Fourth Reich Archaeology - Fourth (Reich) of July

Episode Date: July 4, 2025

Friends, ‘Muricans, Countrymen. Or, for that matter, anyone lucky or unlucky enough to find themselves in the grips of the American Empire. We hope you enjoy this departure from our ongoing series (plural) to take stock of American independence on this anniversary of American “independence” (Luca Brasi voice). Dick and Don offer asynchronous reflections on the meaning and continuing viability of the so-called American Experiment as it descends into a place as dark as the one Frederick Douglass excoriated over 150 years ago.We also feature Douglass’s words, and those of one of his intellectual successors, Kwame Turé aka Stokely Carmichael, to hammer home the point that there can be no progress without the organization of the masses of the people, and only that organization can bring about Justice. Progress isn’t progressive at all if it isn’t built on a foundation of Justice, premised in turn upon a reckoning with the crimes of history. And that reckoning is precisely what we are trying to bring forth here on Fourth Reich Archaeology.

Man-time, that word should have new meaning for all of us today. We can't be consumed by our petty differences anymore. We will be united in our common interests. Perhaps it's fate that today is the Fourth of July, and you will once again be fighting for our freedom. Not from tyranny, oppression, or persecution, but from annihilation. We're fighting for our right to live, to exist. And should we win the day?

The Fourth of July will no longer be known as an American holiday. But as the day when the world declared in one voice, we will not go quietly into the night we will not vanish without a fight we're going to live on we're going to survive today we celebrate our independence day colonialism or imperialism as the slave system of the West is called is not something that's just confined to England or France or the United States Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. It's one huge complex or combine.

Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists. And this international power structure is used to suppress the masses of dark-skinned people all over the world and exploit them of their natural resources. We found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic. The Warren Commission was silent. I'll never apologize for the United States of America, ever. I don't care what the facts are. In 1945, we began to acquire information, which showed that there were two wars going.

His job, he said, was to protect the Western way of life. The primitive simplicity of their minds vendors the more of the moral domination. easy victims of a big lie than a small one. For example, we're the CIA. Now he has a mob. He knows so long as is nine. Freedom can never be secure. It usually takes a national crisis.

Freedom can never be secure. Pearl Harbor. A lot of killers. We've got a lot of killers. Why you think our country's so innocent? I have a model. Now he has a model. Now he has a model.

This is Fourth Reich. Archaeology. This is Fourth Reich Archaeology. I'm Dick. And I'm Don. Welcome back to another out-of-series episode here on Fourth Reich Archaeology. Today is the 4th of July. And so we thought that we would do something a little bit different for you, the listener.

It also just so happens that Dicks and my schedules don't line up this week, so we are recording asynchronously, and we plan to rant and rave about the meaning and the possibilities of American independence until we run out of air. before we do that once again we'd like to invite you all to help us spread the word about our project by liking subscribing to and telling your friends families and loved ones about the pod maybe you're going to a fourth of july barbecue this weekend and you want to question the jingoistic paraphernalia on display. Well, there's no better way to do that than to tip off your interlocutors to Fourth Reich archaeology. And indeed, we are out here on the internet to be your contacts, your friends, and to answer any questions that we can. Please do reach out to us by email at 4thrikepod at gmail.com or on Twitter or Instagram at 4thrikepot.

And as always, if you have a little bit of extra cash jingling around, burning a hole in your pocket, well, head on over to patreon.com slash forthright archaeology and drop us a little donation. we will have more exclusives out there for you in year two of our project. And truth be told, we hope to expand this thing not only the podcast, but the Fourth Reich Archaeology Media Production Factory and your donations fuel us to do so. Now, without any further ado, let's go ahead and get digging. Far between sundown's finish and midnight's broken toll. We ducked inside the doorway, thunder went crashing.

There's majestic bells of bolts struck shadows in the sound. Seeming to be the chimes of freedom flashing flashing flashing for the warriors whose strength is not to fight flashing for the refugees on the unarmed road of flight and for each and every underdog

soldiers the night and we gazed upon the chimes of freedom flashing the statement made by Abraham Lincoln is a true statement you can fool some of the people some of the time but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time with faces hidden as the walls were tightening one of the lessons then that we must draw squarely from the 60s is an understanding that real struggle must be left and must be understood only by the masses of the people. It is the masses of the people who could not believe the lies of America and came to struggle instinctively against these lies.

Tolling for the rebel, tolling for the rake, tolling for the luckness, they are abandoned and for safe. Tolling for the outcast, burning constantly at stake. And we gazed upon the chimes of freedom flashing. Knowledge has but one purpose. Its purpose is to alleviate the sufferings of humanity. Capitalism is a backward and stupid system.

Of course, the capitalist system lies all the time. Some people think it lies some of the time. But it lies all of the time. Capitalism is a contemptuous system. Capitalism is a system made on profit. It will make a commodity out of everything. It will take my mother and seller on a slave block. It will make students acquire knowledge and make themselves their knowledge on the slave block to advance themselves rather than serving humanity. Certainly, one cannot speak of morality when one is speaking to capitalism. It is an immoral system. It has no conscience. It knows only its own interest. Striking for the guardians and protectors of the mind. And the poet and the painter far behind his rightful time. And we gazed upon the times of freedom flashing. It will commit genocide to take land from the red man. It will commit slavery to enrich itself.

It will drop napalm bombs on babies in Vietnam. Of course, the job of the system, the job of the enemy is to confuse you and to let you think that your interest in your history is the same as that of your oppressor. As a matter of fact, the job of the master is to convince the slave that the master is really concerned about the interest of the slave. And if the master doesn't do well, the slave will be in trouble. Any slave who believes that he has the same interests as a master will pick cotton at night. All down in, taking for granted situations.

And Dr. Martin Luther King said it all the time. is indivisible as a matter of fact he used to say all the time injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere consequently if there's injustice in vietnam i'm stupid thinking i'm sitting in america not to think that it affects me if there's injustice in vietnam i better go cut it down before it comes to find me there is no question and you must in no way lose faith in the masses of the people it is they and they alone who make revolution not their petty bourgeois spokesmen who betray them everywhere and the conditions of the masters are worse today than they were in the 60s these masses must have changed and will have

changed by any means necessary oh say can you see through the long genocide as the free and the brave march like sheep to the slaughter you know the star-spangled banner was of course written by Francis Scott Key a Maryland attorney whose career when he wasn't setting poetry to the tune of English drinking songs was as a prosecutor and what was his main objective in that capacity why it was to capture, catch, and prevent the escape of slaves from their owners in the anti-bellum United States. So every time that you hear the words to the so-called national anthem, well, you are listening to the words of a slave-catching son of a bitch. On this occasion of the 4th of

lie, I would like to muse a little bit about whether or not this American experiment, as it's frequently called by its defenders, is worth preserving. And it's a question that comes up a lot, right? Because the circumstances of this Fourth Reich that we live in are so dire. The degree of control exercised by the powers behind the government, which really control the strings. I mean, people that want to tell you that it's the government that's evil and it's the government that's causing all these problems don't really understand who the government serves because the government does and always has been a tool in the hands of capital to advance. the exploitation of the working class, to expand the reach of capital and markets across the

world, and generally to provide a release valve in the form of elections and what have you, to air out the public grievances against the continuous assault on the rights and liberties that Constitution of the United States purports to enshrine and protect. So those owners who control the strings behind the government, well, they also control the most sophisticated surveillance and control apparatus ever constructed in human history and render the democratic process an utter farce and what we have called a mere spectacle of democracy rather than the real thing. So the popular paths to change that the Constitution permits are for all intents and purposes closed off to the people. I think

often about the debate that raged in the 19th century between abolitionist leaders, Frederick Douglas, himself, of course, a escaped slave, and the white abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison, who was the publisher of the Liberator newspaper, and who was a Pennsylvania Quaker and radical. The two of them debated quite fiercely this question of whether the United States Constitution was in fact a pro-slavery document that needed to be torn up and rewritten in the wake of the Civil War in light of the hypocrisy at base of the American project. That was the position that Garrison took, whereas Douglas took the opposite side and pointed to the fact that the Constitution itself doesn't mention slavery,

indicating that it was an anti-slavery document and that, in fact, its founders and framers anticipated the end of slavery such that it could be used towards liberatory goals. I still think that both sides have valid points. However, I tend to side with Garrison, and I think that the 150 or so years since this debate really popped off, have proven that, in fact, the Constitution is not liberatory. It is not even supreme, as it purports to be. And as we've seen from recent Supreme Court decisions, paving the way to ending birthright citizenship that is clearly in the text of the Constitution itself, which is only the latest in a long line of high court

rulings that have withered away any semblance of protections that the Constitution's text could offer Americans. So the loss of birthright citizenship, if that does in fact happen, is ultimately not that meaningful if citizenship, scarcely confers any rights or protections at all. As I record this, ICE has deported over 70 American citizens. So clearly they don't give a fuck about citizenship status. They give a fuck about race, about class, and about power. And when they talk about the great replacement, what they really mean is not replacement of quote-unquote Americans, whatever that means. It's the replacement of whites who have constituted a majority and can identify with the beneficiaries of the unequal

distribution that has persisted since the founding of the country. And the Supreme Court obviously has played a massive role in whittling down any meaning of constitutional rights. Many of those rulings have purported in turn to be based on the original meaning, intent, and understanding of the framers of the Constitution. And so what was the original intent, meaning, and purpose of a, bunch of slave-owning white men who denied suffrage to women, who denied citizenship and even personhood to blacks, well, it wasn't good. Put it that way. And so this, I think, brings us to a conundrum here, because on the one hand, the majority of Americans we must recognize do have some

fealty to the idea that the purpose of this nation is to spread democracy and liberty all over the world I mean that is almost a must for any American politician to assume and to pretend they believe it even if they don't but it's something that we on the last broadly speaking can't very well just ignore or say is wrong or pooh-poo because doing so will lose the support of people whose support we desperately need to bring about any sort of an alternative system let alone a radical internationalist communist communist redistributive project. So how do we do that? How do you reconcile the original sins of the United States of slavery and genocide with the fact that Americans themselves actually believe this stuff and they believe it's good? John Brown's body lies a moldering in the grave. John Brown's body lies a moldron in the grave. John Brown's body lies a moldron in the grave, but his soul goes marching on.

Glory, glory, hallelujah. Glory, glory, hallelujah. Glory, glory, hallelujah. Glory, glory, hallelujah. But his soul goes marching on. The stars above in heaven are a looking kindly down the stars above in heaven are looking kindly down the stars above in heaven are looking kindly down on the grave of old john brown glory glory hallelujah glory glory glory hallelujah glory glory his soul goes marching on i really like the way you set that question up, Don. How is it that so many Americans, even today, can tout the country's ideals, freedom, liberty, justice, all of those things that make you feel warm and fuzzy inside when you think about the Declaration of Independence, how is it that those people can reconcile

in their heads the fact that the United States is responsible for the enslavement of so many millions of people for so many years. And it's really interesting to think about what the Civil War period of America was like and what we've been told about it in grade school, because that's really the period where this question came to the forefront. And I think about what I was told in school growing up in the public school systems of the United States and I'll say, you know, I went to school in what we will call a northern state. So the story I got, I think, would be very different than what someone who was sitting and getting a public school education in Georgia would be. But for me, growing up as an American, I was told that by the time

the Civil War came around, you know, we were living in this age of reason and wasn't really framed so explicitly, but the battle of slavery was really framed as like a battle of good and evil, right? You had these northern states that were on the side of justice, and they understood that the Constitution was meant to protect all people, that the Declaration of Independence, that all of the American ideals, that applied to. everyone and that at this point in America, we fought as a country collectively on this question as to whether all men are truly created equal and the good guys won. Of course, the truth is much more complicated than that. For one, while there was rancorous debate about the issue of slavery

in the years leading up to the Civil War, the reality is that there really wasn't much appetite to change the status quo. Let's not forget that the formation of this country, the original intent of this American project, was profit. And what I mean by that is if you look back to the original 13 colonies, the predecessors to the first 13 states, you'll see that these were really profit-driven enterprises. Their whole purpose was to extract resources, to exploit the land, to exploit people, and to take excess profits and give them to the crown. Now, another material omission happening in public schools across America has to do with the foundation of this country. And I'm talking about this idea that the founders form the country

under the notions that all men are created equal, that freedom and justice and liberty prevails. but really downplaying the fact that at the time of the American Revolution, the interests that were most prominent, those were business interests, right? They wanted the king out of their pocket. So when you think about the unifying force that drove these 13 colonies to revolution to declare their independence. That unifying force can be characterized, I think, defensively as a idea that they just want to keep the profits to themselves. And to that question of whether the Constitution is pro-slavery, I think my answer is a resounding yes, it is. And I'll say it's so pro-slavery that it can address and indeed has addressed the slavery issue.

and also still allow slavery to persist. Slavery by another name, of course, but slavery none the less. And what I mean by that is this. You see, in the early days of this country, we had a dispute about how these states would have representation at the federal level. The idea was, of course, that the federal government

would take care of the business between the states, the business of the collective, the business of the country, the broader mission of the American project. And, well, the southern states wanted their slaves to be counted in their representation, because remember, there were fewer property-owning white men in the south at the time than there were in the north. So there's this great debate about whether to count slaves or not for the tabulation of the number of seats you would get in the House of Representatives. And of course, that leads to the three-fifth compromise. that's in Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3, which basically says that for the purposes of determining

representation, free men, and three-fifths of all other men will be counted. Three-fifths of all other men. That is a reference to enslaved people. so from the get-go the Constitution acknowledged that slave owners should get some sort of representation based on how many slaves they had and just to point out one of the reasons for this is half the country's economy at the time was based on slave labor and it was big business the transatlantic slave trade was big business. And as a country, one of the things the federal government needed to figure out because it was the federal government that was responsible for

international relations, for trade, for tariffs, one of the things that needed to be sorted out is how do we address the business of slavery? And I just want to talk about one. more provision in the Constitution that indicates that the document is a pro-slavery document from the outset. And I'm talking about the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, which provides, among other things, that no person shall be deprived of their property without due process of the law. Now, in the years leading up to the Civil War, there was the famous dreaded Scott decision, Dred Scott v. John Sanford in 1857, and wouldn't you know it? The Supreme Court

decided the issue of whether an enslaver could be deprived of his slave through Act of Congress and whether Congress violated that person's right to own a slave. And I think, You will all know, I'm sure, or hopefully are able to guess. Our great Supreme Court in 1857 said, yes, indeed, this act of Congress does violate the Fifth Amendment. The Fifth Amendment protects property, and at the time, that included enslaved people. And you've got to wonder why did the Supreme Court

in the middle of the 19th century, take this position, and the answer is, of course, to maintain the status quo. The American project was becoming much too profitable. It had too much promise, and it could not be torn apart by an issue such as slavery. And maintaining the status quo is really what most Americans wanted in the middle of the 19th century. So the people in the north, the truth is, if you were to ask anyone individual, whether you are for slavery or against slavery, of course they would be against slavery. And their response would be that, of course, we're against slavery. We've outlawed here in Vermont or New York or whatever. But If you were to ask them, where do you rank?

Where do you value slavery on your set of values right now? That would give a different response. And I'm sure you would find that for most Americans at that time, preserving the union, maintaining the status quo was the most important thing not to rock the boat in this fledgling country. and that the issue of slavery would sort itself out. That brings me to the concept of sectionalism

and how it is that Americans are able to allow conflicting ideas to coexist in their heads and to let the horrible conditions persist. So going back to the 19th century, and one of the reasons that this, apathy towards slavery was able to persist for so long in the north was this concept of sectionalism. And what I mean by that is America is a big place and the economies of the various states developed in different ways. So as a northerner, what you could do to rationalize

to your day to day is say, yes, of course slavery is abhorrent and of course I'm against it. But I am for the union, I am for this great American project, and it is not up to me sitting in New York to decide how the people in Georgia handle their business. And you could add to that justification, this notion in the age of reason, that slavery was so repugnant that, of course, one day it would die down because nobody would, would allow it to go on. And so to go back to your point, Don, about how it is we reconcile these conflicting ideas in our heads as we go about our day to day. I think we can apply the teachings of history from the Civil War era. And this idea that the powers that be, the people in charge, really did not want to change the staff. status quo. They did not want to rock the boat. Hell, President James Buchanan, who was president

before Abraham Lincoln, he essentially won the office of the president based on the concept of maintaining the status quo. The only real discussion that he was willing to entertain on the question of slavery was how to manage slavery in the federal territories. So again, the people in charge were only interested in one thing, and that was to keep the engine of capital running. And this goes back to that thing I was saying at the top of my little tirade that the Constitution is so pro-slavery. It is so good at protecting slavery that it can solve the slavery.

slavery question and still allow it to persist by another name. And to see that, you just have to look at the years following the Civil War. Of course, the famous example here is the Tilden-Hays presidential election, in which, of course, Rutherford B. Hayes takes the office of president after a smoky backroom deal in which the federal government agrees to withdraw its troops from the South and allow the South to slip into the horrific system of Jim Crow, which in many respects was no better than the system of slavery. And so that brings me back to your question on how do we recognize? these conflicting ideas. How do we let these ideas coexist in our head? And how do we address that?

And I think really the best way to start is to take a good long look at history. And by that I mean take a good long look at the facts without any reverence or bias and without lionizing those who came before us and those who set up this country to be the way it is. And, you know, we love to quote her on the show and to just quote Kamala here. You exist in the context of all in which you live and what came before you. And really what I'm getting at, you know, this is important, the reason that this is important to explore the historical record, to really understand how it is we got here. It's because you can uncover truths, for example, the teachings from the years leading up to the Civil War and how it was that people were able to juggle these conflicting

ideas of freedom and liberty with the reality of slave labor. Those teachings are applicable to what we're going through today, where we're seeing pretty much the same sort of reconciliation that's happening in people's heads every day. So I think, you know, on this our independence day, what I am finding myself reflecting on is how it is we can apply history and how we can use history to address the concerns of the day. My eyes had seen the glory of the coming of the Lord. He is trampling out the vintage where the grapes of wrath is stored. He loosed the fateful lightning of his terrible swift sword.

His truth is marching on. Glory, glory, hallelujah. Glory, glory, hallelujah. Glory, glory, hallelujah. his soul goes marching on well i think that's partly what our project is geared towards the excavation of the past the understanding of what really happened and the lies that we have been told is really necessary to generate a consensus around any sort of a radical project. Because if you are basing your worldview on the fact that everybody who's been elected president was chosen among the most qualified people and not a

race to the bottom for immorality, capriciousness, and greed, well, you're not going to be able to join any sort of a useful political project at all. On the other hand, if people wake up to the fact that indeed the ideals that are stated in the Declaration of Independence have not animated the conduct of the United States government, but rather those owners that referred to before that control the government, not talking about Jews. by the way talking about capital here and it's not a dog whistle it is a reality an understanding of who controls the puppet strings and of what the role of the people as disgusted spectators has withered down to in the government of the people for the people and by the people well that is step number one in other words Rather than carrying around the contradictions between the ideals of America and the conduct of America,

around our collective neck like a millstone that prevents our politics from making even a tiny dent in the Fourth Reich hellscape we inhabit, it. We must bring those contradictions all the way to the surface and lance them like a fucking boil. Let the pus ooze out of the wound and then begin the healing process. From there, those ideals can serve a very useful purpose because it wasn't for nothing that the black Panther Party emphasized the Declaration of Independence in all of its early communications. It played a central role that what the Black Panthers were after was really no different from what we in the popular imagination understand the founding fathers to have been after. And in the case of the Black Panthers, it just so happened to be true.

in most cases that they were pursuing that freedom and liberty for all. But of course, as we know, they were tragically thwarted by the repressive apparatus of the FBI through CointelPro, sabotage, and a lot of money put into propaganda that today, for example, when I went to school and learned about the Black Panthers, I was taught that they were a violent extremist, quasi-terroristic group rather than a collective of black leftist intellectuals who wanted to free their people from really the continuation of enslavement by other means and under another name. And this simultaneous embrace of so-called American ideals and rejection of the American Empire and its

misdeeds all over the world should not be difficult to articulate or to grasp on the opposite end for those who have been so brainwashed through education, media, spectacle, indoctrination, what have you. And in fact, it's a platform that can build consensus between people of varying political stripes, all the way from your libs to your libertarians to your socialists to your anarchists to your communists and we talked a little bit with malcolm harris a few weeks back about how to build consensus among the left and how to reconcile competing approaches to survival of the planetary crisis, as he calls it. But it's really a question of political transformation in an irreversible direction because the end goal must not be confined to the borders of the United States. It must be

internationalist in scope. Why? Well, for one, because one of these principles that I'm talking about here is the principle of justice. And justice on a global scale requires reckoning with all of the crimes past and present of the American Empire of the Fourth Reich, both against those within its borders and those outside of its borders. The United States, as we discussed in our Fourth Reich Geopolitic series, has committed or has facilitated a continuous string of genocides all over the world, has deliberately taken military action to suppress wages of workers all over the world, and has built not only a pyramidal structure of class oppression within the United States, where, of course,

the U.S. working class is the backbone and the whipping boy for the bourgeoisie and for what has now concentrated in a keystone atop the pyramid of hyper billionaires. You know, it's billionaire now. It's almost a misnomer because the people with the real power have tens, if not hundreds, of billions of dollars, and the scope of the difference between just a mere billion and, say, 50 billion is really incomprehensible to us mere mortals. So there is common ground to be found, and meanwhile, I think there is room to begin experimentation in radical political projects. So, for example, we celebrate the recent election of Zoran Mamdani to the Democratic primary of New York. And I only half jokingly offered Zoran my services as head of counterintelligence

because we've seen it before hundreds of times where the repressive apparatus at the disposal of this ultra wealthy controlling class is brought down upon the heads of anyone who challenges their supremacy. And the Black Panthers that I just referred to is but one example. And so we wish Zoran the vest in the general election, where he'll surely face a corrupt and disgusting amount of sabotage and infiltration and every trick in the book being played against him to prevent him from taking the reins of the city and that assault will not cease even if he is elected so the support not only from people on the left but from people across the political spectrum and i know that our

listeners are not limited to people on the left or to communists but we should all support anything that marks a rupture with the absolutely untenable unjust and despicable status quo that puts us all under the boot of the fascist jackbooted thugs that are running this country right now on behalf of some of the most venal, disgusting, and insane people that have ever been born. I mean, you listen to the recent Peter Thiel interview with Ross Douthat, and then you understand that this guy not only has tremendous power himself, but speaks for a cabal of psychopaths who would just as soon kill a billion people as throw their boyfriend off a balcony in Miami.

And if you don't know what I'm talking about, just look it up. So the atheist philosophical framing is one world or none. That was a short film that was put out by the Federation of American Scientists in the late 40s, It starts with a nuclear bomb blowing up the world. And obviously you need a one-world government to stop it, one world or none. And the Christian framing, which in some ways is the same question, is Antichrist or Armageddon. You have the one-world state of the Antichrist, or we're sleepwalking towards Armageddon. The way the Antichrist would take over the world is you talk about Armageddon non-stop.

You talk about existential risk non-stop. this is what you need to regulate. In our world, the thing that has political resonance is we need to stop science, we need to just say stop to this, and this is where, yeah, I don't know, in the 17th century, I can imagine a doctor

Strangelove, Edward Teller type person taking over the world. In our world, it's far more likely to be Reda Thunberg. My very specific question for you, right, is that you're an investor in AI, you're, you know,

You're deeply invested in Palantir, in military technology, in technologies of surveillance, in technologies of warfare, and so on, right? And it just seems to me that when you tell me a story about the Antichrist coming to power and using the fear of technological change to sort of impose order on the world, I feel like that Antichrist would maybe be using the tools that you were building, right? Like, wouldn't the Antichrist be like, great, you know, we're not going to have any more technological progress. But I really like what Palantir has done so far, right? I mean, isn't that a concern?

Wouldn't that be the, you know, the irony of history would be that the man publicly worrying about the Antichrist accidentally hastens his or her arrival? There are all these different scenarios. I obviously don't think that that's what I'm doing. I'm just interested in how you get to a world willing to submit to permanent authoritarian rule. Well, but, but again, there are these different gradations of this we can describe, but is this so preposterous what I've just told you as a broad account of the stagnation that the entire world has submitted? for 50 years to peace and safetyism.

This is a First Thessalonians 5-3. The slogan of the Antichrist is peace and safety. And we've submitted, you would prefer the human race to endure, right? You're hesitating. Yes? I don't know. I would, I would, um...

This is a long hesitation. There's so many questions in place than this. Should the human race survive? Uh, yes. Yes, but I also would, I also would like us to radically solve these problems. And so, you know, it's always, I don't know, you know, yeah, transhumanism is this, you know, the ideal is this radical transformation where your human natural body gets transformed into an immortal body. We want more transformation than that. The critique is not that it's weird and unnatural.

It's, man, it's so pathetically little. I think the word nature does not occur once in the Old Testament. And so, you know, if you, you know, and there is, you know, there is a word in a sense in which, the way I understand, you know, the Judeo-Christian inspiration is, it is it is it is it is about transcending nature it is about overcoming things and you know and the closest thing you can say to nature is that people are fallen and that that's the natural thing in a Christian sense is that um you're messed up and that's true but um you know there's some

ways that uh you know with God's help you are supposed to transcend that and overcome that We really must let a thousand flowers bloom, a thousand experiments in communism. Hell, experiments in anarchism, whatever you want. it is we just have to establish this trust and establish some foundational principles that will enable us to rewrite the Constitution to rewrite the Constitution in the wake of a reckoning of the crimes of the American Empire because the numbers of people that are underneath the boot of these freaks is so much in excess of the number of the freaks who are wearing the boots

that the only thing holding us back is our delusions of identity with these absolute monstrous humans The ICE antics of recent weeks in carrying out Trump's mass deportation project should be a clarion call to everyone across the entire political spectrum that these people are inhuman monsters. They recently was reading a story that ICE went to a woman's immigration hearing to arrest her. and her six-year-old son who has leukemia, they brandished a weapon, and the poor little guy peed all over himself there in the courthouse before they took him away in their fucking truck and essentially black-bagged him off to deportation to a country he has never known. That is immoral, that is disgraceful, and anyone who would co-sign that,

action does not warrant inclusion in this big tent that I'm talking about that will be necessary to bring about the next phase. Now, to be clear, we're not saying join just any old project for the sake of building a coalition. It's important to always remain vigilant and relentlessly critical and to keep top of mind, to keep focused on the need. to transform the relations of production and the ownership over the means of production. And so when you see these Elon Musk types come out here and say there has to be a new party, a new alternative to the two-party duopoly, maybe don't take them for their word. So all that being said, we must take seriously the animating principles of the so-called American project.

We must form coalitions, even with people that we disagree with. We must get off the Internet and into the streets, and we must educate ourselves and everyone around us. and that means, and I'm guilty of it too, speaking up if somebody says some utterly false bullshit, speaking up when somebody makes light of or agrees with in any way the types of inhumanity and cruelty that are bearing down upon the people as we record this. If we don't, then certainly, as Secretary of Health and Human Services, R.FK. Jr. recently said, my vision is that every American is wearing a wearable within four years. A wearable health patch to monitor your biometrics in real time.

And if you get out of line, maybe shoot a few milligrams of benzodiazepines into your bloodstream and calm you down. or maybe shoot you full of amphetamines or whatever the case may be. Whilst we carry around these high-tech surveillance machines on our persons at all times and interact with them more than we interact with the people that we know and love. And that brings us back to the bottom line of forthright archaeology,

and that is love. We love you, our listeners. I love human beings and I love nature and I love the world. And I love the idea of changing the world for the better, not just for myself and my immediate family, but for all of the creatures on the amazing, miraculous planet that we, were born on two and we'd like to end today's episode with frederick douglas's powerful speech what to the slave is the fourth of july as read by the late great icon james earl jones until next week i'm dick and i'm don saying farewell and keep on digging Fellow citizens, pardon me and allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice embodied in that declaration of independence extended to us? and am I, therefore, called upon to bring our humble offering to the national altar

and to confess the benefits and express devout gratitude for the blessings resulting from your independence to us? I am not included within the pale of this glorious anniversary. Your high independence only reveals the immeasurable distance between us, the blessings in which you this day rejoice, but not enjoyed in common, the rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity, and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, not by me. The sunlight that brought life and healing to you has brought stripes and death to me. This fourth of July is yours, not my.

You may rejoice, I must mourn to drag a man in fetters into the grand illuminated temple of liberty and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems where in human mockery and sacrilegious irony. Do you mean, citizens, to mock me by asking me to speak today? What to the American slave is your Fourth of July? I answer a day that reveals to him more than all other days of the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is a constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham. boasted liberty, an unholy license, your national greatness, swelling vanity, your sounds

of rejoicing are empty and heartless, your denunciation of tyrants, brass-fronted impudence, your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery, your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade and solemnity, utter him mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy, a thin veil to cover up crimes that would it, that would disgrace a nation of savages. There's not a nation of the earth, guilty, but practices more shocking.

and bloody, then are the people of these United States at this very hour. At a time like this, scorching irony, not convincing argument is needed. Oh, had I the ability and could reach the nation's ear, I would today pour forth a stream, a fiery stream of biting ridicule, blasting reproach, withering sarcasm and stern rebuke, for it is not light that is needed, but fire. It is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, the earthquake. The feeling of the nation must be quickened.

The conscience of the nation must be roused. The propriety of the nation must be startled. The hypocrisy of the nation must be exposed, and the crimes against God and man. must be proclaimed and denounced. I don't know. ...you know... ...notes... ...you know.

...their... ...and...