figure that's pretty documented that using blackmail and strong arming and connections. But the sexual blackmail being his go-to technique is not the piece of the puzzle that fits in. And wasn't Maya Lansky mentioned before is the connection that goes to Cohn, where there's some organized crime figure that did the similar kind of thing, right? And I think, like, so I think it's true that he is compromising material

against politicians and judges and things like that. He did that. But the specifics on the sexual blackmail and stuff like that is kind of tenuous. But anyway, so the point is, is about what you're describing. The proposition is that there's a series of links here. There's a connection between Lansky and Cohn, a connection between Cone and Trump and Trump to Epstein. And the thesis is kind of that they're handing off, or there's an ongoing, some sort of knowledge about sexual black male that's going between them. Is that the idea? Yeah, yeah. And just to make you clear, how it ties into the Epstein stuff. So there's two clips that speak to the connections that are being positive.

So here's one. What you're seeing is organized crime and also it's blackmail. It's a blackmail network. The files also strongly suggest that Epstein was working for somewhere between Masad, who are the Israeli intelligence services

and the CIA and MI5 were stuck in there too with some Libyan shit that he was doing. But intelligence services, like the CIA or Massad or MI5, You think of them as these operate to service their respective countries, like the militaries of their respective countries or the safety of those countries. Think of them more as the organized crime wing of wealthy industrialists and billionaires who use lobbying to control governments.

So the notion there, right, Matt, is that it's well established by the files. that like Epstein was not just an agent for Mossad. He was possibly like working for several agencies or keynote, all of them. And I'll just say that isn't strongly supported by the material. There's specific emails that people point to. But like what the emails do not present is somebody clearly working for intelligence agencies. They present somebody who is a socialized financial person who wants to go out, and meet people and foster all these connections.

And the rest is classified. This podcast, which is about, you know, spies, ep, spinaage, covert operations, and it's hosted by people with expertise in this. They did a two-part series on like the alleged connections between Epstein and Mossad, right? And their general read of the evidence is very counter to Blind Boy, which is that the evidence that he was in. in any sense, like a formal agent, is extremely thin and mostly relies on this kind of, you know, associative thing that Gillian Maxwell's father was associated with Mossad and a big supporter of, like,

Israel and, you know, Zionist stuff. And Jeffrey Epstein was heavily embroiled with Gillian Maxwell. Now, he met her the year that her dad died. So presumably they did the handoff in that year. And like he, he wasn't, you know, this was in 1991. well, Matt, so many, many years before. But what they said in that episode, and I defer to their expertise in the matter, is like, there isn't the kind of smoking gun evidence that you would expect in many of the things that he was doing would be very bad for an intelligence agency. There would be a liability in a lot of respects. And they couldn't use, like, most of the stuff for various reasons, right? But what they did say is, like, obviously, intelligence is, like, obviously,

agencies would be interested in someone like him, right? Because he has connections. He has a lot of money and is working with powerful people and so on. So you would expect them to try to cultivate links and, uh, but there's a big difference between a subject that they are cultivating than an agent that is. Yes. It's a difference between like Eric Weinstein's view that he's a construct created by intelligence agencies, a bit more. reasonable is that he's an actual agent. And then this position, right, that people suggest that he would be an asset for the kind of information that he could provide. So it's likely that intelligence agencies would want to try and foster friendly relations with him. And also clear that he liked

Israel, right? He had connections with people in the Israeli government and, you know, the people often point out that the led a Israeli prime minister, stayed at his house and so on. But he also let Chomsky stay at his house and he also was meeting with Steve Bannon

you know he was a prolific networker so you have to really emphasize you know selectively

emphasize the potential ties the Mossad but here blindboard kind of just asserts it you know like it's

it's very obvious from the material that that's the case yeah it's kind of like a version of the base rate fallacy isn't it

like applying to Epstein right because he was so prolific knew so many people and had so many contacts and relationships and that there is so much material there that when something is spotted, it's so easy to cherry pick that and forget for the moment

that he was doing that with everybody, like anyone who was in any way, you know, a person of influence or importance. Yeah, yeah. And, you know, to make it clear, Matt, that, you know, this isn't us overreaching. I mean, I think it was pretty obvious from that clip, But there's another section where he spills out the connections pretty clearly.

So what you see with the Epstein thing? It's, it appears to be a big, massive blackmail operation for the most powerful people in the world. Doing the most horrendous shit imaginable. Because a lot of them, that's what they want. That's what they're into. That's what they enjoy. And then about trying to bring people into that club to condition them into, that way of behaving and using peer pressure or drugs or coercion to get them to behave that way

or to do it dishonestly. Maybe somebody went to Epstein's Island, thought it was just a big, cool party with rich people, ended up meeting a girl at that party thinking that she was overage and that it was consensual. Then having sex with that person, there's a hidden camera and then afterwards it turns out, oh, she's actually underage. You thought that she was maybe 20 or 21, but that's not the case at all. And she didn't have secrecy out of free will. She was coerced into that. And we have footage of it now. And you're very wealthy and powerful and now you have to tow the line. I would wager that there was also some of that. How does it get to that point? And again, like I said, judging by the files, it would appear that Epstein works for both.

Masad and the CIA Geelaine Maxwell her father was Robert Maxwell Robert Maxwell was definitely with Massad. You have to go back to Prohibition in America. Do you know what? Even further than that. I'll take it to... This is a hot take episode, lads, this is a ramble.

I'm going to take it to Limerick in the early 1800s. I'm aware how insane this sounds, but you'll just have to trust me. my process. So that's how, you know, it got on to the Irish history about immigrating to New York, gangs of New York stuff. Yeah. Yeah. It's a, it's a wild arc, isn't it? It ranges from 1800s Limerick, you know, through so many things. The troubles, the gangs in New York, prohibition, what is it, the MK Ultra. Like, it's, it's all, it's, it's, it's all, it's

such a broad sweep and and it all gets connected together for this thesis. Yeah, yeah. So, I mean, the overall conspiracy, he summarizes it neatly at the end like this. And then into the fucking middle of that steps, Jeffrey Epstein, into that circle. Roy Kohn was definitely working with the FBI, probably the CIA as well. those are all kind of tenuous links but what you see there you see a thread

of sexual blackmail at first with organized crime then US intelligence services start to work with organized crime and you go from Meyer Lansky Roy Cohn

Trump Epstein somewhere along the way fucking CIA Massad get involved I'm guessing with Epstein it's so he did work with Guillain Maxwell's dad Robert Maxwell and you can see this in the files

and Maxwell he was 100% Massad most definitely so what I'm trying to get out with this phone call you're looking at organised crime that's what this is but we don't call it that because these people are so powerful you don't fucking call at that but that's what we're witnessing

this is organised crime on a grand scale and it appears to be operating above the law. Yeah, so it's kind of clear. Like he's got this thread, as he says himself, which stretches from 1800s Libric to the 2025 Epstein files in which all of these disparate things and everything serves this underlying function, you know, of depravity and blackmail and control by elites and manipulation of the masses, et cetera. And, you know, it's such a, like it's such a tidy narrative.

Like it should be a massive red flag. If you look at all of these disparate events and you can nitpick and find little exceptions, but when it's that incredibly tidy, that all of these diverse things are all examples of this one underlying thesis that there's a continuous international program of elite control that spans two centuries. I think that's a red flag. And it's entertaining. And I think, I think, you know, many of the details are true.

But I don't think that makes the overall arc, the single thread, true. Yeah. Yeah. And, like, again, the timeline, is that, you know, the connection is drawn specifically around Epstein here. and for some of the other clips there's a lot made about Gilean Maxwell's follower but it's worth noting he died you know in November

1991 and Gilean Maxwell moved to New York in 1991 or they're right right so at best they only have a couple of months before his death right so he doesn't mention that but you know he obviously hammers that point home he mentioned it like he repeated it three or four times

times. Maxwell's dad was definitely a must-out. It's like he's got one solid stone to stand on. So you've got to repeat it a few times to make sure that it really hits home. And he keeps saying things like, you know, it's not, that's documented in the emails. That's definitely true. Yeah. Yeah, if you look into it, it's not.

You're right. It is people extrapolating rather significant. Now, to be clear, there are people that make those extrapolations, but they tend to be people who were always. going to be those extravalations, right? Yeah, like he's not innovating massively here in this. He has sources for this. There are other people that basically posit versions.

The same thing, yes, of this, yeah. And I will say, I mean, we mentioned Operation Midnight. There's also, you probably know more about this than me, but there was the famous Salon Kitty thing in Germany, right, during World War II, where they used of Brothel. and they basically did what he's outlining, right, about getting people foreign ministers and whatnot in compromising positions and then using that, the blackmail them,

those various verified honeypot operations, right, by Russia and China and so on, where they are trying to get people to be in intimate relationship with spies. These are things that actually occur, so did the CIA programs. But it's the broader, claim, right? It's like he takes the things which are well documented like that Operation Midnight. But what that is not well documented to be is the thing that is well documented

around the Saloon Kitty. It wasn't the case of them gathering information on influential individuals to blackmail them. That's what happened there at that Salon Kitty and that was well documented. But he like, it's weaving a deal where it's all plausibly connected. But the actual links are a lot more tenuous than what is suggested. So it's not like me in matter saying, no government anywhere has ever used sexual blackmail to try and advance its interests or get people to behave as spies or no, no. I'm sure that has happened many times in history. But that Epstein was doing that is not well documented in the material,

whereas he keeps saying like the email showed. this, but what the email show instead is just, like, it is criminal and it is a network of people who feel that they're above the law or like that the rules don't apply to them. But it isn't in the way that he suggests, which is like, it's all to do with geopolitics and it's all to do with like destroying class consciousness and stuff. No, it seems much more to just be about very rich people being abusive and acting entitled to not giving the shit about, you know, crimes that people commit. Yeah, like it's equally unpleasant and unsavory, but it's more tawdry rather than a grand Machiavellian Illuminati-type scheme to, I guess, recruit, coerce and control the elites

forming this ultra-powerful body of compromised people with the implication that that can be then used to control, like, the rest of us. I mean, that's everything. Everything, you know, and that's, you know, that's the narrative that is being built out of the constituent pieces. Yeah, and there's another technique that comes up. You know, with Brett Weinstein, you get the disclaimer studies. He's not conspiracy theorizing. He's hypothesizing. It's scientific to consider different possibilities, right?

Eric Weinstein is always saying he's not saying this definitely happened. He's just raising the possibility, and you're not even allowed to talk about these kind of things, right? And this is the motive, of course, that Jordan Peterson, often used to take, which is he's, you know, this, of course, this may, this may well not be true, but it might not not be true. But, you know, I mean, but more, but more usually just like exploring, like exploring a stream of, of argumentation and thought. And it's the framing that they will use is that this is, you know, speculation. They have that caveat sort of at the beginning. But then you hear the tone of their voice and the amazing confidence with which, you know,

they are building on that, and it's clear that they are not treating it as speculative. No, and sometimes, Matt, there's very vocal and very obstinate conspiracy fears who are absolutely clear that this definitely happened in this way. But the more common mode, even amongst your hardcore conspiracy fears, is that they are the schemers, that like, well, I'm not sure about all those details, right? But this is possible. And it's clear that something happened, right? Like, it's clear something went on there. Yeah, because the official story just doesn't add up. Exactly.

And this is why often they will tolerate conflicting narratives where people have incompatible explanations for things. You know, just think about COVID. It's at once like a bioweapon designed by the Chinese that is, you know, extremely destructive and so on. And it's also a thing that's been overhyped and they need to count more bodies. And it's also a thing which the scientists, have cooked up.

You know, like it's at both, it's hardly afraid. It doesn't kill anyone. And it's also the most dangerous bioweapon and, you know, scientists playing God and so on. And they're all relatively mutually incompatible when you get down to like the specific details. But that doesn't mean you can't have a conference where for eight people northing along in agreement,

even though they're all advancing competing conspiracy theories. And I mentioned this because there are disdimmers. We heard at the start of the episode, episode, the biggest one, which is that this is a phone call episode. It is going to be not as well researched. It's just going to be throwing out a lot of things. And that serves as like a disclaimer, where you can say, well, come on, like he's just weaving a narrative based on the things that he saw. But as we sing when we saw clips from other episodes, this is not an uncommon mode that he takes in the non-phone call episodes. And this is the disclaimer that comes towards the end of the podcast.

I'm aware this podcast is absolutely insane. You were all asking me to talk about Epstein, so I spoke about it. What was the point of that podcast? It's for people who feel so confused that you have no language for what's happening whatsoever. So that tries to add explanation or narrative or story or words to it. I think viewing it in that human way where it's this is organized crime, this is power. This is about blackmail coercion and the evilness that rises to the top in an evil system. I think that's a much more healthy and helpful way to look at something so terrible

without needing to resort to interdimensional shape-shifting lizards, Illuminati, ritual. Even if there is satanic rituals and shit like that, it doesn't have to mean anything. It's not supernatural. ritual can be an initiation. Ritual can be brainwashing isn't the word but bringing someone into a club. Like there's some weird shit in the Epstein files.

Like there's reports of him wanting Mormon blood. There's reports of him wanting very specific artifacts from the Muslim faith and you're just going, what are you at? Ritual doesn't have to be supernatural.

are super supernatural, supernatural, it's used to construct legitimacy. So I'll just mention there, Matt, whenever you highlight that you're not endorsing some of the most extreme claims, right? Like you're not saying it's about, you know, creating supernatural demons and doing satanic rituals and whatnot. It serves to kind of make it seem that like the things that you're alleging are much more reasonable. Alex Jones does this too, right? Or people, when they want to contrast themselves with Alex Jones, they'll say, it's not about fourth dimensional reptiles and stuff.

What I'm talking about is like actual genuine thing. So there's not this game where that there's much more crazy conspiracies. But even with that, he still does the thing of saying, and there's this weird stuff, right? There's him looking for artifacts and him getting, so you get this still mention, you know, the kind of unusual things. And then say, but you know, but I'm not saying that. supernatural, right? But as we've seen from what he's alleged, it's not necessarily supernatural,

but he is basically positing like an evil ruling class of overlords who are psychologically, just very cruel to get off on seism. They engage in like taboo busting rituals and so on. And they're, they're not like normal people, right? It's, it is in some ways, like it doesn't have to be supernatural, but it's certainly a class of very extraordinarily evil people. Yeah, yeah, that's right. So it's, yeah, as a disclaimer, it's not really doing much. It's not disclaiming much at all. Oh, it will for his audience, though.

It will for the audience. Yeah. Well, I mean, you know, the thing about those disclaimers, of course, is that they're a form of protection, right? It's a way to insulate yourself from criticism. And that's one of the things that struck me about this. this episode altogether, which is that there are so many layers in which I don't know whether the blind boy is doing it consciously or not, but they are certainly there. And that is,

I guess, serve to make it difficult to criticize what he is asserting. And, you know, like, first of all, there was the format disclaimer. You know, it's a phone call episode. It's not rigorously researched. It's just off the top of my head. But then the episode is about, oh, bunch of purported facts about history and stuff like that. It is actually developing quite a strong rhetorical argument. So the disclaimer doesn't really match. That disclaimer would be appropriate if you are going to then free associate about your dreams and how you saw a bird and stuff like that. Not so much this kind of thing. And then we discussed the sort of virtue anecdotes where the subtext was that he is a virtuous person, which again, it's like, well, you know, don't criticize me. I'm on the

good person, right? I'm on the side of light. And, you know, the fact that he, you know, part of his public profile is his autism diagnosis, which means that he sees things differently. He sees things in wild and wildly different ways. He sees patterns and gets overwhelmed. So there's always that escape clause, which is, well, you know, maybe some of that didn't connect or it doesn't connect for you, but it does for someone who, who thinks differently and, you know, different neurodivergent ways of thinking are perfectly valid, of course. Well, it just means that, like you say, there's overlapping layers that you can invoke to, you know, defend. And it also means that by criticizing Blind Boy, you can easily be portrayed

as like you are, on the one hand, dismissing concerns about any criminal activity, right? You're defending the system. You don't want to acknowledge, like, the crimes that are being conducted. you're pro-capitalism, your pro-exploitation. It's kind of that in the same way, like with Dari or whatever, that if you're critiquing his narrative, that you want there to be inequality, you want there to be exploitation. Are you saying that rich people are good people,

you know, that Elon Musk has our best interests at heart, that the political class like the MAGA administration isn't above blackmailing or abusing people or they treat women well? And like, no, no, no, no, no, right? Like, none of that follows. But there is the implication that if you are going to be criticizing that, that you are, you know, endorsing the inverse. Yeah, you're on the side of darkness.

And, you know, I guess that that's the thing with mannequian framings. And, you know, we have moral grandstanding in our in our garometer. And, you know, most of our gurus do it in different ways where the world does get kind of sorted into the side of light. However you want to define it, for some, it's classical liberal values and science and so on, and then the bad people are the shrieking woke, or it could be a more class-oriented thing as Blind Boy is doing.

And just to mention, I think a final layer of protection there is that those disclaimers around emotions, right? So the sort of gut-feeling, stuff. You know, there's just something in the pit of my belly and I just can't separate these things. And, you know, that's not something you can really, I'm quibble with, right? Because your feelings are valid and it's making an argument. Like the argument is clear, right, that you're saying these things are connected. But by framing it as a feeling, then that is quite helpful rhetorically. Yeah. And so here's an example of these kind of things being connected together to traditional.

left-wing anti-capitalist, anti-colonial concerns. This is a phone call podcast so allow me to go on bizarre tangents. I'm aware that only five minutes ago I was talking about the Hells Angels having sex with corpses.

What I'm trying to get at is that under the system of capitalism is very, very cruel. It's based on domination, exploitation. The 1% is me and you. It's people who live in the global north.

The quality of life that you have, if you live in America or Europe or Australia, the quality of life that you have in the global north, the access to cheap food, clothes. These things come to us as consumers under the capitalism and globalisation. Like I know someone who got arrested for growing and selling cannabis to a few of their friends. someone who was growing their own cannabis in their house and selling this cannabis to a network of about six friends they were arrested they were brought to trial they were a criminal now

they spent a few weeks in prison they're a criminal but purchasing cannabis from that person is more ethical than the underpants that I buy in a high street shop where the raw materials in labour and construction of those underpants is made in the global south in a sweat factory where people are being exploited and abused. It's almost impossible

to live outside of that system. Our phones contain rare earth minerals that are mined in artisanal mines in the Congo where children have their hands chopped off.

Is that still happening in the Congo? No, I checked there's a And there's a lot of mistreatment and so on. But, you know, like children having their hands chopped off as punishment for not working hard enough, no. You know, I'm sure there's probably been an instance where something like that has happened, but that is more associated with, you know, the brutal Belgian regime in the Congo.

So, so yeah. But, you know, the broader picture is that ultimately the villain, surprise, you know. When you pull off the mask, the real villain is... You and me. Not me. I just installed a whole bunch of solar panels. You're a solar punk. Well, you paid for those.

What are those made out of Matt? And where did those materials come up? I don't dare to think where the metals came from, Chris. Well, yeah. So, you know, it does remind me, and Blind Boys analysis in general, I have to say, does remind me of this, that, you know, I went to university at SOAS, a good left-wing university in the UK. I worked on the side, Matt, scrimping to get by, editing essays for people being a proof reader, for their PhD thesis as well. And in that university, God bless so us,

I will say that I knew every single essay where the final conclusion was coming. And he always, always was neoliberal globalization is the root cause of all evil. In some cases, well argued, in other cases, less well argued. And here, I do think that the events around Epstein and the emails and what they reveal is an indictment of capitalism. The same way Elon Musk rising to the top of the global wealth charts

is an indictment of capitalism, right? If you imagine that capitalism only rewards people who are good people or working very hard and so on, Like, no, no, no, it clearly doesn't. And people can profit from being terrible and exploitative. And there are plenty of opportunities for that under capitalist systems. But I just think that being the key takeaway somewhat takes the focus off what the actual thing should be, which is that Jeffrey Epstein, primarily him, some of his associates, but him and Gillian Maxwell primarily. were engaged in abuse of young girls and women.

And that is the primary crime. The primary crime isn't geopolitics and CIA and globalization. Should we be so harsh on Epstein? Because, I mean, there's really no ethical behavior possible under capitalism. Well, there's degrees, Matt. There's degrees. That's true. That's true.

And clearly me and Blind Boy are two of the good ones. I mean, we're doing our best within a corrupt system, I think. That's the takeaway. Yeah, if I see a general pattern, it's that there's a real harm or historical injustice that is referenced, right? Then it's often linked in an emotionally evocative moral outrage way, right? The most lurid example, chopping hands off, having sex with corpses. It's always, you know, the most extreme thing which is reached for.

then harm caused his framed as like an intentional cruelty being acted by a cruel class an elite class of vampiric evil people and then this is linked in

with you know like some psychology lesson or a broader framework about how this is inevitable under the neoliberal capitalist system yeah that's that seems to be the the kind of steps that follow in most of the stories that we've heard.

Yeah, I agree with that. Yeah, so have we reached the end of our journey, Chris, through the episode? Well, yes, I think the last thing just to play is the clip where he talks about the research that he did for this and, you know, where he got the information from because, you know, he did say it's a stream of consciousness thing. And I do think that he's going on, you know, tangents that come to mind. but it's also clear that he's referencing a body of information

and factoids and details, right? So he does give details about that at the end that I think are worth mentioning. The information that I got there in the second half, the connecting it from Meyer Lansky to Roy Cohn to Epstein to Trump, I want to give a shout out to a journalist called Whitney Webb. She did all that research there.

She's done for you. years has been one of the few journalists looking at the Epstein shit from like an evidence-based rational point of view and framing it as a giant blackmail operation.

The Illuminati conspiracy theory shit all that crazy stuff is a distraction interdimensional shape-shift and lizards. That's all a distraction and it's unhelpful. These are human beings doing bad things. All right, dog bless,

I'll catch you next week. In the meantime, wink at a swan, genie flick to a snail. Whistle at a cat. Here you go, Matt. And whimsical, you know, a little bit brandish at the end there.

And I'll note, Matt, that he makes reference to Whitney Webb. And she has a book, which is called One Nation Under Blackmail. from 2022, right, which is essentially outlining the thesis that he outlines, right? So this is where he's making a lot of those connections. But that book, I went and read quite a lot about this, right? And this is a like very dense book, which collected a lot of material together. And it's, it's really regarded as like a Bible of sorts amongst the conspiracy minded, because it's so dense.

with, you know, footnotes and references to documents and so on. But critical evaluations of it note that that is actually the weakness, that like, it's collating huge amounts of references and materials. And some of it is like well validated. Some of it isn't. And she kind of moves easily between things that are documented to speculative conclusions, to put it mildly and yet the fact that there's so many references and pieces provided it kind of creates the impression of rigor it's not a book that is regarded as rigorous by the more critically

minded or like historians or this kind of thing yeah yeah i mean it's um it sounds similar to the epstein files themselves which is the the plethora of information makes it a happy hunting hunting ground for connecting dots. I mean, you know, this is not, this is not unusual, right? Like, religious texts are like this too. Like the Bible is treated by some as a similar kind of happy hunting ground because kind of it's got it's got it all. There's something in there for everyone. And with a bit of mental flexibility, you can connect together a lot of dots and come up with a lot of interesting theories. So, so yeah, I think you're right in that, a book like that, which assembles such a vast amount of titbits of varying quality

can provide the source material for a lot of different narratives, depending on what your preference is. Right, and this book came out before the current tranche of documents were released. So, like, if it were true, you would have expected in the documents to see all these details about the blackmail plants and whatnot, right? But you don't see that. Like, what you see is people are reimbableness. managing massages and networking and being sycophantic and making business deals and,

you know, giving insider information and all this kind of things, like genuine crimes, but much more mundane than the evil vampire. And he meets the point, Matt, that they're human. You know, these are just humans. But his presentation of them doesn't throughout just present them as humans. Like they're almost like, and I'm. an unholy evil, like not like normal humans. Whereas I think the actual reality is much more like depressing,

which is these people are, for the most part, with some exceptions, perhaps, or, you know, Jeffrey Epstein and allers, like unusually callous or unusually willing to carry out abuse. But like, the fact that they can ingratiate themselves with people or have a vibrant social life, it doesn't mean that like the reason Chomsky was hanging about with him was because he likes kids or the reason Bill Gates ever had contact with him because they shared the predilections. But it is very much that that's the way that, you know, Blanboy and others take it.

Yeah. Yeah. And I think there's another rhetorical move there, which you were hinting at, which is that there's the kind of like throwing a bone. Like he emphasizes, look, I'm not saying there's actual magic happening. Like nothing supernatural. Yeah. I'm just saying that they were like getting blood to like do the rituals and, you know, like, you know what I mean? Like, it's like, was anyone who was thinking that there was real magic happening?

And like with this one, he said, you know, it's not, there's not shape shifting aliens here. You know, these are people. These are humans doing this. It's like, I think everyone was anyone thinking that they're actually lizard people? I mean, who's the audience for that? I mean, unfortunately, probably some people. Probably a few. But you get my point, which is that, I mean, and we've heard other gurus do this actually,

which is that puts him in the sort of anti-conspiracist camp, right? He's the one saying, poo-poo-poo-y. Now, you know, that's crazy, right, in contrast to what I'm proposing, which is more grounded. Yeah. So I just wanted to point out that, you know, there is a source referenced, right? So there is preparation that went into it. So not purely stream of consciousness then.

Some research involved. Some research is available. Yes. So do you have any big picture? thoughts, Matt, before we wrap things up. G-O-G-O-G. I don't think I do have too much to add, Chris. I understand why the content is attractive.

Actually, the ASMR thing doesn't really work for me. I much prefer your harsh accent, Chris, of Irish accents. But I do see the entertainment value in it. And, you know, there's a lot of interesting stuff there, which is true that is covered, right? all of that big historical thing. You know, a lot of the elements are accurate enough, and it's an interesting journey to go on. But at the same time, as we covered at the very beginning,

he is absolutely proposing quite lurid conspiracy theories. And a lot of that broad sweep of interesting history was presented to sort of slot into a pretty big claim in connecting a bunch of disparate dots. Yeah, similar to, to what a conspiracy theorist does. So, you know, and this, in the case of Blind Boy, of course, it's situated within this, you know, anti-capitalist, anti-globalist,

anti-a, yeah. Sort of class-oriented political slant where you have the very good, or not the very good, but, you know, decent real people, you know, of which Blind Boy is first and foremost, no doubt. As he established, yes. He's supposed that quite effectively, I think. You know, and this mannequian sort of worldview, but at the same time, as per standard sort of doctrine in those circles, we're all trapped in a system of mutual abuse and exploitation. There's no way to get out of it because it pervades everything and it is everything.

So that's kind of what he is in my humble opinion. And, you know, take it or leave it, I suppose, if you enjoy that kind of thing. Yeah, I liked your point. And I'll just reiterate it to finish about like the layers of rhetorical defense that are, they are operating simultaneously, right? Because you have the format, which is a disclaimer, which we've covered, right? You've got the anecdotes about like only the purest motivations, virtuous things that he, he isn't about trying to grow his audience or get the biggest slice of the pie or a dressing room.

There's also that he thinks differently because of autism or because of his background, not being an elite person or whatever the case might be right. He is from not the establishment. He's not part of the great and the good. Yes, he does sell out world tours and those kind of things, but he does it while maintaining his principles and honor. And then you have that what's being invoked isn't being completely endorsed. It's just, you know, his feelings, stuff which he admits,

there are aspects of it that maybe, you know, that it's loose connections and whatnot, But it just feels like there's something there. And then last is just this systematic appeals, which is like it's fundamentally connected to, you know, the events in Gaza, to capitalist exploitation, to neoliberal globalism, to colonialism, so on and so forth. And of course, in a certain sense, Matt, if you look hard enough at everything that functions in the world, it is connected to, you know, repressive regimes and to systems of capital flow.

and to politicians line and so on. But I think you have to be very selective in your framing in order to make it, that is the number one factor that goes into all the stuff around Epstein, right? Because there are people that are equally as wealthy, equally as focused on trading influence and whatnot, and they aren't engaged in what Epstein was, right? Like it is not the case that all people who are wealthy, CEOs are blood-sucking demons, right?

Or abusing young underage guards. As much as I share his biases, I don't think that's the case, right? They're people and some of them are bastards and some of them aren't. And that is the nature of the world. The people that get to the top of capitalist systems might be more inclined towards like certain personality types. But I think the way that he presents it is like a cartoonish evil. at the elite levels.

Yeah. Look, and I think maybe just the thing to be aware of is that his audience is obviously one that is, you know, very much in on this. It's a popular worldview amongst certain groups. So he is hitting those points and the grand narrative that he is constructing there is one that is going to resonate really strongly with the audience. So when you take the whole package, it is going to feel incredibly satisfying. You're going to see all the connections. It is all going to point and confirm the

worldview you have. And it's not so much that I disagree. And so I know that worldview is wrong. You're diluted or anything like that. I'm just saying, be cautious of a grand narrative that explains everything. And be cautious when the discourse is constructed to appeal to all of the things that you like so neatly. That's just, the guy would advise. Yeah. Yeah. And I think it's worth noting that like everybody in the IDW world, in the heterodox world, in Blind Boys world, they always present that they are saying the thing which nobody wants to hear, which is unpopular. But like in actual fact, it is very popular amongst their audience, right? Like if you take a survey saying, you know, is it okay to attack, you know,

rich capitalists and bankers and and colonialism and so on, these are popular. positions, but they're often presented that like it's very brief to say it. Whereas for that audience, it's what everybody agrees, right? Like, it's the broadly endorsed position. So it's a bit less brave in the case where it might be true. It can still be true, but I'm just saying it isn't the kind of renegade thing where you're not going to get booked for any more left-wing book tours if you're reeling against capitalism. No, no. Actually, you're reminded me of Constantine Kissin because he's, he's great at this. One of his favorite drums to beat is just, you know, he's so brave. He doesn't care if he offends your feelings, you know, all of that stuff. He loves to do self-aggrandized.

Like, that's his form of virtue signaling, right? In his crowd. And yet, when he did a survey or somebody did a survey of the voting intentions of his audience, it was like 90% for reform. It wasn't even reform. It was the more extreme one than reform. It was like revived. Oh, God. Yeah. Anyway, regardless of the details. It was like his audience, just eat that shit up. Everything that he says is absolutely tailored to make them happy and make them feel more confident about their worldview. Because we all enjoy that, right?

We all enjoy that feeling of being right that our worldview is confirmed. So, you know, it doesn't mean you're wrong, but just be aware that that's something that all human beings enjoy. Yeah, yeah. I agree. So for the final thing, I'll say, Matt, is just how well does he align to the secular guru template? You know, at the start we said, that's what we're about. We're trying to match him up. And of course, we'll do it officially through the grometer, highlighting various things. But I do detect notes of things that we often see around the self-aggrandizing and the conspiracy hypothesizing, the, anti-establishment rhetoric, the strategic disclaimers, and the, you know, in some sense, this is the format of Blind Boys podcast that he's doing associative, like somewhat indulgent

monologing, right? So I don't think it's fair to completely ding him on that, but I also do think that people that are able to do that, people who are good storytellers, often also meet people who are good gurors. And Blind Boy does have, you know, a broader worldview. and things that he links things into and your agreement with it may vary, your mileage may vary, or you might be totally on board. Whatever the case might be, I invite anyone who's listened to the episode to consider, you know, even if you think we're getting things completely wrong, are we completely wrong about the, you know, the various motifs and the parallels that we see

with other content that we've looked at? Because from my lens, it's quite clearly there. It doesn't mean he's at the tipy top of the, you know, the worst gurus that we've covered or this kind of thing. But I do think he fits within a left-wing style of modern guru and that the whole podcast delivery is in a way framed in that way. But it carries with it, you know, the self-deprecation and the motifs that you usually would see in left-wing content, which means it's not like the right-wing bombastic or heterodark stuff that we often cover. So that's all I want to say. Yeah.

And if you're generally left and progressive people like us, then it's incredibly easy to spot the tenuous connections, the conspiratorial logic and the rhetorical tricks that are done by people on the right. It's really easy because we don't like the messaging. Right? We don't like the message to begin with. So that's very easy. It's a lot harder to acknowledge that it might be there to a small degree or a large degree when somebody is presenting a message that you very much like. But it is logically possible. It can happen. It can happen. That's right. A good message for Alma. And on that note, shall we now finish off by thank you. our patrons for supporting us.

Would you permit me to do that? Please. Of course. My good sir, by all means. By all means. Okay. Okay. Well, remember, this was the last month where people could sign up as conspiracy

hypothesizers. Now, after this, we will just have revolutionary geniuses and galaxy brain gurus because everybody then can have access to the all-important accordion academia series. But don't worry, if you're already a conspiracy hypothesis, you will always remain there. It will never go away, right? So we warned people, Matt, it was happening. The capitalist, I mean, we couldn't do any alert

because it was the system, right? We tried to fight it, and yet it came all the same. So the last of the conspiracy hypothesizers, we will thank them, Matt. And they are Matthew Hughes, Pieler Washburn, Sparks, Kales, 1 through 3, C.W. Lone, Christopher Kira Wissix, Jordan Levin, Stephen Quinn, Anya Marchanak, Frank Boyce, Botan, Boutan, Flau, Stuyden, Asteen, Aston, Peter Jordanstein, Roland Bolts, Oliver Martin, Aram, Nathan, James Myers, Sammy Vesa, Petteri,

Fernando Amado, Peter Gavin, Peter Blum, Miles, Ike Gullesma, KW, David Tiger, Food and The average executive, Tom Robert, Thomas Wilson, Laura, Selin Bernstein, Joshua Whitson, Carol Consell, Jan, and Luke Hill. We've got a food and beverage executive in there. Why aren't they at a high tier, Chris? They can afford it. They're exactly. Yeah. That's right. You're shaming them now, Matt. Shaming them. And I will also mention Logan Mayate, who did not join this month, but has been a long serving conspiracy hypothesisizers. So thank you all and all previous conspiracy hypothesizers as well. We love you all equally, all equally. I feel like there was a conference that none of us were invited to that came to some very strong

conclusions and they've all circulated this list of correct answers. I wasn't at this conference. This kind of shit makes me think, man. It's almost like someone is being paid. Like when you hear these George Soros stories, well, he's trying to destroy the country from within. We are not going to advance conspiracy theories. We will advance conspiracy hypotheses. There you go. They will.

Thank you. Never true or words were spoken. And you're still doing it. Quite right. Yes. Yeah, that's right. Now, revolutionary geniuses, Matt, we have a couple of those as well. And there we have Andrew Heury,

Jan Marius Sonagall Olson Ryan Weeks Kieran Mulhound Michael Savridae Shane Benjamin Newcom Grocer Listen Ladd Ryan Ross

Value Soup Dan Morris Matthew Roche Trented Dodson Julia Stein Nathan Armagost Brandon Bosch Kat Valentin Ashling Mike Caro

Jack O'Hourow J Art Blake Potter Travis Welsh Albiorg Albiont dot there Joshua Peck Telmo Rob Eves Chris O, Sallax, Aaron Isaac, Rex Ashes, C.H. Leforgia, Ladd, and Rufthal.

Would you like to... I think we did mention this name before, but I still want to hear you said, because I think you did it better than me before, but... Oh, my God. Oh, my God. Oh, I need to put my glasses on. That's important. Have a go with that one. Let me prepare.

I'll beog. I'll beog. Albiogogelbogons.u. Okay, very good. There we go. Thank you. Apologies to Albatore. Apologies and thanks all at the same time.

I'm usually running, I don't know, 70 or 90 distinct paradigms simultaneously all the time. And the idea is not to try to collapse them down to a single master paradigm. I'm someone who's a true polymath. I'm all over the place. but my main claim to fame, if you'd like, in academia is that I founded the field of evolutionary consumption. Now, that's just a guess, and it could easily be wrong, but it also could not be wrong. The fact that it's even plausible is stunning.

I'd never get tired of the timbre of his voice, as he said, stunning. It's a thing of beauty. Even being plausible, Matt, it's stunning. Yeah, I'm still hanging up on the number of umlouts and stuff. on Al Bjork's name. That seems excessive. It's a cool name. Yeah, it's something.

That's something. That's a hell of a million. It's a hell of a name. Well, speaking of hell of a name people, the Galaxy Brain Gurus, the highest in the gurus guy, the ones that can hang out

at the monthly live stream things that we do. That would include, Matt, Stian Hagli, David Tainham Carl Winterling, Josh Kilaran, Ifi Donatello, and Yelham Deschpan Day. Yelham Deschpan Day.

These are the people who, you know, you were available to argue with them as much as they want. You will argue on any topic. Yeah, if he done a test of this, that if you join the Patreon, assuming that it means that I will not disagree with you, that's not true. There's disagreeing and there's disagreeing, Chris. Your disagreeing is, you know. I mean, it's engaged disagreement. Engaged disagreement.

I like that. It's an incredibly engaged disagreement. Nice. That's right. That's the way it goes. Well, and we thank them all for it, Matt. We thank them all. Yeah, if he's getting his money's worth.

Hello there, you awakening wonders. You may not be aware that your entire reality, is being manipulated, become part of our community or free speakers. We are still allowed to say stuff like this. Science is failing. It's failing right in front of our eyes and no one's doing anything about it. I'm a chill for no one. More than that, I just simply refuse to be caught in any one single echo chamber.

In the end, like many of us must, I walk alone. There we go. Oh, my God. Right. Well, we all walk alone at the end. we met into the embrace of the eternal dark. The deep, that's something. The long sleep, Chris.

Yeah, it's coming through. And they're just walking, stretching towards it. Yeah, that's okay. Okay. Well, that was great. That was good fun. You know,

I enjoyed, I enjoyed some of the stories. I enjoyed some of the history stuff. Yeah. Yeah. Some of it was. It wasn't totally accurate. You know, accurate enough.

That's all right. I look forward to the feedback. for this episode. I'm sure it won't create any Reddit threads or consternation amongst it. Just remember at the end of the day, it's just our opinion, man.

Okay? Here's our own disclaimer. You put the content out there. Other people are allowed to critically evaluate that. You can do it to us if you want. Be my guest. Get clipping. Yep. Yeah. Get clipping. That's a high bar.

A lot of people will not clear that one. That's a lot of work. Don't I know it, Matt. Don't I know it. Well, on that note, I bid you at your, you know, kiss little snails, dance with spiders, and slap a wallaby on the butt. That's... Are you doing a blog boy there, Chris?

I'm doing a whimsical end. Yeah, that's a good different turn. But I respect the effort. Thank you, Jack, Chris. Over and out. Bye-bye. Bye.